Rand Paul: Tea Bag turncoat

[HomerJS]

What's that saying, you could at least buy me dinner first before sticking it there. You guys didn't even make to the restaurant yet (Jan 20, 2011)

Rand Paul already taking back a primary campaign promise to end earmarks. And you thought the incoming Tea Party candidates would be different??

I see Dick Army, Karl Rove and Fox News have been sucessful in putting a new coat of paint on that same piece of shit car, and actually found buyers. HAHAHAHAHA!!!

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/11/08/paul-earmarks-pledg/

 

[matt0611]

Rand responds to that here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo78wBtPvZs

Seems pretty clear to me. I know it probably won't mean much to you though.

Until he actually supports earmarks, I will take him at his word.

 

[rudder]

54% of our budget is for entitlements. 25% for the military. Although wasteful... earmarks make up a small percentage of the budget.

Supporting a ban on earmarks would cede congress' spending authority to the white house.

Seems he is making the right choice after all.

 

[manimal]

Well I dont fault Rand much in this case and actually respect him for always being so transparent. When was the last time a politician was as brutally honest as Rand Paul to the detriment of his political career. In a normal environment he would have had a much tougher time with his candid interview with Rachel Maddow on his views on the segregation and his libertarian ideals.

In this case he was being just as honest. Will he hesitate to bring the bacon back to his constituents who want the bacon? Of course he will fight for his peeps. Its his job...

I may disagree with many of his positions but I respect his transparency..

 

[punjabiplaya]

wait, a politician lied?

 

[fskimospy]

This is only the first of many collisions with reality that the tea party will have.

 

[rudder]

wait, a politician lied?

maybe he realized that if earmarks were banned.... obama would be the one doling out that money wherever he wanted. More like he came to his senses.

 

[DominionSeraph]

You mean the right's political campaigns were based on inflating talking points to manipulate an emotional reaction out of those too uneducated to compensate to promote voter action which they then rode into office?

Wow, it's almost as if they learned by watching Fox News.

 

[trenchfoot]

Just goes to show that campaign propaganda is just that. Whether said out of ignorance or anger, candidates sometimes say the darndest things to reach their target audience only to have to pass the wand over those promises to make it either disappear or mean just the opposite when the consequences of their utterances catch up with them and their lack of foresight and situational awareness.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Just goes to show that campaign propaganda is just that. Whether said out of ignorance or anger, candidates sometimes say the darndest things to reach their target audience only to have to pass the wand over those promises to make it either disappear or mean just the opposite when the consequences of their utterances catch up with them and their lack of foresight and situational awareness.

I think you're giving him far too little credit. It's only been DAYS since the election. He hasn't been sworn in or cast a single vote, let alone gone through a budget hearing. How did he suddenly come upon all this insight into how Washington really works?

It only makes sense that this was a farce from day 1 and that he was never really stupid enough to believe that he'd be able to do anything without earmarks. He knew he was riding people's stupidity and he just went right along with it. He's getting this out right now so it's ancient history later on -- when he gets around to voting his votes won't have such the sting of betrayal because he's prepared the people beforehand. He can run for reelection "on his record" scandal-free because this is before his record.

If I were to run as a Republican or Tea Party member, it's exactly how I'd do it. Stupid people are quite predictable in their emotional reactions, and he's covered things well.

Was he Fox News' candidate? Someone tell me how they spin this.

 

[JSt0rm]

maybe he realized that if earmarks were banned.... obama would be the one doling out that money wherever he wanted. More like he came to his senses.

lol. You think that?

 

[hal2kilo]

Suckers!

 

[trenchfoot]

I think you're giving him far too little credit. It's only been DAYS since the election. He hasn't been sworn in or cast a single vote, let alone gone through a budget hearing. How did he suddenly come upon all this insight into how Washington really works?

It only makes sense that this was a farce from day 1 and that he was never really stupid enough to believe that he'd be able to do anything without earmarks. He knew he was riding people's stupidity and he just went right along with it. He's getting this out right now so it's ancient history later on -- when he gets around to voting his votes won't have such the sting of betrayal because he's prepared the people beforehand. He can run for reelection "on his record" scandal-free because this is before his record.

If I were to run as a Republican or Tea Party member, it's exactly how I'd do it. Stupid people are quite predictable in their emotional reactions, and he's covered things well.

Was he Fox News' candidate? Someone tell me how they spin this.

Good point. :thumbsup:

 

[cubby1223]

Still doesn't make me want to vote for a progressive

But keep trying guys, keep trying.

 

[umbrella39]

lol. You think that?

But, but, but Barraaaaack

 

[JSt0rm]

Still doesn't make me want to vote for a progressive

But keep trying guys, keep trying.

dont worry we will :awe:

 

[her209]

Mmmmm... big government.

 

[Perknose]

Still doesn't make me want to face up to the truth.

But keep trying guys, keep trying.

We know, cubby, we know. :hmm:

 

[cubby1223]

^^^
What truth? That I do not live in Kentucky, and did not vote for Rand Paul nor for his opponent?

 

[cubby1223]

Seriously, google search on his comments gives news reports with these two quote:

"I will advocate for Kentucky's interests,"
*and*
"I do tell people within Kentucky I say, ‘Look, I will argue within the committee process for things that are good for Kentucky that they want, and also within the context of a balanced budget,’"

Perknose, if you know what the definitive 100% truth of what will happen over the next 6 years of Rand Paul decision making, from those two statements, please do share!

Drop the partisan bullshit for a moment, and tell me what those two statements mean. We can take turns guessing the context, the "hidden" intent all we want, but it's all a guessing game. And, of course, this is just a meaningless internet forum where nothing written here means anything to anyone

 

[Throckmorton]

"Advocate for ______'s interests" = earmarks

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Good point. :thumbsup:

Yep it worked for Obama and everyone else. If you believed any of them you are an idiot.

 

[PeshakJang]

You mean the right's political campaigns were based on inflating talking points to manipulate an emotional reaction out of those too uneducated to compensate to promote voter action which they then rode into office?

Wow, it's almost as if they learned by watching Fox News.

Did you pay any attention to the 2008 election, or were you not old enough yet?

 

[nick1985]

you go to thinkprogress


lol

 

[bamacre]

I think you're giving him far too little credit. It's only been DAYS since the election. He hasn't been sworn in or cast a single vote, let alone gone through a budget hearing. How did he suddenly come upon all this insight into how Washington really works?

Gee, I don't know, maybe because his dad has been in Congress for years?

It only makes sense that this was a farce from day 1 and that he was never really stupid enough to believe that he'd be able to do anything without earmarks. He knew he was riding people's stupidity and he just went right along with it. He's getting this out right now so it's ancient history later on -- when he gets around to voting his votes won't have such the sting of betrayal because he's prepared the people beforehand. He can run for reelection "on his record" scandal-free because this is before his record.

If I were to run as a Republican or Tea Party member, it's exactly how I'd do it. Stupid people are quite predictable in their emotional reactions, and he's covered things well.

Was he Fox News' candidate? Someone tell me how they spin this.

Just as he's giving Rand too much credit, aren't you judging him too early? He hasn't even voted on one bill yet. I'm the first to admit he has got a lot to prove, but damn, at least wait until he's a senator before we judge him as one.