by Mike (in Chico)
I’m sure many Republicans were afraid that Rand Paul was unelectable because he was “ultraconservative”. His big win shows how many voted for him because he believes we should have more personal freedom and less big government. They voted for the Tea Party principles of 1. Limited Constitutional government, 2. Fiscal Responsibility and 3. Free Markets.
Let’s hope that Republican and Democrat Party bosses wake up to the fact that we want all the freedoms that our Constitution intended. We don’t want our hard earned money and liberties taken away by government employee unions, big business lobbyists and the useful idiots who vote for more and more government control. Aynn Rand fled Russia and warned us about tyrannical government power in Atlas Shrugged. Rand Paul and the Tea Party can help us regain the liberties that government has been taking away.
Mike you are right on the money! I am doubtful that we can turn this all around quickly but I do think that is the part of the mission for this generation of citizens. The second mission is the education of the people, especially future generations of Americans.
Finally I’d like to say that one of the biggest problems in America is the constant pandering by our Congress to all special interest entities, left and right. Decisions in Congress should be made with the general welfare in mind and in keeping with the Constitution. I have defended corporations on this blog many times but let me be very clear that I’m against special deals and government takeovers and bailouts of corporations just as I am against radical or unreasonable regulation and high tax rates.
Rand Paul was a terrific candidate and he will make a brilliant servant of the people…we all must do our part by remaining vocal and present to lend our support and hold feet to the fire!
This is a guy who believes we should repeal the Civil Rights Act.
And you’re actually proud of him?
I never cease to be amazed.
Chris turn your PC tuner down…yes, I’m proud of the comment made by Mike in Chico:
I think youre wrong about Paul’s position on the Civil rights Act:
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2010/05/rand_paul_no_repeal_of_civil_r.html
See also here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005512-503544.html
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/rand-paul-i-will-not-support-any-efforts-to-repeal-the-civil-rights-act-1.php
Chris you said Rand Paul supports the repeal of the Civil Rights Act. Newsweek and Paul have publically said otherwise and because of the left spreading disinformation he made his position real clear:
“Rand Paul issued a statement saying he abhors discrimination, backs the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and would not support its repeal.
“Let me be clear: I support the Civil Rights Act because I overwhelmingly agree with the intent of the legislation, which was to stop discrimination in the public sphere and halt the abhorrent practice of segregation and Jim Crow laws,” he said.
Later Thursday, in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, he went further. Asked specifically whether facilities should have had the right to segregate their lunch counters, as was common in the South, he said, according to the CNN transcript, “I think that there was an overriding problem in the South so big that it did require federal intervention in the ’60s. And it stems from things that I said, you know, had been going on, really, 120 years too long. And the Southern states weren’t correcting it. And I think there was a need for federal intervention.”
Chris, I know you rely heavily on liberal sources for your facts, but this was a whopper that somebody fed you.
Jack and Tina, thank you for bringing that to my attention. Clearly I was not up to date on Paul’s most recent statements regarding the Civil Rights Act. I was referring to previous comments he made in which he said that he did not approve of the government telling private businesses that they were not allowed to discriminate based on race. I am glad that he has since made his position clear (or changed it, depending on your level of cynicism).
Yeah. So did the election of Jesse Ventura. But I’ll bet that history show Jesse acquitting himself better than Rand.
Libby you said, “Yeah. So did the election of Jesse Ventura. But I’ll bet that history shows Jesse acquitting himself better than Rand.” Paul holds a doctorate of medicine, Jesse was a fake wrestler. I would say Rand is off to a much better start and has acquitted himself rather well.
Uh, you don’t think pro-wrestling is real do you? That might explain a lot of things.
Funny, given that Rand Paul is kind of a fake ophthalmologist.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/14/rand-paul-not-board-certi_n_611018.html
Chris, that is unfair, it’s another half truth used to attack a man over his politics. Paul is in compliance with the state medical board in which he practices. Board certifcation is often a confusing subject to lay people. Many boards are just made up to recognize a speciality, but do not have anything to do with quality control.
From 1995 through 2005, Paul was certified by an AMA-recognized certification board. Paul says he let his certification lapse over a dispute over who the American Board of Ophthalmology recertifies.