Skip to comments.Rand Paul's present to his dad Ron
Posted on 08/24/2009 4:50:40 PM PDT by freepersunite
Rand Paul's Birthday Present to Dad Ron Paul By Nikki Schwab, Washington Whispers
What do you give a congressman for his birthday? If you're Senate candidate Rand Paul and you're choosing presents for dad, Rep. Ron Paul, whose birthday was yesterday, you go for gifts that scream politics. "I gave him an original copy of Barry Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative that was given to me by the publisher," Rand Paul tells Whispers, adding that it was published in Kentucky, where he's running for U.S. Senate. He also gave his pop, who's a big fan of economics, some early 20th-century currency called gold certificates. "So I gave him that, framed, with a statement at the bottom that says, 'When paper was as good as gold,' " he says.
Though that's nice, what Ron gave back to his son was better; he let Rand use his birth date as a fundraiser. "His birthday present to me, I guess, was helping with the 'money bomb,' " says Rand Paul. His campaign scheduled a money bomba mass online donation for Ron's birthday and, within 24 hours, added $430,000 to its coffers. While the underdog candidate has now raised over $680,000, the original goal for yesterday's money bomb was $1 million. Rand tells us he's not disappointed. "I think you set high goals in order to try to motivate people to go for things," he says. "When my dad raised $6 million online [during his presidential campaign], nobody remembers that his goal was $10 million."
It was a pretty good day all around.
I thought it might have been an autographed copy of the Koran, bearing the signatures of his/their heroes: Mohammed, Ahmanutjob and Saddam Hussein.
it was Ronald Reagaon’s speech “A Time Of Choosing” that moved me right. Previously I viewed myself as a left winger
Yes I never knew that Danny Kaye and Ron Paul were such good friends.
Wonder where they got the name Rand for their son?
Mw Too! I read it in 64, 13 years old.
You joined up to post Ron Paul nonsense?
I have an August 1961 copy of CoaC within reaching distance, on my desk. It’s a 14th printing - from it’s original print date of March 1960. Best conservative manifesto ever. It’s a condensed reading of Mark Levin’s Liberty and Tyranny. Both should be required reading for all those you care about most.
Interesting article, but don’t expect a favorable response on this website.
A coalition of the neo-cons and the Neandertal wing of the GOP dominates the Free Republic site as well as the GOP. This coalition intentionally drives off libertarians and libertarian-minded conservatives, and has done a darn good job of it so far. If you doubt that, just consider the 2008 election results.
Rand Paul follows in the footsteps of Ron Paul, a genuine limited-government, libertarian conservative. The ideals of individual liberty, free markets, and limited government hold no sway with neo-cons and Neandertals. Consequently, Rand Paul is persona non grata here. If it were 1977, Ron Reagan would be persona non grata as well; after all, it was Reagan who said, “the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”
BTW, Rand is short for Randall.
Well said, I agree!
wasn’t RR a bit of an outcast? he even campaigned for Ron Paul in the special election and Ron Paul was one of his first backers in congress when people said he was unelectable.
Ping to #11 & #12. Too good to pass up.
by the way, when RR became president he changed (for the worse). Ron Paul got very disillusioned with that and quit congress.
Ron Paul is a genuine apologist for America's enemies who wants to see a continuation of Comrade O's worldwide groveling apology tour and general policy of collapsing America in upon itself as a pitiful and defenseless has been among nations.
Free markets in this day and age is simply code for "no more income for any Americans who work with their hands for a living" and for "send all the jobs to Bangladesh." Let us instead dump GATT and WTO in favor of tariffs to rebuild American industry. The worship of money by our spoiled rich is a national disgrace and not a political cause that can reasonably be called "conservative" or sane, for that matter.
Ronald Reagan was a patriot. The paleopipsqueaks are not patriots. DO NOT imagine that you can hijack the memory of Ronaldus Maximus to advance those whose foreign policy and military policy more resembles by far those of little Ronnie Tutu. If Ronaldus Maximus had lived to see the sorry state to which the likes of paleoPaulie had dragged libertoonianism, he would not have spoken favorably of libertarianism. It was once the philosophy of free men and women and knew the evils of totalitarian enemies. It was once a philosophy which would have recognized Sharia Law as not a libertarian ideal. It became a philosophy which first cozied up to the mass murder of babies by abortion because it is just none of our bidness (don'tcha know?) and then decided that homosexual and other perversions were perfectly OK and then decided that peace, trade and fiddlesticks was an apprppriate foreign policy response to the enemies of Western Civilization. To many libertarians, the only recognizable enemies are God and these United States of America.
I was a Libertarian state party officer until Roe vs. Wade and the "libertarian" response to same. By 1976, I was a Reagan State Chairman when he challenged Ford. Now we have Ron Paul applying that brilliant libertarian insight of refusing to care or do anything about outrages like abortion to foreign policy where he would go on autosmooch for Islamofascist butt. THAT is not the heart and soul of conservatism, just a combination of Margaret Sanger and Neville Chamberlain warmed over. Ignore the mold on the casserole and maybe you will find it a tasty meal with no heavy lifting. I won't.
AND, puhleeze stop with the whining about the poor paleolibertoonians being unpopular on FR or in the GOP. They are unpopular everywhere and rightfully so. Ayn Rand was no conservative. There is no God but Moolah and Ayn Rand was its prophet (profit?) is no statement of a conservative. Conceding that Rand Paul's first name is short for Randall, why do you suppose that Randall tolerates shortening it to "Rand?"
Conservatives and libertarians have diverged and are not to be confused with one another. Frank Meyer's dream of fusionism has failed. To the extent that individual liberty (not for abortion or perversion) and "free" markets and limited government are somewhat important values, they take a permanent backseat to Judaeo-Christian values and national survival without which they will not exist at all. If you are disappointed that the entire conservative movement agenda and focus is not the fertilization and worship of your securities portfolio, tooooo baaaaad.
Neanderthal and proud of it. What you and most of the leftists call "neocon" is, of course, conservative. The actual "neo-cons" are still a handful of surviving and mostly New York City based nonogenarian intellectuals who used to be socialists (but emphatically NOT communists) but fled the Demonratic Party when it was seized by McGovern and the communists in the early 1970s. Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Midge Decter, Gertrude Himmelfarb, et al. The departed include Sidney Hook, Daniel Patrck Moynihan, the Rostows. You do their intellectual stature a disservice by taking their collective name "neocons" and applying it to garden variety conservatives of lesser intellectual rigor but more conservative views on domestic issues.
As to the paleos posing as "conservative" but are not and the libertoonians, they share the always fatal flaw of believing with a pissant coward like Neville Chamberlain that nothing is REALLY worth fighting for. As the good Book says: Men cry peace, peace! but there is no peace.
Ron Paul and his political love slaves have much more in common with Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, International ANSWER, John Lennon's Imagine and Ramsay Clark than they do with patriotism or any form of actual conservatism. And lest we forget, paleoPaulie's campaign last year drew the eager support of the likes of David Duke. Yes, paleoPaulie and his spawn are not very popular around here nor should they be.
Oh, and Ronaldus Maximus campaigned repeatedly for a Congressional candidate named Lowell P. Weicker, Jr. in 1970 so I wouldn't be reading too much into his campaigning for the paleofruitcake Ron Paul many years ago and long before Paul had apostasized from conservatism to be the Al Qaeda mouthpiece in the last presidential tournament. The appropriate (and merciful) conservative response to the Galveston treasonweasel is to deport him permanently.
When Ronaldus Maximus became president, he continued to be Ronaldus Maximus. It was paleoPaulie who went nuts and abandoned conservatism then and ever since. Thanks for the concession that Paul is not to be confused with Ronald Reagan, though.