Rand Paul's using Sarah Palin talking points, and the Tea Party, while it may have been Ron Paul's idea, is sticking with the free market fundamentalist ideology without preserving any semblance of the anti-war, anti-torture stance Ron Paul is also famous for.
Full article here.Ron Paul takes a stand on the issues of foreign entanglement, the rule of law and due process, wiretapping and the right to privacy, and torture, but he also thinks public education is Communist and must be destroyed.
This would be a tough give and take for someone who wants to see progress in America and a stronger middle class but also wants the rule of law to be restored and the foreign invasions to end, but even if Ron Paul were, for example, President, he would have to make compromises on that agenda.
And if he had to make compromises, which side would he take? I think the Tea Party movement and the slight differences between his ideology and his own son's ideology, shows which direction he would take.
In a hypothetical situation, if Ron Paul had to choose between free-market capitalism and anti-fascism, which would he choose? Looking at his two children in the political arena, the Tea Party and Senate candidate from Kentucky Rand Paul, it appears that Ron Paul is more likely to associate himself with red-baiting fearmongers than with peace activists. There is a split in the Tea Party between people who believe in Ron Paul's anti-war stance and Sarah Palin's tough-talking, throw-the-rules-out-the-window position, but Rand Paul appears to be bridging that gap. On his website, he says that terrorists need to be tried in military tribunals at “Gitmo” and says that, “… the primary Constitutional function of the federal government is national defense,” a talking point Sarah Palin made during her address at the National Tea Party Convention.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
