Rand Paul 2016: Amnesty, Legalize Pot, Defense Cuts

District of Corruption

No thanks.

The GOP is going to fall flat on its face in 2016: Rand Paul, Chris Christie, Susana Martinez, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Jeb Bush, Nikki Haley, etc.

Who cares? If that’s the choice, then I am voting for Reality.

This entry was posted in BRA Politics. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Jim

    He was one of them “tea party” senators too. Wow, talk about a movement that achieved absolutely none of its goals. Even their successes electorally turned to failures.

    Let that be a lesson to them, you can’t take america back.

  • RobRoySimmons

    When is the American Spring? The only solution is secession.

  • RobRoySimmons

    Thomas Chittum a grunt, merc and author wrote back in the mid-90s that our empire is next (USSR was first) to crumble.

  • http://www.southernnationalist.com/blog/ PalmettoPatriot

    Rand is a huge disappointment. Everyone I know is upset with him. They’re all disappointed.

  • http://Www.Yahooligans.com Tamer of Savages

    We need to stop worrying about the cabaret act of DC politics.
    Turn off C-Span and find a girl with a different colored passport.

  • Probably the Next Hitler

    You’re pro-secession but anti-leaving states to legalize pot (or not)? Why?

  • http://www.southernnationalist.com/blog/ PalmettoPatriot

    PTNH,

    I’m not against States legalising weed. I’m against amnesty for Third World immigrants. That is where Rand is a disappointment.

  • Bernie

    I knew Rand Paul was like his father when I heard him on Sean Hannity’s show yodeling about how “racist” the criminal justice system is to blacks.

    Even Romney was better than this.

  • http://www.occidentaldissent.com/ Hunter Wallace

    The country is sinking into a Third World dystopia and Rand Paul’s priorities are amnesty for illegal aliens and legalizing weed.

  • Bernie

    I’m fine with the defense cuts and legalizing weed, however.

    By the way, why don’t the libertarians ever hector leftists about affirmative action and freedom of association?

  • http://www.occidentaldissent.com/ Hunter Wallace

    The fact that legalizing weed and amnesty for illegal aliens are his priorities tells you everything that you need to know. Rand Paul is nothing more than another typical libertarian.

  • http://www.occidentaldissent.com/ Hunter Wallace

    Ron Paul’s comments about the border fence in the debates and particularly his comment around the time of the Nevada primary in which he compared illegal aliens to the Jews in Nazi Germany was also revealing.

  • TabuLa Raza

    Bigger fish to fry than secession.

    Breaking up the paper money grip on the world is priority numero uno. We can cooperate with others until this task is complete.

  • jeppo

    Of course the defence budget should be cut and the states should be able to legalize cannibis if they so choose. The US is now $16 trillion in debt and adding another trillion in new debt every nine months. EVERY NINE MONTHS! Government spending must be cut and new sources of revenue must be found, so cutting the Pentagon’s bloated budget and taxing stoners sound like good ideas to me.

    As for Paul’s amnesty plan, please read this comment of mine from a couple days ago:

    Rand Paul came out in favour of amnesty, but–as Peter Brimelow pointed out–he coupled “assimilation” of illegal aliens with a moratorium on legal immigration. Here is the relevant part of the interview with Paul in Politico:

    Paul plans to inject himself into the middle of the GOP’s emotional immigration debate in the wake of Romney losing swing states with heavy Latino populations like Florida, Colorado and Nevada. Paul is working on a novel plan that he says would “assimilate” many of the 12 million illegal immigrants currently in the country. Those individuals, he said, could apply for legal status, but immigration would then be clamped down in the interim. He also says his plan would toughen security at the border.

    “I want to show what conservatives would or can accept,” he said in describing his plan. “If we assimilate those who are here, however they got here — don’t make it an easy path for citizenship. There would be an eventual path, but we don’t make anybody tomorrow a citizen who came here illegally. But if they’re willing to work, willing to pay taxes, I think we need to normalize those who are here.”

    Paul said the “trade-off” would be “not to accept any new legal immigrants while we’re assimilating the ones who are here.” Asked if he is concerned about the ripple effect that could cause around the world, Paul said the details over which countries would be affected are still in the works.

    From an immigration restrictionist standpoint, this plan is utterly brilliant in its deviousness. Toughening border security would presumably not mean make-believe solutions like a “virtual fence”, but rather an actual double fence along the entire length of the Mexican border. This would have the effect of permanently cutting the number of illegal crossings from Mexico by at least 95%. Promising to naturalize millions of illegals once the border is secured might be the impetus needed to finally get the powers-that-be to actually build the damn fence.

    But the real brilliance of Paul’s plan is to “not to accept any new legal immigrants while we’re assimilating the ones who are here.” The process of assimilating millions of illegals could end up dragging out over 10, 15, maybe 20 years. Twenty years without any legal immigration would be a godsend for America, and would buy much-needed time for whites to maintain their majority status.

    Even if this was eventually watered down to mean zero *net* immigration instead of zero immigration, period, this would still be a deal worth making. A policy of zero net immigration would allow about 200,000 immigrants annually to roughly match the same number of emigrants, far less than the million plus that are legally admitted every year now.

    And Paul cryptically mentions that the details over which countries which would be affected are still in the works, possibly meaning that the “quotas” from nations with lots of illegals (Mexico, Guatamala, El Salvador, etc.) being regularized would be completely filled, and that any new legal immigrants would be selected from countries with few illegal nationals in the US. Like the countries of Europe for example. Canada is slowly but surely increasing immigration from Europe and the US while lowering it from Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and there’s no reason why the US can’t do the same thing.

    The best part of Paul’s “temporary” immigration moratorium is that it will almost certainly turn out to be permanent. From the beginning of this century, Turkish immigration to Germany has dropped precipitously, and in the past couple years it is actually negative; more Turks are emigrating than immigrating. The same trend is happening with other Muslims and Third Worlders in Germany; more are leaving than coming. And there is virtually no popular or political support to re-start the influx of non-Europeans. Sure, there is still large scale immigration to Germany, but it is virtually all from Eastern and Southern Europe.

    The same pattern can be seen in other European countries where immigration restrictionist parties have been part of government, like Switzerland, Denmark and the Netherlands. Third World immigration rates have dropped big time, and even when these Rightist governments have been replaced by Leftist ones, there has been no corresponding rise in the number of non-European immigrants. Why? Because Third World immigration is inherently unpopular with the large majority of the electorate and if it comes down to a choice between flooding the country with non-whites or staying in office, even Leftist politicians will always choose the latter. The lesson here is that once the immigration tap has been turned off, it is exceedingly difficult to ever turn it back on again.

    If it was up to me, and probably just about every other OD reader, I would stop Third World immigration completely and permanently, deport all the illegals, and pay a significant bounty to any non-white or non-Christian willing to renounce their citizenship and leave the country voluntarily. But Rand Paul’s plan, while on its surface seemingly just another GOP Hispandering sellout, might just be the ticket to end the Third World colonization of the US for all time. We’ll have to wait and see what the details of Paul’s plan actually are, but this is the type of out-of-the-box thinking that our side needs to do more of. Let the Left think they’ve won the amnesty battle while we win the immigration war. Call it victory by deception.

  • Probably the Next Hitler

    Given that the article is specifically about how he can win over blue states, it doesn’t sound too bad. Maybe I’m giving his euphemisms too much credit, but Rand sounds much better than Ron on immigration, based on that article, at least.

  • Brutus

    Yeah, yeah, Paul’s plan sounds absolutely “brilliant.” Assimilate 15 or 20 millions of wetbacks and muds. Brilliant! Then let them breed for 20 years while things “drag out.” Absolutely brilliant, I say.

  • Brutus

    I’m thinking seriously about becoming some kind of shyster that goes up and down the country selling wonder products to the huge population of rubes and hayseeds we have in this country.

    I’m debating between that or becoming one of those devious preachers and starting a church to fleece the sheep and get rich.

  • jeppo

    Yeah, yeah, Paul’s plan sounds absolutely “brilliant.” Assimilate 15 or 20 millions of wetbacks and muds. Brilliant! Then let them breed for 20 years while things “drag out.” Absolutely brilliant, I say.

    A partial amnesty in exchange for real border security and an immigration moratorium is a good deal, for the reasons I outlined above. But if you don’t like that, there’s always the emerging Obama-Boehner plan: no strings attached amnesty. Choose your poison wisely.

  • Brutus

    Yeah, it’s a real good deal.

  • Mosin Nagant

    I’ve always said “Ayn” Rand Paul is not like his father. He even turned his back on Ron and backed the Neocon loser. That’s why the Tea Party loves him and he has been able to join the Republican Party machine, where he will be useful to sell amnesty to unsuspecting conservatives. When has Rand been an editor of a sometimes racially-incorrect newsletter, or made speeches in favour of states’ rights to secession directly in front of large confederate flags?

  • Mosin Nagant

    The only part that matters is the assimilation part. The “moratorium” is just window dressing to delude unsuspecting conservatives. A genuine moratorium would necessarily include deportation.

  • Mosin Nagant

    “Choose your poison wisely.” Reminds me of the recent election. The majority in the Northeastern states and urban areas everywhere will out-vote everyone else for the most potent poison.

  • Mosin Nagant

    His other bright idea, the marijuana initiative “to distinguish the G.O.P. from the Democrats and draw in younger voters” proves he is a rascal.

  • Snowhitey

    They’re all bending over and Rand Paul obviously is no exception. Perhaps Mitch McConnell has truly mesmerized him.

  • Snowhitey

    We complain that the Republican Party is always selling us out yet it looks like we have a few sellouts on this board as well. We feel so impotent that we’re willing to accept 20 millions browns for another empty promise of a secure border and a phony moratorium on legal immigration which will be overturned within months with claims that it’s not working for some fake reason or another.

  • Snowhitey

    Looks like compromise is only a white thing.

  • Mosin Nagant

    I think the second-generation Paulist, like most second-generations of whatever, is bound to be generally worse than the original.

  • Gottfried

    Amnesty for illegals is horrible and unforgivable but drug decriminalization is ok, and the defense budget absolutely needs to be cut.

  • Mosin Nagant

    Only the first is likely to happen, the other two are too profitable to change.

  • Nick Adams

    “We are born into this time and must bravely follow the path to the destined end. There is no other way. Our duty is to hold on to the lost position, without hope, without rescue, like that Roman soldier whose bones were found in front of a door in Pompeii, who, during the eruption of Vesuvius, died at his post because they forgot to relieve him. That is greatness. That is what it means to be a thoroughbred. The honorable end is the one thing that can not be taken from a man.”

    That said, I wouldn’t mind burning a doobie while we watch it all collapse.

  • Ulfric

    By the way, why don’t the libertarians ever hector leftists about affirmative action and freedom of association?

    Remember when Rand Paul did come out about freedom of association? It was back during the Tea party days. Rand made some statement about it and then came out the very next day and apologized.

    The free market and pot are safe subjects that they know will not get them in trouble with the media and other leftist institutions.

  • coldequation

    Jeppo, you’re a fool. Here’s what would really happen: Illegals are amnestied, more illegals come in, in 10 – 20 years they get amnesty too. The fence would be worthless without the will to enforce border security. In two weeks it will be full of holes and the coyotes will know where they are. No president since Eisenhower has been interested in border security and there’s no reason to believe the next one will be either.

    Right-wingers are always talking themselves into thinking that some right-liberal like Rand Paul is secretly on their side, and that their liberal actions are really part of some super-secret plan to outsmart the lefties, and they’re always wrong.

  • Bill Yancey

    Ron Paul was a savior unrecognized. Rand Paul is a typical politician, initially enthused to change the direction of suicidal America but ultimately swept away by the tide of compromise.

    Ron Paul was right. Americans’ government will not reflect their will until they take charge of it.

  • Brutus

    As far as many Americans are concerned, they HAVE taken charge of their government. That is the crucial point that apparently sails right past a great many white people. This past election demonstrated the disconnect with that reality most clearly. White Republicans were sure that it was all just a mistake and that Obama would be defeated in a landslide.

    But it wasn’t a mistake; a lot of white people and the vast majority of non-white people wanted just what they got.

    Some white people think a lot of things, e.g., the welfare system, is being run in the way they are because of just some mistake. In fact, things are working with the precision of a Swiss watch, just as planned.

    Some white people, like the ones who read and post on sites like this, think that pretty much most white people really don’t like what has happened and the way society is today. They are wrong. A hell of a lot of white people are enthusiastic about the “Progressive” society we have and applaud the demise of “Traditional America.”

    That reality MUST be realized.

    Anyone who plans to take action against modern society and the “Progressive” government we have today must recognize the priority of first selecting those segments of the population that are receptive of the vision they want to implement while rejecting AND accurately strategizing against the segment that will oppose. It is time to recognize that, at least in this important area, the doctrine propagated by white nationalists is fatally flawed. Our “uniforms” are NOT just our skins.

    Deplorable to be sure. But a reality nonetheless. It would be Grand if only this were not so, but it is so. No amount of forced argument to the contrary or fantasy is going to alter this cogent fact.

    If a favorable society is to be successfully engineered, then it must be engineered with material that actually exists and is workable and available. And always remember, good enough is the enemy of the best. A solution that actually works is better than all of the idealistic designs and PREFERENCES desired but which do not work.

  • john

    “His other bright idea, the marijuana initiative “to distinguish the G.O.P. from the Democrats and draw in younger voters” proves he is a rascal.”

    Putting things back to how they were for the first 150 years of US history sounds pretty traditional and conservative to me. If that’s a “bright idea”, then the idea to give gangster thugs a tax-free profit making franchise all their own, (preventing hemp farmers from earning honest money in the process) was nothing short of brilliant.

  • Bill Yancey

    Just because Rand Paul is a complete sellout does not mean that his father was. Sure, Ron did some nosediving to gain access to the unfortunate MSM but he knew the score. His agenda would have reversed – get that, reversed – the regime’s agenda.

    Fuck with libertarians all you want but they only exist in place of your own inaction.

  • http://www.occidentaldissent.com/ Hunter Wallace

    Ron Paul waved a HUGE RED FLAG last year in the Republican primaries when he compared illegal aliens to the Jews in Nazi Germany. He also came out against the border fence in the debates.

    That’s the reason why I didn’t vote for him. There were some positive threads here about Ron Paul during the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries, but the more he spoke about immigration, the more that support started to wane.

    Not just here but at VDARE too.

  • Mosin Nagant

    Yes Hunter, he apparently fell away from constitutionalism into libertarianism in the primary season, pandering for votes and probably doing some taqiyya — no longer being known as the editor of the newsletter, nor standing in front of any large confederate flags making speeches on states’ rights.

  • jack ryan

    Hunter, please ignore Bill Yancey and other, Ron Paul cult true believers.

    There is no trying to use reason with them.

    They have no life outside of this Libertarian, Constitutionalist cult.

    Don’t feed the race denying Libertarians. Don’t allow them in your home, in your life.

    Like vampires, once you allow them across your threshold….

    THEY WILL NEVER LEAVE!

  • jack ryan

    Nick Adams says:
    November 21, 2012 at 3:54 am
    “We are born into this time and must bravely follow the path to the destined end. There is no other way. Our duty is to hold on to the lost position, without hope, without rescue, like that Roman soldier whose bones were found in front of a door in Pompeii, who, during the eruption of Vesuvius, died at his post because they forgot to relieve him. That is greatness. That is what it means to be a thoroughbred. The honorable end is the one thing that can not be taken from a man.”

    Jack Ryan responds:

    Very beautiful Nick Adams. If Hunter Wallace will allow me, I would like to make a post featuring your quote and link to Saga’s beautiful, live performance – “If this is the way it ends”.

  • Jim

    Fuck that honorable shit, I got my kids to think about. I’d go for the most dishonorable tactics known to man if they were guaranteed to work.

  • chelton

    “Amnesty” that results in 20 million illegals getting the right to vote is the end of America. The guiding principle in any negotiation on this issue should be that no one who has broken the law should ever be rewarded with citizenship.

  • Sam

    Hunter Wallace says:
    ‘Ron Paul waved a HUGE RED FLAG last year in the Republican primaries when he compared illegal aliens to the Jews in Nazi Germany.’

    What a loon!

    Hunter Wallace says: ‘He also came out against the border fence in the debates.’

    Great idea. Libertarian idiot!

  • Stonelifter

    we’ve heard the “give them amnesty and we’ll close down the border” line before. How did that work out for us?

  • test

    “A partial amnesty in exchange for real border security and an immigration moratorium is a good deal”

    It’s not a good deal. The idea that you should have to trade something for border security is a joke. It’s like bargaining with a burglar over how much of your stuff he can take.

    However, it is a good way of introducing the idea of an immigration moratorium into the debate. If the balance of opinion ever shifted to the point where the other side was willing to accept that trade then you can withdraw the bit about the partial amnesty at the last minute.

  • test

    However despite my comment above i still think “border security first, then we’ll talk about amnesty” is a better tack.

  • AntiLiberalNorth

    Ron Paul has a massive detriment on the immigration plan but because he is so super states rights he wouldn’t try to use any Fed power against Red States passing statewide illegal immigration laws because it would be so anti-libertarian to do so?

    I easily imagine if he were Prez that he wouldn’t really lift a finger if say, the Red States formed a interstate coalition between only other Red States, forming a network plan between all their state governments to send all the illegals to Texas, where it’s the final destination all along the Rio Grande to deport back to Mexico and further south.

  • Sam2

    Brutus says,”I’m thinking seriously about becoming some kind of shyster that goes up and down the country selling wonder products to the huge population of rubes and hayseeds we have in this country.

    I’m debating between that or becoming one of those devious preachers and starting a church to fleece the sheep and get rich.”

    Brutus is brilliant. We need to try something else cause we don’t run the country. Immigration, legal and illegal, will increase til blood comes out of our ears.