Senator Rand Paul plus and minus columns

Positives

Drone filibuster.
Asked Clinton about CIA/State Dept arms smuggling to Syrian Islamic Extremists in January.
Has spoken up against gun control - but that's just a general GOP supporters line and didn't make any difference.

Negatives

(In rough reverse chronological order.)

Voted FOR the Monsanto Protection Act

Says that he does not want to end the drugs war (thereby accepting the massive levels of crime and corruption that goes with the trafficking of illegal drugs).
http://reason.com/blog/2013/05/13/rand-paul-assures-evangelicals-that-he-d

Endorsed Mitch McConnell with no pressure to do so.

Did not ask about the CIA/State Dept arms smuggling to Syrian Islamic Extremist at the Benghazi hearings in May. Toed the Neocon line.
Comments, questions and interviews were just designed to gain GOP popularity and support, not to do any good or steer the debate towards the multitude of evidence of CIA/State Dept support of Islamic Extremists.
http://ian56.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/unanswered-questions-from-benghazi.html

Even John McCain made a statement against Obama because of his outright abuses of the powers granted in the AUMF.
Haven't heard anything from Rand.

"But even Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who generally agrees with Graham in pursuing a vigorous war on terror, said the AUMF has been stretched past the breaking point.

"This authority ... has grown way out of proportion and is no longer applicable to the conditions that prevailed, that motivated the United States Congress to pass the authorization for the use of military force that we did in 2001," McCain said."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/16/war-powers-obama-administration_n_3288420.html

How about saying something against the 74 wars and conflicts that America is now involved in?
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/05/u-s-currently-fighting-74-different-wars-that-it-publicly-admits.html

Very poor comments on his visit to Israel.
He should of been less pro Israel and more supportive of Palestinian attempts at international recognition. Did not make a comment against the further illegal Israeli West Bank and Jerusalem settlement building.
Attended AIPAC (at least for the last 2 years).

Very poor speech at CPAC 2013.
Did not mention cutting any of the over $1.3tn of annual Corporate Welfare.
Did not mention cutting any of the $1,219bn military spending or any of the current massive Pentagon waste.
Did not mention stopping the continuing $1tn a year bailout of the big banks by the government and the Federal Reserve.
Did not mention stopping the $1tn a year of Federal Reserve QE printing.
He did advocate raising the income tax thresh hold to $50,000, i.e. cutting taxes on the middle class and lower paid rather than the rich, contrary to Ryan's so called budget.
He did say the GOP needed to become more Libertarian - but it was very general with no specific mentions of the multitude of abuses to the Bill of Rights.
http://ian56.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/not-particularly-good-speech-by-rand.html

Endorsed Romney DURING the Texas State Convention.
He could easily have waited until after all the State Conventions were finished and final delegate totals were set.
He could of waited until after Tampa - his speech at Tampa just contained a load of waffle.
Did not make any statements in support of Ron Paul during Tampa. Ben Ginsberg actually asked him to "sort your guys out" referring to Ron Paul delegates and supporters who were causing a nuisance.
Did not make any statements against the Stalinist rule changes imposed during Tampa. Lots of other people made highly critical public statements, even people like Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin - but not Rand.
Made the endorsement of Romney on Hannity of all places - why didn't he at least do it somewhere a bit more supportive like Cavuto?

Previous statements supporting Iranian sanctions.
Recent comments about Iran have been non existent or poor.
Movement towards the Neocon line.

Other
There is plenty of other material that Rand could speak up about, against the increasing heavy handed intervention of the Federal government.
But I haven't heard anything.

The change in the wording of procedure to allow the military to operate on the streets of the US, without any consent from the civil authorities (usually the Governor).
http://www.longislandpress.com/2013/05/14/u-s-military-power-grab-goes-into-effect/

Hasn't said anything against the introduction of biometric ID's in the Immigration bill.

Indeed I haven't heard him say anything recently against any of this long list of civil rights abuses by Obama.
http://ian56.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/obamas-civil-rights-violations.html

How about going after Holder for his non prosecution of the bankers?
Elizabeth Warren is harder on the bankers than Rand. He could of supported her actions and questions.
Warren to Federal regulators "when was the last time you jailed a senior banker".
http://ian56.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/a-catalog-of-criminality-big-banks.html

How about going after Obama and Holder for their utter failure in upholding the Rule of Law?
http://ian56.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/a-governments-duty-is-to-protect-its.html
http://ian56.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-heinous-and-serious-crimes-of-obama.html

He could even of had a go at the Monsanto Protection Act - but he didn't.


He has made statements in support of Hemp production, but in the scheme of things this is not major.
A statement against the futile and counter productive "war on drugs" would be much better.
http://ian56.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/how-to-save-200bn-pa-from-federal-and.html


All we have heard lately is waffle that is generally supportive of the Neocon line, plays to the GOP crowd, or makes no difference.
(Except for the couple of positives mentioned at the top of this article.)