I woke up this morning to see Krugman’s post about Rand Paul’s recent statements about speech at violent rallies. Throughout the day the typical slew of left-leaning media sources has piled on as well. What do you all think?
It’s really unfortunate this controversy is arising in such close proximity to his opposition to the Patriot act renewal in the senate which seemed to have caused at least some liberal folk to sympathize.
I tried unsuccessfully to find a proper transcript - my internet is too slow to watch videos right now. 
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/01/libertarian-politicians-arent/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto
It’s foolish to presume that Rand Paul is a carbon copy of his father Ron Paul. Rand doesn’t understand the impliciations of what he espouses more so then his father which is kind of sad because rather then standing on the shoulders of his father, he is bathing in the mud with the other politicians.
Rand Paul a libertarian…that is pretty rich.
If Rand Paul wasn’t the son of Ron Paul, he would not get talked about by Libertarians. I thought he’d leave his statist positions behind after getting elected, no dice I’m afraid.
Rand Paul is simply dissapointing. At one time he will take a stand for liberty and two weeks later he will say something like this.
He is the personification of the Tea Party. This is their contradiction presenting itself.