CPAC: Rand Paul, Libertarians Rising

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

CPAC: Rand Paul, Libertarians Rising

HD Video Download

"The new GOP will need to embrace liberty in both the economic and personal sphere," Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told a packed crowd at the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).

Reason's Matt Welch and Kennedy attended the first day of CPAC to take the temperature of the political organizers, media observers, and grassroot activists who are central to the Republican Party's identity and political fortunes. What did they find? A movement that seems to gravitating to a baldly libertarian stance when it comes to everything from economics to social issues to foreign policy.

About 3 minutes. Produced by Jim Epstein and Meredith Bragg. Hosted by Matt Welch and Kennedy.

Please subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube channel and like and share this video! Scroll below for downloadable versions of all our videos.

Comments

[CE]

If CPAC picked the president, or even the Republican nominee, this might be worth celebrating. Ron Paul won their poll two years in a row, and Romney won the primaries. When Romney won, the GOP went with McCain.

[Caleb Turberville]

Then when Romney lost, the GOP was forced with addressing square one all over again.

[Caleb Turberville]

I know everyone has had their say about Ron Bailey's "punish the GOP" vote for Obama in 2008. But after the failure of the 2012 GOP presidential primaries, if Rand Paul can get the nomination in 2016 (still a long ways off), does that lend support to the idea that the post-Bush/Rove GOP needed a little punishment.

[SimpleMan]

Rand Paul 2016!

[CE]

Dr. Rand Paul, 2020: A Clear Vision for the Future!

[Almanian!]

yes

[Caleb Turberville]

I would prefer that Paul try to win re-election in the Senate first. He'll only be 57 in 2020, and it'll at least demonstrate at least a bit less political ambition than the former 4 year Senator from Illinois demonstrated. Plus, he can use it to help answer any question of his "electability."

[BakedPenguin]

He's still got 2 years to raise his national profile. And he seems to have a talent for doing it well.

[gaoxiaen]

Bullshit. The Republicans need new blood. By the next election most socons will be dead. The Republican's future is libertarian or extinction. I WILL give money to Rand Paul's campaign. The Republican Party will not get one red cent. Not even moral support.

[A Serious Man]

Doesn't matter if he wins the straw poll. It's (insert boring moderate)'s turn in 2016. In 08' it was McCain's turn, in 2012 Mitten's.

[Caleb Turberville]

The good thing about the old, boring GOP candidates is that they're all in their 60s and older. Rand Paul will be 53 in 2016 and 57 in 2020 (eye pun for the taking there, RAND!).

[John]

Who finished second in 2012? Hint, it wasn't Santorum.

[Randian]

Eh, it would have been had he stayed in.

[John]

True.

[gaoxiaen]

Santorum is a "Christian" Osama bin Ladin.

[gaoxiaen]

Religious nut cases should form their own party and not drag down the cause of Liberty.

[Almanian!]

No, fuck you, cut spending.

I'm lookin' at YOU, #CPAC retards.

[Fist of Etiquette]

CPAC looks as white as the reason staff.

The party will have to start destroying Paul now, because it sounds as though he's generating some buzz for the Republicans in places conservatives don't want any such onomatopoeia.

[buybuydandavis]

How dare whites engage in the political process!

[gaoxiaen]

It's time to destroy Rancid Shortbus.

[sarcasmic]

Rush 2112!

[Eduard van Haalen]

"This video contains content from EMI Music Publishing and UMG. It is not available in your country."

[JW]

Related: Rand Paul rising: the 'Facebook generation' shouts over the Republican establishment

Enjoy the non-Gawker non-douchbaginess, but avoid the comments.

[John]

Avoid the comments?

Seriously Rand Paul? What's with the Internet and siding with racists?

That is the top one right now. How dare you try to deprive me of that idiocy.

[JW]

I read a couple and then my brain started to hemorrhage.

[John]

And what about this?

Oh really? That's what people like to say, but guess what. It has never existing, never proven itself, and is a complete made-up myth. Never has any form of capitalism not lead to wealth inequality to an increasing degree. It has always lead to wealth empowerment and has never decreased wealth inequality.

Actual free-market capitalism can't work either. It's even more corrupt and since government is the one that ultimately has to deal with back debt / bankruptcy, it always leads to bailouts of sorts. If "true free-market capitalism" existed, it would lead to even more people jumping ship with golden parachutes and leaving all their workers to die. The socialistic properties were put in place for a reason.

Companies going under used to just not pay their employees, write themselves a big check and leave the company and let the tax payers deal with it. This isn't new. The very idea of a corporation or even a LLC is terrible in my opinion. If you are shifting responsibility of the company's actions to the government (which is what a corporation or LLC effectively does), then you should have a maximum wage you can make and the rest should be set in a rainy day fund for the company or for companies expenses, not payouts. But I guess that's too socialist to you as well.

Comedy gold JW Comedy gold.

[Warty]

corporation or even a LLC

Wut?

[John]

If you are shifting responsibility of the company's actions to the government (which is what a corporation or LLC effectively does)

WTF? It is a see of stupid over there.

[John]

sea I mean.

[Tonio]

Well, it's a "see" too. Like the papal see.

[John]

Good point.

[Randian]

Guys, I didn't get past the last picture. And no, I am not talking about the obviously-British-by-their-teeth dudes.

[DarrenM]

I liked the sweater.

[John]

And this gem

Capitalism ? especially free-market capitalism ? will always be a failure.

[RockLibertyWarrior]

Wow I am glad I didn't look at that comment section. Doing so would make me literally destroy my computer and give up all hope for the human race. Leave it up to the leftards (yeah we've tried Democratic Socialism and Communism and those worked out so well.)

[Smilin' Joe Fission]

...majority rule doesn't give you the right to dictate who another person decides to sell to.. or let on their property. You misunderstand the core of the matter: Personal ownership...

At least somebody on that site has a bit of critical thinking ability.

[Shine on, Nikki Diamond]

Mike Riggs is currently tweeting about Paul introducing a "Life at Conception Act"...

[Shine on, Nikki Diamond]

Mike Riggs ?@MikeRiggs
Paul: "[H]uman life begins at the moment of conception, and therefore is entitled to legal protection from that point forward."
Expand
2m Mike Riggs ?@MikeRiggs
Paul's Life at Conception Act "would implement equal protection under 14th Amendment for the right to life of each born and unborn human."
Expand
3m Mike Riggs ?@MikeRiggs
"Sen. Paul Introduces the Life at Conception Act." There goes his support from the left.

[sarcasmic]

Gays, guns, and abortion.

[Cytotoxic]

[H]uman life begins at the moment of conception

I don't expect anyone to bat 1, but this is absolutely bonkers.

[Ptah-Hotep]

[H]uman life begins at the moment of conception

I don't expect anyone to bat 1, but this is absolutely bonkers.

Does anyone know when life does begin, from a scientific standpoint? At conception, when the fertilized egg implants, when? I think if anyone could answer that question, then you could say if it was bonkers or not.

[Apatheist ?_??]

Life begins at conception. People debate about when personhood exists but I don't see how it is controversial scientifically to say that a zygote is a living organism.

Of course in political language the word life can have all kinds of connotations.

[Tonio]

Uh, it's never *not* alive. The egg is a living cell, as is the sperm.

The whole argument is when it becomes a human being, or at least human enough that it's wrong to kill it.

[Todaluney]

Good point!

[Shine on, Nikki Diamond]

I assumed Cytotoxic's point was that life began, I don't know, a really fucking long time ago and has been continuous ever since. At least that's what people often mean when they complain about that claim.

[John]

A fertilized egg has the exact same DNA I have. It also is the product of two human beings. Sure, it can't walk, talk and think. But it will some day.

I know it is a touch debate. I don't see how saying that a fertilized egg is a person is bonkers.

[Shine on, Nikki Diamond]

life != person

And we still don't know why Cyto said it, so.

[John]

life != person

Sure. But same DNA, created by two people, might equal person. Or if it doesn't, you better have a pretty compelling reason.

[Ptah-Hotep]

life != person

What is the difference? I would truly like to know.

Assuming of course you are talking human life.

[Shine on, Nikki Diamond]

The statement that was described as "bonkers" was that "[H]uman life begins at the moment of conception." I have in the past read many people claim that human life began whenever the first homo sapiens sapiens was conceived, maybe, or born, whatever, and that human life has simply been continuous since then. It's a completely different thing and really has nothing to do with being pro-choice or pro-life.

Personally (ha), I don't think anything nonsentient can be a "person," but I'm not here to go down the pro-choice road (yet again). Just reporting.

[Sudden]

Well, for one, when Warty is claiming how many people he has slept with, he often includes the corpses.

[Tonio]

That's the question, Pharoah. Is a braindead Terry Schiavo an actual person or is it just a genetically human organism which was once inhabited by a person?

You could take a decapitated corpse and keep it alive on life support for some period of time. Is that still somehow a person?

[Tonio]

"But it will some day." Probably, yes.

For me, it's not about what will probably happen, but what it is right at that moment.

[Randian]

If brain death = end of personhood, then brain life = the beginning of personhood.

[John]

That is probably about as good of a line as we could draw Randian. But that would make all abortion after the first trimester or maybe before illegal, which is fine with me but perhaps not others.

The other problem with that distinction is that the two situations are not analogous. If I am brain dead in a coma, it is okay to cut me off life support because we assume I will never get any better. If we knew I would have a functioning brain again in nine months, no way would cutting me off not be murder. Well, a fetus if it doesn't have a brain, will have one shortly.

[Citizen Nothing]

Yeah -- I've always been a software/hardware guy. When the brain acquires enough "software," then you got yourself a person, but not before.

[Tonio]

I could live with some sort of compromise like that, John. But detectable brain activity isn't the same as rational thought process.

[Randian]

Well, brain activity is not sufficient. prenatal dogs have brain activity. We have to identify that which makes a brain uniquely human. As I understand it, there is/are particular wave(s) that are unique to people. I would say if you can detect those then you have yourself a protectable life.

[John]

The problem with that Randian, is that I doubt a new born has though that is uniquely human. So the standard would have to be lower than that.

[Tonio]

Unfortunately, Randi, I don't think those particular patterns emerge in humans until well after birth. But I'm fine with using birth as a bright line for this, as icky as late term abortions are (except for anencephaly and other conditions of similar magnitude).

[John]

I would vote for feeling and reacting to pain, which is if I am not mistaken around two or three months. Reacting to and feeling pain is a pretty good indication of self awareness.

[Tonio]

John, self-awareness is a high-level behavior indicating a sense of personhood as a being distinct from the environment. Even earthworms feel pain and shy away from painful stimuli. That doesn't make them human.

And I'm off to read the PM links, but this has been a really good discussion on this topic.

[Randian]

My understanding is that they did around the 22nd - 26th week or so.

[John]

Then I think that would be a good spot to start.

[Cytotoxic]

The problem with that Randian, is that I doubt a new born has though that is uniquely human. So the standard would have to be lower than that.

No it doesn't.

[Fist of Etiquette]

There goes his support from the left.

He was never going to get support from the left.

[John]

I keep hearing how the SOCONs are going to do him in in the primaries. This looks pretty SOCON to me.

[A Serious Man]

This. As long as he doesn't pull an Akin and say something profoundly idiotic and false about biology this won't hurt him that much.

[Tonio]

Well, First, he could probably siphon off some of those conservative working class catholics from Team Blue, except they tend to also be the union types. Tricky, but possible.

[Smilin' Joe Fission]

I just do not agree with Paul here. The laws on the books now regarding abortion, I believe, are completely moral. But I am of the belief that it is not a human life with all the rights of a human until it has developed a brain and can feel any sort of pain.

[Randian]

You know there are people who cannot feel pain, right?

[Smilin' Joe Fission]

KILL EM

[Smilin' Joe Fission]

But seriously, the not having a brain part is the main factor.

[Tonio]

There's brains and there's brains. Human brains start as a couple of cells early in gestation, but that's not much processing power.

[Smilin' Joe Fission]

Yes, this is what I was getting at. Was a little too quick on hitting the submit button.

[Tonio]

Warty tells me there's a cream for that...

[Sudden]

So super computers that have processing ability and overall power for thought akin to that of a human with MR would be considered worthy of constitutional protections?

[Sudden]

How do you feel about abortion being a state issue? Considering the fallibility of human knowledge as it pertains to the origins of human life and hence a competing claim to rights with the mother, it seems acceptable to me to allow different states to regulate abortion differently. Moreover, given the relative ease of travel in the US, if you get knocked up in Utah and can't procure an abortion there, you can always book a flight to California for a medical day.

[Smilin' Joe Fission]

That's better than a Federal ban.

But I don't think abortions at 9 months should be legal anywhere unless the mothers life is at risk.

[DarrenM]

But I don't think abortions at 9 months should be legal anywhere unless the mothers life is at risk.

The Feds take it upon themselves to dictate a one-size-fits-all minimum wage, regardless of local economic conditions, so there is certainly nothing inconsistent with a maximum limit on the development of the fetus at the time of an abortion.

[Tonio]

As long as pregnant women aren't prohibited from travelling out of state, sure.

[Sudden]

Prohibitions on freedom of travel within the U.S. would certainly be unconstitutional.

[Raven Nation]

Don't some/many airlines have rules about late-term pregnant women flying?

[Tonio]

There are plenty of fully developed nonhuman organisms which can feel pain. But pain isn't the same as rational thought, which is what sets us apart from those other organisms.

[Sudden]

If rational thought is the barrier to entry for being considered living, I'm pretty certain that I'm surrounded by literal zombies on a daily basis.

[Smilin' Joe Fission]

I agree, that is why I also stated a developed brain as part of the criteria.

The abortion conversation is really just not enjoyable and am going to end my participation here: I'm not for an all out ban, but there needs to be a point where you cannot legally get an abortion anymore.

[Tonio]

Yes, it's a difficult conversation, Joe, and it brings me no joy, either. I hope at some point you'll revisit this because defining what it means to be human and have rights is an important discussion.

[Smilin' Joe Fission]

I have an opinion I just find it tedious to discuss on Reason.

[Eduard van Haalen]

I would dare to suggest that whre the rights of living human beings are concerned, Rand Paul is more libertarian than the Reason Foundation and most H&R commenters.

[Randian]

Stroke that beard! Concern-troll AWAY!

[Eduard van Haalen]

Your mother invited me to stroke *her* beard.

[Tonio]

Concern troll running free and clear. Impact in 5..4..

[Eduard van Haalen]

Yeah, I impacted...with *your mother.*

[Paul.]

There goes his support from the left.

What support?

[Mensan]

I have a problem with the term moment of conception. There is no such thing. Conception is a process that begins with insemination and ends with implantation and it usually takes about a week. Even at that point the early cell divisions are programmed into the oocyte. It takes several days after insemination before the parental haploid DNA combines into a new separate genome and starts transcribing proteins.

[Emmerson Biggins]

Obviously, since we don't know, we should go with a minimum mean squared error.

Should be legal up until 4.5 months exactly, and illegal after that. And if you disagree with me you are either a baby killer or a patriarchal nazi.

[Cytotoxic]

I would prefer the title to be 'Terminator 4: Rise of the Libertarians'. I saw a cyborg Ayn Rand going back in time to neutralize statists and fight cyborg Keith Olbermann. It was awesome. WHY AM I NOT A WRITER!?!?!

[Caleb Turberville]

Sarah Connor: Objectivist

[Cytotoxic]

I'll be back. A is A.

[Virginian]

Damn it, this is not the point of CPAC. The three I went to were about drinking and boning your fellow College Republicans. CPAC is fucking amazing because, in general, conservative girls are much hotter and nowadays are just as slutty, because most of them are from out of town so the rationalization hamster lets them go all out.

I miss CPAC....

[John]

Where is it held?

[A Serious Man]

This year they moved it to National Harbor, Maryland.

I thought about going but I decided to spend the money I saved on the Students for Liberty Conference instead.

[John]

That is near me. Sadly no reason to show up and am married. But if I were single.

[grey]

It just means you bring your wife and pick up the women together.

[Virginian]

It's always somewhere in the DC area. I think this year it's at the Gaylord in National Harbor, MD.

[JW]

I think they moved it there because it's too far for the proglodyte protesters to walk to, and there's no Metro out or Bike Share there.

And technically, AFAIK. it's privately owned, so they can boot the filthy fucking hippies out, unlike at the Convention Center.

[John]

Do conservative trolls go to the national Kos convention?

[Randian]

Pfft. Fuck no. Even the youngest members of the Right have jobs.

[John]

And even the worst members of the right think the other side has a right to have their own meetings in peace. The left really are totalitarian.

[Paul.]

Maybe it's because going to a Kos convention, even as a troll would be so utterly horrifying.

[Cytotoxic]

It trolls itself.

[Virginian]

One year I had to explain to some nice older people that the protesters styling themselves Billionaires For Bush were not in fact of the Right. This was in 2011. So Bush had been out of office for two whole years at that point. But our brave lefties don't let that stop them.

[Tonio]

The problem with the convention center is that it's in the middle of a city block and the sidewalks and streets are public. That other venue is on a big private lot, and outside DC.

[Randian]

Damn it, this is not the point of CPAC. The three I went to were about drinking and boning your fellow College Republicans. CPAC is fucking amazing because, in general, conservative girls are much hotter and nowadays are just as slutty

I'll just leave this here: GOParty Animals

[General Butt Naked]

Here's Paul's cpac speech.

It's not bad, which is miles ahead of our bumbling orator in chief.

[John]

It is fun to talk about drones and all. But everything I read says that everyone's health insurance rates are going to double or close to it in the coming year. If that is true, and I have no reason to think it isn't, people are going to go ape shit. Absent nuclear war with North Korea, I think that is going to create a political tidal wave of anger that is going to pretty much swamp every other issue.

[Smilin' Joe Fission]

I agree. I'm planning on moving down to the Carolina areas from Canada this summer and don't like that I'm moving down just in time for this shit storm to kick in.

BTW anybody have any ins at SCANA or Duke energy???

[gaijin]

rates are going to double or close to it in the coming year. If that is true, and I have no reason to think it isn't, people are going to go ape shit

maybe that explains the armored personnel and bullet purchases by the DHS?

[Raven Nation]

Also the argument that ammo purchases are gun control by another name:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-G.....other-Name

Another site reported that the Social Security Admin purchased 170k rounds. Not much in terms of amount but why the hell does SSA need ammo?

[Sevo]

John| 3.15.13 @ 4:06PM |#
"It is fun to talk about drones and all. But everything I read says that everyone's health insurance rates are going to double or close to it in the coming year. If that is true, and I have no reason to think it isn't, people are going to go ape shit. Absent nuclear war with North Korea, I think that is going to create a political tidal wave of anger that is going to pretty much swamp every other issue."

Yep, and that anger won't get anywhere close to Obozo and his magic medical care.
I live in SF; the comments on the local sites all focus on those KORPORASHUNS!!!!

[SumpTump]

Dude seems to be talking a LOT of smack!

http://www.Goto-Anon.tk

[Olive]

If you think Edna`s story is cool..., last pay-cheque my sister's best friend basically also recieved a check for $5865 working a seventeen hour week from there apartment and their best friend's mom`s neighbour done this for 9-months and got over $5865 parttime from a labtop. follow the instructions on this address, http://www.wow92.com

[boschefreddy]

If you think Victoria`s story is flabbergasting,, 3 weaks-ago my friend made $4441 putting in a ninteen hour week an their house and they're roomate's ex-wife`s neighbour has done this for nine months and earned more than $4441 in their spare time from a computer. the guidelines available at this link, http://www.fly38.com

[irish.irish]

my friend's mom makes $69/hr on the laptop. She has been without a job for seven months but last month her pay check was $13431 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more on this site and go to home tab for more detail. http://tinyurl.com/homejobs4you

[Floyd64]

my best friend's sister-in-law makes $84 an hour on the computer. She has been fired for five months but last month her pay was $14040 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read more on this web site http://www.wow92.com

[nannasin28]

the comments on the local sites all focus !! TDA1557Q

[ygsrf]

Which is the best blog for us.we are enjoy it and will show them to everyone.

[lendapatricia]

If you think Betty`s story is nice..., last pay-check my mum's girl friend basically recieved a check for $9276 working thirteen hours a week from their apartment and the're co-worker's ex-wife`s neighbour has done this for 9-months and got a cheque for more than $9276 part time at their pc. the guidelines available on this page,
http://JUMP30.COM