Rand Paul Quotes

Rachel Maddow: Do you think that a private business has the right to say we don't serve black people?<p>Rand Paul: I'm not in favor of any discrimination of any form; I would never belong to any club that excluded anybody for race. We still do have private clubs in America that can discriminate based on race. But I think what's important about this debate is not written into any specific "gotcha" on this, but asking the question: what about freedom of speech? Should we limit speech from people we find abhorrent? Should we limit racists from speaking? I don't want to be associated with those people, but I also don't want to limit their speech in any way in the sense that we tolerate boorish and uncivilized behavior because that's one of the things freedom requires is that we allow people to be boorish and uncivilized, but that doesn't mean we approve of it. I think the problem with this debate is by getting muddled down into it, the implication is somehow that I would approve of any racism or discrimination, and I don't in any form or fashion.<p>I do defend and believe that the government should not be involved with institutional racism or discrimination or segregation in schools, busing, all those things. But had I been there, there would have been some discussion over one of the titles of the civil rights. And I think that's a valid point, and still a valid discussion, because the thing is, is if we want to harbor in on private businesses and their policies, then you have to have the discussion about: do you want to abridge the First Amendment as well. Do you want to say that because people say abhorrent things — you know, we still have this. We're having all this debate over hate speech and this and that. Can you have a newspaper and say abhorrent things? Can you march in a parade and believe in abhorrent things, you know?

What I don't like from the president's administration is this sort of, 'I'll put my boot heel on the throat of BP.' I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business. I've heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I think it's part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that it's always got to be someone's fault instead of the fact that sometimes accidents happen. I mean, we had a mining accident that was very tragic and I've met a lot of these miners and their families. They're very brave people to do a dangerous job. But then we come in and it's always someone's fault. Maybe sometimes accidents happen.

But we need to stand up for every minority. The Bill of Rights isn't for the prom queen. The Bill of Rights isn't for the high-school quarterback. They're gonna be treated fairly; they always do fine. The Bill of Rights is truly for those who might be unorthodox, who might have an unusual idea, who might not look like everybody else. … I said to him, "You could take an American citizen and send them to Guantanamo Bay with no trial?" and he said, "Yeah, if they're dangerous." So I said, "It begs the question, doesn't it, who gets to decide who's dangerous and who's not?" Anybody remember Richard Jewell, the Olympic bomber—the so-called "Olympic bomber" as it turns out? Everybody thought he was guilty; he was "convicted" on t. v. within hours—but it turned out he wasn't—it wasn't him, he wasn't guilty. But could you imagine if he had been a black man in the South in 1920, what would have happened to him? The Bill of Rights is to protect minorities, whether it's the colour of your skin or the shade of your ideology. We need to be the party that protects the rights of everyone.

If you want boots on the ground, and you want them to be our sons and daughters, you got 14 other choices. There will always be a Bush or Clinton for you, if you want to go back to war in Iraq. But the thing is, the first war was a mistake. And I'm not sending our sons and our daughters back to Iraq.

A free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin. It is unenlightened and ill-informed to promote discrimination against individuals based on the color of their skin. It is likewise unwise to forget the distinction between public (taxpayer-financed) and private entities.

I wouldn't be doing this dumb ass live-stream if I wasn't, so get over it.

The debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence.
Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.
What I would suggest is that if we want greater confidence in our elections -- and 75% of Republicans agree with me -- is that we do need to look at election integrity.
There's been no examination -- thorough examination -- of all the states to see what problems we had and see if they could fix them.
There were lots of problems and there were secretaries of state, who illegally changed the law and that needs to be fixed, and I'm going to work harder to fix it and I will not be cowed by people saying 'oh, you're a liar'
Now, let me say to be clear, I voted to certify the state electors because I think it would be wrong for Congress to overturn that.

While I’m not for foreign aid in general, if we are going to send aid to Israel it should be limited in time and scope so we aren’t doing it forever, and it should be paid for by cutting the aid to people who hate Israel and America
Each time I’ve tried to stop giving aid to enemies of the U.S. and Israel, I have been thwarted. Often by groups that claim they are pro-Israel
Why would supposedly pro-Israel groups oppose my legislation to end aid to the Palestinian Liberation Organization? Maybe it’s because they fear any debate on anyone’s foreign aid threatens a broader debate on whether we should be borrowing from foreign countries simply to send the money to other foreign countries.

the battle for liberty happens at all levels, federal, state and local
My friend Glenn Jacobs not only made a name for himself in the world of WWE, but for years has labored as a community activist eager to bring more freedom and prosperity to as many people as possible.
his small government and pro-liberty philosophy of government – on education, the economy, regulation, taxes and more – is exactly what we need more of in our politics
It’s why I think Glenn would be an excellent choice for mayor of Knox County.

Foreign aid goes from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.

There is a systemic problem with today's law enforcement.<p>Not surprisingly, big government has been at the heart of the problem. Washington has incentivized the militarization of local police precincts by using federal dollars to help municipal governments build what are essentially small armies—where police departments compete to acquire military gear that goes far beyond what most of Americans think of as law enforcement.<p>This is usually done in the name of fighting the war on drugs or terrorism.

I do want to reduce the income tax and if possible, eliminate the income tax...The first thing you do is balance the budget, then reduce the size of government.

The enemy is radical Islam. You can't get around it. And not only will I name the enemy, I will do whatever it takes to defend America from these haters of mankind.

Mr. President, there comes to a time in the history of nations when fear and complacency allow power to accumulate and liberty and privacy to suffer. That time is now. And I will not let the PATRIOT Act, the most un-patriotic of acts, go unchallenged.

Some Republicans are not going to want to hear this, but I live near Fort Campbell, and there are 50,000 soldiers there. I tell people you have to truly imagine what your feelings would be if those soldiers were Chinese soldiers and they were occupying the United States. We wouldn't have it. Republican and Democrat, we'd be blowing up the Chinese with roadside bombs as they were coming off the base. No country wants foreign soldiers on their land.