Long-time readers know that I was anything but a supporter of Ron Paul; regarding him as a small-time grifter who managed to sound rational on fiscal policy. Anyone reading his newsletters, regardless of who authored the articles, was presented with the same type of craziness of those “financial gurus” who push apocalyptic scenarios and then urge their readers to buy copious quantities of gold – preferably from “investment firms” they recommend.

Now we see the meme that a potential ticket of Rand and Marco Rubio starting to make its way around the internet.

And, this proposed ticket only reinforces my feelings that both Ron Paul and Rand Paul are bad for our nation. Bad in the same way that Lyndon LaRouche managed to attract a cult-like following that operated with the fervor seen today in Scientologists. Us against the “World.”

It is my belief that Rand Paul will do or say anything to gain or maintain power – even to the point of mixing vote-winning populism with  fiscal conservatism to win. The only point in Rand Paul’s favor is that he is not a traditional Northeastern Liberal or Rockefeller Republican. Whereas Paul senior did not have the respect of the GOP and found it astronomically difficult to pursue his own legislation through Congress, only time will tell whether or not Rand Paul will overcome his father’s high negatives.

To conflate any Ron Paul run for the Presidency with Marco Rubio is a major mistake. Primarily because I believe Rubio is the real deal and Paul is merely a wiser version of his battered father.

According to the media, we are about to see the Rand Paul “evolution” in place of the Ron Paul “revolution” … 

In the wake of Barack Obama’s reelection win and ahead of a possible 2016 White House bid of his own, the Kentucky Republican plans to mix his hard-line tea party conservatism with more moderate policies that could woo younger voters and minorities largely absent from the GOP coalition.

It’s the latest tactic of the freshman senator to inject the Libertarian-minded views shared by his retiring father into mainstream Republican thinking as the party grapples with its future.

In an interview with POLITICO, Paul said he’ll return to Congress this week pushing measures long avoided by his party. He wants to work with liberal Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy and Republicans to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for pot possession. He wants to carve a compromise immigration plan with an “eventual path” to citizenship for illegal immigrants, a proposal he believes could be palatable to conservatives. And he believes his ideas — along with pushing for less U.S. military intervention in conflicts overseas — could help the GOP broaden its tent and appeal to crucial voting blocs that handed Democrats big wins in the West Coast, the Northeast and along the Great Lakes.

“We have three big regions where we’re not competitive,” Paul said. “And we have to be competitive in those regions.”

Is this more evidence of a “do anything or say anything to gain power” attitude? I suggest to you that putting out a principled platform and inviting other like-minded individuals and patriots to join the party is infinitely preferable to compromising core principles and pandering to the democrat entitlement coalition. In fact, by the time 2016 rolls around, the political landscape may have drastically changed on both pot and immigration.

Like his father? 

But after his first two years in elected office, few, if any of Paul’s goals on his 2010 tea party platform have gone anywhere. He wanted to force lawmakers to wait one day for every 20 pages of a bill before a vote can occur — that never saw the light of day. He wanted to make sure every bill explicitly lays out its constitutional authority — that proposal is gathering dust. Often, he finds himself on the losing end of his own party — most notably on his recent push to slash foreign aid that failed resoundingly 10-81 over fears it would have weakened national security.

Learning from his father’s failure to gain traction within the GOP?

Now, Paul appears to want a more influential role in his party than simply the bomb-throwing back-bencher with a penchant for grabbing headlines. Unlike his father, retiring Texas Rep. Ron Paul, who toiled on the GOP fringes for years and battled with the party establishment, the younger Paul seems to have developed political savvy in dealing with GOP leaders.

Bottom line …

Considering that his father, Ron Paul, refused to assist the party in a close race – and contributed to the vote gap – I suggest that neither Paul may be the answer to a deeply troubled and divided nation. Legalizing pot to make people feel good, expanding gambling to reduce the deficit and trying to attract illegal aliens who might normally vote democrat by promising a “path to citizenship” is not the answer. Especially when these people appear to be committed democrats who will say “thank you” and vote for the opposition that promises increasing entitlements and financial benefits. Not the right answer at all.

Until Rand Paul proves that he has the ability to become a congressional thought leader and is able to effective craft and promote legislation, he remains a suspect quantity, at least in my mind. And while it is important to gear-up for the 2016 presidential election, I suggest that is of the ultimate importance to prepare for the House and Senate races of 2014 to redress the “checks and balances” missing in today’s administration.

-- steve

Reference Links …

Welcome to the Rand Paul evolution - Manu Raju - POLITICO.com