Rand Paul lied about graduating from college & about being a real doctor....

[Playinghardball]

Say hi to the most qualified GOP candidate....

[WillowTree]

1. We've already played this game this morning.

He is, indeed, a Medical Doctor. Whether or not he currently holds a specialty certification doesn't change the fact that he's a physician.

Curious, though. What "college degrees" has he lied about. I haven't heard that one before.

Edited to add: I get it. You're talking about the fact that he never finished his bachelor's degree. Still doesn't mean he's not a doctor, but I would think that it would make people wonder.

[Savannahmann]

2. Ah but now he has a graphic

That Graphic makes it all true. You see, if you take something stupid, and put it on a picture, then it's all totally awesomely true. I bet he gets lots of recs now that there's a Graphic man.

[WillowTree]

15. Ah......I must have missed that rule. Thanks for the update!

[Playinghardball]

3. Rand Paul caught lying about his college record

Senator's office forced to admit that he never graduated from Baylor University

http://www.salon.com/2015/02/13/rand_paul_caught_lying_about_his_college_record/

[Zorra]

26. heehee nice catches! nt

[CherokeeDem]

51. Rand Paul is a lying SOB....

However, as long as he completes the prerequisites courses and passes the medical school entrance exam, he doesn't need a bachelors degree. Lots of physicians skip that step.

But to lie bout it... typical Rand Paul.

I understand he didn't like the policies of the national certification board, quit and formed his own board. I don't believe Mr. Paul plays well with others.

[Gothmog]

4. Rand has issues telling the truth

[Savannahmann]

5. So today's question.

Did Paul graduate from Medical School? Yes. Did he complete his Residency and get a license to practice medicine? Yes. Was he at one time a member of the National Board of Ophthalmology? Yes. Did he resign supposedly in protest? Yes.

Did Duke medical School require a Bachelors Degree for admission? No.

So when all of this is plainly available on Wikipedia, why the hell are Democrats making us look like conspiracy theory idiots? We're supposed to be the smart ones, but for some reason we jump into the deep end of the pool of stupidity whenever a Republican comes up as a topic.

Guys, quit pretending that the Republicans are idiots. Cruz graduated from Princeton, and Harvard. Any other time you would be talking about how excellent the Harvard education is. Now, he's an idiot. Take him on with issues, debate the facts, and debate the issues and win on those issues. But asinine character assassination bullshit is only going to make us look bad, and when they do it then it looks like dirty politics as usual, and the message is lost.

Besides, our presumptive (I don't know why I still refer to Hillary that way) nominee has a lot more of those hanging around, and it hasn't hurt her yet.

Oh, and you better hope that Rand isn't the GOP nominee, otherwise we're going to lose a lot of support at the polls and he'll probably win.

[OregonBlue]

6. I disagree. From what I read the guy is a plagarist who never had an original thought in

his life. He will get killed in any real debates.

[Savannahmann]

7. He's in favor of legalization of Marijuana.

That's a populist issue that has wide support. He's in favor of reigning in the NSA. Another populist issue with wide support. He's in favor of ending the wars overseas. Guess what, another populist issue with pretty good support.

Guess where that support comes from? If you think the law and order what do you have to hide Right Wing is in favor of reigning in the NSA and FBI spying on the people, then you're not as aware of the political debates as you think. If you believe the RW is the party associated with not sending troops to war, then we have another debate on our hands.

President Obama won by four million votes in 2012. How much of that advantage can Paul siphon off with Populist issues, that our party is on the wrong side of?

[progressoid]

18. Yeah, he could get a lot of support from the "independent" voters.

[bluedigger]

24. No, he's not.

He's for reduced penalties for possession, which is not legalization by a long shot. Fuck Rand Paul.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

47. What good are reduced penalties if you are left with a freaking criminal record...

What good are reduced penalties if you are left with a freaking criminal record which will haunt you every time you apply for a job even if you never see the inside of a jail?


Weed isn't legal in CA but it's a civil infraction like jaywalking and carries no criminal record...

IMHO, that's a great way of a government conferring the use of weed without approving of it if it citizens aren't all the way to legalization.

[NoMoreRepugs]

27. 4 million tallied votes.....

consider provisional ballots not counted, electronic voting machine tabulation irregularities and flat out voter suppression and that number is I would think twice that at a minimum??

[OregonBlue]

40. He has a few populist positions but the reality is, he's just another white southern politician.

He is opposed to civil rights laws, voting rights laws, social programs, abortion, etc. He believes in a flat tax which hurts the poor the most. He is just another b.s. mean conservative who likes to pretend he's more hip than the rest of those nasty jerks.

Personally I see him as a privilege insiders insider who has a giant ego. He can't be very bright or he wouldn't have to plagiarize all his speeches and writings and he wouldn't have been so obvious about it. The guy is phony through and through.

[bvar22]

31. You're forgetting, the Media control the debates.

The last Presidential "Debate" was sponsored by the League of Women Voters.

On October 2, 1988, the LWV's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a press release:

" The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. [font size=3]The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.[/font]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_debates

Everything since then has been a Made for TV Sham.

[Andy823]

8. Hmmmmm

"Oh, and you better hope that Rand isn't the GOP nominee, otherwise we're going to lose a lot of support at the polls and he'll probably win."

Do you really believe that, or did you must forget the sarcasm smilie? If you really do believe that what to you back your statement on?

This guys is a pathetic liar, and he may get some votes, but he will never win the nomination, and even if he did why would democrats lose support at the polls?

[Savannahmann]

14. I base it upon the issues.

Rand is on the populist side of several issues facing us. NSA Surveillance, FBI Spying, Marijuana Legalization, and foreign wars to name a handful. Those issues enjoy wide populist support. To counter them, our candidate would have to take on other populist issues, or match Rand. Hillary the Presumptive Nominee has a long history of being on the other side of those issues.

The elections always come down the same. Forty percent vote Democratic, always have, and always will. Forty percent vote Republican, always have, and always will. The decision is from the remaining twenty percent. When they go Republican, then Republicans win, as evidenced in 2010, and 2014. When they go Democratic, we win. President Obama lost four million votes from 2008, to 2012. Romney got a million more than McCain did. These are not make believe numbers, they're the actual vote totals. Four million votes separated Romney from Obama. four more million voted for Obama than Romney.

Hillary is no Obama, so we can't realistically hope for a greater turnout than Obama enjoyed. How many of those four million voters will switch sides based upon those issues. People who see the stupidity of the prison sentences for pot? People who want the NSA and FBI out of their phones? How many people will vote for Rand based upon those issues?

What will our side do? Our side will stay the course. Afraid that if they come out against the NSA/FBI/CIA/GCHQ spying that they'll look weak on the war on Terror, or weak on crime, or weak on defense. So they'll stay hawkish. The RW Hawks won't believe it and will still vote Republican. The people for whom Privacy is a big issue may change their votes to Republican. How many can we afford to lose? If we go with President Obama's numbers, we can't afford to lose many. We didn't win those swing states by that big of a margin.

My opinion is based upon a detailed examination of the people involved. Rand, and Hillary. Positions, and issues. Public support for those issues, and voting trends. It is an opinion, and I absolutely admit that. Yet, my concerns about the Senate made almost a year before the election were born out. The Republicans were going to fight hard to win, and they were going to keep from making the mistake that torpedoed them in 2012.

Here's the next question. How many of those four million votes for President Obama were based upon that asinine Real Rape quote? If we say none, we're fools. If we say half, we're probably pretty accurate, if we say all, we're just as big as the fools who say none.

What drives the voters is the question. In 2014, it was issues. I think it's going to be issues in 2016, and Rand is on the populist side of several issues. Do we really want to underestimate that level of potential? If we go into 2016 with the idea we've already won, and the election is a mere formality because we erroneously think that the Republicans are idiots, we are going to get our asses kicked. The Republicans are winning, because they are taking the game far more seriously than we are. If you doubt that assertion, try and get a hold of Senate Majority Leader Reid. Oh wait, you can't. you'll have to search for Senate Minority Leader Reid. The Republicans enjoy a pretty significant majority in the Senate. Because we took the idea that they were stupid for granted, and ran on the idea it would be an easy victory in 2014. We lost, badly.

If we are serious, and a little lucky, we can win in 2016. If we are overconfident, and pretend that the Republicans are idiots, we will lose. Again.

[JaneyVee]

29. The 4 million votes will come from opposing Rand's economic agenda.

[Darb]

38. Your concern is noted.

And dismissed. Paul is a racist douchebag, among other things. The nut doesn't fall far from the tree. Should I emphasize "nut" any more for you?

[COLGATE4]

11. You're missing (or avoiding) the fact that the "National Board

of Opthalomolgy" is a sham organization, created by Paul and family members so he could claim Board Certification in Opthalmology. It's not and he isn't.

[WillowTree]

20. He was certified by the ABO, which is recognized.

He quit that volunarily in a dispute over changes that the ABO was making in certificaton eligibility (changes that would not have affected him, by the way) and created the NBO. He has since, to my understanding, allowed that to go defunct and has not recertified through the ABO.

That being the case, it is correct to say that he is not currently board certified in opthamology, though he is probably eligible to be recertified if he chooses. But that doesn't change the fact that he is, in fact, a license physician, no matter how much some people seem to want it to.

[OregonBlue]

41. And he seems to believe that being an eye doctor qualifies him to judge when women

should be allowed birth control and abortion. Nasty little plagiarist.

[napi21]

54. He also claims to be certain that some vaccines can cause autism.

I've heard clips of the speech where he said he believes in vaccines but parents should be allowed to decide for their kids. THEN he added that disgusting phrase "They own their kids!" That's always bothered me. They ARE responsible for their kids, but NOBODY OWNS another human being!

[Gormy Cuss]

13. His claim to be board certified is based on an unrecognized board he ran himself.

More than once he either implied that he graduated from Baylor or failed to correct others who described him as a Baylor grad.

This isn't about his intelligence, it's about his character or lack thereof.

[lame54]

22. Bush graduated from Yale...

and he's a big fucking idiot

he ran the country like an idiot and we are still paying for it

[fasttense]

28. Pretending RepubliCONS are stupid?

They may have graduated from expensive colleges but it didn't make them smart. Have you forgotten the bush rubbing the shoulders of the head of state of Germany? Have you forgotten his fumbling over words? Have you forgotten the cringing every time he opened his mouth while representing America?

How about Ronnie Reagan? How about how stupid he always looked? How about how he could remember nothing during the contra hearings?

And most presidential GOP candidates come across as bubble living idiots. That's what the oligarchs want. A stupid white man who does what he is told and doesn't ask deep questions. It doesn't hurt if the candidate is greedy and cruel with some blood lust.

[Logical]

32. LOL, you don't think Cruz is an idiot? So you base your judgement of intelligence on Degrees....

Well, many creationists have advanced degrees in Geology from major universities.

I guess you would say " they are not idiots" also.

Wow, wrong board?

[Savannahmann]

36. No I don't think he's an idiot.

I think Cruz is a determined, dedicated, and dangerous opponent. I think he is smart. I don't like his policies, issues, or plans. But that does not make him stupid. It makes him wrong on the issues, but not stupid.

We pretended that the Republicans would obligingly commit political suicide in 2014 and got our asses kicked. They learned from 2012, it's a shame we didn't learn from our defeat.

[Logical]

37. People said the same thing about McCain and Romney. Asses Kicked! nt

[Darb]

39. 63% did not vote. Disgust, maybe? Blocked? Hopelessly gerrymandered?

Or worse?

Say what you want, 19% is no mandate.

Rand Paul is a dick. Cruz is an even bigger dick. We will kick both of their asses handily. Without your help I suspect.

[Reter]

44. Why don't you ask Alan Dershowitz if Cruz is an idiot

He hates his politics, but called Cruz one of his best students. You don't become one of his best students at Harvard by being an idiot.

[Dawgs]

50. Being a good student does not mean you're smart...even at Harvard.

I'm amazed that people on DU don't know the difference.

[Reter]

52. Yes it does

It doesn't mean you have common sense, but it certainly means you're smart.

[Dawgs]

55. Sorry. You're wrong. n/t

[Reter]

56. No, you're wrong

You can't pass an exceptionally difficult school unless you are smart, let alone rise to top student. His grades were also top notch before Harvard, so he wasn't like Shrub who's father got him in. He's extremely intelligent, which makes him dangerous.

[KamaAina]

9. And he actually thinks we're going to believe that's his real hair.

[Sienna86]

12. How did he get malpractice insurance and admitting rights to a hospital?

I would love to know.

[WillowTree]

16. Because he's a DOCTOR.

Board certification is not a requirement to be a physician. He graduated from Med school and did his internship and residency. He's a doctor.

[Douglas Carpenter]

17. he is a real doctor - he is not currently a properly certified opthomologist

He did graduate Duke University School of Medicine and has held a state-issued medical license in Kentucky since moving there in 1993. In 1995, Paul passed the American Board of Ophthalmology exam and was properly certified by the American Board of Ophthalmology which he later resigned from apparently have to do with a dispute over grandfathering in older ophthalmologist.

I'm not a supporter of Rand, OBVIOUSLY - but I think it best to keep things factual.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. Odd that a legitmately boarded doctor would give it up for any reason.

I have a friend, a board certified internist, who hasn't practiced in over a decade, who keeps us with his boards...


That being said , these attacks are weak sauce...

[LittleBlue]

19. This argument sounds weak

He's down in Central America performing successful eye surgeries. The general public doesn't care about who certified him, they don't have the attention span to care about certifications.

I'd find something else. This comes across as weak when we have plenty of legit ammo to use against him.

[Duppers]

33. totally agree except for the fact he lied ...

about having a degree from Baylor.

See my post below.

[AtomicKitten]

21. OMG that is hilarious. What a poser. /nt

[Mr.Bill]

23. His speech today sounded like this:

Freedom! blah, blah, blah, Liberty! blah, blah, blah God! blah, blah, blah Freedom! blah, blah, blah Constitution! blah, blah, blah Freedom! blah, blah


He's a little short on details.

[IggleDoer]

25. Did he bill Medicare/Medicaid as if he were "Board Certified" instead of asking for lower fees?

If so, he committed Medicare Fraud.

[Duppers]

35. Great point!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. He is a douche, a teabagger, and a nutter but I doubt boarded and unboarded physicians...

He is a douche, a teabagger, and a nutter but I doubt boarded and unboarded physicians bill the government differently...

[Duppers]

30. WAIT...wait

He was graduated from med school....but not Baylor...

"Paul left Baylor early, without completing either his Bachelor's degree in biology or in English, when he was accepted into the Duke University School of Medicine. At the time, Duke did not require an undergraduate degree for admission to its graduate school."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_Paul


He DID lie his ass off about having a degree from Baylor:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2015/02/13/rand-pauls-claim-twice-in-one-day-that-he-has-a-biology-degree/

[Tarheel_Dem]

34. The responses so far are a laugh riot. It's like we've been invaded by the defensive dailypaul.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. Agree and disagree...

He is a physician, just not a legitimately boarded one, and it is dissembling on his part to claim otherwise...However I think this line of attack is weal sauce...


The poster who claims he's ten feet tall, is out of his freaking mind...He has a lot of vulnerabilities.

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. I don't agree with the morality of making up lies about one's political opponents

Rand Paul is an extremist right-wing nut with plenty of material to attack his record on. There is no excuse for making up lies that any simple fact check will immediately expose.

[Reter]

42. He's definitely a "real" doctor

He graduated from medical school. If he didn't, he'd be arrested and sued by every patient. Let's attack him on the issues that matter.

[ncjustice80]

48. Another lying rethug.

Why isnt he being investigated for practicing medicine w/o a license? Is he being ignored sohe can be a spoiler canidatwnfor Tes Cruz?

[WillowTree]

49. Probably because he isn't practicing without a license and likely never did.

There's a difference between being a practicing MD and therefore being licensed and keeping the certification for the specialty active. You can look it up.

It's amazing how many people just take claims like this as gospel without any real knowledge of the subject matter just because it fits their agenda.

[Trajan]

53. I don't care if he is a 'real' doctor ...

I can see DU has a small contingent of Paulites who are posting on this thread ... I say - fuck'm ...

Paul is an ass, and so are his supporters ...

[Rex]

58. Fuck Rand Paul. He is garbage. Probably cheated his entire life to get where he is now.

Scumbag deluxe.

[Cha]

59. I don't have the screen shot graphic anymore but on his website they also misspelled "Education"..

It's a hard one.

mahalo Play