He notes that unlike his father, Rep. Ron Paul, he would abolish the earmark system altogether. That is certainly correct on a macro level but would be hurt Kentucky so long as we are fortunate to have a party leader represent us.
Note that his indictment of the earmark system was in response to a question regarding to what extent he disagrees with his father on the issues. He identified earmarks as one of several "minor issues" with which he disagrees with his father.
Rand Paul needs to specify the other "minor issues." For the most part, however, he seems to embrace his father's failed presidential platform. That means Rand Paul now owns all of Ron Paul's positions (as well as his internet lists).
Asked about the legalization of drugs, Rand Paul responds that "It's a state issue. All issues of crime are better addressed at the state level."
He is correct that the constitution leaves the police power to the states. He is running for a federal office, so I don't view his answer as waffling (which it clearly would be were he running for governor.)
And though his respect for federalism is laudable, on the issue of the criminalization of narcotics, it strikes me as simplistic. It is not enough for Kentucky to criminalize a drug that has not only crossed state lines but in fact is being smuggled into our country from other nations. The interstate and international nature of drug smuggling makes this an appropriate area for some federal coordination with the states.