As his presidential campaign gathers steam, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) appears to be going out of his way to cozy up to establishment “Republicans” in key early voting states like Iowa and South Carolina.
Paul swung through the Palmetto State a month ago, raising money for the ideologically bankrupt state party while also holding a series of meet-and-greets with local GOP activists. Apparently his efforts to endear himself to the state’s status quo are paying off, too …
“Many in the GOP (say) Paul was received favorably by rank and file in the party, particularly as he made efforts to distance himself from strictly libertarian views of his father,” wrote Shawn Drury, editor of The (Columbia, S.C.) Patch.
Hmmmmm … that sounds awfully familiar.
Here’s our question, though: What, exactly, is wrong with the views of Paul’s father – former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul? And why would these be views Paul the Younger needs to “distance” himself from? More importantly, why does Rand Paul need to move in the ideological direction of the Republican Party – especially in a state as corrupt, incompetent and fiscally liberal as “GOP-controlled” South Carolina?
Isn’t the whole idea here for the GOP to move in the direction of Rand Paul?
Anyway, Paul will be back in the Palmetto State on August 26 to participate in a “Faith and Freedom” barbecue held at the Anderson (S.C.) Civic Center – an event sponsored by U.S. Rep. Jeff Duncan. Wonder which Paul we’ll see at that event? The crusading libertarian Senator? Or the accommodating candidate for president?
164 comments
I supposed you’d rather he go all Ron Paul and lose the primary so we get another Mitt?
I’d rather he not raise money for the SCGOP that’s for damn sure.
AMEN brother
It’s “Our founding editor would…”, not “I’d…”.
Dammit.
Standards, man.
Consistency.
You’ve got your fancy dual column website. Don’t eff it up with this first person crap.
JEESH!
Yeah, the dual column is weird. It wraps last weeks post to the top of the right hand column. What’s up with that?
The new FITS is barely a half a day old. We’ve got a lot of bugs we’re working on. Hopefully this one will be resolved soon.
‘sall good
‘sall good
Frank’s goin’ all ghetto on us.
Represent, boi!!
And another thing…..
At the bottom of the homepage, you have a section called “This Weeks Top Articles”. There is shit in there from FOUR years ago. Right now there is…..er…..sideboob…
*Homer Simpson voice* mmmmmmmmmm…siiiide boooob…
Um….nevermind.
TBG would rather not watch Rand Paul morph into another Mitt.
The morphing has already begun my friend, your best “hope” is that he’s a Francisco D’anconia type…and I doubt that very highly.
*Sigh*
Francisco Domingo Carlos “Danger” Andres Sebastián d’Anconia
I supposed you’d rather he go all Ron Paul and lose the primary so we get another Mitt?
I’d rather he not raise money for the SCGOP that’s for damn sure.
AMEN brother
It’s “Our founding editor would…”, not “I’d…”.
Dammit.
Standards, man.
Consistency.
You’ve got your fancy dual column website. Don’t eff it up with this first person crap.
JEESH!
Yeah, the dual column is weird. It wraps last weeks post to the top of the right hand column. What’s up with that?
The new FITS is barely a half a day old. We’ve got a lot of bugs we’re working on. Hopefully this one will be resolved soon.
‘sall good
‘sall good
Frank’s goin’ all ghetto on us.
Represent, boi!!
And another thing…..
At the bottom of the homepage, you have a section called “This Weeks Top Articles”. There is shit in there from FOUR years ago. Right now there is…..er…..sideboob…
*Homer Simpson voice* mmmmmmmmmm…siiiide boooob…
Um….nevermind.
TBG would rather not watch Rand Paul morph into another Mitt.
The morphing has already begun my friend, your best “hope” is that he’s a Francisco D’anconia type…and I doubt that very highly.
*Sigh*
Francisco Domingo Carlos “Danger” Andres Sebastián d’Anconia
Whoever wins the GOP primary will need backers from ALL factions to win in November, period. Why can’t he embrace the things he thinks are good about Ron Paul and stay mute on the other things. If someone asks just state “we don’t agree on all things”, one doesn’t have to piss people off to win elections nor cater to whiners and busybodies.
Why can’t he embrace the things he thinks are good about Ron Paul and stay mute on the other things.
Probably because a good portion of the GOP thinks Ron Paul’s ideas are dangerous, and want to be sure that Rand is “clean” in their eyes before they give him the stage.
Many Establishment Republicans, especially neo-conservatives, would vote for a Democrat before they would vote for either of the Paul’s. Ron and Rand are persona non-grata to DC insiders in both parties, because they don’t toe the line on war, empire, surveillance and Israel. That’s why you see King and Christie attacking him at every corner, and that’s why the Washington Post’s opinion page has been Rand Paul hit piece after Rand Paul hit piece the last two weeks. This reveals that the two-party paradigm is a sham, political theater for the masses.
“Well absolutely, we stand with Israel, but what I think we should do is announce to the world, and i think it is well-known, that any attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States.”-Rand Paul
“because they don’t toe the line on war, empire, surveillance and Israel.”
Yea….you mean Ron doesn’t “tow” the line….
Rand has the Neocon agenda on war and Israel down quite nicely.
I consider Ron Paul a hero, one America didn’t deserve. I voted for him in the 2008 primary, wrote him in for the presidency in 2008, voted for him in the 2012 primary and then voted for Gary Johnson in the general election. Unlike Ron, I think Rand is playing the game of rhetoric when it comes to Israel. You cannot get elected in this country today without paying homage to the 51st state. Do I think Rand distrusts the Israelis? Yes. Do I think he is the only candidate who will not drag us into war with Syria and Iran at the behest of Likud and the neo-cons? Absolutely. Rand is likely the most serious non-interventionist Presidential candidate since Robert Taft.
“Unlike Ron, I think Rand is playing the game of rhetoric when it comes to Israel.”
Your entire diatribe is based on nothing but imagined concepts of what you “think” is going on in Rand’s head.
You aren’t even taking his comments at face value, in fact you are suggesting he’s lying to get elected…which for most people would suggest Rand is defunct in character.
If that’s your new “hope”, a person that lies to get into office, good luck.
Nothing you’ve said is based on any palatable reality. Even your last comment about “Rand is likely the most serious non-interventionist Presidential candidate since Robert Taft” is completely laughable in the face of Rand’s recent vote for sanctions against Iran.
If your fantasy land makes life tolerable for you, so be it.
My fantasy land? First, find me a politician who hasn’t or doesn’t lie or manipulate, and I will sell you some oceanfront property in Arizona. Jack Hunter’s comments about Rand indicate he is playing the game, and that’s fine with me, because it’s about damn time someone with libertarian views, and certainly not even perfect libertarian views, played the damn game. And what are the alternatives? Hillary Clinton, or a foaming at the mouth neoconservative? Rand is right about drones, about the NSA spying, has demonstrated some support for Edward Snowden, is opposed to arming rebels in Syria, has come out against foreign aid, including aid to Israel, was the only vote against Comey as FBI director, has not wavered in support of private property rights, even when put under the gun by Rachel Maddow given his stance on the Civil Rights Act and he has reiterated his desire to reform drug laws pertaining to marijuana. Do I like the assuaging of the Israel lobby? No. Do I like the vote on Iranian sanctions? No. Is Rand Paul better for civil liberties, cutting spending and curbing the empire than Hillary Clinton, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie or Peter King? I believe so. If it were a perfect world, Gary Johnson would be President. And unless the very structure of our government and media changes, he has no chance running as a Libertarian. Rand is not his daddy, but he’s sure as hell better than the rest.
“My fantasy land? First, find me a politician who hasn’t or doesn’t lie or manipulate, and I will sell you some oceanfront property in Arizona.”
Like I said dude, good luck with the “my hero is going to lie his way to victory, and then fix everything”.
You just confirmed everything I was saying. If you think the libertarian hero is the one that’s going to lie his way into office, out lying the liars…and then use an already corrupt system filled with the same people to somehow turn the system back against itself…LMAO!…yea, well good luck.
“And what are the alternatives?”
You have no alternatives to start, you are kidding yourself.
But that being said, all you have to do is sit back and watch. The whole thing is going to come down and there’s nothing anyone can do about it either way.
Whoever wins the GOP primary will need backers from ALL factions to win in November, period. Why can’t he embrace the things he thinks are good about Ron Paul and stay mute on the other things. If someone asks just state “we don’t agree on all things”, one doesn’t have to piss people off to win elections nor cater to whiners and busybodies.
Why can’t he embrace the things he thinks are good about Ron Paul and stay mute on the other things.
Probably because a good portion of the GOP thinks Ron Paul’s ideas are dangerous, and want to be sure that Rand is “clean” in their eyes before they give him the stage.
Many Establishment Republicans, especially neo-conservatives, would vote for a Democrat before they would vote for either of the Paul’s. Ron and Rand are persona non-grata to DC insiders in both parties, because they don’t toe the line on war, empire, surveillance and Israel. That’s why you see King and Christie attacking him at every corner, and that’s why the Washington Post’s opinion page has been Rand Paul hit piece after Rand Paul hit piece the last two weeks. This reveals that the two-party paradigm is a sham, political theater for the masses.
“Well absolutely, we stand with Israel, but what I think we should do is announce to the world, and i think it is well-known, that any attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States.”-Rand Paul
“because they don’t toe the line on war, empire, surveillance and Israel.”
Yea….you mean Ron doesn’t “tow” the line….
Rand has the Neocon agenda on war and Israel down quite nicely.
I consider Ron Paul a hero, one America didn’t deserve. I voted for him in the 2008 primary, wrote him in for the presidency in 2008, voted for him in the 2012 primary and then voted for Gary Johnson in the general election. Unlike Ron, I think Rand is playing the game of rhetoric when it comes to Israel. You cannot get elected in this country today without paying homage to the 51st state. Do I think Rand distrusts the Israelis? Yes. Do I think he is the only candidate who will not drag us into war with Syria and Iran at the behest of Likud and the neo-cons? Absolutely. Rand is likely the most serious non-interventionist Presidential candidate since Robert Taft.
“Unlike Ron, I think Rand is playing the game of rhetoric when it comes to Israel.”
Your entire diatribe is based on nothing but imagined concepts of what you “think” is going on in Rand’s head.
You aren’t even taking his comments at face value, in fact you are suggesting he’s lying to get elected…which for most people would suggest Rand is defunct in character.
If that’s your new “hope”, a person that lies to get into office, good luck.
Nothing you’ve said is based on any palatable reality. Even your last comment about “Rand is likely the most serious non-interventionist Presidential candidate since Robert Taft” is completely laughable in the face of Rand’s recent vote for sanctions against Iran.
If your fantasy land makes life tolerable for you, so be it.
My fantasy land? First, find me a politician who hasn’t or doesn’t lie or manipulate, and I will sell you some oceanfront property in Arizona. Jack Hunter’s comments about Rand indicate he is playing the game, and that’s fine with me, because it’s about damn time someone with libertarian views, and certainly not even perfect libertarian views, played the damn game. And what are the alternatives? Hillary Clinton, or a foaming at the mouth neoconservative? Rand is right about drones, about the NSA spying, has demonstrated some support for Edward Snowden, is opposed to arming rebels in Syria, has come out against foreign aid, including aid to Israel, was the only vote against Comey as FBI director, has not wavered in support of private property rights, even when put under the gun by Rachel Maddow given his stance on the Civil Rights Act and he has reiterated his desire to reform drug laws pertaining to marijuana. Do I like the assuaging of the Israel lobby? No. Do I like the vote on Iranian sanctions? No. Is Rand Paul better for civil liberties, cutting spending and curbing the empire than Hillary Clinton, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie or Peter King? I believe so. If it were a perfect world, Gary Johnson would be President. And unless the very structure of our government and media changes, he has no chance running as a Libertarian. Rand is not his daddy, but he’s sure as hell better than the rest.
“My fantasy land? First, find me a politician who hasn’t or doesn’t lie or manipulate, and I will sell you some oceanfront property in Arizona.”
Like I said dude, good luck with the “my hero is going to lie his way to victory, and then fix everything”.
You just confirmed everything I was saying. If you think the libertarian hero is the one that’s going to lie his way into office, out lying the liars…and then use an already corrupt system filled with the same people to somehow turn the system back against itself…LMAO!…yea, well good luck.
“And what are the alternatives?”
You have no alternatives to start, you are kidding yourself.
But that being said, all you have to do is sit back and watch. The whole thing is going to come down and there’s nothing anyone can do about it either way.
Clinton is going to walk the dog on whatever chump they pick in the primary. Might as well go down swinging and pick Ted Cruz.
Not me brother. The faster we hit bottom, the faster we can start climbing out. I’ll vote for the evilest I can find. Let the Republicrats and Demlicans finish running into the ground.
Youll vote for the Republican because you are a Republican.
Clinton is going to walk the dog on whatever chump they pick in the primary. Might as well go down swinging and pick Ted Cruz.
Not me brother. The faster we hit bottom, the faster we can start climbing out. I’ll vote for the evilest I can find. Let the Republicrats and Demlicans finish running into the ground.
Youll vote for the Republican because you are a Republican.
It doesn’t matter who “wins” the next election anyway. The pie is already baked.
Rand can do all the tip toeing, back pedaling and double talking he wants.
It doesn’t matter who “wins” the next election anyway. The pie is already baked.
Rand can do all the tip toeing, back pedaling and double talking he wants.
It doesn’t sound like Rand Paul “did” anything other than campaign. This story is short on facts and long on opinion, which Fitz right in with most of the “news” reported here.
It’s an opinion website, bra.
Then maybe it should be called Fitz-Op. And the name-calling says more about you than it does about me.
I challenge you to find a site with more news than this one. Remember, news is sans adjectives when paraphrasing.
NYT is available online,and Fits often presents his opinion as fact,or just tells big fucking lies.
I still want him to tell me who William Ayers murdered..
William Ayers participated in the bombings of the NYPD (not that I consider that a huge loss, though then the people may have been different LOL). In for a penny in for a pound. If you helped, you did it.
The NYT has about as much newsworthy information as the paper I wipe my ass with every morning.
Next
The State?
Here in Columbia right? Worse.
You mad bro?
It doesn’t sound like Rand Paul “did” anything other than campaign. This story is short on facts and long on opinion, which Fitz right in with most of the “news” reported here.
It’s an opinion website, bra.
Then maybe it should be called Fitz-Op. And the name-calling says more about you than it does about me.
I challenge you to find a site with more news than this one. Remember, news is sans adjectives when paraphrasing.
NYT is available online,and Fits often presents his opinion as fact,or just tells big fucking lies.
I still want him to tell me who William Ayers murdered..
William Ayers participated in the bombings of the NYPD (not that I consider that a huge loss, though then the people may have been different LOL). In for a penny in for a pound. If you helped, you did it.
The NYT has about as much newsworthy information as the paper I wipe my ass with every morning.
Next
The State?
Here in Columbia right? Worse.
You mad bro?
Maybe, I dunno, Rand saw his kooky father chase windmills into irrelevancy? Or maybe Rand is not his father and actually doesn’t believe the conspiracy-mongering (UN dictatorship! CIA is in the drug business! One World Government!) or the fantasy that paleolibertarianism will ever have electoral pull.
Side note: like the new site! Better on mobile devices!
You do realize that without the liberty movement that Ron advanced toward the mainstream, Rand would still be practicing ophthalmology in Ky, and we would have never heard of him.
One man’s kook is another man’s visionary, I guess.
And YOU must realize that the only reason Rand stands a chance at getting the nomination is his distancing himself from his dad, right?
Absolutely.
But I think his dad is right on most issues and I admire him for his consistency.
You and I agree on that, the Neocons will eventually demand a knife in his father’s back as he grasps for the ring of power.
The way you say it, it sounds like Rand is Smeagol.
At least Smeagol had internal debates within his conscience/split personality in regards to what was right and wrong.
:)
“…i truly…sincerely…hope…and …pray he gets the nomination…”
spoken by every single democrat in the usa
“Kooky” is defined in summary by the following:
1. A MYOB/golden rule foreign policy
2. Balanced budgets
3. A hard currency(inflation proof)
Aside from Cicero’s ramblings on OWG or the CIA being in the drug business(which is true and easy to prove)….those were never issues in any of the GOP debates.
The GOP boo’d the golden rule, stood mute on balanced budgets and the federal reserve.
“Limited gov’t” is nothing but a meaningless slogan to the GOP, accompanied by some flag waving and “Ooh-Rah”‘s.
Let’s agree on one thing: no one has ever really seriously paid much attention to Ron Paul. He has a rabid (or “loyal”) following, he’s sold a lot of books and made some speeches, but otherwise has been relegated to the loud-but-ignored wing of the GOP.
No lets agree that Paul and his loyal followers are the only true conservatives and the likes of the Repuklicrats and Demlicans can only drive this country further into oblivion.
“Let’s agree on one thing: no one has ever really seriously paid much attention to Ron Paul.”
I don’t know we can agree on that…it’s a fuzzy line.
I suspect the name “Ron Paul” is known by say, 25% of American households…but the whole metric of “paid much attention” isn’t clear.
I truly say this without trying to be argumentative.
He was prominent in a few of the GOP debates until his air time was curtailed….I think a good % of the voting population(more than 25%) is aware of him…but I think where you and I agree more might be that:
1. Most don’t fully understand his positions(maybe that qualifies as “paid much attention”?)
2. A large percentage of #1 wouldn’t touch him with a 10 foot pole or take him seriously.
TBG doesn’t think you are giving Ron Paul enough credit. He has almost single handedly brought libertarianism to the cusp of being “mainstream”. Hell, if it wasn’t for Ron Paul, this website probably wouldn’t exist in a recognizable form, and we wouldn’t be having this discussion. (Notice we are not talking about Nancy Lord, Harry Browne (TBG was a big fan..),Murray Rothbard, Ed Clark, or Andre Marrou…)
Ron Paul supports a lot of things I’d love to see the Republicans (and Democrats) support. I don’t think Ron Paul truly believes he will win any primary, but I think he believes that by running, he gets his ideas out there, and maybe people will listen and start expecting Republicans to follow through with what they claim they support in some cases, or entirely change what they support in others.
I do think Paul has had some success to that degree, but unfortunately, not enough to matter.
“I do think Paul has had some success to that degree, but unfortunately, not enough to matter.”
Agreed!
Ideas have to start someplace obviously and don’t gain large acceptance immediately.
That being said, when Fatboy(Christie) announced the other day that “libertarianism” is dangerous,that was WAYYYY more a reflection on the success of Ron Paul rather than the media attempts to call it an attack on Rand Paul(who Christie included in his diatribe).
The victory was the admission that libertarian ideas were “dangerous”, and we had a similar admission from Ms. Linsdey last month.
Anyone that wants to pretend that the concept of libertarianism isn’t gaining some traction has to ignore these public proclamations by prominent GOP members, and is IMHO ignoring reality.
The GOP is trying to abort the libertarian fetus in its own party and they have to explain why:
1. A global empire/wars and the money to support it
2. Fiscal deficits/inflation forever
are better and less dangerous than “libertarianism”…LMAO!
Good luck with that GOP.
I see the GOP and a dying dinosaur…and I think the GOP knows it and is fighting the inevitable….the ? is how long they have left…10 years? 30 years?
Will the collapse of our empire precede it and make it irrelevant? All questions that no one really know the if/how/why answers to.
Probably fewer than 10 I would guess. Two cycles?
Excellent points Smirks.
Nope, just a kook.
A kook that tried to save the colonel’s ass from another unnecessary unwanted illegal war.
Maybe, I dunno, Rand saw his kooky father chase windmills into irrelevancy? Or maybe Rand is not his father and actually doesn’t believe the conspiracy-mongering (UN dictatorship! CIA is in the drug business! One World Government!) or the fantasy that paleolibertarianism will ever have electoral pull.
Side note: like the new site! Better on mobile devices!
You do realize that without the liberty movement that Ron advanced toward the mainstream, Rand would still be practicing ophthalmology in Ky, and we would have never heard of him.
One man’s kook is another man’s visionary, I guess.
And YOU must realize that the only reason Rand stands a chance at getting the nomination is his distancing himself from his dad, right?
Absolutely.
But I think his dad is right on most issues and I admire him for his consistency.
You and I agree on that, the Neocons will eventually demand a knife in his father’s back as he grasps for the ring of power.
The way you say it, it sounds like Rand is Smeagol.
At least Smeagol had internal debates within his conscience/split personality in regards to what was right and wrong.
:)
“…i truly…sincerely…hope…and …pray he gets the nomination…”
spoken by every single democrat in the usa
“Kooky” is defined in summary by the following:
1. A MYOB/golden rule foreign policy
2. Balanced budgets
3. A hard currency(inflation proof)
Aside from Cicero’s ramblings on OWG or the CIA being in the drug business(which is true and easy to prove)….those were never issues in any of the GOP debates.
The GOP boo’d the golden rule, stood mute on balanced budgets and the federal reserve.
“Limited gov’t” is nothing but a meaningless slogan to the GOP, accompanied by some flag waving and “Ooh-Rah”‘s.
Let’s agree on one thing: no one has ever really seriously paid much attention to Ron Paul. He has a rabid (or “loyal”) following, he’s sold a lot of books and made some speeches, but otherwise has been relegated to the loud-but-ignored wing of the GOP.
No lets agree that Paul and his loyal followers are the only true conservatives and the likes of the Repuklicrats and Demlicans can only drive this country further into oblivion.
“Let’s agree on one thing: no one has ever really seriously paid much attention to Ron Paul.”
I don’t know we can agree on that…it’s a fuzzy line.
I suspect the name “Ron Paul” is known by say, 25% of American households…but the whole metric of “paid much attention” isn’t clear.
I truly say this without trying to be argumentative.
He was prominent in a few of the GOP debates until his air time was curtailed….I think a good % of the voting population(more than 25%) is aware of him…but I think where you and I agree more might be that:
1. Most don’t fully understand his positions(maybe that qualifies as “paid much attention”?)
2. A large percentage of #1 wouldn’t touch him with a 10 foot pole or take him seriously.
TBG doesn’t think you are giving Ron Paul enough credit. He has almost single handedly brought libertarianism to the cusp of being “mainstream”. Hell, if it wasn’t for Ron Paul, this website probably wouldn’t exist in a recognizable form, and we wouldn’t be having this discussion. (Notice we are not talking about Nancy Lord, Harry Browne (TBG was a big fan..),Murray Rothbard, Ed Clark, or Andre Marrou…)
Ron Paul supports a lot of things I’d love to see the Republicans (and Democrats) support. I don’t think Ron Paul truly believes he will win any primary, but I think he believes that by running, he gets his ideas out there, and maybe people will listen and start expecting Republicans to follow through with what they claim they support in some cases, or entirely change what they support in others.
I do think Paul has had some success in that, but unfortunately, not enough to matter.
“I do think Paul has had some success to that degree, but unfortunately, not enough to matter.”
Agreed!
Ideas have to start someplace obviously and don’t gain large acceptance immediately.
That being said, when Fatboy(Christie) announced the other day that “libertarianism” is dangerous,that was WAYYYY more a reflection on the success of Ron Paul rather than the media attempts to call it an attack on Rand Paul(who Christie included in his diatribe).
The victory was the admission that libertarian ideas were “dangerous”, and we had a similar admission from Ms. Linsdey last month.
Anyone that wants to pretend that the concept of libertarianism isn’t gaining some traction has to ignore these public proclamations by prominent GOP members, and is IMHO ignoring reality.
The GOP is trying to abort the libertarian fetus in its own party and they have to explain why:
1. A global empire/wars and the money to support it
2. Fiscal deficits/inflation forever
are better and less dangerous than “libertarianism”…LMAO!
Good luck with that GOP.
I see the GOP and a dying dinosaur…and I think the GOP knows it and is fighting the inevitable….the ? is how long they have left…10 years? 30 years?
Will the collapse of our empire precede it and make it irrelevant? All questions that no one really know the if/how/why answers to.
Probably fewer than 10 I would guess. Two cycles?
Excellent points Smirks.
Nope, just a kook.
A kook that tried to save the colonel’s ass from another unnecessary unwanted illegal war.
That is exactly why I like Rand Paul. He is very conservative without being insane like his father.
The only thing I can agree with in your statement is that Rand Paul is not his father. That boy is so far left, he makes Grahmnesty only look like a liberal.
He ain’t that bad, Frank.
At least not yet.
Yeah you’re right. I retract. I fantasize of going back to the good old days where children were inspected in Spartan society to see if they’re worthy.
“Vomit”…pretty much describes Rand Paul and the father he rode in on.
That is exactly why I like Rand Paul. He is very conservative without being insane like his father.
The only thing I can agree with in your statement is that Rand Paul is not his father. That boy is so far left, he makes Grahmnesty only look like a liberal.
He ain’t that bad, Frank.
At least not yet.
Yeah you’re right. I retract. I fantasize of going back to the good old days where children were inspected in Spartan society to see if they’re worthy.
“Vomit”…pretty much describes Rand Paul and the father he rode in on.
If mainstream Republicans can lie about being conservative and then be liberal, surely Rand Paul can lie about being a conservative and then be a conservative-libertarian.
I’d love to hear a definition of what a “conservative-libertarian” is.
I think the two words are synonymous and mutually required. Similar to Republicrat and Demlican
Exactly, it’s the repackaging of a “turd” with more buzz words to lure in the stupid.
Ok. I don’t care but I’m curious. I’ve read this thread numerous times and for the life of me I can’t tell if that was a shot at me or not. Please advise.
No shot at you…lol…not in the least.
One who fully supports The Constitution and believes in limited government, individual & economic freedom. Pretty simple really.
What’s “limited gov’t”? What does that look like?
If the Constitution was so great, how did we get to where we are today?
Pfft. Total nonsense.
I love hearing these drones chant on about “limited gov’t” with no real definition of what it is.
Even Sic Willie calls himself a “cops & courts” libertarian…you don’t even need 2 minutes to start dissecting that.
What about fireman? What about an army? What about roads?
Oh yea? Those too? Guess it’s not just “cops & courts” then, eh?
Sheesh…it’s all a joke. The whole “fight” between everyone is over this notion of “limited gov’t”, and everyone has a god damned different idea of what that represents. EVERY SINGLE PERSON. You can include Democrats in that discussion, most libertarians, Republicans, Commies, etc.; EVERYONE.
Even the occasional drone that carries on about how “great” the failed document known as the Constitution is, as representative of this mystical Jackalope called “limited gov’t”, has to acknowledge that terms in it like “general welfare” or the power “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes” allow for UNLIMITED gov’t intervention.
Yea, let’s hear more vagaries on the supposed greatness of this undefined “limited gov’t” spoken with high minded platitudes and such, referring to the Constitution.
In fairness to everyone I’m guilty of it at times too…I’m just getting tired of people getting duped by the next up and coming pol claiming this obscure/slippery mantle of the “limited gov’t” candidate. What horse shit.
Here’s a simple one:
Fuck the gov’t(s). Fuck them, the horse they rode in on, and fuck them some more once the whole system caves in on itself. There, nice and simple.
I welcome a national Detroit scenario, it will be cathartic and refreshing.
Save the BS comments on “you can leave”, or “pick up a gun” or any other horseshit too.
I paid for the fucking guns, I paid for the pols, the streets, the buildings, etc. I’m not leaving till I’m good and ready.
I’m gonna milk what’s left and then go when it suits me and if I need to…be glad I’m doing it by being productive to society instead of sitting home and getting welfare checks or claiming disability…cause the longer I stay the longer those people are getting checks till the whole thing blows up.
Fuck Rand too, he’s a chump.
:) Nice!
If mainstream Republicans can lie about being conservative and then be liberal, surely Rand Paul can lie about being a conservative and then be a conservative-libertarian.
I’d love to hear a definition of what a “conservative-libertarian” is.
I think the two words are synonymous and mutually required. Similar to Republicrat and Demlican
Exactly, it’s the repackaging of a “turd” with more buzz words to lure in the stupid.
Ok. I don’t care but I’m curious. I’ve read this thread numerous times and for the life of me I can’t tell if that was a shot at me or not. Please advise.
No shot at you…lol…not in the least.
One who fully supports The Constitution and believes in limited government, individual & economic freedom. Pretty simple really.
What’s “limited gov’t”? What does that look like?
If the Constitution was so great, how did we get to where we are today?
Pfft. Total nonsense.
I love hearing these drones chant on about “limited gov’t” with no real definition of what it is.
Even Sic Willie calls himself a “cops & courts” libertarian…you don’t even need 2 minutes to start dissecting that.
What about fireman? What about an army? What about roads?
Oh yea? Those too? Guess it’s not just “cops & courts” then, eh?
Sheesh…it’s all a joke. The whole “fight” between everyone is over this notion of “limited gov’t”, and everyone has a god damned different idea of what that represents. EVERY SINGLE PERSON. You can include Democrats in that discussion, most libertarians, Republicans, Commies, etc.; EVERYONE.
Even the occasional drone that carries on about how “great” the failed document known as the Constitution is, as representative of this mystical Jackalope called “limited gov’t”, has to acknowledge that terms in it like “general welfare” or the power “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes” allow for UNLIMITED gov’t intervention.
Yea, let’s hear more vagaries on the supposed greatness of this undefined “limited gov’t” spoken with high minded platitudes and such, referring to the Constitution.
In fairness to everyone I’m guilty of it at times too…I’m just getting tired of people getting duped by the next up and coming pol claiming this obscure/slippery mantle of the “limited gov’t” candidate. What horse shit.
Here’s a simple one:
Fuck the gov’t(s). Fuck them, the horse they rode in on, and fuck them some more once the whole system caves in on itself. There, nice and simple.
I welcome a national Detroit scenario, it will be cathartic and refreshing.
Save the BS comments on “you can leave”, or “pick up a gun” or any other horseshit too.
I paid for the fucking guns, I paid for the pols, the streets, the buildings, etc. I’m not leaving till I’m good and ready.
I’m gonna milk what’s left and then go when it suits me and if I need to…be glad I’m doing it by being productive to society instead of sitting home and getting welfare checks or claiming disability…cause the longer I stay the longer those people are getting checks till the whole thing blows up.
Fuck Rand too, he’s a chump.
:) Nice!
Grand Tango/Big T must be dead or in jail or he’d be all over this like a fly on a cow paddy!
TBG believes that Will is having to put out too many fires and squash to many bugs on the new website to *be* BigT/GrandTango, at the present time.
If you look at Tango’s Discus profile, he’s still commenting regularly on other sites. Maybe Will finally banned him or got a restraining order?
Grand Tango/Big T must be dead or in jail or he’d be all over this like a fly on a cow paddy!
TBG believes that Will is having to put out too many fires and squash to many bugs on the new website to *be* BigT/GrandTango, at the present time.
If you look at Tango’s Discus profile, he’s still commenting regularly on other sites. Maybe Will finally banned him or got a restraining order?
Maybe Rand will follow the Obama-Jeremiah Wright playbook. Ron is his lovable but “crazy” Uncle …er..Father, and distance himself from him while still holding to his ideology when it counts?
Maybe Rand will follow the Obama-Jeremiah Wright playbook. Ron is his lovable but “crazy” Uncle …er..Father, and distance himself from him while still holding to his ideology when it counts?
I trust Rand. He is tactfully supporting the republican establishment, the way his dad refused to do, while keeping a clear conscience. It doesn’t appeal to me in the short term, but I think he has to build this foundation to have a chance at the nomination.
Ron was arguably the greatest presidential candidate this country has ever seen. America rejected him three times. Rand is trying something different- doing the dirty work needed to be elected president.
Yes and the Bills were the greatest football team ever.
Arguably! Best AFC team anyways.
“He is tactfully supporting the republican establishment, the way his dad refused to do, while keeping a clear conscience. ”
I swear, that whole statement is total nonsense.
“I trust Rand.”
What basis is there for earning your “trust”? Has he elucidated one view that has convinced you he’s “trustworthy” on all topics? Is there a series of “trust” issues that have won you over? Do share.
Since he has already disavowed his father, and naturally that give him this “clear conscience” you speak of, maybe you can share with us where Rand is “right” and his father is “wrong”.
Mr/Ms MashPotato ,
I love it when people aren’t afraid to expose their total insanity,but you could use some gravy,don’t you think?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBZSEfLvmQI
I trust Rand. He is tactfully supporting the republican establishment, the way his dad refused to do, while keeping a clear conscience. It doesn’t appeal to me in the short term, but I think he has to build this foundation to have a chance at the nomination.
Ron was arguably the greatest presidential candidate this country has ever seen. America rejected him three times. Rand is trying something different- doing the dirty work needed to be elected president.
Yes and the Bills were the greatest football team ever.
Arguably! Best AFC team anyways.
“He is tactfully supporting the republican establishment, the way his dad refused to do, while keeping a clear conscience. ”
I swear, that whole statement is total nonsense.
“I trust Rand.”
What basis is there for earning your “trust”? Has he elucidated one view that has convinced you he’s “trustworthy” on all topics? Is there a series of “trust” issues that have won you over? Do share.
Since he has already disavowed his father, and naturally that give him this “clear conscience” you speak of, maybe you can share with us where Rand is “right” and his father is “wrong”.
Mr/Ms MashPotato ,
I love it when people aren’t afraid to expose their total insanity,but you could use some gravy,don’t you think?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBZSEfLvmQI
When Rand Paul comes to SC and calls for the defeat of Lindsey Graham, then I will take him seriously as a conservative candidate for President.
When Rand Paul comes to SC and calls for the defeat of Lindsey Graham, then I will take him seriously as a conservative candidate for President.
He could start by getting a man’s name. Something like Clint, or Rocky, or maybe Bubba.
He could start by getting a man’s name. Something like Clint, or Rocky, or maybe Bubba.
Weiner Names New Campaign Manager
NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report) — One day after his campaign manager quit, the mayoral candidate Anthony D. Weiner named his penis to the post, telling reporters, “He was already making most of the major decisions, anyway.”
In announcing the new appointment, Mr. Weiner lavished praise upon his penis, calling him “a tough hombre” who “cares about the struggles of ordinary, middle-class New Yorkers.”
After one reporter questioned the wisdom of naming his penis to such an important role in the campaign, Mr. Weiner dismissed that concern, saying, “Look, he’s gotten me this far.”
While Mr. Weiner’s decision to give the top job to his controversial appendage raised eyebrows among political observers, insiders said the move merely reflected his headline-grabbing member’s already prominent role in the campaign.
“He [Mr. Weiner’s penis] has been calling the shots for weeks now,” one source said, adding that clashes between the former campaign manager Danny Kedem and the mercurial body part had led to Mr. Kedem’s exit.
“There was a power struggle between Danny and the package, and Danny lost,” said one campaign source. “Danny would try to talk sense to Anthony, but at the end of the day, the penis had his ear.”
Weiners Weiner is not news. Maybe you missed the memo from O’billary
Weiner Names New Campaign Manager
NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report) — One day after his campaign manager quit, the mayoral candidate Anthony D. Weiner named his penis to the post, telling reporters, “He was already making most of the major decisions, anyway.”
In announcing the new appointment, Mr. Weiner lavished praise upon his penis, calling him “a tough hombre” who “cares about the struggles of ordinary, middle-class New Yorkers.”
After one reporter questioned the wisdom of naming his penis to such an important role in the campaign, Mr. Weiner dismissed that concern, saying, “Look, he’s gotten me this far.”
While Mr. Weiner’s decision to give the top job to his controversial appendage raised eyebrows among political observers, insiders said the move merely reflected his headline-grabbing member’s already prominent role in the campaign.
“He [Mr. Weiner’s penis] has been calling the shots for weeks now,” one source said, adding that clashes between the former campaign manager Danny Kedem and the mercurial body part had led to Mr. Kedem’s exit.
“There was a power struggle between Danny and the package, and Danny lost,” said one campaign source. “Danny would try to talk sense to Anthony, but at the end of the day, the penis had his ear.”
Weiners Weiner is not news. Maybe you missed the memo from O’billary
What, exactly, is wrong with the views of Paul’s father – former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul? They make you unelectable. That’s what.
What, exactly, is wrong with the views of Paul’s father – former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul? They make you unelectable. That’s what.
The Pauls are militia people, admirers of Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, that’s what’s wrong with ’em.
The Pauls are militia people, admirers of Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, that’s what’s wrong with ’em.
No matter which way your,’politics’ lean,the now meaningless terms;’conservative’ ‘liberal,’democrat’,’republican’ or ‘libertarian’,NOTHING is going to change until the electoral college is abolished.
No matter which way your,’politics’ lean,the now meaningless terms;’conservative’ ‘liberal,’democrat’,’republican’ or ‘libertarian’,NOTHING is going to change until the electoral college is abolished.