Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Hang themselves

sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:11:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Republican party should just vote in favor of everything the Democrats want to implement no matter how insane without any debate or resistance if they ever hope to be in the White House ever again. The Democrats will look for and find any excuse they can and blame the Republican party for it's fiscal and social policy failures. All it will take is a single Republican to voice some objection to pin it on. The Republicans have a better chance of regaining the white house by letting the Democrats hang them selves with no opposition than to try and compromise and just prolong the inevitable.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:15:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:11:19 PM, sadolite wrote:
The Republican party should just vote in favor of everything the Democrats want to implement no matter how insane without any debate or resistance if they ever hope to be in the White House ever again. The Democrats will look for and find any excuse they can and blame the Republican party for it's fiscal and social policy failures. All it will take is a single Republican to voice some objection to pin it on. The Republicans have a better chance of regaining the white house by letting the Democrats hang them selves with no opposition than to try and compromise and just prolong the inevitable.

That may be true, but all the present members will lose their jobs.
sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:20:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:15:09 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:11:19 PM, sadolite wrote:
The Republican party should just vote in favor of everything the Democrats want to implement no matter how insane without any debate or resistance if they ever hope to be in the White House ever again. The Democrats will look for and find any excuse they can and blame the Republican party for it's fiscal and social policy failures. All it will take is a single Republican to voice some objection to pin it on. The Republicans have a better chance of regaining the white house by letting the Democrats hang them selves with no opposition than to try and compromise and just prolong the inevitable.

That may be true, but all the present members will lose their jobs.

So what, they are just as responsible. Bring in new faces.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:34:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.

I kind of liked him until he endorsed Romney.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:48:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:34:05 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.

I kind of liked him until he endorsed Romney.

don't hate the players, hate the game. By endorsing Romney, Rand Paul will earn more respect among the republican party then Ron Paul ever would.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:53:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:34:05 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.

I kind of liked him until he endorsed Romney.

He had to endorse Romney. Nixon endorsed Goldwater to get elected. Endorsement =/= policy. You can't betray your party and expect to get Romney's and the GOP support in 2016 if you snuff the GOP nominee in 2012. Rand Paul admitted on CNN that his endorsement was a strategy. Rand Paul even wrote a scathing essay decrying Romney's foreign policy.

I challenge anyone to show me once where Rand Paul has compromised or sacrificed policy.and principle.

Rand Paul has 100% Ron Paul Libertarian policy AND knows how to play the political game. He knows how to get support without ever compromising on principles and policy. Look at Rands record. It's impressive. He filibustered the Patriot Act and NDAA and is currently forcing the entire Senate to vote on his 6th Amendment addition to NDAA to at least protect our Constitutional rights if NDAA can't be repealed.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:54:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:34:05 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.

I kind of liked him until he endorsed Romney.

He wants to learn from his father's political "mistakes" and actually be able to be accepted within the party to get stuff done and advance the libertarian agenda. I think he does a fine job of toeing the party line but not compromising his principles. His strategy is kind of Machiavellian if you ask me, but I don't mind. I don't care what he SAYS, only what he votes for and the policies he supports. He might not be perfect, but if you think that government which governs best governs least, if you support more restraint on Presidential war powers, restoring civil liberties, trying to do something about the out of control debt/spending crisis, etc, then this dude is one of your best allies in Congress. I would gladly vote for him.

It irks me how many libertarians/anarchists are so damn principled that someone like Rand Paul, who is a huge ally for these people compared to almost everyone else in Congress, will do something like endorsing Romney or voting for Iran sanctions - both of which are things I think are pretty wrong and stupid - and suddenly he's dead meat, as if he has nothing good to offer. We are not in a situation, politically, where we can afford to throw away potential allies so easily.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:55:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:48:26 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:34:05 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.

I kind of liked him until he endorsed Romney.

don't hate the players, hate the game. By endorsing Romney, Rand Paul will earn more respect among the republican party then Ron Paul ever would.

And if he were to become President what suggests that he wouldn't make such unprincipled concessions in the name and support of the Republican Party?

Also, if you're willing to accept a compromise of principle for the sake of succeeding in the political status quo, why don't you seem to apply that logic to Obama?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:57:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
OMG I got Jat and Geo on my arse for that one. I just think it's a bit hypocritical to decry the party and Romney for their policies while turning right around and endorsing him. Perhaps Rand hasn't compromised as far as policy is concerned (I wouldn't be able to refute/substantiate that) but I'm just not attracted at all to running on principles in one area and then doing the same thing you attack your party for in another.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 6:58:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:55:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:48:26 PM, darkkermit wrote:

don't hate the players, hate the game. By endorsing Romney, Rand Paul will earn more respect among the republican party then Ron Paul ever would.

And if he were to become President what suggests that he wouldn't make such unprincipled concessions in the name and support of the Republican Party?

Also, if you're willing to accept a compromise of principle for the sake of succeeding in the political status quo, why don't you seem to apply that logic to Obama?

I agree. Both Rand and Obama are Machiavellian fucktards.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 7:03:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:55:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:48:26 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:34:05 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.

I kind of liked him until he endorsed Romney.

don't hate the players, hate the game. By endorsing Romney, Rand Paul will earn more respect among the republican party then Ron Paul ever would.

And if he were to become President what suggests that he wouldn't make such unprincipled concessions in the name and support of the Republican Party?

Also, if you're willing to accept a compromise of principle for the sake of succeeding in the political status quo, why don't you seem to apply that logic to Obama?

Rand Paul's voting record and the policies he supports reflect broadly libertarian ideals. It is clear that his "concession" to Romney is an electoral strategy that will not make a difference in the legislature he supports and opposes. Just see some of the hell he's raised with respect to Presidential war powers, Romney's proposed foreign policy, NDAA, etc for proof of that. He has only compromised verbally and strategically, not in terms of actual policy. At least as far as I'm aware.

Now, with Obama... See his positively neocon foreign policy (not quite neocon in Iran... yet... but under his term our government has still wrecked their economy, destroyed their currency, raised diplomatic pressure against them for doing nothing wrong, etc) his erosion of civil liberties and furthering of police state measures.... I'll leave it there. Obama's "compromises" were on seriously important policies, not just verbal acquiescence to gain favor with his own party.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 7:12:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Let me make this clear: Endorsement =/= policy or principle.

Rand is doing what's necessary to won in 2016 without sacrificing policy or principle. Rand is not bad for endorsing Romney. Endorsements are meaningless. Rand honestly thought Romney was better than Obama at least.

Btw, Murray Rothbard endorsed George W. Bush.

Again, I challenge anyone to look at Rand Paul's record, his statements, and his rhetoric, and show me one sacrifice in principle or compromise in policy.

If anyone dare look at Rand Pauls actions in Senate, they will be shocked to see the multiple amazing stands for Liberty and what he accomplished. He single-handedly destroyed the Patriot Act before Reid and Obama did a last minute cheat by inserting the text of the Patriot Act into a small business bill amendment.

Ron Paul delivered the message, Rand Paul is here to EXECUTE that message successfully and that requires playing politics.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 7:16:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Geo, I understand the policy/endorsement distinction. It just puts a bad taste in my mouth when libertarian leaning politicians take part in the political game like that. If Romney had actually won what would you have made of the endorsement?

On Rothbard, I think little of what he wrote after his alignment with paleo-conservatism. He got cozy with Pat Buchanan, helped found a major political party, and endorsed Bush. What a dlck.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 7:16:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:57:18 PM, socialpinko wrote:
OMG I got Jat and Geo on my arse for that one. I just think it's a bit hypocritical to decry the party and Romney for their policies while turning right around and endorsing him. Perhaps Rand hasn't compromised as far as policy is concerned (I wouldn't be able to refute/substantiate that) but I'm just not attracted at all to running on principles in one area and then doing the same thing you attack your party for in another.

It definitely is hypocritical and a compromise of principles. You could say the same about the fact that the Pauls served in Congress to begin with, getting paid with taxpayer money (Ron did return a ton of his yearly salary to the treasury for quite a while though). It's the eternal struggle of politics - do you stick by your principles or compromise to better carry them out? And compromising via strategic lying is definitely dishonest and not as "pure" as we've come to expect from the senior Paul. However, all I'm saying is, just because he's not perfect, doesn't mean we should totally throw him away. From the anarchist/voluntaryist POV, this dude and his policies are infinitely superior to any other possible candidate for President.

I would still enthusiastically support a Rand Paul campaign that focuses on fiscal responsibility, reducing our global military footprint, and restoring civil liberties. And there is good reason to believe that he would try and follow through on these things to the best of his ability. I think he just honestly sees how little his father accomplished electorally and wants to learn from that by being more of a "team player." Being a team player fvcking sucks, but the system is already firmly set up in such a way that you can only succeed politically by being a team player to an extent, so for anyone who is serious about advancing libertarian-based ideas in Washington, there isn't much of a choice....
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 8:17:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 7:03:54 PM, jat93 wrote:

Rand Paul's voting record and the policies he supports reflect broadly libertarian ideals. It is clear that his "concession" to Romney is an electoral strategy that will not make a difference in the legislature he supports and opposes. Just see some of the hell he's raised with respect to Presidential war powers, Romney's proposed foreign policy, NDAA, etc for proof of that. He has only compromised verbally and strategically, not in terms of actual policy. At least as far as I'm aware.

Now, with Obama... See his positively neocon foreign policy (not quite neocon in Iran... yet... but under his term our government has still wrecked their economy, destroyed their currency, raised diplomatic pressure against them for doing nothing wrong, etc) his erosion of civil liberties and furthering of police state measures.... I'll leave it there. Obama's "compromises" were on seriously important policies, not just verbal acquiescence to gain favor with his own party.

Senator Obama was also vehemently opposed to and voted against the Iraqi war...but he could not end it immediately as president. This is the reality of being president of the United States. The idea that someone is going to strategically ride into the white house on a golden chariot and incite a political upheaval is unheard of and naive to put it blankly. Rand Paul will get no where without the grace of the Republican Party. And his presidency will also be a failure without the support of his party. That will translate into broadrange concession...and senatorial voting patterns will never completely ally that possibility.

So my point is this. Being president is a whole different dimension from running for or aspiring to be president... and in this political atmosphere, Rand Paul would be a conservative Republican with modest legislative trinkets for his Libertarian constituents....not that this is his fault, and not that it is Obama's fault either, but it's just practical reality.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 8:29:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:11:19 PM, sadolite wrote:
The Republican party should just vote in favor of everything the Democrats want to implement no matter how insane without any debate or resistance if they ever hope to be in the White House ever again. The Democrats will look for and find any excuse they can and blame the Republican party for it's fiscal and social policy failures. All it will take is a single Republican to voice some objection to pin it on. The Republicans have a better chance of regaining the white house by letting the Democrats hang them selves with no opposition than to try and compromise and just prolong the inevitable.

Than democrats will claim their failed policies are failed republican policies
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 8:30:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:55:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:48:26 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:34:05 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.

I kind of liked him until he endorsed Romney.

don't hate the players, hate the game. By endorsing Romney, Rand Paul will earn more respect among the republican party then Ron Paul ever would.

And if he were to become President what suggests that he wouldn't make such unprincipled concessions in the name and support of the Republican Party?

He'll probably make some. He has a good voting record. He didn't vote for the NDAA.

Also, if you're willing to accept a compromise of principle for the sake of succeeding in the political status quo, why don't you seem to apply that logic to Obama?

Because Obama doesn't support libertarianism ideals at all. Mitt Romney was superior in terms of supporting free markets, so I voted for him.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Mr_Anon
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 8:42:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:11:19 PM, sadolite wrote:
The Republican party should just vote in favor of everything the Democrats want to implement no matter how insane without any debate or resistance if they ever hope to be in the White House ever again. The Democrats will look for and find any excuse they can and blame the Republican party for it's fiscal and social policy failures. All it will take is a single Republican to voice some objection to pin it on. The Republicans have a better chance of regaining the white house by letting the Democrats hang them selves with no opposition than to try and compromise and just prolong the inevitable.

As a Democrat, I fully support this idea! End all Republican opposition now!

On top of that, maybe we can finally get that NAFTA Superhighway built. With all this partisan gridlock, you can't get any basic Empire-building done. Implementation of Agenda 21 will also be important, if we want to get ahead of our international competitors.
sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 9:00:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 8:29:37 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:11:19 PM, sadolite wrote:
The Republican party should just vote in favor of everything the Democrats want to implement no matter how insane without any debate or resistance if they ever hope to be in the White House ever again. The Democrats will look for and find any excuse they can and blame the Republican party for it's fiscal and social policy failures. All it will take is a single Republican to voice some objection to pin it on. The Republicans have a better chance of regaining the white house by letting the Democrats hang them selves with no opposition than to try and compromise and just prolong the inevitable.

Than democrats will claim their failed policies are failed republican policies

Good point, didn't think of that. The Republicans will never be in the white house agin.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Mr_Anon
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 9:12:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 9:00:34 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 11/19/2012 8:29:37 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:11:19 PM, sadolite wrote:
The Republican party should just vote in favor of everything the Democrats want to implement no matter how insane without any debate or resistance if they ever hope to be in the White House ever again. The Democrats will look for and find any excuse they can and blame the Republican party for it's fiscal and social policy failures. All it will take is a single Republican to voice some objection to pin it on. The Republicans have a better chance of regaining the white house by letting the Democrats hang them selves with no opposition than to try and compromise and just prolong the inevitable.

Than democrats will claim their failed policies are failed republican policies

Good point, didn't think of that. The Republicans will never be in the white house agin.

In that case, secession might just be your best option. That's why I support Texas' right to secede (mainly though because it means Ron Paul and Rick Perry will no longer embarrass the nation, and because it will ensure a Democratic lock on the electoral vote).
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 9:12:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 7:12:04 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Let me make this clear: Endorsement =/= policy or principle.

Rand is doing what's necessary to won in 2016 without sacrificing policy or principle. Rand is not bad for endorsing Romney. Endorsements are meaningless. Rand honestly thought Romney was better than Obama at least.

Btw, Murray Rothbard endorsed George W. Bush.

Again, I challenge anyone to look at Rand Paul's record, his statements, and his rhetoric, and show me one sacrifice in principle or compromise in policy.

If anyone dare look at Rand Pauls actions in Senate, they will be shocked to see the multiple amazing stands for Liberty and what he accomplished. He single-handedly destroyed the Patriot Act before Reid and Obama did a last minute cheat by inserting the text of the Patriot Act into a small business bill amendment.

Ron Paul delivered the message, Rand Paul is here to EXECUTE that message successfully and that requires playing politics.

I have to say, I agree with Geo. Romney was superior when it came to advocating free enterprise relative to Obama, and the endorsement made Rand Paul better recognized among the GOP.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 10:05:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:53:11 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:34:05 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.

I kind of liked him until he endorsed Romney.

He had to endorse Romney. Nixon endorsed Goldwater to get elected. Endorsement =/= policy. You can't betray your party and expect to get Romney's and the GOP support in 2016 if you snuff the GOP nominee in 2012. Rand Paul admitted on CNN that his endorsement was a strategy. Rand Paul even wrote a scathing essay decrying Romney's foreign policy.

I challenge anyone to show me once where Rand Paul has compromised or sacrificed policy.and principle.

Rand Paul has 100% Ron Paul Libertarian policy AND knows how to play the political game. He knows how to get support without ever compromising on principles and policy. Look at Rands record. It's impressive. He filibustered the Patriot Act and NDAA and is currently forcing the entire Senate to vote on his 6th Amendment addition to NDAA to at least protect our Constitutional rights if NDAA can't be repealed.

I thought rand Paul was a socisl conservative? So he can't be 100% libertarian.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Mr_Anon
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2012 10:13:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 10:05:55 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:53:11 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:34:05 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/19/2012 6:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
The man in my avatar will save the Republican party. Even prominent neo-cons admit it.

I kind of liked him until he endorsed Romney.

He had to endorse Romney. Nixon endorsed Goldwater to get elected. Endorsement =/= policy. You can't betray your party and expect to get Romney's and the GOP support in 2016 if you snuff the GOP nominee in 2012. Rand Paul admitted on CNN that his endorsement was a strategy. Rand Paul even wrote a scathing essay decrying Romney's foreign policy.

I challenge anyone to show me once where Rand Paul has compromised or sacrificed policy.and principle.

Rand Paul has 100% Ron Paul Libertarian policy AND knows how to play the political game. He knows how to get support without ever compromising on principles and policy. Look at Rands record. It's impressive. He filibustered the Patriot Act and NDAA and is currently forcing the entire Senate to vote on his 6th Amendment addition to NDAA to at least protect our Constitutional rights if NDAA can't be repealed.

I thought rand Paul was a socisl conservative? So he can't be 100% libertarian.

Correct. He mocked President Obama for supporting gay marriage, calling it his "gayest move yet". He also tried to block a flood insurance bill over a life amendment. While his father is a disgusting bigot, Rand is merely a joke to the rest of the Senate. Not to mention that he opposed the closing of Guantanamo, making Obama's position actually more appealing to libertarians. That said, I intend on voting for him in the Republican primaries if Joe Biden runs for the Democratic nomination. I like Biden, but I want him to have the easiest opponent possible.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 5:12:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/19/2012 6:11:19 PM, sadolite wrote:
The Republican party should just vote in favor of everything the Democrats want to implement no matter how insane without any debate or resistance if they ever hope to be in the White House ever again. The Democrats will look for and find any excuse they can and blame the Republican party for it's fiscal and social policy failures. All it will take is a single Republican to voice some objection to pin it on. The Republicans have a better chance of regaining the white house by letting the Democrats hang them selves with no opposition than to try and compromise and just prolong the inevitable.

Oh pulease, how lame...as the Python troupe used to say..."and now for something completely different". I'm going to make a non-partisan comment that is sure to bring all you folks together in opposition to me.

Consider this, it isn't all about knowing who to blame, believe it or not, in the end, most of these politicians are trying to be good public servants, and now the election is over. There are problems that need to be fixed, there is a country that needs to be saved from disaster, they aren't going to just fix blame and hope for disaster, they are going to do what they can to avert disaster....and later they will try to get re-elected by pulling all that crap, but that isn't on them, that is on the voters, because it's how people vote.

The partisan politics comes from strong opinions on how to fix things, it isn't just an attempt to wreck the country so you can pin it on the evil others of your "us/them" thinking...and "us/them" it isn't just about them, it's about us, it's how we vote.

It's all supply and demand, this is the kind of politics we vote for, so it's the kind of politics we get, you can't lay it on the politicians, it's our own bed we have made, and so we have to lay in it, so quit your bellyaching.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater