Quote:

---

Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
For 4 years on this board before Obama I proclamed the sanity of Ron Paul. For 4 years we Paul supporters were ignored as insignifigant.

I'm honored to finally be worthy of your Liberal scorn. I'm gleeful that people are now actually spending time and treasure trying to create reasons to hate us.

It means we matter. Go Rand.

---

Quote:

---

In Kentucky, the Democratic Party's primary winner, Jack Conway, and the Democrats' runner-up, Dan Mongiardo, each had more votes than the Republican primary's winner, Rand Paul, but it's Paul who's been crowned winner by the media. He's apparently more headline-worthy than the oil disaster in the Gulf or anything else in the world.

Rand Paul is every preppy schmuck at every Libertarian Party meeting I attended so many years ago when I was a libertarian. He has the same assumption that his principles will solve every problem. He offers the same solutions that sound swell but disintegrate if they're brought into real world daylight. He has the same knee-jerk affection for any giant corporation, the same confidence that government has no standing to do much of anything, and the same righteous stand against racism in theory but in practice other principles come first.

I swear, it's like I know the guy. He was at every supper speech and every tax protest, with Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard books under his arm. If I met Rand Paul in person I'm sure he'd clumsily hit on me all over again. Only two things have changed — he's apparently solved his dandruff and pimple problem, and we haven't yet heard his extended speech on the wisdom of investing in gold (to most libertarians, gold is more important than freedom). But he makes up for the latter by believing in the mythical Amero.

Rand Paul is principled but woefully sheltered, and so naïve he's never stopped to think past his libertarian platitudes. Like, what happens if the government doesn't ban discrimination at gas stations and restaurants? When racist owners of these businesses say "No Blacks", "No Jews", "No Mexicans", then what happens when a Black Jewish Mexican walks in? In Rand Paul's libertarian state, the owner points to his "No shirts, no shoes, no Blacks, no Jews, no Mexicans" sign and demands that the Black Jewish Mexican leave — and if the Black Jewish Mexican doesn't leave quickly enough, what then? Presumably, tax-paid cops are supposed to arrest this Black Jewish Mexican fellow for trespassing, and tax-paid county prosecutors are supposed to bring him to trial, and tax-paid jailers are supposed to house him for a year as he serves his imagined debt to society.

In my perspective, if a business is open for business then a customer's right to buy a meal or use the toilet trumps a bigoted business owner's property rights to kick out Blacks, Jews, Mexicans, or whomever else he hates. In Rand Paul's world a businessman's right to hate you is more important than your right to eat or pee. Sounds very libertarian, she said snidely. Which is another reason I'm no longer a libertarian.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
For 4 years on this board before Obama I proclamed the sanity of Ron Paul. For 4 years we Paul supporters were ignored as insignifigant.

I'm honored to finally be worthy of your Liberal scorn. I'm gleeful that people are now actually spending time and treasure trying to create reasons to hate us.

It means we matter. Go Rand.

---

Hello,

Rand Paul is not the Libertarian we've been looking for.

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

---

Quote:

---

For 4 years on this board before Obama I proclamed the sanity of Ron Paul. For 4 years we Paul supporters were ignored as insignifigant.

I'm honored to finally be worthy of your Liberal scorn. I'm gleeful that people are now actually spending time and treasure trying to create reasons to hate us.

It means we matter. Go Rand.

---

Quote:

---

Many of the views Libertarians hold to are foreign and unfamiliar w/ Americans these days,as Libertarians favor corporations over security. And that frightens most people.

---

Quote:

---

With out the Imperial Federal Gov't there to hold our hands every minute of every day, we become scared, as a society.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
For 4 years on this board before Obama I proclamed the sanity of Ron Paul. For 4 years we Paul supporters were ignored as insignifigant.

---

Quote:

---

I'm honored to finally be worthy of your Liberal scorn. I'm gleeful that people are now actually spending time and treasure trying to create reasons to hate us.

It means we matter. Go Rand.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

For 4 years on this board before Obama I proclamed the sanity of Ron Paul. For 4 years we Paul supporters were ignored as insignifigant.

I'm honored to finally be worthy of your Liberal scorn. I'm gleeful that people are now actually spending time and treasure trying to create reasons to hate us.

It means we matter. Go Rand.

---

Well, you proudly proclaim your allegiance to big monopolies (a "bad guy" in the FF verse). That alone makes you worthy of scorn.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Rand annoys me. He's a spoiled brat, not much like his father. He only adopted his fathers platform after his father got a huge following, because Paul became a brand name. Sure, Rand is a libertarian, and I really doubt he's a racist, but he is a moron, for falling for the bait hook line and sinker, thinking that he was involved in a discussion about a constitutional question.

Also, he's wrong. This is something else that bothers me: ten amendment libertarianism. This is a pretty clear fourteenth amendment issue, not a first amendment issue as Rand Paul claimed in his argument with rachael maddow.

I would think that Rand would know his 14th A cases since he seems so big on corporate citizenship, which, Btw, gets my big WTF?! I mean seriously, libertarianism is about protecting the rights of the people, not the citizens who happen to be corporations. I mean, sure, they should be protected from the govt, but not at the expense of the people.

Finally, Rand fails on the whole caving issue. Ron Paul really doesn't cave on anything. Recently I heard Rand cave on whether or not we should go to war with Iran. Seriously, if you can't stick to your guns when you're right, then you're no kind of libertarian.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
So at this point, does Rand Paul even HAVE any actual policy positions? Last time I saw anyone changing their positions this frequently was in the Kama Sutra!

---

Quote:

---

Dream, you may have missed it (you've been away, and you're feeling MUCH better now, I hope), but I brought that idea up in regards to the backlash against Scott Brown. The thought I had was that there's a Catch-22 inherent in trying to run a successful campaign to elect an "anti-government" candidate for office. Best-case scenario? He wins. And then he's anti-government, and part of the government. So he's compromised, in order to get anything done at all, so that he can show his supporters that he's actually doing things. Or he doesn't compromise at all, and nobody on either side will get near him, because he's toxic to the go-along-to-get-along old-boys' club in DC.

What Brown has found is that going along and doing what you think is best for your district or your state, instead of doing what a national movement wants you to do, can be a politically fatal flaw. Brown was elected to represent MASSACHUSETTS in the United States Senate; he wasn't elected the Senator of the Tea Party. As such, he's doing what he can to create jobs in his state, and to try to stave off financial ruin for his state. And his former followers hate him for it. They've labeled him a "turncoat", a "traitor", and worse; they've posted things on his Facebook page, claiming that "we put you in office, and we'll take you out in 2012!", and "unliking" him.

So once you get into office as that anti-government elected official, you are now the one with a target painted on your back. You ARE the establishment now. And your always-loyal followers now must run someone against you, because the incumbent is always bad, and the underdog is always good, or so we were told when the children held their tea parties.


There's nothing inherently wrong with libertarian ideals. Reality tends to muddy them up a bit, and they generally come out of the fracas a little bloodied and bruised. But if a candidate wants to steer things TOWARDS a more libertarian political bent, more power to him or her. But if they think their first act in office will be to radically shift the country all the way to a libertarian paradise, they're deluded beyond all hope or reason. Heck even someone the right calls "an avowed socialist" - with BOTH Houses of Congress solidly behind him and a slew of "activist judges" AND the entire lefty-looney-liberal-lamestream media backing his every move and word - even that guy hasn't been able to make this country into the vaunted workers' paradise that socialism promised all those years ago.

So how is one anti-government guy going to change everything, especially if he won't work with those who are already in the system?

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Imma quote Helen Highwater, cause she gave him both barrels.
(And maybe a little cause she reminded me of Niki)

Quote:

---

In Kentucky, the Democratic Party's primary winner, Jack Conway, and the Democrats' runner-up, Dan Mongiardo, each had more votes than the Republican primary's winner, Rand Paul, but it's Paul who's been crowned winner by the media. He's apparently more headline-worthy than the oil disaster in the Gulf or anything else in the world.

Rand Paul is every preppy schmuck at every Libertarian Party meeting I attended so many years ago when I was a libertarian. He has the same assumption that his principles will solve every problem. He offers the same solutions that sound swell but disintegrate if they're brought into real world daylight. He has the same knee-jerk affection for any giant corporation, the same confidence that government has no standing to do much of anything, and the same righteous stand against racism in theory but in practice other principles come first.

I swear, it's like I know the guy. He was at every supper speech and every tax protest, with Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard books under his arm. If I met Rand Paul in person I'm sure he'd clumsily hit on me all over again. Only two things have changed — he's apparently solved his dandruff and pimple problem, and we haven't yet heard his extended speech on the wisdom of investing in gold (to most libertarians, gold is more important than freedom). But he makes up for the latter by believing in the mythical Amero.

Rand Paul is principled but woefully sheltered, and so naïve he's never stopped to think past his libertarian platitudes. Like, what happens if the government doesn't ban discrimination at gas stations and restaurants? When racist owners of these businesses say "No Blacks", "No Jews", "No Mexicans", then what happens when a Black Jewish Mexican walks in? In Rand Paul's libertarian state, the owner points to his "No shirts, no shoes, no Blacks, no Jews, no Mexicans" sign and demands that the Black Jewish Mexican leave — and if the Black Jewish Mexican doesn't leave quickly enough, what then? Presumably, tax-paid cops are supposed to arrest this Black Jewish Mexican fellow for trespassing, and tax-paid county prosecutors are supposed to bring him to trial, and tax-paid jailers are supposed to house him for a year as he serves his imagined debt to society.

In my perspective, if a business is open for business then a customer's right to buy a meal or use the toilet trumps a bigoted business owner's property rights to kick out Blacks, Jews, Mexicans, or whomever else he hates. In Rand Paul's world a businessman's right to hate you is more important than your right to eat or pee. Sounds very libertarian, she said snidely. Which is another reason I'm no longer a libertarian.

---

That is excerpted from here.
http://www.unknownnews.org/1005-24.html

Sums it up about right.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:

I never paid much attention to Ron Paul, I admit. What I have learned about him and his policies from you people HERE is more than I ever knew before, and it has made me come to admire him, and even agree with him on many of his positions.

Rand Paul is not Ron Paul.

---

Quote:

---

I admit Scott Brown has surprised me, to a degree, but I don't expect any surprises out of Rand. Scott Brown had the sense to use the Tea Party to get into office,

---

Quote:

---

Scott Brown had the sense to use the Tea Party to get into office,then to distance himself as fast as he could. Rand will go down with the Tea Party.

---

Quote:

---

As for BlueSun, kiddo we don't have to find reasons, Rand Paul puts them right out there for us, and "we're" not the only one who will mock him, trust me; it's already begun:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by antimason:
you must truely believe that Americans are nothing more then a bunch of racist, xenophobic, biggots. wow... that quite an opinion to take on your fellow citizens.

---

Quote:

---

Frem-

That's not an opinion.

Shit like THIS ?
http://detnews.com/article/20100528/METRO01/5280364/1409/

Fuck, man, Christianity is also a religion of intolerance, hate and violence, have you even ever read that work of glorified perverto-gore-porn they call their bible, and pondered that their sickass demongod probably gets off on human suffering, feeding on it like some twisted vampire while manipulating those fool enough to be susceptible into causing as much as possible ?

---

Quote:

---

Ever gave thought to the concept that it's perhaps the same entity behind most if not all of those religions that encourage one to hate and destroy all that isn't just like them ?

---

Quote:

---

And americans foremost in the charge, rah-rah-hoorah, kill anythin different, yeah...

---

Quote:

---

No, it's not opinion, it's fucking POLICY.

---

Quote:

---

AnthonyT-

Hello,

In some areas, and in some emotional climates, such businesses could last indefinitely. There are historical precedents that you should consult, where entire races of people were barred from businesses in a particular geographic zone.

---

Quote:

---

in regards to comments about the government interfering in food selection? I agree that they should stay out of it. Their only role is to be sure we are adequately informed about what we are eating. Whether or not we choose to eat it is our concern.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
"By the way, in an interview with a Russian journalist, Paul just said he wants to block citizenship to children born in the States to illegal immigrant parents. Score one more for an illogical, bigoted ideology!"

Um... hes right to say that.

If your parents were illegals, you too are illegal.

---

Quote:

---

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:

You ARE joking, aren’t you? It just wasn’t as accepted publicly, but believe me there were tons of abortions going on back then, too. Women just weren’t in a position to decide for themselves, so they either took concoctions to abort or went to the streets where prostitutes hung out where it was available, or did things to themselves that would prevent pregnancy, or left the baby on a doorstep. Sex has always been around and always will be; unplanned pregnancy has always and always will; we’re just more confused about it than some other societies.

---

Quote:

---

Saying Michelle Obama is bent on “prohibiting” you from anything is bad debate. Nobody’s outlawing salt, etc., they’re trying to EDUCATE us poor slobs and our deadly eating habits. Big difference.

---

Quote:

---

Oh, wow, I just got to the rest of the post. Obviously a waste of time to try to discuss or debate with you. “you claim to be soo concerned about” abortion, how many unwanted babies have YOU adopted lately?

---

Quote:

---

Anyone who starts out in a discussion with “I think all this feigned outrage from all you guilt ridden white liberals is very telling” isn’t someone who has an open enough mind to discuss anything with.

---

Quote:

---

Nonetheless, I’ll debate a couple of your points: “The Jim Crow laws were state and local laws in the United States enacted between 1876 and 1965. They mandated de jure racial segregation in all public facilities.” The argument Rand Paul was making was about FEDERAL laws, and the fact that some places were racist and instituted the Crow laws locally and statewide was WHY the federal government had to step in. To ensure equal treatment across the country. I reject your argument.

---

Quote:

---

Businesses provide something, the owner doesn’t have to “associate” with his customers, in fact few do, relatively speaking. They can “associate” with anyone they choose. I reject your argument.

---

Quote:

---

Businesses thrived for a long, long time when there was discrimination. I saw no sign they were suffering because they didn’t allow black people in their establishments; I reject that argument.

---

Quote:

---

Oh Jezus, a rabid ideologue Tea Bagger. Heaven help us.

---

Quote:

---

NIki-

None of that has anything to do with laws, and there are no laws impacting any of that.

---

Quote:

---

Visceral fallacious statements. Enuff already. I'm interested in actual discussions/debates, this is neither.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

In the 1940's, the government declared the coasts of the US 'military zones' where the military had authority to remove any ethnic Japanese who resided there, for security purposes. These citizens were re-settled into concentration camps on the interior. This is generally known and common knowledge. This was government discrimination of the highest order.

---

Quote:

---

It was not implemented overnight. The handwriting was on the wall, and some Japanese attempted to leave the coastal regions in the hopes of finding more tolerant inland areas.

They couldn't buy supplies. They couldn't get gas. No one would rent them hotels to sleep in. Suppliers stopped supplying Japanese-owned businesses, so the Japanese couldn't even rely on getting what they needed from Japanese run stores. An entire population was cut off from commerce and transportation, not by the government, but by private citizens who were reacting to an emotional bias in the face of war.

---

Quote:

---

Jim and Crow had nothing to do with it. This can happen again. Perhaps to the Muslims, next time. Who knows? This is why businesses must be subject to anti-discrimination laws that limit their freedom of association. They can still choose their friends, and they can still hold their opinions, but they can't deny service based solely on race, religion, or creed.

---

Quote:

---

So, now that I have illustrated the historical precedent for a race of people to be paralyzed by private discrimination within a geographic area, I am sure you understand the problem and support a small infringement on liberty in the interests of preserving the greater liberty for all.

---

Quote:

---

This is what government is for. To protect our Freedoms. Not for some of us. For all of us.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Patriots wage a constant battle to improve their nations, digging in twice as deep when it gets twice as bad. They love their countries too much to ignore wounds in need of mending. They don't wear blinders, and they don't abandon their charge.

---

Quote:

---

Niki-

Uh, yes they were. And still are, not that you'll acknowledge it. I know of several personally, and of some Afghan establishments that were forced to close because of attacks and vandalism.

The rest is gibberish

---