User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 8:53:56 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it.  If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 8:57:28 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, it is not and you're your own worst enemy when you absorb and accept leftist talking points. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Is that not an accurate statement? How can a rational person interpret that an untruth or pander? O.M.G. The man spoke teh TRUTH! 
You guys are your own worst enemies. No, it is not and you're your own worst enemy when you absorb and accept leftist talking points. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Are you so dense that you can't see he's trolling for votes from the other 30% down the road? His statement will cost him nothing with R voters but keeps the door open to others so at the very least, he's not the boogeyman the D's make most of us out to be. Strictly a checkers man huh? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:02:00 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you so dense that you can't see he's trolling for votes from the other 30% down the road? His statement will cost him nothing with R voters but keeps the door open to others so at the very least, he's not the boogeyman the D's make most of us out to be. Strictly a checkers man huh? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Is that not an accurate statement? How can a rational person interpret that an untruth or pander? O.M.G. The man spoke teh TRUTH!
You guys are your own worst enemies. No, it is not and you're your own worst enemy when you absorb and accept leftist talking points. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Are you so dense that you can't see he's trolling for votes from the other 30% down the road? His statement will cost him nothing with R voters but keeps the door open to others so at the very least, he's not the boogeyman the D's make most of us out to be. Strictly a checkers man huh? It has already cost him....hence these threads. You guys remind of Obama supporters, you will rationalize and defend untold stupidity. Hell, y'all are now defending leftist talking points in the name of such lol. The Democrats are already making videos of this guy's many contradictions. I want to win in 2016, that is not going to happen with Rand I support it but don't really support it Paul. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:09:45 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats We clearly profoundly disagree on Rand's general electability. "Hillary is just another third way corporatist shill, I may not agree with Rand on everything but presidents have a profound effect on the policies of their party. Just look how the Dems adopted Bill Clinton's third way and how the Reps adopted W's neoconservatism. Imagine how much better off this country would be with a more Rand-like Republican party. We need two functional parties to have a functional government." Hillary wouldn't stand a chance. I know people who'd never vote for any other likely nominee that would vote for Rand over Hillary without a second thought. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:14:09 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Just fess up. the though of a decrease in federal spending or a crack down on civil forefieture law makes your blood run cold. You dont have to hide it. You want to protect your pension. thats cool. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:32:27 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We clearly profoundly disagree on Rand's general electability. "Hillary is just another third way corporatist shill, I may not agree with Rand on everything but presidents have a profound effect on the policies of their party. Just look how the Dems adopted Bill Clinton's third way and how the Reps adopted W's neoconservatism. Imagine how much better off this country would be with a more Rand-like Republican party. We need two functional parties to have a functional government." Hillary wouldn't stand a chance. I know people who'd never vote for any other likely nominee that would vote for Rand over Hillary without a second thought. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats We clearly profoundly disagree on Rand's general electability. "Hillary is just another third way corporatist shill, I may not agree with Rand on everything but presidents have a profound effect on the policies of their party. Just look how the Dems adopted Bill Clinton's third way and how the Reps adopted W's neoconservatism. Imagine how much better off this country would be with a more Rand-like Republican party. We need two functional parties to have a functional government." Hillary wouldn't stand a chance. I know people who'd never vote for any other likely nominee that would vote for Rand over Hillary without a second thought. I hope you're right. I seriously doubt Rand or Cruz will get the nomination so this is all probably academic. We need a strong Governor to run. I don't know who exactly that is yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:33:22 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just fess up. the though of a decrease in federal spending or a crack down on civil forefieture law makes your blood run cold. You dont have to hide it. You want to protect your pension. thats cool. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Just fess up. the though of a decrease in federal spending or a crack down on civil forefieture law makes your blood run cold. You dont have to hide it. You want to protect your pension. thats cool. You can't address the issue posted so you resort to ridicule.....classy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:47:58 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can't address the issue posted so you resort to personal attacks.....classy. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Just fess up. the though of a decrease in federal spending or a crack down on civil forefieture law makes your blood run cold. You dont have to hide it. You want to protect your pension. thats cool. You can't address the issue posted so you resort to personal attacks.....classy. What is their to adress. He stated his opinion on a states issue that he has little control over as a federal politician. It was also an issue that cost the tea party movement a senate seat in mississippi as blacks voted to return a shithill to the senate. Again you are a smart man. you must know that. I just simply deducted your position from your mile wide blind spots. To attack you I would have to say something that isn't true. It is obviously in your personal interests to oppose the guy and you ignored the purpose behind his statement. Maybe it is just my suspicious nature. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:04:51 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is their to adress. He stated his opinion on a states issue that he has little control over as a federal politician. It was also an issue that cost the tea party movement a senate seat in mississippi as blacks voted to return a shithill to the senate. Again you are a smart man. you must know that. I just simply deducted your position from your mile wide blind spots. To attack you I would have to say something that isn't true. It is obviously in your personal interests to oppose the guy and you ignored the purpose behind his statement. Maybe it is just my suspicious nature. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Just fess up. the though of a decrease in federal spending or a crack down on civil forefieture law makes your blood run cold. You dont have to hide it. You want to protect your pension. thats cool. You can't address the issue posted so you resort to personal attacks.....classy. What is their to adress. He stated his opinion on a states issue that he has little control over as a federal politician. It was also an issue that cost the tea party movement a senate seat in mississippi as blacks voted to return a shithill to the senate. Again you are a smart man. you must know that. I just simply deducted your position from your mile wide blind spots. To attack you I would have to say something that isn't true. It is obviously in your personal interests to oppose the guy and you ignored the purpose behind his statement. Maybe it is just my suspicious nature. No, you resorted to ridicule rather than address what was posted. Do you have proof of that? He suggested Paul's statements about Voter ID being offensive were true. I posted the contrary with supporting evidence. Now, you're doubling down on ridicule. All this tells me is you have nothing to say. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:33:24 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, you resorted to ridicule rather than address what was posted. Do you have proof of that? He suggested Paul's statements about Voter ID being offensive were true. I posted the contrary with supporting evidence. Now, you're doubling down on ridicule. All this tells me is you have nothing to say. Redicule, since when is it redicule to question a persons motives? Usually when the motives are questionable I wott. It seems normal to me to question a persons motives when they seem to be intentially misleading. Especially in politics. Google Thad Cochran. He told the democrats(blacks in opposition of the ID law just passed in Mississipi) that he would work to re-insitute the parts of the VRA that had been overturned by SCOTUS. They (democrats opposed to the VRA changes) crossed party lines and voted for him. So pushing for voter ID laws in Mississippi cost the Tea Party a seat. Rand Paul is a "Tea Party" Republican. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:38:46 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm curious as to what they think he should have said regarding the matter.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What exactly did Paul say that has butthurt the mouthbreathers so much? I wonder if they even know. I'm curious as to what they think he should have said regarding the matter. He should have said he stands with law enforcement instead of peddling this police brutality against blacks because they are racist shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:40:30 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It has already cost him....hence these threads. You guys remind of Obama supporters, you will rationalize and defend untold stupidity. Hell, y'all are now defending leftist talking points in the name of such lol. The Democrats are already making videos of this guy's many contradictions. I want to win in 2016, that is not going to happen with Rand I support it but don't really support it Paul. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Is that not an accurate statement? How can a rational person interpret that an untruth or pander? O.M.G. The man spoke teh TRUTH!
You guys are your own worst enemies. No, it is not and you're your own worst enemy when you absorb and accept leftist talking points. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Are you so dense that you can't see he's trolling for votes from the other 30% down the road? His statement will cost him nothing with R voters but keeps the door open to others so at the very least, he's not the boogeyman the D's make most of us out to be. Strictly a checkers man huh? It has already cost him....hence these threads. You guys remind of Obama supporters, you will rationalize and defend untold stupidity. Hell, y'all are now defending leftist talking points in the name of such lol. The Democrats are already making videos of this guy's many contradictions. I want to win in 2016, that is not going to happen with Rand I support it but don't really support it Paul. It has and will cost him exactly jack and shit. The obvious logic of the statement to a particular segment of the audience has been pointed out to you. It fits in perfectly with his outreach to minorities who can be educated on the issue after he is elected. These people have been fed a steady diet of how we try to limit their participation. Why ring that bell for the D's? Hell, let's just make the whole election about abortion. Jesus Christ. And this is the best you got? No wonder we can't get a win. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the obvious is your shortcoming, not Rand's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:43:26 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He should have said he stands with law enforcement instead of peddling this police brutality against blacks because they are racist shit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What exactly did Paul say that has butthurt the mouthbreathers so much? I wonder if they even know. I'm curious as to what they think he should have said regarding the matter. He should have said he stands with law enforcement instead of peddling this police brutality against blacks because they are racist shit. now that I agree with. He had no idea what went down between the officer and brown when he made his statement. He should have kept his mouth shut. But since you supported Romney even after he voted for and passed an assault weapons ban and Obamacare before it was cool, Surely you can overlook this right? I mean it would be strange if you didn't. I think it would be strange. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:56:45 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I never said he was not a loyal Republican. I made no comment in that post about Rand Paul at all. I was making the point that many libertarians find Rand Paul a palatable choice and that is probably why you must cut him down. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Rand Paul is a loyal Republican. Endorsed McConnell, Cochran and Romney. Hadn't you heard? This might sound crazy, but my reasons for not wanting to vote for Rand Paul in the future Republican Primary has NOTHING to do with YOU or anyone else other that Rand Paul. Not everything is about you, sweetheart. I find his pandering about Ferguson to be unacceptable. YOU give him a pass on it, or endorse his perspective. That's fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:01:18 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. Once upon a time, a guy who pandered to Sharpton, to prove he could "reach across the aisle," endorsed McConnell, Cochran, and Romney, supported Amnesty, and didn't support voter ID laws was known as a R.I.N.O.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:06:01 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Paul derrangement syndrome is when you see and hear Paul do things that you would condemn vociferously, had you heard it coming from any other Republican, but you will white-wash, defend and make excuses for, if it comes from "Paul." THAT is Paul derrangement syndrome. Personally, I have always found such adoring worship of politicians or families of professional politicians (Kennedys, Pelosis, Pauls, Bushes, Clintons) to be cult-like and distasteful. I don't like politicians. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's like trying to explain M-theory to your cat. Paul Derangement Syndrome. Paul derrangement syndrome is when you see and hear Paul do things that you would condemn vociferously, had you heard it coming from any other Republican, but you will white-wash, defend and make excuses for, if it comes from "Paul." THAT is Paul derrangement syndrome. Personally, I have always found such adoring worship of politicians or families of professional politicians (Kennedys, Pelosis, Pauls, Bushes, Clintons) to be cult-like and distasteful. I don't like politicians. /thread Bravo, very well said! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:08:36 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Says one of the neo-cons I was speaking of. We now see that it makes no difference what we do. There is no pleasing you. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Personally, what I like about Rand most is how much he bothers the neo-cons here in GD. Makes me wonder what they are so afraid of. They say, Stop being libertarian. Work within the Republican Party." Last I looked, Rand is a Republican. Some of us libertarian types are doing exactly what you always whine that we should do—working within the Republican Party—and you bastards whine anyway. http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/97/975399a0bf18e01ac645add63772b2744a192f1adf0c24efc70e5d7c0c89c989.jpg What point is there in dialog with such folks? Your strawmen are tiresome. You seem to be taking criticism of Rand Paul personally. I find that odd. I didn't mind Marco Rubio. But then he pushed for pseudo-amnesty. Now I will no longer support him. Period. I liked and supported Rand Paul. But then he pandered to the race pimps and provided moral support to victimhood cult that we see on display in Ferguson. Now I will no longer support him. It's nothing personal. It's not about you. Rand just demonstrated a quality that I find distasteful in a politician. It IS funny to see so many people defending his pandering and the idea of "electability" and the ability to appeal to moderates. Like I said, I prefer Ted Cruz. I think he's much better qualified and more intellectually honest. Ah, the favorite slur of the left circa 2007-8. Interesting that it is also the favorite term of the moby crowd now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:16:35 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just fess up. the though of a decrease in federal spending or a crack down on civil forefieture law makes your blood run cold. You dont have to hide it. You want to protect your pension. thats cool. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Just fess up. the though of a decrease in federal spending or a crack down on civil forefieture law makes your blood run cold. You dont have to hide it. You want to protect your pension. thats cool. Is that what Hillary will do when she soundly defeats Paul? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:19:53 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well why don't we see if he has any follow-on talks with minority leaders and who they might be and what they might or might not agree on before we string him up? If he beds down with the usual suspects, we'll know he's FOS. Then we can string him up and I'll take point. 
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I like Rand, but his pandering in Ferguson is unforgivable. He won't get my support in the primaries. Ted Cruz, 2016. You keep saying pandering. It's not pandering just to disagree with you. But you know that...... Yes, I DO know that. Of course, I am not saying that he pandered because he somehow "disagreed" with me. I am saying he was pandering, because he was quite clearly pandering. But you know that... Well why don't we see if he has any follow-on talks with minority leaders and who they might be and what they might or might not agree on before we string him up? If he beds down with the usual suspects, we'll know he's FOS. Then we can string him up and I'll take point.
http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-just-had-a-sitdown-with-al-sharpton-2014-11 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:24:28 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Disagree. He adverdently or inadvertently gave credence to a mob and its insane narrative without even waiting on facts. It was not just dumb, it was completely unforgivable. He will never get my vote in a primary. That mob is a symptom of long term wide spread government abuses that need to be stopped. It goes way beyond the issue of brutality too. Recognizing that what we do every day (welfare, drug war, and yes, police treating folks, especially poor black ones) like shit doesn't condone their violence. It's the first step in stopping what we're doing to help cause it. Sure the individual rioters are primarily to blame, but they wouldn't be nearly so inclined to fuck up if we stopped fucking them over. As always, freedom is the solution. Freedom from the police state bs, freedom from the drug war, and freedom from subsidized failure. Pointing that out requires more than a single step logic attention span. That might be a bridge too far for some folks though, and they'll just grunt and say ugh. Him like rioters. Ugh! We're all better than that though. At least I hope we are. This! The level of ignorance and stupidity that some members display is, staggering, to say the least. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:27:54 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I like Rand, but his pandering in Ferguson is unforgivable. He won't get my support in the primaries. Ted Cruz, 2016. You keep saying pandering. It's not pandering just to disagree with you. But you know that...... Yes, I DO know that. Of course, I am not saying that he pandered because he somehow "disagreed" with me. I am saying he was pandering, because he was quite clearly pandering. But you know that... Well why don't we see if he has any follow-on talks with minority leaders and who they might be and what they might or might not agree on before we string him up? If he beds down with the usual suspects, we'll know he's FOS. Then we can string him up and I'll take point.
http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-just-had-a-sitdown-with-al-sharpton-2014-11
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:40:40 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I like Rand, but his pandering in Ferguson is unforgivable. He won't get my support in the primaries. Ted Cruz, 2016. You keep saying pandering. It's not pandering just to disagree with you. But you know that...... Yes, I DO know that. Of course, I am not saying that he pandered because he somehow "disagreed" with me. I am saying he was pandering, because he was quite clearly pandering. But you know that... Well why don't we see if he has any follow-on talks with minority leaders and who they might be and what they might or might not agree on before we string him up? If he beds down with the usual suspects, we'll know he's FOS. Then we can string him up and I'll take point.
http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-just-had-a-sitdown-with-al-sharpton-2014-11 I don't agree with any contact with Sharpton but I'm not his strategist. The mere fact that he speaks with anyone is not a disqualifier in itself. I wouldn't give Sharpton the publicity myself. FUAS I will be watching this "relationship" closely as it could become a disqualifier for me. I'm all about reaching out but the gravy train stops and Sharpton et al has no place in any group I'd care to reach out to. ETA That pretty well pisses me off the more I think about it. At best it's piss poor judgement.
We shall see I guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:46:18 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOddly, he gets not only a pass on that, but, a pat on the back as well from some members. The hypocrisy here at time is something to behold. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 12:23:59 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
now that I agree with. He had no idea what went down between the officer and brown when he made his statement. He should have kept his mouth shut. But since you supported Romney even after he voted for and passed an assault weapons ban and Obamacare before it was cool, Surely you can overlook this right? I mean it would be strange if you didn't. I think it would be strange. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What exactly did Paul say that has butthurt the mouthbreathers so much? I wonder if they even know. I'm curious as to what they think he should have said regarding the matter. He should have said he stands with law enforcement instead of peddling this police brutality against blacks because they are racist shit. now that I agree with. He had no idea what went down between the officer and brown when he made his statement. He should have kept his mouth shut. But since you supported Romney even after he voted for and passed an assault weapons ban and Obamacare before it was cool, Surely you can overlook this right? I mean it would be strange if you didn't. I think it would be strange. I didn't support Romney in the primaries and I won't support Rand in them either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 12:33:51 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't agree with any contact with Sharpton but I'm not his strategist. The mere fact that he speaks with anyone is not a disqualifier in itself. I wouldn't give Sharpton the publicity myself. FUAS I will be watching this "relationship" closely as it could become a disqualifier for me. I'm all about reaching out but the gravy train stops and Sharpton et al has no place in any group I'd care to reach out to. ETA That pretty well pisses me off the more I think about it. At best it's piss poor judgement.
We shall see I guess. So, you'll just forgive and forget anything he does obviously... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 1:33:16 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I didn't support Romney in the primaries and I won't support Rand in them either. I don't think anyone here was expecting you to support Rand. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 5:14:51 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, you'll just forgive and forget anything he does obviously... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't agree with any contact with Sharpton but I'm not his strategist. The mere fact that he speaks with anyone is not a disqualifier in itself. I wouldn't give Sharpton the publicity myself. FUAS I will be watching this "relationship" closely as it could become a disqualifier for me. I'm all about reaching out but the gravy train stops and Sharpton et al has no place in any group I'd care to reach out to. ETA That pretty well pisses me off the more I think about it. At best it's piss poor judgement.
We shall see I guess. So, you'll just forgive and forget anything he does obviously... Comprehension obviously isn't your strong point. We shall see if Rand starts sounding like Sharpton, in which case I'll bail on him in a flat minute. I have said all along that if he went off the reservation or a better option came up, I'd go with it. I'm a supporter, not a Bot. In your zeal to prove me a hypocrite, you draw incorrect conclusions. I doubt it's your first time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 8:15:22 AM EDT
[#28]
Why do I see this in my head whenever Hugh wanders into a thread and post dumps?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 8:49:10 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I stopped following the Ferguson thread once the first one got locked. So I am pretty much out of the loop. Did it come out that the video of Mike Brown stealing from the store was incorrect? Was it confirmed that the officer was not punched in the face? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Your whole argument that Rand "went with Al Sharpton" is predicated on his statement that he wouldn't expect to be shot for mouthing off. It isn't known yet and may never be how he came to get shot, especially since the stories about him robbing a store and breaking the officers occipital both turned out to be wrong. What is known is that his community does expect people to get shot for mouthing off, and I know that doesn't surprise me. I tend to agree with you wording of the opening statement of the Time article was an error in judgment, especially before enough facts had come out, but I also remember the state of the story at that time, and understand the points he was trying to make, rather than the ones being attributed to him that would lead anyone to associate him with somebody like Sharpton. I stopped following the Ferguson thread once the first one got locked. So I am pretty much out of the loop. Did it come out that the video of Mike Brown stealing from the store was incorrect? Was it confirmed that the officer was not punched in the face? Of course you have a link to a credible source to back up that assertion, because in fact, Brown's famlily was livid that the police released the video of their "gentle giant" committing a strong arm robbery of the store along with the same accomplice who admitted the robbery and was with Brown when he was shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:27:17 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The one where he said there was no excuse for looting and rioting? Where he said bad policy choices were contributing to the unnecessarily adversarial relationship between the people and law enforcement? The one where he effectively inoculated himself against the inevitable charges of racism and bigotry that are always interjected into libertarian campaigns? (and not just by the left?) That editorial? That's his crime? lol Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Did you read his Ferguson editorial? The one where he said there was no excuse for looting and rioting? Where he said bad policy choices were contributing to the unnecessarily adversarial relationship between the people and law enforcement? The one where he effectively inoculated himself against the inevitable charges of racism and bigotry that are always interjected into libertarian campaigns? (and not just by the left?) That editorial? That's his crime? lol The shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown is an awful tragedy that continues to send shockwaves through the community of Ferguson, Missouri and across the nation.
If I had been told to get out of the street as a teenager, there would have been a distinct possibility that I might have smarted off. But, I wouldn’t have expected to be shot. Rand directly accuses Officer Wilson of shooting Michael Brown for 'smarting off'. It's not only a despicable statement but completely contrary to the facts. The fact is that Michael Brown was a petty thug drug abuser and a menace to his community. Officer Wilson deserves praise for doing his job, not condemnation. Quoted:
Here are some of his comments that are probably bothering people: "If I had been told to get out of the street as a teenager, there would have been a distinct possibility that I might have smarted off. But, I wouldn’t have expected to be shot." - here, he is actively selling the bullshit narrative that poor Michael Brown was just gunned down for "smarting off" to a police officer.  He doesn't seem to leave any room for error there, or question whether perhaps Michael Brown was violent or attacked the officer - but has completely BOUGHT the bullshit story that Michael Brown didn't attack the officer, but just "smarted off" and was shot for it.
"The outrage in Ferguson is understandable" - while he pays lip service earlier to how rioting and violence is wrong, this statement then waters that down, and suggests that perhaps there is some justification, since the "outrage" is apparently perfectly reasonable. And WHY is the outrage so reasonable? Because of the bullshit story of Michael Brown just being gunned down for "smarting off" that he has decided to peddle.
"Given the racial disparities in our criminal justice system, it is impossible for African-Americans not to feel like their government is particularly targeting them." - this just seems like blatant racial pandering. Really, it's IMPOSSIBLE for blacks to not feel like their government is "targeting" them?
"Our prisons are full of black and brown men and women who are serving inappropriately long and harsh sentences for non-violent mistakes in their youth." - this is a classic liberal talking point By actively promulgating the story that Michael Brown was killed for "smarting off" to a police officer (essentially supporting the murder/execution accusation, if you take it to the logical conclusion), he HAS CHOSEN the narrative of the Al Sharptons of the world (before the facts were known). He then CHOSE to follow that up with classic liberal talking points of victimization, in terms of how the outrage is "reasonable" and how it's "impossible" for black people to not feel targeted by the government, and how our prisons are full of black people who just made some minor "mistakes" - that is pandering, plain and simple. Great summary. Rand is parroting classic NPR talking points. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:34:57 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
GD sure does a good job of demonstrating the GOP's consistent habit of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Every possible candidate put forth could say something that would irritate a portion of the party, and next thing you know, they've been kicked to the curb until the only one left is a milquetoast worm like McCain. Then come election time, the wailing and gnashing of teeth begins. All of this 'libertarian' crying about the McCain boogieman overlooks one important point- in seeking out traditionally liberal audiences to bad-mouth the GOP, Rand Paul is running the McCain playbook to a T. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:36:39 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
His original statement in a NYT's piece was: “Everybody’s gone completely crazy on this voter ID thing,” he told the paper at the time. “I think it’s wrong for Republicans to go too crazy on this issue because it’s offending people.” He clarified by saying he is for Voter ID but doesn't want to make an issue of it. What does that mean? I am for it but not really for it? This guy is now trying to straddle to many fences. Voter ID is an incredibly popular issue with voters. This is not his first instance of this. I thought his appeal was that he was a principled guy, not a wishy washy Rubio type. He is simply not ready for prime time IMO. I will vote for him if he is the candidate, but not in the primary. Yeah, his statements on Voter ID have been a real dog's dinner. He came out weakly in 'support' at the end but it doesn't read as if there's any conviction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:55:43 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why do I see this in my head whenever Hugh wanders into a thread and post dumps? http://i1227.photobucket.com/albums/ee427/ltlabner/Gifs/jamiepresleystraw_zps9nssqjql.gif Because you just aren't bright enough to say anything substantive? It could be that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:58:31 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because you just aren't bright enough to say anything substantive? It could be that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why do I see this in my head whenever Hugh wanders into a thread and post dumps? http://i1227.photobucket.com/albums/ee427/ltlabner/Gifs/jamiepresleystraw_zps9nssqjql.gif Because you just aren't bright enough to say anything substantive? It could be that. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:59:16 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, his statements on Voter ID have been a real dog's dinner. He came out weakly in 'support' at the end but it doesn't read as if there's any conviction. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
His original statement in a NYT's piece was: “Everybody’s gone completely crazy on this voter ID thing,” he told the paper at the time. “I think it’s wrong for Republicans to go too crazy on this issue because it’s offending people.” He clarified by saying he is for Voter ID but doesn't want to make an issue of it. What does that mean? I am for it but not really for it? This guy is now trying to straddle to many fences. Voter ID is an incredibly popular issue with voters. This is not his first instance of this. I thought his appeal was that he was a principled guy, not a wishy washy Rubio type. He is simply not ready for prime time IMO. I will vote for him if he is the candidate, but not in the primary. Yeah, his statements on Voter ID have been a real dog's dinner. He came out weakly in 'support' at the end but it doesn't read as if there's any conviction. It's that same naïveté that McCain and many other "cross the aisle" types have, where they foolishly believe that pleasing the editorial board of the NYT will mean that in the General election, they will still be friends. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 10:02:52 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats +1 When did Rand get anointed as this all conquering political colossus? He's won a grand total of one election, in a strongly GOP state during a wave election with high name recognition. And he hasn't really achieved anything of note, apart from making a hash of contradictory statements on any variety of issues (Ferguson, Voter ID, anything relating to foreign policy). It's completely reasonable to regard him with a skeptical eye. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 10:05:51 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
+1 When did Rand get anointed as this all conquering political colossus? He's won a grand total of one election, in a strongly GOP state during a wave election with high name recognition. And he hasn't really achieved anything of note, apart from making a hash of contradictory statements on any variety of issues (Ferguson, Voter ID, anything relating to foreign policy). It's completely reasonable to regard him with a skeptical eye. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats +1 When did Rand get anointed as this all conquering political colossus? He's won a grand total of one election, in a strongly GOP state during a wave election with high name recognition. And he hasn't really achieved anything of note, apart from making a hash of contradictory statements on any variety of issues (Ferguson, Voter ID, anything relating to foreign policy). It's completely reasonable to regard him with a skeptical eye. Many of his supporters are blind to his glaring flaws. It's very similar to how the Democrats love anyone named "Kennedy"; there's no judgement required; just adoration and ignorance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 10:12:17 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Many of his supporters are blind to his glaring flaws. It's very similar to how the Democrats love anyone named "Kennedy"; there's no judgement required; just adoration and ignorance. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You mean liberal talking points like shitting on the best republican candidate in 2016. Sorry couldn't help it. If our best candidate is a political amateur who regurgitates leftist talking points that are not true, then we are in a heap of trouble. Hillary is going to mop the floor with him. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/206300-poll-70-percent-support-voter-id-laws The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats +1 When did Rand get anointed as this all conquering political colossus? He's won a grand total of one election, in a strongly GOP state during a wave election with high name recognition. And he hasn't really achieved anything of note, apart from making a hash of contradictory statements on any variety of issues (Ferguson, Voter ID, anything relating to foreign policy). It's completely reasonable to regard him with a skeptical eye. Many of his supporters are blind to his glaring flaws. It's very similar to how the Democrats love anyone named "Kennedy"; there's no judgement required; just adoration and ignorance. The Kennedy comparison is right on - EMK was a political genius who never did anything but run in Massachusetts and talk on TV. He fell on his face the only time he left the cozy environs of Boston/DC. Rand is starting to give off the same vibe - chasing around cameras, microphones and op-ed page editors, talk, talk, talking away. This is a big reason why I've soured on Senators as Presidents, it's not a skill set conducive to effective executive management. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 10:14:08 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why do I see this in my head whenever Hugh wanders into a thread and post dumps? http://i1227.photobucket.com/albums/ee427/ltlabner/Gifs/jamiepresleystraw_zps9nssqjql.gif Because you just aren't bright enough to say anything substantive? It could be that. http://i1227.photobucket.com/albums/ee427/ltlabner/Gifs/whoiswinking2_zpsedadc391.gif I now have a boner |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 10:14:50 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why do I see this in my head whenever Hugh wanders into a thread and post dumps? http://i1227.photobucket.com/albums/ee427/ltlabner/Gifs/jamiepresleystraw_zps9nssqjql.gif To be honest this gave me a boner as well |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 10:15:45 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To be honest this gave me a boner as well Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why do I see this in my head whenever Hugh wanders into a thread and post dumps? http://i1227.photobucket.com/albums/ee427/ltlabner/Gifs/jamiepresleystraw_zps9nssqjql.gif To be honest this gave me a boner as well 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 10:15:49 AM EDT
[#42]
I fired off a letter early this morning inquiring as to WT actual F they were doing playing with Sharpton.
We'll see if he responds. He always has before. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 10:19:18 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Doesn't matter to me. This "liberaltarian" voted basically straight R this last election. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You liberaltarians do realize he is pro-life right? Doesnt that make him to much of a "bible-thumper" for you? Doesn't matter to me. This "liberaltarian" voted basically straight R this last election. Same here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 11:52:13 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Of course you have a link to a credible source to back up that assertion, because in fact, Brown's famlily was livid that the police released the video of their "gentle giant" committing a strong arm robbery of the store along with the same accomplice who admitted the robbery and was with Brown when he was shot. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your whole argument that Rand "went with Al Sharpton" is predicated on his statement that he wouldn't expect to be shot for mouthing off. It isn't known yet and may never be how he came to get shot, especially since the stories about him robbing a store and breaking the officers occipital both turned out to be wrong. What is known is that his community does expect people to get shot for mouthing off, and I know that doesn't surprise me. I tend to agree with you wording of the opening statement of the Time article was an error in judgment, especially before enough facts had come out, but I also remember the state of the story at that time, and understand the points he was trying to make, rather than the ones being attributed to him that would lead anyone to associate him with somebody like Sharpton. I stopped following the Ferguson thread once the first one got locked. So I am pretty much out of the loop. Did it come out that the video of Mike Brown stealing from the store was incorrect? Was it confirmed that the officer was not punched in the face? Of course you have a link to a credible source to back up that assertion, because in fact, Brown's famlily was livid that the police released the video of their "gentle giant" committing a strong arm robbery of the store along with the same accomplice who admitted the robbery and was with Brown when he was shot. I understand now, You're upset because I said the story was wrong and you thought I was asserting he was innocent. I wasn't. All I meant was the story that he broke the cops skull while resisting arrest on a robbery charge wasn't correct. What I said was we don't know how it went down, and for the purposes of this discussion it doesn't matter, while responding to a post where it was asserted we do know what happened. I get it, I didn't word it very well, because it was beside the point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 1:52:05 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I understand now, You're upset because I said the story was wrong and you thought I was asserting he was innocent. I wasn't. All I meant was the story that he broke the cops skull while resisting arrest on a robbery charge wasn't correct. What I said was we don't know how it went down, and for the purposes of this discussion it doesn't matter, while responding to a post where it was asserted we do know what happened. I get it, I didn't word it very well, because it was beside the point. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your whole argument that Rand "went with Al Sharpton" is predicated on his statement that he wouldn't expect to be shot for mouthing off. It isn't known yet and may never be how he came to get shot, especially since the stories about him robbing a store and breaking the officers occipital both turned out to be wrong. What is known is that his community does expect people to get shot for mouthing off, and I know that doesn't surprise me. I tend to agree with you wording of the opening statement of the Time article was an error in judgment, especially before enough facts had come out, but I also remember the state of the story at that time, and understand the points he was trying to make, rather than the ones being attributed to him that would lead anyone to associate him with somebody like Sharpton. I stopped following the Ferguson thread once the first one got locked. So I am pretty much out of the loop. Did it come out that the video of Mike Brown stealing from the store was incorrect? Was it confirmed that the officer was not punched in the face? Of course you have a link to a credible source to back up that assertion, because in fact, Brown's famlily was livid that the police released the video of their "gentle giant" committing a strong arm robbery of the store along with the same accomplice who admitted the robbery and was with Brown when he was shot. I understand now, You're upset because I said the story was wrong and you thought I was asserting he was innocent. I wasn't. All I meant was the story that he broke the cops skull while resisting arrest on a robbery charge wasn't correct. What I said was we don't know how it went down, and for the purposes of this discussion it doesn't matter, while responding to a post where it was asserted we do know what happened. I get it, I didn't word it very well, because it was beside the point. Stop. We know damned well what happened. You're equivocating. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:02:40 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly the right place. Even Hillary didn't go there. Hillary already has the black vote. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:06:00 PM EDT
[#47]
Maybe Rand could get some more moderates to vote for him if he supported "common sense" gun control laws. Chess not checkers, after all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:06:31 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryNot even in the same ball park.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:07:23 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I stopped following the Ferguson thread once the first one got locked. So I am pretty much out of the loop. Did it come out that the video of Mike Brown stealing from the store was incorrect? Was it confirmed that the officer was not punched in the face? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Your whole argument that Rand "went with Al Sharpton" is predicated on his statement that he wouldn't expect to be shot for mouthing off. It isn't known yet and may never be how he came to get shot, especially since the stories about him robbing a store and breaking the officers occipital both turned out to be wrong. What is known is that his community does expect people to get shot for mouthing off, and I know that doesn't surprise me. I tend to agree with you wording of the opening statement of the Time article was an error in judgment, especially before enough facts had come out, but I also remember the state of the story at that time, and understand the points he was trying to make, rather than the ones being attributed to him that would lead anyone to associate him with somebody like Sharpton. I stopped following the Ferguson thread once the first one got locked. So I am pretty much out of the loop. Did it come out that the video of Mike Brown stealing from the store was incorrect? Was it confirmed that the officer was not punched in the face? He is full of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:19:03 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He is full of it. Please... http://www.snopes.com/info/news/wilson.asp |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
