Rand Paul "Fingers Crossed" on Cover of New Republic: (1 Viewer)

[NeverTrump]

I have been known to known to be a huge critic of Rand Paul. I say he cannot be trusted. After reading Julia Ioffe’s amazing profile of Rand Paul. Which libertarians instantly tried to turn into something that is racist and insulting of Ayn Rand… I have to say that my position has not changed I do not trust Rand Paul! The question I have is why didn’t the media do something like this for Barack H. Obama?

The fingers crossed picture sends a loud and clear message to anybody paying attention in politics. Rand Paul is thinking about running for President in 2016, and based on the profile and what Rand has supported and stood up for in recent years, that could either be a scary thought, or even more hopeful than the country was when voting for Obama... I believe Rand Paul is trying to be what Obama was in 2007/2008. An unstoppable political voice of hope and change...but we all see where that lead us. Do we want to make the same mistake again by voting for an empty politician?

Profile- Rand Paul Can He Be Trusted?: | Hypocrisy-Now!

President Rand Paul: He's Becoming a Better Politician Every Day | New Republic

 

[American]

Why not a balance review, instead an anti-Right thread? What about Hillary?

 

[NeverTrump]

Why not a balance review, instead an anti-Right thread? What about Hillary?

Did you miss what I said about Obama?

 

[haymarket]

I have been known to known to be a huge critic of Rand Paul. I say he cannot be trusted. After reading Julia Ioffe’s amazing profile of Rand Paul. Which libertarians instantly tried to turn into something that is racist and insulting of Ayn Rand… I have to say that my position has not changed I do not trust Rand Paul! The question I have is why didn’t the media do something like this for Barack H. Obama?

The fingers crossed picture sends a loud and clear message to anybody paying attention in politics. Rand Paul is thinking about running for President in 2016, and based on the profile and what Rand has supported and stood up for in recent years, that could either be a scary thought, or even more hopeful than the country was when voting for Obama... I believe Rand Paul is trying to be what Obama was in 2007/2008. An unstoppable political voice of hope and change...but we all see where that lead us. Do we want to make the same mistake again by voting for an empty politician?

Profile- Rand Paul Can He Be Trusted?: | Hypocrisy-Now!

President Rand Paul: He's Becoming a Better Politician Every Day | New Republic

My fingers are also crossed hoping Rand Paul runs for President in 2016 and captures the GOP nomination. Heck , I will even light a votive candle in church and donate money to him if that helps.

It will then be 1964 with the Goldwater debacle all over again and the GOP will lose from top of the ticket to the bottom in most parts of the nation. It will be just the sort of political enema that the body politic needs and get rid of the same substance.

 

[American]

Did you miss what I said about Obama?

No, I'm asking you why don't you do something about Obama, why not about both?

 

[Rocketman]

I was in Des Moines last week and people that voted for Obama and regretting it are excited about Rand Paul. I did not think he had a chance but I am beginning to see that people want and need representation in a bad way and are willing to take a chance

 

[NeverTrump]

No, I'm asking you why don't you do something about Obama, why not about both?

The right wing hasn't even begun to tarnish the reputations of possible 2016 of the democrats contenders. They are currently more worried about their own picks right now. It's still early give it time. It is also unclear if they will touch her with benahzi like when Romney failed to do it with Obama more aggressively.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

He and his father are among the only politicians I do trust, because they are consistent and I always know where they stand.

 

[Geoist]

I do not completely trust Rand (as with nearly all politicians). I do not agree with all of his politics. But I would much rather see him as president than any other presidential hopeful (outside of a third party).

 

[DA60]

I have been known to known to be a huge critic of Rand Paul. I say he cannot be trusted. After reading Julia Ioffe’s amazing profile of Rand Paul. Which libertarians instantly tried to turn into something that is racist and insulting of Ayn Rand… I have to say that my position has not changed I do not trust Rand Paul! The question I have is why didn’t the media do something like this for Barack H. Obama?

The fingers crossed picture sends a loud and clear message to anybody paying attention in politics. Rand Paul is thinking about running for President in 2016, and based on the profile and what Rand has supported and stood up for in recent years, that could either be a scary thought, or even more hopeful than the country was when voting for Obama... I believe Rand Paul is trying to be what Obama was in 2007/2008. An unstoppable political voice of hope and change...but we all see where that lead us. Do we want to make the same mistake again by voting for an empty politician?

Profile- Rand Paul Can He Be Trusted?: | Hypocrisy-Now!

President Rand Paul: He's Becoming a Better Politician Every Day | New Republic

Trusted?

What the heck does trust have to do with anything?

You are (potentially) voting for him - not marrying him.

Anyone that is naive enough to actually 'trust' a politician or ANYONE they do not know personally, deserves everything they get.


You look at the candidates, see which one pledges to vote the way you want on the most number of things that matter to you AND then vote for him.

It ain't rocket science.


This notion that American's have to 'like' or 'trust' their politicians is ridiculous.

I assume every, single one of them are pricks that I would not trust with the simplest task.

All I want from them is to shut the 'f' up and vote the way I want them to vote...that's it.

They are my representative - not my parent.


A country that looks up to their political leaders is usually a country in big trouble.

Look to yourselves to solves your problems - not others to do it for you.

 

[head of joaquin]

Why not a balance review, instead an anti-Right thread? What about Hillary?

Start another of your own partisan hack threads; this one is about the loony Rand Paul.

 

[head of joaquin]

My favorite Rand "moment" was this one, where he used his committee status to ask an energy department official about abortion and he low flush toilet. The man is truly off balance and adolescent.


RAND PAUL: DERANGED BY TOILETS - T H E   L  E  F  T  -  W  I  N  G    N  O  I  S  E    M  A  C  H  I  N  E

 

[NeverTrump]

Trusted?

1. What the heck does trust have to do with anything?

2. You are (potentially) voting for him - not marrying him.

3. I assume every, single one of them are pricks that I would not trust with the simplest task.

4. You look at the candidates, see which one pledges to vote the way you want on the most number of things that matter to you AND then vote for him. All I want from them is to shut the 'f' up and vote the way I want them to vote...that's it.

1. A lot I will explain below.
2. Some people especially around these parts take that a lot more seriously than marriage.
3. I agree with you here.
4. This seems contradictory to your last statement. You said that you wouldn't trust them with the simplest task, yet voting is deeply complex, personal and philosophical connection with the politician. It is emotionally connected to millions of Americans and the Representatives need to earn your trust and you need to earn theirs. That's why they are called representatives. They are supposed to vote where the majority is represented or where they feel. You want them to vote your way? It's actually not that simple. In fact, I'll go so far to say that Romney was probably one of the cleanest people to have run in a long time! Why else do you think the democrats spent so much time, demonizing him for being rich? That's all they had! And they were successful, due to the liberal mentality of many younger people that seem to hate the image of the "successful rich fat cats." The polls leading up to the 2012 election indicated that they trusted Romney less than Obama. Though, most of the polls were reversed when it came to the economy specifically. That wasn't enough. Trust IS key!

 

[Henrin]

My favorite Rand "moment" was this one, where he used his committee status to ask an energy department official about abortion and he low flush toilet. The man is truly off balance and adolescent.


RAND PAUL: DERANGED BY TOILETS - T H E* *L *E* F* T *- *W* I *N* G* **N* O* I* S* E* **M* A* C* H* I* N* E

The question still remains. Why must we buy low flow toilets? Why can't we buy the type of toilet the market supports?

 

[head of joaquin]

The question still remains. Why must we buy low flow toilets? Why can't we buy the type of toilet the market supports?

The answer is simple, like the energy department official pointed out, you don't. Just go down to Home Depo and you can toilets that are perfectly adequate to deal with Rand Paul's crap. He apparently held onto a low flow toilet for 25 year just so that, years later, he could rant about it in a Congressional hearing.

It's weirdness like that which will spell electoral disaster if you wins the GOP nomination. I'm hoping that he does.

 

[Henrin]

The answer is simple, like the energy department official pointed out, you don't. Just go down to Home Depo and you can toilets that are perfectly adequate to deal with Rand Paul's crap. He apparently held onto a low flow toilet for 25 year just so that, years later, he could rant about it in a Congressional hearing.

The Energy Policy Act of 1992 is still in place if I'm not mistaken. The fact is that the market responded to complaints soon after about the toilets inadequacies, but the market was really unable to resolve the problem completely due to the restrictions the act put in place.

 

[head of joaquin]

The Energy Policy Act of 1992 is still in place if I'm not mistaken. The fact is that the market responded to complaints soon after about the toilets inadequacies, but the market was really unable to resolve the problem completely due to the restrictions the act put in place.

It's fair to say that Rand Paul has wrapped up the anti-low flow toilet vote. Just like Ron Paul wrapped up the heroin addict vote.

Good luck with that, Rand!

 

[DA60]

1. A lot I will explain below.
2. Some people especially around these parts take that a lot more seriously than marriage.
3. I agree with you here.
4. This seems contradictory to your last statement. You said that you wouldn't trust them with the simplest task, yet voting is deeply complex, personal and philosophical connection with the politician. It is emotionally connected to millions of Americans and the Representatives need to earn your trust and you need to earn theirs. That's why they are called representatives. They are supposed to vote where the majority is represented or where they feel. You want them to vote your way? It's actually not that simple. In fact, I'll go so far to say that Romney was probably one of the cleanest people to have run in a long time! Why else do you think the democrats spent so much time, demonizing him for being rich? That's all they had! And they were successful, due to the liberal mentality of many younger people that seem to hate the image of the "successful rich fat cats." The polls leading up to the 2012 election indicated that they trusted Romney less than Obama. Though, most of the polls were reversed when it came to the economy specifically. That wasn't enough. Trust IS key!

'Deeply complex, personal and philosophical'?

No offense, but that seems overly dramatic.

I don't care if the politician is an absolute scumbag with virtually no redeeming characteristics...so long as he votes the way he promises during his campaigns (assuming he votes as I want him to).


Look, it's simple.

You decide what you want your country to look like.

You then choose the politician that states that he/she intends to vote (or introduce legislation) that will, in your opinion, move the country closer to where you want it to be.

The only trust involved is whether you trust the politician to vote the way he/she says they will...that's it.


As for why Romney lost - I don't care.

He did not propose what I wanted (and Obama certainly did not) - so they are both useless in my eyes.

 

[Henrin]

It's fair to say that Rand Paul has wrapped up the anti-low flow toilet vote. Just like Ron Paul wrapped up the heroin addict vote.

Good luck with that, Rand!

So what about that Yucca Mountain? Oh right, we want to protect the low flow toilets, but not even think about Yucca Mountain that was in the same law. :lol:

It doesn't matter though. Even after twenty one years full-flush toilets still beat out what they now call high efficiency toilets.

 

[head of joaquin]

So what about that Yucca Mountain? Oh right, we want to protect the low flow toilets, but not even think about Yucca Mountain that was in the same law. :lol:

I think if you add up all the outré issues and obsessions that constitute Rand Paul's political philosophy, you get the perfect tea party candidate. I sure hope he gets the nomination!

 

[Zyphlin]

Thanks for posting this story. Absolutely spectacular write up and it's the type of thing I was hoping to be reading around this time when I first heard about Rand actually running for Senate. Ron Paul's general ideological bend, but with a more pragmatic and realistic note running through it and all packaged in a younger, more charismatic shell. It's the key ingredients I've been suggesting were needed for quite some time


9-03-08

I honestly hope that Ron Paul's bid this time out does spur forward a new youth movement. His domestic policy, and some of his foreign policy, is what ended up getting him my vote in the primaries. I think some of his supporters are bat **** insane, and I think the extremists within his followers are part of what is keeping the movement from really moving forward. It did SOOOO Many things right, but also did sooooo many things wrong. And it was such an egotistical, stuck up its own ass movement that it couldn't be humble enough to admit or understand the things that it did wrong.

He had a good message, but was a horrible shell to get that message out. Hopefully in the next 4 to 8 years that message propagates through the youth and as they move into their 30's we start to see a lot more of the Ron Paul republicans, hopefully tempered by some reason and realism.

1-12-10

Fringe does not make it bad, just that its not exactly main stream. Many of Ron Pauls general ideological foundations are becoming more mainstream within conservatism and becoming more focused upon. However, many of his ideas on how to pursue those principles and enact them are where the "fringe" mentality and belief comes into play. Its also been my biggest gripe with Ron Paul. In a generalize way his message is a great one and one I think can win. The problem is he either is FAR from a pragmatic realist OR has no ability to explain things simply and succinctly so that the average voter can understand the extreme things he's saying is not an immediate goal but a potential end point.

2-5-10

And yet again Ron Paul shows why he will never, ever, be a viable national candidate and his "movement" won't be either until they get a pragmatic and realistic figure head and mostly drown out the conspiracy nuts

2-22-10

There's a large difference in believing that Ron Paul's general ideals could/should be the inspiration for a potential legitimate Presidential nominee and believing that Ron Paul himself can currently be a legitimate Presidential nominee.

I think the majority of his general philosophy, if tempered a bit by some realistic pragmatism, could do very well on a national stage.

I don't think Ron Paul can be the one to do it though.

2-27-10

His best legitimate shot would be to find a younger, more charismatic, politician that is better able to present his general philosophy in our sound clip heavy world and to express it with a fair deal of pragmatism mixed in.

Find that person, place his blessing upon him, campaign for him, talk about him, etc. This will basically assure you get the whole large Ron Paul base following after this new guy while also giving it a MUCH more likely shot of woo'ing others into the camp.

5-18-10

From what I've read about Rand, and admittedly its limited thus far, Rand seems to be what I've been saying was needed for Ron Paul for a while...

Namely, Ron Paul's generalized views mixed with some legitimate pragmatism and realism, mixed with a slightly less radical foreign defense policy.

5-31-10

I'm not at all upset or moaning about it [Ron Paul not getting the nod from the Republican party]. The Republican party has changed. Oh he has a started something that cannot be stopped. It would have been nice if he did indeed get more media. His goals are almost met however.

Hey, I hope he's started something. I hope the good parts of his movement continues and the absolutely idiotic parts of it die off. I hope it gets a charismatic figure head to run and someone with a bit more pragmatism. I'd love it.

 

[Henrin]

I think if you add up all the outré issues and obsessions that constitute Rand Paul's political philosophy, you get the perfect tea party candidate. I sure hope he gets the nomination!

So what do you think of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository project? I'm just interested if you support the entire law or not. I don't usually come across someone like you that is willing to say they support the Yucca Mountain project.

 

[penn1954]

Thanks for posting this story. Absolutely spectacular write up and it's the type of thing I was hoping to be reading around this time when I first heard about Rand actually running for Senate. Ron Paul's general ideological bend, but with a more pragmatic and realistic note running through it and all packaged in a younger, more charismatic shell. It's the key ingredients I've been suggesting were needed for quite some time


9-03-08



1-12-10



2-5-10


2-22-10



2-27-10



5-18-10



5-31-10

AMEN to your 5-31-10 comment !!!!!:applaud

 

[Henrin]

Thanks for posting this story. Absolutely spectacular write up and it's the type of thing I was hoping to be reading around this time when I first heard about Rand actually running for Senate. Ron Paul's general ideological bend, but with a more pragmatic and realistic note running through it and all packaged in a younger, more charismatic shell. It's the key ingredients I've been suggesting were needed for quite some time

Pragmatism is overrated and extremely dangerous to any small government platform. When you are dealing with liberals and sadly conservatives it's cancer. I believe if both sides are arguing inside a certain realm it's fine to accept compromise, but that is not the world we live in to a large degree.

I'm bit lost on why Ron Paul's non-aggression approach to foreign policy is radical though. Conservatives just have fear issues, imho.

 

[NeverTrump]

1. You decide what you want your country to look like. You then choose the politician that states that he/she intends to vote (or introduce legislation) that will, in your opinion, move the country closer to where you want it to be.

2. The only trust involved is whether you trust the politician to vote the way he/she says they will...that's it.


3. As for why Romney lost - I don't care. He did not propose what I wanted (and Obama certainly did not) - so they are both useless in my eyes.

1. So that's not deeply complex, personal and philosophical? How exactly do you arrive at your decision then? Do you just blindly follow what sounds good?
2. That is the very definition of trust lolz!
3. So that's not deeply complex, personal and philosophical? How did you arrive at that conclusion?