# Start Here > Guest Forum >  HuffingtonPost calls out Sen. Rand Paul (R-Fencepost)

## YesI'mALiberal

*Rand Paul Suddenly Goes Very Silent On U.S. Airstrikes In Iraq*


WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama on Friday announced his decision to launch limited airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Iraq, a move that was largely met with bipartisan support from congressional lawmakers. But there's one prominent member of Congress who hasn't had much to say at all about the airstrikes: Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

...

But for a man who has kept a high profile in recent months -- barnstorming the early caucus state of Iowa, campaigning for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), reaching out to black voters at the Urban League, and joining forces with Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) on prison sentencing reform -- Paul has been conspicuously silent on the latest conflict in Iraq. His office did not comment on his stance after multiple requests from The Huffington Post.

more:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/11/rand-paul-iraq_n_5668356.html#

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

So Derek Jeter just passed Honus Wagner on the all-time hits list.  Story here:  http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/...&vkey=news_mlb


Discuss.

----------


## phill4paul

$#@! or get off the pot, Rand.

----------


## Anti Federalist

I wouldn't call back PuffHo either.

11 August 2014

Paul spoke to several from the Campbellsville Chamber of Commerce about a number of issues including the situation in Iraq.

"I have mixed feelings about it. I'm not saying I'm completely opposed to helping with arms or maybe even bombing, but I am concerned that ISIS is big and powerful because we protected them in Syria for a year. Do you know who also hates ISIS and who is bombing them? Assad, the Syrian government. So a year ago, the same people who want to bomb ISIS wanted to bomb Syria last year. Syria and ISIS are on opposite sides of the war. *We're now bombing both sides of one war that has spread into another country," said Paul.*

http://www.wbko.com/home/headlines/S...270818741.html

----------


## Warlord

NEG the liberal

----------


## acptulsa

> I wouldn't call back PuffHo either.


Amazing that they think because he doesn't talk to _them,_ he's silent.  He didn't talk to me, but _I_ heard the man...

----------


## cajuncocoa

> So Derek Jeter just passed Honus Wagner on the all-time hits list.  Story here:  http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/...&vkey=news_mlb
> 
> 
> Discuss.


Very cool!

----------


## oyarde

> So Derek Jeter just passed Honus Wagner on the all-time hits list.  Story here:  http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/...&vkey=news_mlb
> 
> 
> Discuss.


 I was hoping Honus got to keep his spot .

----------


## oyarde

> I wouldn't call back PuffHo either.
> 
> 11 August 2014
> 
> Paul spoke to several from the Campbellsville Chamber of Commerce about a number of issues including the situation in Iraq.
> 
> "I have mixed feelings about it. I'm not saying I'm completely opposed to helping with arms or maybe even bombing, but I am concerned that ISIS is big and powerful because we protected them in Syria for a year. Do you know who also hates ISIS and who is bombing them? Assad, the Syrian government. So a year ago, the same people who want to bomb ISIS wanted to bomb Syria last year. Syria and ISIS are on opposite sides of the war. *We're now bombing both sides of one war that has spread into another country," said Paul.*
> 
> http://www.wbko.com/home/headlines/S...270818741.html


I see no reason for them to call the Huffpooh .

----------


## oyarde

> *Rand Paul Suddenly Goes Very Silent On U.S. Airstrikes In Iraq*
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama on Friday announced his decision to launch limited airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Iraq, a move that was largely met with bipartisan support from congressional lawmakers. But there's one prominent member of Congress who hasn't had much to say at all about the airstrikes: Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).
> 
> ...
> 
> But for a man who has kept a high profile in recent months -- barnstorming the early caucus state of Iowa, campaigning for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), reaching out to black voters at the Urban League, and joining forces with Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) on prison sentencing reform -- Paul has been conspicuously silent on the latest conflict in Iraq. His office did not comment on his stance after multiple requests from The Huffington Post.
> 
> more:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/11/rand-paul-iraq_n_5668356.html#


So , I take it you support more involvement in Iraq ?

----------


## green73

> I was hoping Honus got to keep his spot .



Honus played in the dead ball era, which makes his accomplishment much more impressive than Jeter's.

----------


## oyarde

> Honus played in the dead ball era, which makes his accomplishment much more impressive than Jeter's.


I think so . Had 22 triples in 1900 while batting .381 , Five time NL stolen base champ .

----------


## oyarde

> Honus played in the dead ball era, which makes his accomplishment much more impressive than Jeter's.


Hit .354 and 109 RBI's in 1908 when the League ERA was 2.35 .

----------


## Cleaner44



----------


## jllundqu

Typical liberal troll... drive-by thread post and won't discuss their views or respond to posts in their own thread.  Who does that?

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

I once read a biography on Honus Wagner.  Must have been the World Series where Ty Cobb was on first.  He yells to Wagner something like_ I'm comin' down Krauthead!_  Cobb slides into second with his signature spike move while Wagner is covering.  Wagner uses some part (elbow?; glove?) to really lay into Cobb's face.  Story was that a tooth or two of Cobb's was loosened.

Not even sure/can't remember if that story is true or if it's just one of those baseball stuff of legend things.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> Typical liberal troll... drive-by thread post and won't discuss their views or respond to posts in their own thread.  Who does that?


Look up an RPF member called Boshembechle.  He was also posting threads and barely commenting.  I looked him up on the internet and saw that he plays various political persuasions in different forums.  My guess was that he was writing internet articles (common internet job) on various subjects.  He would pose the subject of his questions on RPF, but never really reply.  He was just actually gathering material for his articles.  Too lazy to look up the information.

I mentioned this in one of his threads.  He came back with a lame story of how he is really libertarian but posing devil's advocate's questions because he wanted to learn.  I have yet to look up the OP of this thread, but I would not be surprised to see the same thing.

----------


## YesI'mALiberal

> Typical liberal troll... drive-by thread post and won't discuss their views or respond to posts in their own thread.  Who does that?



Dude - you obviously don't know WTF you're talking about, so I will forgive your stupid statement.  I waited here refreshing for over two hours waiting for the post to get past moderation, and then I left because my patience ain't limitless.

Note the time gap between the OP and the first comment - ELEVEN HOURS.

----------


## acptulsa

> Dude - you obviously don't know WTF you're talking about, so I will forgive your stupid statement.  I waited here refreshing for over two hours waiting for the post to get past moderation, and then I left because my patience ain't limitless.
> 
> Note the time gap between the OP and the first comment - ELEVEN HOURS.


I've never had that experience here, and this is the first time I've _ever_ heard someone else claim to have had that experience here.

I've had that experience at HuffPo with their totalitarian mods, though.

Could it be that we, while looking for a convenient excuse for our drive-by trolling, just assumed that this place is in _any way_ like HuffPo?

----------


## YesI'mALiberal

> So , I take it you support more involvement in Iraq ?


I support blowing the hell out of all the vehicles and artillery that the Iraqi army abandoned, yes.  Ground troop involvement, no (although if the opportunity for a special forces decapitation mission against ISIL were to arise, I wouldn't object).

The main point of the thread - and the HUFFPO article - is that Rand-the-man-who-would-be-president is going to have to speak out on the issues of the day, including those that he wants to avoid ruffling RonPaulist feathers.

----------


## dannno

Are you here because you like what Rand stood for the last few years and you are trying to hold him accountable or are you here because you have never liked Rand and want to turn current Rand supporters away?

----------


## dannno

Neocons have been using the strategy of pandering to a Christian conservative "greatest generation" worshiping base to get elected while implementing big government and war propaganda to help get through their imperialist military strategies. That doesn't work in the general election anymore because too many of them have died off, but the strategy still holds true for the Republican primaries which is why the party is dying.

Rand is pandering to a Christian conservative "greatest generation" worshiping base to get the Republican nomination and will continue the tight rope walk with plans to implement small government oriented, diplomatic and peaceful leadership to help get our country back on track economically and garner more respect from individuals around the world by holding back militarily when we aren't attacked.

----------


## YesI'mALiberal

> Are you here because you like what Rand stood for the last few years and you are trying to hold him accountable or are you here because you have never liked Rand and want to turn current Rand supporters away?


I am here because (1) I am Libertarian-curious, and (2) Ron Paul intrigued me.  I was hoping he would have moved the GOP further away from the Neo con and further towards individual liberty, but he abdicated by not going after the obvious front-runner.  Sigh.

As for Rand, he should fire his whole staff, be himself, quit playing games, and STAND FOR SOMETHING.

Now then, I think the non-interventionist-light position he has occasionally outlined would allow for something like our current involvement vs. ISIL.

----------


## acptulsa

> I support blowing the hell out of all the vehicles and artillery that the Iraqi army abandoned, yes.  Ground troop involvement, no (although if the opportunity for a special forces decapitation mission against ISIL were to arise, I wouldn't object).


Do you think we should stop funding and arming ISIL before we start killing them, or after?




> The main point of the thread - and the HUFFPO article - is that Rand-the-man-who-would-be-president is going to have to speak out on the issues of the day, including those that he wants to avoid ruffling RonPaulist feathers.


He did.  Do you think a tree falls soundlessly unless it returns HuffPo's phone calls?

----------


## YesI'mALiberal

> Do you think we should stop funding and arming ISIL before we start killing them, or after?
> 
> 
> 
> He did.  Do you think a tree falls soundlessly unless it returns HuffPo's phone calls?



We are not now and have never funded ISIL directly.  They have misappropriated loot and defectors have joined them - but you knew that, and so does Rand Paul.

(p.s.  "*We're now bombing both sides of one war that has spread into another country," said Paul
*This is a misstatement, I believe.  Who exactly are we bombing in Syria?)

As for soundless forests - if he doesn't want to talk to HUFFPO, fine;  but where are Rand's op-eds in Breitbart/Washington Post/NY Times?  ... his interviews on FOXNews?  You talk to a small local station in KY when you don't want anyone to hear you.

----------


## dannno

> As for Rand, he should fire his whole staff, be himself, quit playing games, and STAND FOR SOMETHING.


I hope he does whatever he can to get elected. I prefer Ron Paul and his strategy, but it didn't work and it would be very difficult for Rand to get over the hurdle of getting the Republican nomination if he doesn't pander to the wartards.

----------


## acptulsa

> We are not now and have never funded ISIL directly.  They have misappropriated loot and defectors have joined them - but you knew that, and so does Rand Paul.


'...have never funded [so and so] directly'?

You insulted our intelligence with your 'awaiting moderation' tale and now you're insulting your own intelligence parroting CIA double-talk.  Regardless of how 'direct' it was, we backed ISIL against Assad in Syria and now we're trying to kill the disease in Iraq because we were actually stupid enough to think it wouldn't cross the border from the country we were trying to infect into a country we weren't trying to infect.

I believe that's known as a 'slippery slope', and the only way to keep one of those from causing your downfall is to make for high ground and stay there.




> (p.s.  "*We're now bombing both sides of one war that has spread into another country," said Paul
> *This is a misstatement, I believe.  Who exactly are we bombing in Syria?)


Assad and his forces.  You need better news sources.




> As for soundless forests - if he doesn't want to talk to HUFFPO, fine;  but where are Rand's op-eds in Breitbart/Washington Post/NY Times?  ... his interviews on FOXNews?  You talk to a small local station in KY when you don't want anyone to hear you.


You talk to a small local station in Kentucky when you're the sitting junior senator from Kentucky because all politics is local and you're representing those people.  They deserve your representation and your personal attention.  And if you're getting the nation's attention, then why not give that station a chance to bask in the national spot light with you?  Are you saying this organ of the populace, this product of the rail splitters and the Common Man, doesn't deserve it more than Rupert Murdoch and his Institution of Yellowcake Journalism?  Really?

Besides, there's a certain advantage to getting your whole message out there first, then giving the General Electric Channel (NBC), the Westinghouse Channel (CBS),  the All the News that Fits the Agenda people, and the rest of the major propagandists a chance to edit, cut, and twist it later.

Isn't there?

----------


## thoughtomator

Rand is probably following Napoleon's advice here: "Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake"

----------


## YesI'mALiberal

> '...have never funded [so and so] directly'?
> 
> You insulted our intelligence with your 'awaiting moderation' tale ...



The awaiting moderation problem was absolutely true;  and I pose the philosophical question, "Can you actually insult something that doesn't exist?"  Before you dig deeper, maybe you should ask an actual moderator.  I suspect it is either a property of this subforum or because my rep is below a certain threshold.




> ...  Regardless of how 'direct' it was, we backed ISIL against Assad in Syria and now we're trying to kill the disease in Iraq because we were actually stupid enough to think it wouldn't cross the border from the country we were trying to infect into a country we weren't trying to infect.
> 
> ...  Assad and his forces. You need better news sources.
> 
> ...  You talk to a small local station in Kentucky when you're the sitting junior senator from Kentucky because all politics is local and you're representing those people.


We did not back ISIL, we backed some of the people fighting against Assad and also against ISIL.  The war there has multiple factions;  so sorry the world isn't simple enough for you.

As for us bombing Assad - please point me to those better news sources (and please say "Infowars" or "Zerohedge" or "RT" - I could use a good laugh).

And as for all politics being local - in what county in Kentucky is Iowa located?

----------


## acptulsa

> I've never had that experience here, and this is the first time I've _ever_ heard someone else claim to have had that experience here.
> 
> I've had that experience at HuffPo with their totalitarian mods, though.
> 
> Could it be that we, while looking for a convenient excuse for our drive-by trolling, just assumed that this place is in _any way_ like HuffPo?


Of course, I never started a thread in the subforum set aside for guests, either.

Turns out that excuse _is_ plausible.  I apologize for suggesting it wasn't

----------


## acptulsa

> We did not back ISIL, we backed some of the people fighting against Assad and also against ISIL.  The war there has multiple factions;  so sorry the world isn't simple enough for you.
> 
> As for us bombing Assad - please point me to those better news sources (and please say "Infowars" or "Zerohedge" or "RT" - I could use a good laugh).


You're forgetting your CIA weasel word 'directly' again.  Or did they start building Humvees in Saudi Arabia under license?  And as long as we're parsimoniously parsing words, why are you confusing 'bombing' with 'airstrikes'?  Would you call launching RPG's at someone 'shelling' them or 'firing upon' them?  Because neither is quite correct.




> And as for all politics being local - in what county in Kentucky is Iowa located?


I _know_ you'd like Rand Paul to be dumb enough to neglect the constituents he has even as he lays the groundwork to take on more.  But I don't think he's going to accommodate you.  Sorry.

----------


## oyarde

> I support blowing the hell out of all the vehicles and artillery that the Iraqi army abandoned, yes.  Ground troop involvement, no (although if the opportunity for a special forces decapitation mission against ISIL were to arise, I wouldn't object).
> 
> The main point of the thread - and the HUFFPO article - is that Rand-the-man-who-would-be-president is going to have to speak out on the issues of the day, including those that he wants to avoid ruffling RonPaulist feathers.


I see nothing to avoid , nor speak of , Quds , or Iranian Special Forces are already in Iraq and can do whatever they determine is needed, The Kurds can as well, Now , that leaves the Iraq people in between , maybe they should defend themselves as well....

----------


## oyarde

> I am here because (1) I am Libertarian-curious, and (2) Ron Paul intrigued me.  I was hoping he would have moved the GOP further away from the Neo con and further towards individual liberty, but he abdicated by not going after the obvious front-runner.  Sigh.
> 
> As for Rand, he should fire his whole staff, be himself, quit playing games, and STAND FOR SOMETHING.
> 
> Now then, I think the non-interventionist-light position he has occasionally outlined would allow for something like our current involvement vs. ISIL.


Well , I would vote for Rand , who else ?

----------


## oyarde

Time to get back to Honus .

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> Time to get back to Honus .


And then there's the story about him not appearing on too many tobacco baseball cards because he was against smoking.  A more likely explanation, some say, is that he was not paid enough.  Another explanation is that he thought some types of cigarettes effeminate.

----------


## oyarde

> And then there's the story about him not appearing on too many tobacco baseball cards because he was against smoking.  A more likely explanation, some say, is that he was not paid enough.  Another explanation is that he thought some types of cigarettes effeminate.


I think he was just a non smoker that did not want to be represented by tobacco companies.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Do you think we should stop funding and arming ISIL before we start killing them, or after?


I support ISIL.  They do good work.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> I think he was just a non smoker that did not want to be represented by tobacco companies.


He just chewed the stuff, but yeah, he was just more low profile.  Wonder how much that one card is worth now.  I'll have to look that up.

----------


## oyarde

> He just chewed the stuff, but yeah, he was just more low profile.  Wonder how much that one card is worth now.  I'll have to look that up.


I think you may be amazed to see what the last few went for @ auction .

----------


## oyarde

Honus is just so much more fun than , Yes I am a Liberal , Yes I am a commie , Yeah I am a Marxist , Yes we should steal everything from everybody to give it to what retarded cause we like , etc .

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> I think you may be amazed to see what the last few went for @ auction .


I just saw it's over two million.  Yo!

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

What do these shortstops have in common?

Derek Jeter
Cal Ripken
Robin Yount
Barry Larkin
Ernie Banks
Alan Trammel
Luke Appling
Pee Wee Reese
Phil Rizzuto



Scroll for answer

















































They played for one MLB team their entire career.

----------


## oyarde

[QUOTE=NorthCarolinaLiberty;5616646]What do these shortstops have in common?

Derek Jeter
Cal Ripken
Robin Yount
Barry Larkin
Ernie Banks
Alan Trammel
Luke Appling
Pee Wee Reese
Phil Rizzuto



Scroll for answer















I dunno , do not have as many batting titles as Tony Gwyn and Honus , or as many stolen base titles as Honus ??

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> I dunno , do not have as many batting titles as Tony Gwyn and Honus , or as many stolen base titles as Honus ??




Guess I should have made the answer more visible in the post.  They played for one MLB team their entire career.  Eh, probably not the best trivia question.  

One of my favorite trivia answers is for the question:

Name the only 4 players to have 3,000 hits and 500 home runs.


Answer:


l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v


Hank Aaron
Willie Mays
Eddie Murray
Rafael Palmeiro

----------


## oyarde

I would make the guest forum the pre 1913 sports forum .

----------


## amy31416

I have no problem with people from the "other" party questioning things. Don't be so hostile to people who simply might want to make informed decisions.

----------

