Buzzfeed hit piece on Rand staff: "Why Rand Paul Lost"

[BenMuldowney]

First of all, I'm not a dude. Secondly, I don't have to choose anyone else now...there is no one else. And if you don't see the unique qualities that Ron and Rand had vs. everyone else, I don't know what else to say.

i loved ron and dont regret being a delegate for him for one second. i like rand and i am very grateful he is in the senate. i would agree with you about there being no choice if trump weren't running but he is and he keeps saying the right things. is he perfect? no... but neither was ron (soft on immigration) nor rand (groveling to blm in ferguson).

i know many of you libertarians think your cause is the greatest but it's not.... survival of this nation is and she can't take another 8 years of massive immigration or you will never ever see precious liberty.

 

[BenMuldowney]

Calling out Goldman Sachs huh?

Well, Trump supported the bank bailouts.

...which involved the gifting $618 billion of taxpayer money to Wall street, including $10 billion to Goldman Sachs.

Not to mention the subsequent multi-trillion dollar stealth bailout known as QE (I, II, and III), which he also supported.

So there's that...

yes.. i pointed this out.. i do not support the banker bailout scams... but i dont support ron paul's stance on immigration nor rand's cowering to blm in ferguson. there is no perfect candidate. but i already pointed this out earlier.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

yes.. i pointed this out.. i do not support the banker bailout scams...

If you know that Trump supported the $10 billion bailout of Goldman Sachs, then why are you pretending that he's "calling out" Goldman Sachs?

Has it occurred to you that he's "calling out" Ted's Goldman connection not because he has a problem with Goldman (he obviously doesn't, since he supported the bailouts), but because he knows that you have a problem with Goldman, and he's willing to say anything to bamboozle you into supporting him?

but i dont support ron paul's stance on immigration nor rand's

Do you support Trump's plan to deport all illegals and then let almost all of them back in?

Did you support Trump when he criticized Mitt Romney's immigration policy of self-deportation as "mean spirited" toward immigrants?

Did you support Trump when he said he doesn't want to further restrict legal immigration?

Do you support Trump when he employs illegal aliens to work at his hotels?

Did you support Trump when he met with DREAMers and said "you convinced me."

...or did you just listen to Trump's inane ranting about how Mexicans are rapists and assume he must be on your side of the issue, without doing any research at all?

cowering to blm in ferguson.

"Cowering" means what exactly?

...not screaming insults at them like a retarded 3rd grader?

 

[jmdrake]

First I will continue to use the term xenophobia because I have a brain and could care less if a moron trumpster respects what I have to say or not.

Second, there's nothing wrong with evolving on your positions as long as you do it before you run for public office! Trumps positions have "evolved" to fit what he believes the voters want to hear. He was okay with amnesty until he realized he needed to be against it. In contrast Ron Paul, who's position on immigration you have criticized for no articulated reason, has steadfastly been against amnesty. He's also against giving welfare to immigrants. Since you don't like Ron Paul's position on illegal immigration does that mean you support welfare for immigrants? Or is it all about "da fence" for you? As Ron Paul has pointed out, that fence could be used to keep Americans from taking themselves and their money out in the event of a full blown economic collapse. You think that's just "conspiracy theory"? Just last year the IRS announced plans to revoke the passports of Americans who owe taxes.

You didn't know Trump was for the bailouts? So you support a candidate that you haven't completely researched? Not surprising. What's concerning is that you will cheer Trump for being a hypocrite and excuse his hypocrisy for saying "Well he's not perfect." Well why not say that about Ted Cruz? Yes Ted Cruz got a loan from Goldman Sachs and he's married to a Goldman Sachs exec but hey "He's not perfect." Trump should not be saying jack about Goldman Sachs while still supporting TARP and eminent domain for private business and other forms fascism. He needs to clean his own house up first. It's like Jimmy Swaggart preaching against adultery.

As for Rand supposedly "pandering" to BLM, you need to wake up and smell the gunpowder! Violent crime is at an all time low in this country but killings by police are at an all time high. And it's not just black youth being killed. Here is a white teen who was an airforce ROTC honor student that was killed by cops who raided his home by mistake and thought the Wii controller in his hand was a gun.

To coin a phrase by Barack Obama "That could have been YOUR son!" And Rand isn't the only republican to see there's a real problem going on. In the wake of Ferguson Mike Huckabee said there is a problem of militarization of police, and there most certainly is. The tea party was concerned about this until it all became about "black lives". Well Bundy Lives Matter as well! (The white ranchers that had the stand off with the federal government. One of their supporters got killed by police not too long ago.)

But hey, keep buying Trump's snake oil. I hope he becomes president and then follows through on his pledge to rid America of assault rifles just so that people in the Liberty Movement that keep defending him can realize how mistaken they were. Like I said, Trump is an opportunist. He would be your version of PC (which really is the false definition of politically correct) if he thought it would get him more votes. I do appreciate his position on Iraq, Libya, Syria and Russia but that's about it.

i said "PC speak"... and he has crushed it. has trump evolved on certain issues? duh.. so have i. we live in the information age and there are 100s of layers to this onion. but trump did speak out on the iraq war in 2004 on record... so im guessing he was against it before that too... but that said, he is not your typical neocon/rino pandering to goldman sachs and the other elite deep pockets. and honestly you don't know trump's heart..... he told the truth why he gave people like hillary money.. he was playing the game and he knows the other candidates are taking money from the big corps and that they are owned by them.

ron paul was great... the fed message was great (i've been spreading the news on the fed for decades myself) but what did it get us? "we got the message out"? so did the communist occutards. look, we are still in bondage as a nation, but trump is not bought off like ALL OF THE OTHERS. ron/rand had zero chance even if they had the voters, which they didnt. it takes someone that knows how to fight these scumbags and has extremely deep pockets. there is no one else out there that can win.

lastly? please, if you want anyone with testicles and a rational brain to take you seriously, never ever use the term xenophobia again unless you are mocking others for using it seriously.

do i like trump's support for the banker bailout scams ? no... (i have not heard him on the issue but i will trust you) but did i like ron paul's stance on immigration? no.. i am more conservative, but he was better than most of the rino neocons. do i like rand pandering to BLM in ferguson? hell no. there is no one perfect candidate.

 

[jmdrake]

i loved ron and dont regret being a delegate for him for one second. i like rand and i am very grateful he is in the senate. i would agree with you about there being no choice if trump weren't running but he is and he keeps saying the right things. is he perfect? no... but neither was ron (soft on immigration) nor rand (groveling to blm in ferguson).

i know many of you libertarians think your cause is the greatest but it's not.... survival of this nation is and she can't take another 8 years of massive immigration or you will never ever see precious liberty.

You keep saying you don't support Ron's position on immigration. Why? Do you even understand it? Here it is:

1) No amnesty. (Trump has supported and still supports some form of amnesty)

2) End welfare for illegal immigrants. (I haven't seen Trump take a position on that or not.)

3) Amend the constitution to end birthright citizenship. (Actually I disagree with Ron on that, but I don't understand why you would).

4) Don't increase the power of the federal government by building and manning an expensive wall.

Is that it? #4? It's all about the wall?

 

[BenMuldowney]

If you know that Trump supported the $10 billion bailout of Goldman Sachs, then why are you pretending that he's "calling out" Goldman Sachs?

Has it occurred to you that he's "calling out" Ted's Goldman connection not because he has a problem with Goldman (he obviously doesn't, since he supported the bailouts), but because he knows that you have a problem with Goldman, and he's willing to say anything to bamboozle you into supporting him?



Do you support Trump's plan to deport all illegals and then let almost all of them back in?

Did you support Trump when he criticized Mitt Romney's immigration policy of self-deportation as "mean spirited" toward immigrants?

Did you support Trump when he said he doesn't want to further restrict legal immigration?

Do you support Trump when he employs illegal aliens to work at his hotels?

Did you support Trump when he met with DREAMers and said "you convinced me."

...or did you just listen to Trump's inane ranting about how Mexicans are rapists and assume he must be on your side of the issue, without doing any research at all?



"Cowering" means what exactly?

...not screaming insults at them like a retarded 3rd grader?

why would i defend the banker bailout? i disagree with trump if he said he supported it. as far as immigration goes i have evolved myself... as i see what the scumbag bankers are up to and how they plan to use it. it's time to shut it down and get the unemployment rate down from 23%. so far trump is the only one talking about the real unemployment rates. so far trump is the only one that connected the dots of vaccines to autism (and then had the balls to say it during a debate). trump also said let putin take care of isis... and no to bringing the refugees here. trump also called out the iraq war in 2004. he tells the media to go F themselves... and doesnt cower to megyn feminist kelly.

when i see the new york elite (rino/neocons) media circle the wagons bashing trump i get a "tingle down my leg." i saw david brooks almost have an orgasm last week on npr when trump only placed second... that tells me there is a sliver of hope.

but r3.. you have all the answers just like the 2012 ron paul leadership that told me we won by "getting along" that yr and we would take over in 2016... so who is your candidate now? let me guess... you are going to sit home and do nothing and help put this in the WH again:

 

[GunnyFreedom]

i said "PC speak"... and he has crushed it. has trump evolved on certain issues? duh.. so have i. we live in the information age and there are 100s of layers to this onion. but trump did speak out on the iraq war in 2004 on record... so im guessing he was against it before that too... but that said, he is not your typical neocon/rino pandering to goldman sachs and the other elite deep pockets. and honestly you don't know trump's heart..... he told the truth why he gave people like hillary money.. he was playing the game and he knows the other candidates are taking money from the big corps and that they are owned by them.

ron paul was great... the fed message was great (i've been spreading the news on the fed for decades myself) but what did it get us? "we got the message out"? so did the communist occutards. look, we are still in bondage as a nation, but trump is not bought off like ALL OF THE OTHERS. ron/rand had zero chance even if they had the voters, which they didnt. it takes someone that knows how to fight these scumbags and has extremely deep pockets. there is no one else out there that can win.

lastly? please, if you want anyone with testicles and a rational brain to take you seriously, never ever use the term xenophobia again unless you are mocking others for using it seriously.

There is a big difference between evolving positions and just telling people whatever they want to hear.

Also, the ball-less people are the ones who actually have the irrational fears, like xenophobia, and not the ones who are mocking them for clinging to said irrational fears.

 

[BenMuldowney]

You keep saying you don't support Ron's position on immigration. Why? Do you even understand it? Here it is:

1) No amnesty. (Trump has supported and still supports some form of amnesty)

2) End welfare for illegal immigrants. (I haven't seen Trump take a position on that or not.)

3) Amend the constitution to end birthright citizenship. (Actually I disagree with Ron on that, but I don't understand why you would).

4) Don't increase the power of the federal government by building and manning an expensive wall.

Is that it? #4? It's all about the wall?

SEVERE BACKSLIDING ON AMNESTY

In his book, Dr. Paul sounds very much like supporters of Comprehensive Amnesty measures by talking about the impossibility of sending back home 11 million illegal aliens.

Like most amnesty supporters who say they oppose "amnesty," Dr. Paul seems to buy the false choice between "legalization" or mass deportation. Since he says mass deportation isn't possible, he feels he has to choose some kind of legalization.

He fails to support Attrition Through Enforcement, which is the middle way supported by most anti-amnesty Members of Congress.

He would limit the legalization by perhaps not allowing the illegal aliens to ever be citizens or to vote. But they still would get to stay in the U.S. and to keep their U.S. jobs, while millions of Americans who want the jobs would have to stay unemployed.

"It could be argued that (this system) may well allow some immigrants who come here illegally a beneficial status without automatic citizenship or tax-supported benefits -- a much better option than deportation," Rep. Paul writes on page 156.

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/...s-new-book-sinks-his-immigration-grade-f.html

 

[BenMuldowney]

First I will continue to use the term xenophobia because I have a brain and could care less if a moron trumpster respects what I have to say or not.

Second, there's nothing wrong with evolving on your positions as long as you do it before you run for public office! Trumps positions have "evolved" to fit what he believes the voters want to hear. He was okay with amnesty until he realized he needed to be against it. In contrast Ron Paul, who's position on immigration you have criticized for no articulated reason, has steadfastly been against amnesty. He's also against giving welfare to immigrants. Since you don't like Ron Paul's position on illegal immigration does that mean you support welfare for immigrants? Or is it all about "da fence" for you? As Ron Paul has pointed out, that fence could be used to keep Americans from taking themselves and their money out in the event of a full blown economic collapse. You think that's just "conspiracy theory"? Just last year the IRS announced plans to revoke the passports of Americans who owe taxes.

You didn't know Trump was for the bailouts? So you support a candidate that you haven't completely researched? Not surprising. What's concerning is that you will cheer Trump for being a hypocrite and excuse his hypocrisy for saying "Well he's not perfect." Well why not say that about Ted Cruz? Yes Ted Cruz got a loan from Goldman Sachs and he's married to a Goldman Sachs exec but hey "He's not perfect." Trump should not be saying jack about Goldman Sachs while still supporting TARP and eminent domain for private business and other forms fascism. He needs to clean his own house up first. It's like Jimmy Swaggart preaching against adultery.

As for Rand supposedly "pandering" to BLM, you need to wake up and smell the gunpowder! Violent crime is at an all time low in this country but killings by police are at an all time high. And it's not just black youth being killed. Here is a white teen who was an airforce ROTC honor student that was killed by cops who raided his home by mistake and thought the Wii controller in his hand was a gun.

To coin a phrase by Barack Obama "That could have been YOUR son!" And Rand isn't the only republican to see there's a real problem going on. In the wake of Ferguson Mike Huckabee said there is a problem of militarization of police, and there most certainly is. The tea party was concerned about this until it all became about "black lives". Well Bundy Lives Matter as well! (The white ranchers that had the stand off with the federal government. One of their supporters got killed by police not too long ago.)

But hey, keep buying Trump's snake oil. I hope he becomes president and then follows through on his pledge to rid America of assault rifles just so that people in the Liberty Movement that keep defending him can realize how mistaken they were. Like I said, Trump is an opportunist. He would be your version of PC (which really is the false definition of politically correct) if he thought it would get him more votes. I do appreciate his position on Iraq, Libya, Syria and Russia but that's about it.

what i see concerning cops and blacks is the media lying during initial reports and then a mob mentality defines the narrative after that. are cops wrong sometimes? yes.. but they kill more whites than blacks. please dear God tell me you didn't fall for the whole trayvon martin scam? i exposed that day one of coming across it. posting all the pics of a 12 yr old and interviewing a bunch of women that swore they heard a young boy screaming for his life. LOL that lil boy screaming turned out to be zimmerman as his head was being pounded into the cement.

LOL @ xenophobia... seriously guys go to u of missouri and find your safe spaces. you have no candidate.. you have no voice.. you will feel right at home with those screwballs. the blm leader there set up a hoax and im sure you all will have a grand old time gobbling it up. keep thinking that you are libertarians while rome burns.

maybe you guys can start a campaign to free kristian gonzalez:

 

[GunnyFreedom]

SEVERE BACKSLIDING ON AMNESTY

In his book, Dr. Paul sounds very much like supporters of Comprehensive Amnesty measures by talking about the impossibility of sending back home 11 million illegal aliens.

bullshit.

Like most amnesty supporters who say they oppose "amnesty," Dr. Paul seems to buy the false choice between "legalization" or mass deportation. Since he says mass deportation isn't possible, he feels he has to choose some kind of legalization.

He fails to support Attrition Through Enforcement, which is the middle way supported by most anti-amnesty Members of Congress.

He would limit the legalization by perhaps not allowing the illegal aliens to ever be citizens or to vote. But they still would get to stay in the U.S. and to keep their U.S. jobs, while millions of Americans who want the jobs would have to stay unemployed.

"It could be argued that (this system) may well allow some immigrants who come here illegally a beneficial status without automatic citizenship or tax-supported benefits -- a much better option than deportation," Rep. Paul writes on page 156.

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/...s-new-book-sinks-his-immigration-grade-f.html

"Amnesty" has always meant citizenship. Numbers USA is moving the goalposts and placing them squarely around Rand, because they do not like Rand. Numbers USA has always been a pro-establishment neocon thinktank with their primary issue being anti-immigration. They hated on Ron Paul too, just making crap up about his immigration policies, because he was not a pro-establishment neocon.

The reality is that Rand's plan is even more against illegal immigration than Trump's, as Trump's plan would eventually allow them to become citizens and vote whereas Rand's plan would not. I do not for a minute anticipate that fact will penetrate into your thought process, of course, as I have dealt with Trumpaloompas in the past and I have come to learn that they do not have a proper appreciation for truth.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

LOL @ xenophobia... seriously guys go to u of missouri and find your safe spaces. you have no candidate.. you have no voice.. you will feel right at home with those screwballs. the blm leader there set up a hoax and im sure you all will have a grand old time gobbling it up. keep thinking that you are libertarians while rome burns.

So, it's your position that anybody who has a brain and can speak proper English must necessarily be a progressive libtard hipster?

Did you seriously just argue that people have to be stupid to agree with you?

 

[GunnyFreedom]

maybe you guys can start a campaign to free kristian gonzalez:

Because only 'darkies' act up like that amirite?

 

[r3volution 3.0]

why would i defend the banker bailout?

Because you're defending Trump, who advocated for it.

i disagree with trump if he said he supported it.

Not "if."

I linked an article with direct quotes from Trump on the subject.

as far as immigration goes i have evolved myself... as i see what the scumbag bankers are up to and how they plan to use it. it's time to shut it down and get the unemployment rate down from 23%. so far trump is the only one talking about the real unemployment rates.

Trump is to the left of Romney on immigration, on the basis of his own statements, which were quoted in the articles I linked.

Trump is not in favor of restricting legal immigration.

He is not in favor of deporting illegal immigrants (except to allow them all back in).

Trump is a left-liberal conman and you are being conned.

so far trump is the only one that connected the dots of vaccines to autism (and then had the balls to say it during a debate).

lol...

trump also said let putin take care of isis...

He also said we should "bomb the shit" out of ISIS and take their oil.

...as with every other issue, he's taken both sides.

He's 100% full of shit. He believes nothing, he knows nothing. He's a conman who makes bad TV shows.

but r3.. you have all the answers just like the 2012 ron paul leadership that told me we won by "getting along" that yr and we would take over in 2016

So, to you, Rand was "getting along" by proposing the largest federal spending cut in history, the largest tax cut in history, the first real audit of the Fed in history, an end to our pointless military interventions in the Middle East, an end to unconstitutional NSA spying and indefinite detention, and an end to the federal war on drugs. But Trump, who supported the bank bailouts, supported the auto bailouts, supports socialized medicine, opposes any federal spending cuts, and wants to grow the police state, is "fighting the establishment" because he make juvenile personal attacks on some media personalities?

... so who is your candidate now? let me guess... you are going to sit home and do nothing and help put this in the WH again:

My plan is not vote for the male version of Hillary Clinton.

 

[BenMuldowney]

bullshit.



"Amnesty" has always meant citizenship. Numbers USA is moving the goalposts and placing them squarely around Rand, because they do not like Rand. Numbers USA has always been a pro-establishment neocon thinktank with their primary issue being anti-immigration. They hated on Ron Paul too, just making crap up about his immigration policies, because he was not a pro-establishment neocon.

The reality is that Rand's plan is even more against illegal immigration than Trump's, as Trump's plan would eventually allow them to become citizens and vote whereas Rand's plan would not. I do not for a minute anticipate that fact will penetrate into your thought process, of course, as I have dealt with Trumpaloompas in the past and I have come to learn that they do not have a proper appreciation for truth.

you do realize neocons true stance is very pro illegal immigration dont you? they are communist trotskyites and they seek to end our sovereignty. look at chertoff... they caught hell so he went to the border and pretended to start the process of building a fence. 2 miles later they were done. LOL... dont ever tell me neocons are anti immigration.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

you do realize neocons true stance is very pro illegal immigration dont you? they are communist trotskyites and they seek to end our sovereignty. look at chertoff... they caught hell so he went to the border and pretended to start the process of building a fence. 2 miles later they were done. LOL... dont ever tell me neocons are anti immigration.

The neocon philosophy has mostly to do with Israel, foreign policy, and domestic spending. Immigration is one of those hotly contested ideas within the neocon school, much like abortion is hotly contested within libertarianism. From the outside, most people believe that libertarianism is automagically pro abortion because a small handful of the loudest libertarian mouths are pro abortion. In the same way, a lot of people think neocons are automagically pro immigration merely because a small handful of the loudest neocon mouths happen to be pro immigration. Nothing, of course, could be further from the truth.

 

[BenMuldowney]

Because you're defending Trump, who advocated for it.



Not "if."

I linked an article with direct quotes from Trump on the subject.



Trump is to the left of Romney on immigration, on the basis of his own statements, which were quoted in the articles I linked.

Trump is not in favor of restricting legal immigration.

He is not in favor of deporting illegal immigrants (except to allow them all back in).

Trump is a left-liberal conman and you are being conned.



lol...



He also said we should "bomb the shit" out of ISIS and take their oil.

...as with every other issue, he's taken both sides.

He's 100% full of shit. He believes nothing, he knows nothing. He's a conman who makes bad TV shows.



So, to you, Rand was "getting along" by proposing the largest federal spending cut in history, the largest tax cut in history, the first real audit of the Fed in history, an end to our pointless military interventions in the Middle East, an end to unconstitutional NSA spying and indefinite detention, and an end to the federal war on drugs. But Trump, who supported the bank bailouts, supported the auto bailouts, supports socialized medicine, opposes any federal spending cuts, and wants to grow the police state, is "fighting the establishment" because he make juvenile personal attacks on some media personalities?



My plan is not vote for the male version of Hillary Clinton.

by getting along i am referring to local ron paul leaders that refused to challenge the brazen fraud committed by the party during the delegate process.

re: trump i am not saying he is perfect but he is saying stuff even ron backed off of. but please tell me who you are supporting now so i can change my support and save this country. thank God i have you to lead me.

and yes he talks about bombing isis ...rand talks tough on isis too. but im sure if putin wants to take care of them by himself, trump will gladly let him.

and comparing trump to hillary is asinine. you did see where trump crushed her on her "i support women" crap? thats just the beginning.. i pray for a one on one debate between the two.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

you do realize neocons true stance is very pro illegal immigration dont you? they are communist trotskyites and they seek to end our sovereignty. look at chertoff... they caught hell so he went to the border and pretended to start the process of building a fence. 2 miles later they were done. LOL... dont ever tell me neocons are anti immigration.

And the communist-run labor unions are very anti-immigration.

What's your point?

 

[BenMuldowney]

The neocon philosophy has mostly to do with Israel, foreign policy, and domestic spending. Immigration is one of those hotly contested ideas within the neocon school, much like abortion is hotly contested within libertarianism. From the outside, most people believe that libertarianism is automagically pro abortion because a small handful of the loudest libertarian mouths are pro abortion. In the same way, a lot of people think neocons are automagically pro immigration merely because a small handful of the loudest neocon mouths happen to be pro immigration. Nothing, of course, could be further from the truth.

LOL.. so youre saying the fathers of trotskyism wanted sound borders? leo strauss and irving kristol wanted very limited immigration? if you really believe that, you are the most naive person on this board.

 

[BenMuldowney]

And the communist-run labor unions are very anti-immigration.

What's your point?

i bet the teachers unions are all for massive immigration.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

by getting along i am referring to local ron paul leaders that refused to challenge the brazen fraud committed by the party during the delegate process.

So therefore you support Trump?

...who is the opposite of Ron on every issue?

re: trump i am not saying he is perfect but he is saying stuff even ron backed off of.

Like WHAT?

Being pro bank bailouts? Pro Fed? Pro auto bailouts? Pro socialized medicine? Pro welfare? Pro police state?

but please tell me who you are supporting now so i can change my support and save this country. thank God i have you to lead me.

I'll be voting third party, or not voting at all.

None of the viable candidate, in either party, are worth supporting.

and comparing trump to hillary is asinine. you did see where trump crushed her on her "i support women" crap? thats just the beginning.. i pray for a one on one debate between the two.

What are the policy difference between the two?

Both support socialized medicine.

Both supported the bailouts.

Neither wants to cut federal spending.

Both are for NSA spying and indefinite detention.

Both are for partial birth abortion.

Both are soft on immigration.

Both are for gun control.

Both were registered Democrats for most of their lives.

Both helped Democrats raise huge amounts of money.

They're both involved with organized crime.

...and they're long time personal friends; Bill encouraged Trump to run FFS.

How stupid can you be?