Jack Hunter speaks truth.....

so let me guess this straight, we the "liberty" movement is going loose a guy who doesn't "compromise" and is always a straight shooter for a guy who compromise and spins bullshit and some times play along with the republican party to "fit in" and i'm suppose to be happy with that?

F.U. RAND, I KNEW U WERE A BULLSHITTER IN 2010, NOW I KNOW FOR SURE
 
psi2941 said:
so let me guess this straight, we the "liberty" movement is going loose a guy who doesn't "compromise" and is always a straight shooter for a guy who compromise and spins bullshit and some times play along with the republican party to "fit in" and i'm suppose to be happy with that?

F.U. RAND, I KNEW U WERE A BULLSHITTER IN 2010, NOW I KNOW FOR SURE
Click to expand...

Rand is trying to be more effective at actually getting things changed, than his father did.

I love Ron, but he was never able to get a bill passed.

Ron paved the way. Let's give Rand a chance.
 
psi2941 said:
so let me guess this straight, we the "liberty" movement is going loose a guy who doesn't "compromise" and is always a straight shooter for a guy who compromise and spins bullshit and some times play along with the republican party to "fit in" and i'm suppose to be happy with that?

F.U. RAND
Click to expand...

Ron never compromises? This is where sometimes the myth is so big people don't want to look at facts.
 
LibertyEagle said:
Rand is trying to be more effective at actually getting things changed, than his father did.

I love Ron, but he was never able to get a bill passed.

Ron paved the way. Let's give Rand a chance.
Click to expand...

I think we gave him a chance by giving money, time, and effort to get him elected...then he does things, says things, endorses things, and votes for things that leaves you scratching your head or defending him. He's no Ron Paul, or Justin Amash for that matter. I'll let Kentucky worry about Rand, I don't care for him.
 
MJU1983 said:
I think we gave him a chance by giving money, time, and effort to get him elected...then he does things, says things, endorses things, and votes for things that leaves you scratching your head or defending him. He's no Ron Paul, or Justin Amash for that matter. I'll let Kentucky worry about Rand, I don't care for him.
Click to expand...

Votes for things plural? Like what? I get some of you lost your shit over Iran Central Bank, other than that?
 
Ah, the passionate detractors and the level headed realists. So poetic to watch as the vast majority of Ron Paul supporters (by vast I mean almost absolute), infuriated with Rand Paul's decision to announce an endorsement today, are given attempted placation by those who half-heartedly intend to wait-and-see.

This is politics. And in politics of the highest level nothing is as it seems, rarely if ever. The fact that a massive backlash against this decision was inevitable was obvious. So what's the gambit? Do they expect the few who pose as voices of reason to win over enough supporters to achieve whatever unstated goal they have?

Personally, I think anyone accepting this endorsement easily is foolish. And I think making excuses and tiny conspiracies without direct statements as to what benefits will be achieved by the endorsement is insubstantial. Not of enough substance to qualify supporting the decision on it's merits anyways. When those merits seem to be the outrage of the donor base for the Rand Paul Senatorial campaign. So who will the new donors be, Rand? What did you get in return for your endorsement? Aside from this "longevity in the party" BS that your very few supporters left here seem to be telling themselves you've purchased?

And as for Jack Hunter, the snarky nasal toned hero of our blogosphere ... rational as your statement may sound truth be told you and I both know this was a political screw up. If anything on the timing of the decision. I would call it stupid if I didn't suspect there was some intention behind outraging tens of thousands of supporters. Perhaps you are right. Perhaps Paul Jr. was predestined to make this endorsement for Herman Cain if need be.

But you have to wonder why the intense effort coming from the Paul camp all around to clip the enthusiasm at it's knees.
 
Last edited:
BamaFanNKy said:
Votes for things plural? Like what? I get some of you lost your shit over Iran Central Bank, other than that?
Click to expand...

Him being okay with funding rebels and language that was supportive of removing Khaddafi pre-no-fly-zone is another.

The sanctions he voted for were the same sanctions placed on Iraq in the 90s. Cute that you're attempting to spin it, though.
 
Pisces said:
I think the people that say the Goldwater movement was meaningless are not considering all the bad things that were prevented from happening, or that were at least delayed. Like Agenda 21, for instance, we're having some success defeating it in many areas. I attribute that success more to the JBS and the old-fashioned Goldwater conservatives more than to any other group.
Click to expand...

If we're going to talk about NWO stuff, take a look at what Reagan brought into the White House with him. While tripling the national debt.

That's what the Goldwater movement brought us. Worse than nothing, it accelerated the decline.
 
Feeding the Abscess said:
Him being okay with funding rebels and language that was supportive of removing Khaddafi pre-no-fly-zone is another.

The sanctions he voted for were the same sanctions placed on Iraq in the 90s. Cute that you're attempting to spin it, though.
Click to expand...

That's an out and out lie. I even covered this. Now you take the word of Lawrence O'Donnell. You are someone who will believe what you want to hear.
 
Feeding the Abscess said:
If we're going to talk about NWO stuff, take a look at what Reagan brought into the White House with him. While tripling the national debt.

That's what the Goldwater movement brought us. Worse than nothing, it accelerated the decline.
Click to expand...

You're an Anarchist, right? So you don't vote?
 
Feeding the Abscess said:
If we're going to talk about NWO stuff, take a look at what Reagan brought into the White House with him. While tripling the national debt.

That's what the Goldwater movement brought us. Worse than nothing, it accelerated the decline.
Click to expand...

No, because the Goldwater movement was more than just Reagan and/or his staff. I actually consider Reagan to have been a failed president for the most part. I also see the a lot of the Goldwater movement in the Paul campaign. Not all of it, of course, which is why there is so much infighting.
 
BamaFanNKy said:
Again, Wrong. Rand opposed action in Libya.
Click to expand...

He and/or his staff approved of the Menendez language, which was spelled out in my post. Which is precisely my contention - he was okay with language calling for Khaddafi's removal and the support of rebels in the region.
 
Feeding the Abscess said:
He and/or his staff approved of the Menendez language, which was spelled out in my post. Which is precisely my contention - he was okay with language calling for Khaddafi's removal and the support of rebels in the region.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Again, I followed this whole thing. You flat out have this wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
Donating to Rand Paul without going through WinRed
Replies
2
Views
278
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
jmdrake
Jeff Bezos blocks Washington Post from endorsing Kamala Harris
Replies
10
Views
4K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Matt Collins
Rand and Rep. Kat Cammack Introduce REINS Act to Put Power Back in the People's Hands
Replies
0
Views
2K
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
jmdrake
AOC calls Green Party 'predatory' because VP nominee is against men in women's sports
Replies
4
Views
810
Okie RP fan
Okie RP fan
jmdrake
Daughter of NFL legend Jim Brown endorses Donald Trump.
Replies
1
Views
585
Anti Federalist
Anti Federalist
Back
Top