Those two issues in particular (and illegal immigration) are the ones the media harps on to divide the people and distract them from real topics. Who gives a fuck about gay marriage or abortion when we're getting taxed out our butts, our currency is being devalued, our monetary system is a ponzi scheme, half of our population is incarcerated over mostly non-violent crimes, and we're spending a bajillion dollars bombing half the world and making them hate us?
'Major Endorsement' from Rand coming tomorrow
- Thread starter CPUd
- Start date
Those two issues in particular (and illegal immigration) are the ones the media harps on to divide the people and distract them from real topics. Who gives a fuck about gay marriage or abortion when we're getting taxed out our butts, our currency is being devalued, our monetary system is a ponzi scheme, half of our population is incarcerated over mostly non-violent crimes, and we're spending a bajillion dollars bombing half the world and making them hate us?
luctor-et-emergo
Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2012
- Messages
- 7,420
I think you have to add to that he thinks marriage should be a church institute and government shouldn't have anything to do with it. As far as tax benefits for gay couples go... I think he's clear on that as well, abolish the IRS.
erowe1
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 32,183
What religious intolerant bigotry of the worst kind? You mean Christianity?
erowe1
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 32,183
Is that not also Cruz's position?
RonPaulMall
Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2011
- Messages
- 2,245
Dumb stunt. Rand should be focusing his efforts entirely on rehabilitating his image among Conservatives so that he can be a force in the Senate. The endorsement by Ben Carson was a strong step in the right direction. Reigniting the Trump feud is two steps back.
CPUd
Member
- Joined
- May 12, 2012
- Messages
- 22,978
He will, if Cruz is the nominee.
erowe1
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 32,183
Cruz won't be the nominee. That's part of why I want Rand to endorse him. It will help rehabilitate his alliance with Cruz in the Senate, which is where Cruz will be for the next 4 years.
Lucille
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2007
- Messages
- 15,019
cruzrulez
Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2013
- Messages
- 68
yes, very much so. I signed up with it right after the obamacare fillibuster. My old username was tied with an email I no longer have access to.
undergroundrr
Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2007
- Messages
- 3,334
You're naming big institutions. trump as an individual deserves credit as a class A influence peddler. He's spent at least $1.5 million of his personal dough to further the careers and agendas of the worst of the worst. And I wouldn't be shocked if what's accounted for is the tip of the iceberg. McCain, Ted Kennedy, McConnell, f***ing $50,000 to Rahm Emanuel for pity's sake. The neocon class owes a considerable portion of its livelihood to trump.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...-trumps-campaign-contributions-democrats-and/
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2011/02/donald-trumps-donations-to-democrats/
How can it be hard to make up your mind about this guy? Either you support that kinda shit or you don't.
Last edited:
Lucille
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2007
- Messages
- 15,019
I believe you can request a name change.
He doesn't need to rehabilitate any alliance with Cruz in the senate. If Cruz really is Mr. Perfect conservative, he will work with Rand on projects relating to small government.
The Pauls endorsed Cruz before, it doesnt work out well. Cruz isn't actually for limited government as much as he is for himself.
I agree that Paul's endorsement of entropy this morning was a dud. I guess he is getting tired of being asked who he will endorse when there are no good options. Maybe disorder and chaos is the best positive he can see coming from this cluster.
Hey cruzrules, at least you didn't get a tattoo....
You didn't, right?
The Pauls endorsed Cruz before, it doesnt work out well. Cruz isn't actually for limited government as much as he is for himself.
I agree that Paul's endorsement of entropy this morning was a dud. I guess he is getting tired of being asked who he will endorse when there are no good options. Maybe disorder and chaos is the best positive he can see coming from this cluster.
Hey cruzrules, at least you didn't get a tattoo....
You didn't, right?
ThePaleoLibertarian
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2014
- Messages
- 3,497
dannno
Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2007
- Messages
- 65,717
What did his donations influence, besides possibly the outcome of the election, and what did that do to take away our rights? What was the money for exactly? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't know what sort of impact his donations had compared to these industries that have very specific expectations.
Well some people see it like this - they don't support the government doing all of those things, but, if you want to survive in the marketplace you have to do it to some extent. It's wrong, we should all be talking about it and trying to stop it - but if pharmaceutical company A is a good company, but they will go under because pharmaceutical company B who is a worse company donated money to government, then can you blame pharmaceutical company A for also donating? In a purest sense, you quite possibly can, but in reality the only way we will stop it is not to stop the companies from donating, it is to stop allowing the government to have the power to steal things for people.
erowe1
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 32,183
By "is CFR and Goldman Sachs" you mean "once had a membership in the CFR and once worked for Goldman Sachs." But that's making mountains of molehills compared to what we know about Trump. What matters is the policies they would pursue, not what their wives have on their resumes.
undergroundrr
Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2007
- Messages
- 3,334
You're a thoughtful person, but these are strange questions to me. There's no more direct way to influence politics and further an agenda than a financial contribution. The end effect is - the recipients of trump's contributions got elected with a mandate. (And it doesn't look like he contributed to many losers.) Then with that mandate and political power they proceeded to do the particular things each of them did to erode constitutional rights. His recipients are the creme de la creme of constitutional erosion. I'm sorry if this sounds like I'm speaking to a 5-year old but I don't know how else to answer these questions.
To date, I haven't seen any indication that trump has any remorse for his significant role in hastening the collapse of America. If his financial contributions are now to himself, how out of line can he really be than the people he spent the last $1.5 million on?
