Rand Paul: I'm Not a libertarian...

[Barrex]

So... can someone summarize 20 pages in few simple and small sentences?

 

[klamath]

Libertarian themselves gave me the stereotype view I have of a large portion of then. For thrity years I thought I was a libertarian that voted mostly republican until I joined this forum. I remember gasping in horror when I heard rush limbaugh refer to libertarians as being only interested in drug use. After a few years around here ...eh.. maybe he had a point.
If I flipped out every time some libertarian around here made a general insulting comment about republicans I would have to hire a 10 man typing staff to express my continuous OUTRAGE at the insults!

 

[klamath]

So... can someone summarize 20 pages in few simple and small sentences?

same shit, different day... er thread

 

[Brett85]

The Constitution defines personhood as being for a person "Born or naturalized in the United States." I disagree with that, but that's how the constitution defines it.

That's why it would be necessary to create a federal law that clarifies that the 14th amendment should apply to the unborn. That's what Rand's bill does, and Ron's "Sanctity of Human Life" bill was also similar. But, if a pro life President doesn't believe that the federal government has the Constitutional authority to ban abortion, I think he or she should at least be in favor of a Constitutional amendment banning abortion. Such an amendment is unlikely to pass, but the principle of supporting such an amendment is important.

 

[Sullivan*]

I don't consider myself a libertarian either. I don't know what Rand's point was, however I personally don't like being lumped in together with a bunch of people someone hearing a certain label might not even think of as libertarian. I'm an American, I hold traditional American views, and anyone who believes anything I believe to be incompatible with their ideology and philosophy to the point where they would treat me as a second-class citizen without any say in decisions that effect me and my family personally, is not someone I would wish to be neighbors with, and therefore a fellow citizen. I don't care who they identify themselves as, even if they call themselves a classical liberal or libertarian.

Screw that, screw you and screw your dog.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

So for a certain group of people Rand can do no wrong. If you critize Rand in any way, if you deviate from the Gospel of His High Holiness Rand Paul, the Giver of Sight, Breaker of Chains, Clother of Hippies, they will troll you endlessly. They will go to any length it takes to derail a thread and make sure real discussion of Rand doesn't happen. They are nothing but trolls and I highly recommend you put them all on ignore so we can have a real, honest discussion.

The following have been added to my ignore list for this very reason.

FrankRep
RonPaulFanInGA

 

[Christian Liberty]

There are more in the libertarian movement who've aided in that perception FAR more than this relatively innocent disassociation that will be forgotten about in a week among the very few who are even aware or care about it.

What will last however is evangelical leaders feeling far more comfortable in his intentions being in line with theirs, and not seeking to undermine them.

If this really insults you, then grow some thicker skin and realize why he feels the need to disassociate himself from others baggage (and again, this is assuming the worst of the out-of-context and perhaps completely separate statements)

I'm not seriously offended, I've dealt with being picked on all my life anyways. And I know Rand is just playing politics and doesn't really believe that all libertarians are pot smoking nudists. I mean, Rand grew up with his dad...after all, and I'm pretty sure that never happened.

I'm not really offended, I just think it was a stupid and insensetive comment.

 

[Christian Liberty]

So for a certain group of people Rand can do no wrong. If you critize Rand in any way, if you deviate from the Gospel of His High Holiness Rand Paul, the Giver of Sight, Breaker of Chains, Clother of Hippies, they will troll you endlessly. They will go to any length it takes to derail a thread and make sure real discussion of Rand doesn't happen. They are nothing but trolls and I highly recommend you put them all on ignore so we can have a real, honest discussion.

The following have been added to my ignore list for this very reason.

FrankRep
TraditionalConservative
Warlord
RonPaulFanInGA

TraditionalConservative definitely isn't in that category. In fact, he's criticized Rand in this very thread. Granted, he is a Rand supporter, as am I, but he's not one of those.

I'm not really sure Warlord is one of those either, he defended Rand this time, but I think he's been critical of him before.

 

[Brett85]

So for a certain group of people Rand can do no wrong. If you critize Rand in any way, if you deviate from the Gospel of His High Holiness Rand Paul, the Giver of Sight, Breaker of Chains, Clother of Hippies, they will troll you endlessly. They will go to any length it takes to derail a thread and make sure real discussion of Rand doesn't happen. They are nothing but trolls and I highly recommend you put them all on ignore so we can have a real, honest discussion.

The following have been added to my ignore list for this very reason.

FrankRep
TraditionalConservative
Warlord
RonPaulFanInGA

Um, I'm not exactly sure why I'm on that list. I've done nothing but criticize Rand on this thread and other recent threads. Another poster here called me a "Rand hater" yesterday. So to you I'm a "Rand shill," and to this other poster I'm a "Rand hater." It sounds like my position on Rand is about right. I'm neither a hater nor someone who thinks that he can never be criticized.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind. I just got back so maybe I'm wrong. They have acted that way in this thread, IMO.

 

[Brett85]

Back on the abortion issue. The 5th amendment does contain these words as well.

"nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

Granted, that doesn't specifically mention abortion, but it says that no one can be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

 

[Brett85]

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind. I just got back so maybe I'm wrong. They have acted that way in this thread, IMO.

I haven't defended Rand in this thread. I just criticized you for saying "f*ck you Rand." I thought you should've criticized him in a more civil way.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

TC: I apologize and retract my comment. I guess I didn't pay close enough attention to the names.

Seriously felt like 6-7 posters. It was a blur.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Ohhh, so that's what that other thread was about.

Got it.

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

First time using the ignore list. Pretty disappointing; has this big, ugly wall over the user's post. Would be better if it [the posts] just disappeared completely.

 

[TheGrinch]

I agree. I love the taste of lamb.

Back on the abortion issue. The 5th amendment does contain these words as well.

"nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

Granted, that doesn't specifically mention abortion, but it says that no one can be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

Lol, I'm not one of those trolls who derails threads, now let's talk about a completely unrelated hot button issue

Just teasing, but that gave me a good chuckle

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

So for a certain group of people Rand can do no wrong. If you critize Rand in any way, if you deviate from the Gospel of His High Holiness Rand Paul, the Giver of Sight, Breaker of Chains, Clother of Hippies, they will troll you endlessly. They will go to any length it takes to derail a thread and make sure real discussion of Rand doesn't happen. They are nothing but trolls and I highly recommend you put them all on ignore so we can have a real, honest discussion.

Oh the rank, unfiltered hypocrisy:

FUCK RAND PAUL

 

[John F Kennedy III]

I haven't defended Rand in this thread. I just criticized you for saying "f*ck you Rand." I thought you should've criticized him in a more civil way.

I need to learn to wait a bit before posting instead immediately reacted to the Rand stuff. I used to be a huge supporter so I'm pretty emotionally invested. It's almost like watching Ron do it, and you just sit there wondering what the ff* happened.

 

[Christian Liberty]

That's why it would be necessary to create a federal law that clarifies that the 14th amendment should apply to the unborn. That's what Rand's bill does, and Ron's "Sanctity of Human Life" bill was also similar. But, if a pro life President doesn't believe that the federal government has the Constitutional authority to ban abortion, I think he or she should at least be in favor of a Constitutional amendment banning abortion. Such an amendment is unlikely to pass, but the principle of supporting such an amendment is important.

Ron's sanctity of life is a bit weird as it does define life as beginning at conception but literally does nothing at all to actually make the states enforce the law. Technically I don't agree that the Feds have the right to define life as beginning at conception but IIRC they can take jurisdiction from the courts, and that they should do. I'd have voted for the bill.

But yes, assuming the amendment was correctly worded, I'd support the amendment. I just don't believe the constitution currently makes this a Federal issue.

Um, I'm not exactly sure why I'm on that list. I've done nothing but criticize Rand on this thread and other recent threads. Another poster here called me a "Rand hater" yesterday. So to you I'm a "Rand shill," and to this other poster I'm a "Rand hater." It sounds like my position on Rand is about right. I'm neither a hater nor someone who thinks that he can never be criticized.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Lol, I'm not one of those trolls who derails threads, now let's talk about a completely unrelated hot button issue

Just teasing, but that gave me a good chuckle

I do my best