Rand Paul Rocks the Senate!

[Foundation_Of_Liberty]

Like I said you're stupid.

Let's just settle that: YOU are stupid!

 

[gerryb1]

People who still do not understand Rand's endorsement really should not be involved in any electoral process.

 

[Foundation_Of_Liberty]

There were 2 candiates. Obama or Romney. One of the 2 was going to be president. As a senator, you have to pick 1 and preferably the one in your party. Coke or Pepsi. Rand chose 'coca-cola.' He didn't betray anything in that context. It's not like Gary Johnson or Virgil Goode (who I voted for) could have won, and that Rand's endorsement could have thrown them over the top.

Both Coke and Pepsi contain poison. He should have chosen cranberry juice.

It's not like Romney could have won. If he could, so could Ron Paul. Only because everyone believes this garbage Obama wins.

It is a lie! Don't you get it? Ron Paul COULD HAVE WON, no less than Romney could have won. Stop believing a lie, and you will change things!

 

[Foundation_Of_Liberty]

People who still do not understand Rand's endorsement really should not be involved in any electoral process.

People who agree with Rand's endorsement ARE the problem with the electoral process, because they are almost EVERYWHERE. (Unless you believe there are no problems with the electoral process of course).

 

[Aeroneous]

Like I said you're stupid.

Ron isnt ever going to run for president ever again and when he won delegates and tried to get on the ballot at the convention the party screwed him over.

Like it or not if you antagonize the party they will screw you over. Rand wants to be the party nominee and wants to be president so he has to be nice to them.. this means not antagnozing them, raising money for them, endorsing their nominee and being a team player. Every nominee and president in history has done exactly the same.

This is not selling principles this is simply doing what every politician seeking higher office has done before and will continue to do if they want to actually win or be nominated.

Luke and We are Change can quite honestly get lost and should stop shoving cameras in Rand's face (who is the best U.S Senator by FAR and who fillibusters Patriot Act and and other things) when he's not interested in talking to him about these issues.

Agreed. Ron isn't going to be a viable option again, and it doesn't seem like there is anyone else poised to become one outside of Rand. It's a lot easier to gain momentum in a movement if there's a unified focal point and it seems like Rand is going to be that focal point. How long can we keep ignoring the overall goal of growing the liberty movement? If we just keep comparing every potential candidate to Ron Paul, determining that they're not a perfect clone, and then writing in Ron Paul on principle, we won't get anywhere.

Rand may not be perfect, but I'd rather see an 80% candidate win than a 100% candidate get railroaded.

Just my $0.02. Obviously I'm a newbie around these parts so take my thoughts with a huge grain of salt.

 

[gerryb1]

People who agree with Rand's endorsement ARE the problem with the electoral process, because they are almost EVERYWHERE. (Unless you believe there are no problems with the electoral process of course).

You're not going to change 2 million years of the evolution of the human races brain...

 

[Origanalist]

Like I said you're stupid.

Let's just settle that: YOU are stupid!

 

[Foundation_Of_Liberty]

Agreed. Ron isn't going to be a viable option again, and it doesn't seem like there is anyone else poised to become one outside of Rand. It's a lot easier to gain momentum in a movement if there's a unified focal point and it seems like Rand is going to be that focal point. How long can we keep ignoring the overall goal of growing the liberty movement? If we just keep comparing every potential candidate to Ron Paul, determining that they're not a perfect clone, and then writing in Ron Paul on principle, we won't get anywhere.

Rand may not be perfect, but I'd rather see an 80% candidate win than a 100% candidate get railroaded.

Just my $0.02. Obviously I'm a newbie around these parts so take my thoughts with a huge grain of salt.

Good point. That's why I am willing to give Rand another chance. But I do not trust him yet. Will see. This is the reason I still post to this thread. Inasmuch as he does good, I will support him, but inasmuch as he does bad, he has no support from me. And he did compromize his influence with the grassroots and with the truth. Stupid move on his part indeed.

So will see about Rand.

Thanks.

 

[Foundation_Of_Liberty]

You're not going to change 2 million years of the evolution of the human races brain...

Neither do I intend to. I am simply stating the facts: It is ONLY because everyone believes that Ron "has no chance" does a clown, criminal and imposter like Obama wins. You people believe garbage, and you of course get garbage. "According to your faith" it is done unto you. Very stupid belief indeed.

 

[Jamesiv1]

Let me get this straight: You despise Romney's principles but you endorse him because of the party? That is the definition of party over principle philosophy. This is what is wrong with Washington! And you are doing it now!

But I am not very surprised. I knew that Rand is miles apart from his father in understanding and respect for true principles of liberty. This is why I never fully trusted him anyway! I was right.

Ron Paul is head and shoulders above his son as far as integrity and understanding of correct principles is concerned!

Lew is a smart guy and I appreciate all he's done and doing for the cause, but he's in la-la land when it comes to getting things done in Washington.

It's going to be FUN watching Rand the next few years!!

 

[BAllen]

Like I said you're stupid.

Ron isnt ever going to run for president ever again and when he won delegates and tried to get on the ballot at the convention the party screwed him over.

Like it or not if you antagonize the party they will screw you over. Rand wants to be the party nominee and wants to be president so he has to be nice to them.. this means not antagnozing them, raising money for them, endorsing their nominee and being a team player. Every nominee and president in history has done exactly the same.

This is not selling principles this is simply doing what every politician seeking higher office has done before and will continue to do if they want to actually win or be nominated.

Luke and We are Change can quite honestly get lost and should stop shoving cameras in Rand's face (who is the best U.S Senator by FAR and who fillibusters Patriot Act and and other things) when he's not interested in talking to him about these issues.

So glad to read this, as it lets me know I am not alone in this thinking. Too many paulbots have this 'all or nothing' attitude that will get us nowhere. Future elections may not be legitimate anymore anyway, but if there is a chance, Rand is going about it the right way. You play the game to get elected, then do the right thing where it will count the most. It's not only the positions one takes, but when they take it.

 

[Jamesiv1]

Are you stupid?

Luke is stupid

Like I said you're stupid.

Let's just settle that: YOU are stupid!

Political debate in America

(original 'quote the stupid' idea by Origanalist - worth repeating)

 

[Foundation_Of_Liberty]

Lew is a smart guy and I appreciate all he's done and doing for the cause, but he's in la-la land when it comes to getting things done in Washington.

It's going to be FUN watching Rand the next few years!!

Lew is right. Ron Paul is right. Rand is not entirely right. If he does good I will support him. But if he does bad, I will call him out on it.

 

[Mach]

Let Rand explain things......



This will be a very interesting time, from all sides..... hopefully.

 

[Rudeman]

Political debate in America

(original 'quote the stupid' idea by Origanalist - worth repeating)

I know you are but what am I!



LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALA

 

[Foundation_Of_Liberty]

So glad to read this, as it lets me know I am not alone in this thinking. Too many paulbots have this 'all or nothing' attitude that will get us nowhere. Future elections may not be legitimate anymore anyway, but if there is a chance, Rand is going about it the right way. You play the game to get elected, then do the right thing where it will count the most. It's not only the positions one takes, but when they take it.

I disagree. By sacrificing his principles (and make no mistake you sacrifice your principles when you indorse evil), Rand does disservice to his own credibility and to the cause of Liberty in general.

It is WRONG to indorse evil. You cannot promote the cause of Liberty by sacrificing its principles by indorsing an enemy of Liberty.

You cannot defend correct principles by violating them! You cannot defend Liberty by destroying Liberty. It is obvious to anyone with any reason or integrity left intact. It is basic. And Rand does not understand it. That's why I correctly said: He is a little bit pregnant with statism and tyranny. Just a touch of pregnancy. A little bit. If he does not change, this will grow until it destroys him.

 

[Rudeman]

Ron Paul has endorsed evil several times, do you think it did a disservice to his credibility and the cause of Liberty in general?


Do you think Rand Paul is evil?

 

[BAllen]

I disagree. By sacrificing his principles (and make no mistake you sacrifice your principles when you indorse evil), Rand does disservice to his own credibility and to the cause of Liberty in general.

It is WRONG to indorse evil. You cannot promote the cause of Liberty by sacrificing its principles by indorsing an enemy of Liberty.

You cannot defend correct principles by violating them! You cannot defend Liberty by destroying Liberty. It is obvious to anyone with any reason or integrity left intact. It is basic. And Rand does not understand it. That's why I correctly said: He is a little bit pregnant with statism and tyranny. Just a touch of pregnancy. A little bit. If he does not change, this will grow until it destroys him.

Yeah, you keep dreaming about a perfect candidate, b/c they don't exist.

 

[Foundation_Of_Liberty]

Ron Paul has endorsed evil several times, do you think it did a disservice to his credibility and the cause of Liberty in general?


Do you think Rand Paul is evil?

Yes it did a disservice. Ron admitted he is not perfect. His son just took that imperfection and multiplied it by 10 by indorsing his father's opponent. Poetic justice, I suppose.

Ron Paul is not evil. He repented (I hope).

 

[Foundation_Of_Liberty]

Yeah, you keep dreaming about a perfect candidate, b/c they don't exist.

Some are more perfect than others. If they do good, I will support them. But I will not endorse evil, even if it is the lesser of the two.