Will the Libertarian Party Field A Candidate Against Presidential Candidate Rand Paul?

[BlondBeast]

No it's not

So not only are you more familiar with Rand Paul's principles than Rand Paul, you also know better than FrankRep what FrankRep was trying to do! Wow, what an amazingly insightful person you must be!

 

[Carlybee]

So you know more about what Rand Paul's principles are than Rand Paul does? That's a pretty neat trick, how'd you turn it?

Never said that. You have 6 posts and are obviously either a troll or a sockpuppet so don't expect me to take much of anything you say seriously.

 

[FrankRep]

So the question is: Will the Libertarian Party "Stand With Rand" to get a liberty-minded candidate in office or not? If not, the true motivations of the Libertarian Party will be revealed.

 

[BlondBeast]

So it's a he? I thought he was a girl all this time. Anyway...it sounded like he was trying to characterize the libertarians I was referring to as all pot smokers and cretins.

It didn't sound like that to intelligent and reasonable people. Only you.

 

[FrankRep]

So it's a he? I thought he was a girl all this time. Anyway...it sounded like he was trying to characterize the libertarians I was referring to as all pot smokers and cretins.

Nope, he never said that. Will you admit you're wrong?

 

[Carlybee]

Witnessing people say stupid things is irritating. Verbally punishing people for saying stupid things is satisfying and alleviates some of that irritation.

You do not have the right to say retarded things without being called out for it by multiple people. If you'd prefer not to be the victim of a tag team, you should quit saying stupid shit. Easy game!

And who are you with your whole 7 posts who just signed up today to tell me anything? Buzz off.

 

[BlondBeast]

So you know more about what Rand Paul's principles are than Rand Paul does? That's a pretty neat trick, how'd you turn it?

Never said that.

You said:

He already compromised his principles when he endorsed Romney and McConnell

Now, it seems to me that if endorsing Romney and McConnell compromised his principles, he wouldn't have done it. I certainly don't see how doing so compromised anything. And yet you made the claim that these endorsements represented a compromising of principles - something you could only know if you had direct knowledge of said principles.

From this exchange we see that you are too stupid to even understand the implications of your own words.

 

[Carlybee]

It didn't sound like that to intelligent and reasonable people. Only you.

Reported twice and put on ignore so please stop bothering to comment

 

[BlondBeast]

And who are you with your whole 7 posts who just signed up today to tell me anything? Buzz off.

 

[Carlybee]

Nope, he never said that. Will you admit you're wrong?

No

 

[Carlybee]

Okay since we have a lovely troll and obvious sockpuppet taking over the thread, I have things to do besides getting involved in this circle jerk.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Troll speaketh truth.

 

[PatriotOne]

So it's a he? I thought he was a girl all this time. Anyway...it sounded like he was trying to characterize the libertarians I was referring to as all pot smokers and cretins.

I like most Libertarians. Just not the cretins in the party. I have lots of agreement with Libertarians, including the legalization of mj for practical purposes as opposed to those who think mj can save the world. As I said earlier:

Obviously he wants the libertarian vote. And so do I. He just doesn't want the "libertarians" who smoke a joint in one hand while holding a Rand Paul sign in the other. Or like the one that lit up a joint at a Republican meeting while supporting Ron in 2011. Basically he doesn't care about the ones who have an IQ below 80 or the common sense of a rock.

 

[Carlybee]

Troll speaketh truth.

Bullshit LE. I just fucking converted a Bush Republican over to supporting Rand. Does that fucking sound like I'm trying to smear him? Check yourself.

Now I am out of here. I almost feel sorry for Rand's campaign if some of you are who he is counting on carrying the water. Good lord. Learn how to have a conversation without accusing people of having an IQ of less than 80.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Look, Carlybee, up above you claimed that Rand sold out his principles and you also misconstrued what he said about pot smokers. What's more, when called out about it, you refused to admit that you were wrong.

And you expect me to applaud that?

The "troll" called you out on that and that part of what he said, I think was right-on.

 

[FrankRep]

Bullshit LE. I just fucking converted a Bush Republican over to supporting Rand. Does that fucking sound like I'm trying to smear him? Check yourself.

Now I am out of here. I almost feel sorry for Rand's campaign if some of you are who he is counting on carrying the water. Good lord. Learn how to have a conversation without accusing people of having an IQ of less than 80.

We caught you in a few Lies in this thread and now you magically converted "Bush Republican" to Rand Paul. Nice Try.

 

[Carlybee]

We caught you in a few Lies in this thread and now you magically converted "Bush Republican" to Rand Paul. Nice Try.

Think what you want. I love how its okay for some to level personal insults on here and no one is supposed to respond to that. I haven't lied...I have simply posted my perception.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Why do you put that at the bottom of so many of your posts? It's almost like you are just trying to pick a fight. It's weird.

 

[cajuncocoa]

So the question is: Will the Libertarian Party "Stand With Rand" to get a liberty-minded candidate in office or not? If not, the true motivations of the Libertarian Party will be revealed.

Uh, yeah. They're true motivation is to continue to build their party. Just like the GOP and Dems. Whether the candidate is worthy of my consideration remains to be seen, but IMO, the more choices, the better.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Look, Carlybee, up above you claimed that Rand sold out his principles and you also misconstrued what he said about pot smokers. What's more, when called out about it, you refused to admit that you were wrong.

And you expect me to applaud that?

The "troll" called you out on that and that part of what he said, I think was right-on.

I read and re-read all of Carlybee's posts from this morning and I don't see any where she misconstrued anything that Rand said about pot-smokers (or even referenced anything that Rand said about pot-smokers). Is this another reading comp issue?