Perry v. Paul

Perry clearly does not understand the difference between non-interventionism and isolationism.

Paul has a real chance in 2016 to beat the democratic candidate for the presidency.

Perry would not get 40% of the vote in my opinion.
 
Perry has three things going for him.

(1) He has created the best one-party system in a state since Huey Long in LA.

(2) He has the petroleum industry in his pocket.

(3) He has the 35% social conservative in Texas voting for him every time.

When he runs for the presidency again, not of that will protect him in next presidential primary season. His candidacy will destruct early, like it did last time.
 
Perry has three things going for him.

(1) He has created the best one-party system in a state since Huey Long in LA.

(2) He has the petroleum industry in his pocket.

(3) He has the 35% social conservative in Texas voting for him every time.

When he runs for the presidency again, not of that will protect him in next presidential primary season. His candidacy will destruct early, like it did last time.

Rand Paul has a warped philosophy, created by an atheist female that advocated promiscuity, abortion, selfishness, and greed. Plus, Paul does not have his father's brain. Ron Paul is by far the better man.
 
Perry is an idiot, and the term fits.

Non-interventionism =/= Isolationism

Right, he presides over a top 15 world economy and doing a great job, for an idiot.


Perry takes credit for his handlers.. until they took over the State was dealing with a 25 BILLION dollar deficit.

Perry is another cheerleading idiot, just like the cheerleading idiot before him.
 
CNN is a bullshit commie organization.

They're trying to wage a war inside the republicrat establishment.

Notice how there's NEVER a conflict among democrooks. No "mavericks", no "moderates", no "reaching across the isle".

It's because those of us on "the right" aren't robots. We have critical thinking skills, morality and ethics. We don't follow cults of personality. We're individuals and proud of it.

Rand Paul makes good arguments for staying out of foreign conflicts. Rick Perry makes good points about American interests and military power stabilizing global conflicts so that they don't blow up into something worse.

Democrooks do what they want when they have power, regardless of the consequences which are always worse than the problem. They manipulate the story and the bed wetters go along. When shit goes wrong they blame their enemies, that is Americans.

So as far as I'm concerned I'm more interested in who wins the debate in the arena of ideas between Paul/Perry than I am the script Al-CNN is ready to regurgitate.



 
Perry has three things going for him.

(1) He has created the best one-party system in a state since Huey Long in LA.

(2) He has the petroleum industry in his pocket.

(3) He has the 35% social conservative in Texas voting for him every time.

When he runs for the presidency again, not of that will protect him in next presidential primary season. His candidacy will destruct early, like it did last time.

Rand Paul has a warped philosophy, created by an atheist female that advocated promiscuity, abortion, selfishness, and greed. Plus, Paul does not have his father's brain. Ron Paul is by far the better man.

lol... You come off as a nutty CTer.
 
Perry has three things going for him.

(1) He has created the best one-party system in a state since Huey Long in LA.

(2) He has the petroleum industry in his pocket.

(3) He has the 35% social conservative in Texas voting for him every time.

When he runs for the presidency again, not of that will protect him in next presidential primary season. His candidacy will destruct early, like it did last time.

Rand Paul has a warped philosophy, created by an atheist female that advocated promiscuity, abortion, selfishness, and greed. Plus, Paul does not have his father's brain. Ron Paul is by far the better man.

lol... You come off as a nutty CTer.

CTer? I looked it up, no, I reject most conspiracy theories. I do not like Ayn rand, though Rand Paul was NOT named for her, he has quoted her as a source of his political positions. I think Rand Paul is genuine in his beliefs, but disagree with them; of the two, I find Paul more likely to be sincere.
 
Last edited:
Perry has three things going for him.

(1) He has created the best one-party system in a state since Huey Long in LA.

(2) He has the petroleum industry in his pocket.

(3) He has the 35% social conservative in Texas voting for him every time.

When he runs for the presidency again, not of that will protect him in next presidential primary season. His candidacy will destruct early, like it did last time.

Rand Paul has a warped philosophy, created by an atheist female that advocated promiscuity, abortion, selfishness, and greed.

While I dislike the anti-altruist stance of Ayn Rand, I must ask what you find so morally objectionable about hyr advocacy for promiscuity and abortion, as well as what exactly you identify as being Rand Paul's "warped philosophy".
 
CNN is a bullshit commie organization.

They're trying to wage a war inside the republicrat establishment.

Notice how there's NEVER a conflict among democrooks. No "mavericks", no "moderates", no "reaching across the isle".

It's because those of us on "the right" aren't robots. We have critical thinking skills, morality and ethics. We don't follow cults of personality. We're individuals and proud of it.

Rand Paul makes good arguments for staying out of foreign conflicts. Rick Perry makes good points about American interests and military power stabilizing global conflicts so that they don't blow up into something worse.

Democrooks do what they want when they have power, regardless of the consequences which are always worse than the problem. They manipulate the story and the bed wetters go along. When shit goes wrong they blame their enemies, that is Americans.

So as far as I'm concerned I'm more interested in who wins the debate in the arena of ideas between Paul/Perry than I am the script Al-CNN is ready to regurgitate.




Bullshit, prove it.
 
Rand Paul has a warped philosophy, created by an atheist female that advocated promiscuity, abortion, selfishness, and greed. Plus, Paul does not have his father's brain. Ron Paul is by far the better man.

lol... You come off as a nutty CTer.

CTer? I looked it up, no, I reject most conspiracy theories. I do not like Ayn rand, though Rand Paul was NOT named for her, he has quoted her as a source of his political positions. I think Rand Paul is genuine in his beliefs, but disagree with them; of the two, I find Paul more likely to be sincere.

Well you don't even know what a fuckin isolationist is so why would I care who you feel is more sincere?

Let me break it down for you, like baby talk.... Isolationist would have to close off most or all trade. OPS right there you're awkwardly ignorant understanding of the word fails!

In fact, you might be a isolationist of you cause war with many countries. This cuts off contact by way of trade, communication, immigration, tourism and so on.

Or wait, do you disagree still???

Isolationism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
CNN is a bullshit commie organization.

They're trying to wage a war inside the republicrat establishment.

Notice how there's NEVER a conflict among democrooks. No "mavericks", no "moderates", no "reaching across the isle".

It's because those of us on "the right" aren't robots. We have critical thinking skills, morality and ethics. We don't follow cults of personality. We're individuals and proud of it.

Rand Paul makes good arguments for staying out of foreign conflicts. Rick Perry makes good points about American interests and military power stabilizing global conflicts so that they don't blow up into something worse.

Democrooks do what they want when they have power, regardless of the consequences which are always worse than the problem. They manipulate the story and the bed wetters go along. When shit goes wrong they blame their enemies, that is Americans.

So as far as I'm concerned I'm more interested in who wins the debate in the arena of ideas between Paul/Perry than I am the script Al-CNN is ready to regurgitate.




Bullshit, prove it.

BTW you have a talking head who's goal is to be on par with Bill or Beck as your avatar. She is not a journalist, she is not honest, she is "opinionated news." Basically she tries top tell you what to think and how to feel about a story she wants to talk about. You can't call her on her bullshit because it's not news, it's not fact.... it's opinion.
 
CNN is a bullshit commie organization.

They're trying to wage a war inside the republicrat establishment.

Notice how there's NEVER a conflict among democrooks. No "mavericks", no "moderates", no "reaching across the isle".

It's because those of us on "the right" aren't robots. We have critical thinking skills, morality and ethics. We don't follow cults of personality. We're individuals and proud of it.

Rand Paul makes good arguments for staying out of foreign conflicts. Rick Perry makes good points about American interests and military power stabilizing global conflicts so that they don't blow up into something worse.

Democrooks do what they want when they have power, regardless of the consequences which are always worse than the problem. They manipulate the story and the bed wetters go along. When shit goes wrong they blame their enemies, that is Americans.

So as far as I'm concerned I'm more interested in who wins the debate in the arena of ideas between Paul/Perry than I am the script Al-CNN is ready to regurgitate.




Bullshit, prove it.

LOL...

Even bed wetters don't need reality proved to them. They just say BOOOSSHHH or RACISM!!



 
CNN is a bullshit commie organization.

They're trying to wage a war inside the republicrat establishment.

Notice how there's NEVER a conflict among democrooks. No "mavericks", no "moderates", no "reaching across the isle".

It's because those of us on "the right" aren't robots. We have critical thinking skills, morality and ethics. We don't follow cults of personality. We're individuals and proud of it.

Rand Paul makes good arguments for staying out of foreign conflicts. Rick Perry makes good points about American interests and military power stabilizing global conflicts so that they don't blow up into something worse.

Democrooks do what they want when they have power, regardless of the consequences which are always worse than the problem. They manipulate the story and the bed wetters go along. When shit goes wrong they blame their enemies, that is Americans.

So as far as I'm concerned I'm more interested in who wins the debate in the arena of ideas between Paul/Perry than I am the script Al-CNN is ready to regurgitate.




Bullshit, prove it.

If you don;t know by now that there is a liberal bias in our media you in fact might be an isolationist.
 
Rick Perry doesn't impress me at all. He is an open borders guy as proven by his last fiasco, ie running for the Presidency. Anyone who parrots George W Bush shouldn't be trusted by any Conservative.
 
My pick, at this point, would be Rand Paul but since the electoral process has been compromised it probably won't matter WHO gets the nomination.
 

Forum List

Back
Top