Rand Paul: Jail those Who Attend 'Radical Political Speeches from Religious Leaders'

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Click on the link in the OP and listen closely to what Paul said in context. It's not as bad as it's being made out to be.

How ‘bad’ does it have to be?

SO it's out, the OP is a fucking worthless low-life scum bag. Yes Rand was talking about fucking TERRORIST YOU FUCK WASTE OF LIFE. Rand was not implying that the Government DEPORT or IMPRISION a citizen of the USA because they go to a hate rally.

Fucking shit people, then look at the mindless fools saying "yay we have BS lie that we can pretend means something and attack a Republican over yay" in this very thread.

Holy shit people, get some BASIC ass context when you see shit like this. I listened to the pathetically edited audio and the FIRST question that entered my mind was “WHAT WAS HE REPLYING TO?” So now a POS looser goes out and starts a thread where we are left to assume Rand Paul means your normal average everyday citizen should be watched and *DEPORTED* or imprisoned for no fucking reason.

Um, no - non-citizens are also entitled to due process rights.

 

[jillian]

rand paul is a typical rightwingnut hypocrite... small government... except for when it's not so small... which is when *they* want controls.

 

[Polk]

http://thinkprogress.org/author/alex-seitz-wald/ Paul’s suggestion that people be imprisoned or deported for merely attending a political speech would be a fairly egregious violation on the First Amendment, not to mention due process. What if someone attended a radical speech as a curious bystander? Should they too be thrown in prison? And who defines what is considered so “radical” that it is worth imprisonment?

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/05/31/232182/rand-paul-criminalize-speech/

Seems a tad odd for a libertarian, especially one who says he supports allowing white restaurant owners to bar blacks from being served.

He's boldly staring down the wave of anti-white racism.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The right does have a serious issue with the disconnect between their dogma of ‘small government’ and their advocacy of intrusive government policies and the curtailing of due process rights.

 

[Avorysuds]

Click on the link in the OP and listen closely to what Paul said in context. It's not as bad as it's being made out to be.

How ‘bad’ does it have to be?

SO it's out, the OP is a fucking worthless low-life scum bag. Yes Rand was talking about fucking TERRORIST YOU FUCK WASTE OF LIFE. Rand was not implying that the Government DEPORT or IMPRISION a citizen of the USA because they go to a hate rally.

Fucking shit people, then look at the mindless fools saying "yay we have BS lie that we can pretend means something and attack a Republican over yay" in this very thread.

Holy shit people, get some BASIC ass context when you see shit like this. I listened to the pathetically edited audio and the FIRST question that entered my mind was “WHAT WAS HE REPLYING TO?” So now a POS looser goes out and starts a thread where we are left to assume Rand Paul means your normal average everyday citizen should be watched and *DEPORTED* or imprisoned for no fucking reason.

Um, no - non-citizens are also entitled to due process rights.

LOL, again, get some fucking context. Yes, if you look at what the OP posted it means a WHOLE other thing than if you get the rest.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

http://thinkprogress.org/author/alex-seitz-wald/ Paul’s suggestion that people be imprisoned or deported for merely attending a political speech would be a fairly egregious violation on the First Amendment, not to mention due process. What if someone attended a radical speech as a curious bystander? Should they too be thrown in prison? And who defines what is considered so “radical” that it is worth imprisonment?

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/05/31/232182/rand-paul-criminalize-speech/

When so-called citizens provide the Government with the power to label any of it's citizens as "terrorists", the definition of exactly what a "terrorist" is, Is without a doubt in the hands of lunatics and political hacks that will make those decisions while politically motivated. Anyone who believes anything different is an easily brainwashed, sheoplized fool. ~BH

 

[Big Hoss]

This crap coming from a left wing website.

 

[Polk]

This crap coming from a left wing website.

I guess the audio is a fabrication...

 

[Big Hoss]

Wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Polk]

Wouldn't surprise me.

I know. They held a gun to his head. Just like when he said he'd repeal the Civil Rights Act if he got the chance. Then again, that's a plus in your book.

 

[8537]

Wouldn't surprise me.

I know. They held a gun to his head. Just like when he said he'd repeal the Civil Rights Act if he got the chance. Then again, that's a plus in your book.

You're debating a proud white supremacist and Hitler supporter. Keep that in mind as you try to apply "logic" here, amigo.

 

[freedombecki]

Click on the link in the OP and listen closely to what Paul said in context. It's not as bad as it's being made out to be.

From the link: "But if someone is attending speeches from someone who is promoting the violent overthrow of our government, that’s really an offense that we should be going after — they should be deported or put in prison."

"Someone who is promoting the violent overthrow of our government...should be deported or put in prison."

That's what Osama bin Laden did--in another part of the world, but he was so effective almost three thousand Americans died and major damage was done to a large population center, the Pentagon, and airports worldwide who now have to charge crippling fees to people for their own security.

You're right, Metzor. Rand Paul's words have been shamefully distorted possibly by those more interested in Al Qaeda's success than America's.

 

[Samson]

http://thinkprogress.org/author/alex-seitz-wald/ Paul’s suggestion that people be imprisoned or deported for merely attending a political speech would be a fairly egregious violation on the First Amendment, not to mention due process. What if someone attended a radical speech as a curious bystander? Should they too be thrown in prison? And who defines what is considered so “radical” that it is worth imprisonment?

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/05/31/232182/rand-paul-criminalize-speech/

You are consistant, if not intellectually honest.

the context of the quote:

PAUL: I’m not for profiling people on the color of their skin, or on their religion, but I would take into account where they’ve been traveling and perhaps, you might have to indirectly take into account whether or not they’ve been going to radical political speeches by religious leaders. It wouldn’t be that they are Islamic. But if someone is attending speeches from someone who is promoting the violent overthrow of our government, that’s really an offense that we should be going after — they should be deported or put in prison.

He is discussing AIRPORT SECURITY and who may be entering the country.

He is simply stating that if some camal jocky has been in Saudi listening to a raving lunatic "WHO IS PROMOTING THE VIOLENT OVERTHROW OF OUR GOVERNMENT," then it might be wise to deport them.

How the fuck can you or thinkprogress.org be so dense as to misinterpret this?

Because you have a political ax to grind: Too bad its so transparent a ploy.

 

[freedombecki]

http://thinkprogress.org/author/alex-seitz-wald/ Paul’s suggestion that people be imprisoned or deported for merely attending a political speech would be a fairly egregious violation on the First Amendment, not to mention due process. What if someone attended a radical speech as a curious bystander? Should they too be thrown in prison? And who defines what is considered so “radical” that it is worth imprisonment?

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/05/31/232182/rand-paul-criminalize-speech/

Seems a tad odd for a libertarian, especially one who says he supports allowing white restaurant owners to bar blacks from being served.

Link, please.

 

[Samson]

Rand Paul, Supposed Defender Of Civil Liberties, Calls For Jailing People Who Attend ‘Radical Political Speeches’ | ThinkProgress

Seems a tad odd for a libertarian, especially one who says he supports allowing white restaurant owners to bar blacks from being served.

Link, please.

Why linkage?

It seems not odd, but quite natural for a libertarian to believe restaurant owners have the right to serve anyone they goddamn want to serve, without being directed by the nanny state to "play nice."

 

[freedombecki]

Wouldn't surprise me.

I know. They held a gun to his head. Just like when he said he'd repeal the Civil Rights Act if he got the chance. Then again, that's a plus in your book.

Link, please.

 

[Avorysuds]

This crap coming from a left wing website.

I guess the audio is a fabrication...

It's edited you R-tard.

 

[freedombecki]

Seems a tad odd for a libertarian, especially one who says he supports allowing white restaurant owners to bar blacks from being served.

Link, please.

Why linkage?

It seems not odd, but quite natural for a libertarian to believe restaurant owners have the right to serve anyone they goddamn want to serve, without being directed by the nanny state to "play nice."

I want to see the link in which Mr. Paul says such a thing. The distortion of this topic title that doesn't fit the context of Mr. Paul's meanings or his sentence for that matter has already gotten my attention. I want to know if this sort of parsing is consistently done in order to besmirch someone in the public arena who is an elected congresscritter who makes decisions with his votes over my life.

I am fully within my rights to ask for proof.

 

[Samson]

Link, please.

Why linkage?

It seems not odd, but quite natural for a libertarian to believe restaurant owners have the right to serve anyone they goddamn want to serve, without being directed by the nanny state to "play nice."

I want to see the link in which Mr. Paul says such a thing. The distortion of this topic title that doesn't fit the context of Mr. Paul's meanings or his sentence for that matter has already gotten my attention. I want to know if this sort of parsing is consistently done in order to besmirch someone in the public arena who is an elected congresscritter who makes decisions with his votes over my life.

I am fully within my rights to ask for proof.

Toro's not quoting verbatum: Therefore a link isn't required. He is characterizing Rand Paul as a Libertarian. Why? Who the fuck knows: Paul is a REPUBLICAN. They are NOT Libertarian, hence the different parties. If you need to play "gotchya" then you should challenge the obvious distortion first.

 

[Toro]

Rand Paul, Supposed Defender Of Civil Liberties, Calls For Jailing People Who Attend ‘Radical Political Speeches’ | ThinkProgress

Seems a tad odd for a libertarian, especially one who says he supports allowing white restaurant owners to bar blacks from being served.

Link, please.

Rand Paul causes stir with civil rights comment | Reuters