Who else is excited for Rand Paul's presidency?

You are not the authority on words, LL. When a legislature empowered by We the Peoplen enact taxation, it is not theft except in your mind.

You are entitled to your opinion, but maybe that three other people hold that opinion with you tells you just how wack it is.

Tell me how taking money from me against my will is not theft and I'll vote for Obama and donate extra to your unemployment this year.

It's not theft unless you can prove that it is not legitimate for people to come together and form a government,

that then becomes the legitimate authority over those people.

Well I could certainly prove to the best of ones ablity when dealing with issues of the past that almost every founder and especially James Madison the primary constitution author were opposed to taxes based on labor.

Unfortunately for you, I don't need to, because you don't get to change the meaning of words. Theft is still theft regardless of how many people support it. By your logic what is occuring in Syria is OKAY because it is government sanctioned. Slavery is legit if the government sanctions it. So on and so forth.
 
Like I said, you don't care about property rights or you wouldn't support violating people's rights in that regard. Civil Rights is a great thing but it didn't need to occur at the expense of other people's liberty.
 
You are not the authority on words, LL. When a legislature empowered by We the Peoplen enact taxation, it is not theft except in your mind.

You are entitled to your opinion, but maybe that three other people hold that opinion with you tells you just how wack it is.

It's not theft unless you can prove that it is not legitimate for people to come together and form a government,

that then becomes the legitimate authority over those people.

Well I could certainly prove to the best of ones ablity when dealing with issues of the past that almost every founder and especially James Madison the primary constitution author were opposed to taxes based on labor.

Unfortunately for you, I don't need to, because you don't get to change the meaning of words. Theft is still theft regardless of how many people support it. By your logic what is occuring in Syria is OKAY because it is government sanctioned. Slavery is legit if the government sanctions it. So on and so forth.


You are the one trying to change the definition of theft to make it different because some people advocate taxation.
 
You are not the authority on definitions, LL. "Theft" is not what taxation is by We the People.

You belong to the American Republic, and either you comply with the law or you go to jail. To jail offenders is moral, because otherwise they are parasites on the rest of the population.
 
Well, if you are okay with oppressing some people for the *possibility* of helping others I can't do anything for you

No "possibility" about it

Blacks have been helped immensely by Civil Rights legislation. If the Government stepping in and saying "You may no longer oppress blacks" is oppressing those who enforced Jim Crow for100 years....so be it

For the Pauls to believe therwise shows why they are unfit

Or that you are close minded.

Thomas Sowell is famous for having said blacks need to be "unprotected". His case was pretty compelling.

Don't piss in your pants....he didn't say repeal the 13th.
 
I am. I only hope Romney doesnt fuck things up so bad that the country elects another Democrat. Really an Obama reelection might be in the best long term interest of the nation.

Real Paulites know that if Obama secures this term you can throw out any hope for freedom for the future.

He gets his heels into another four, everybody is dead in the water. He gets one more Justice on the Supreme court kiss your rights goodbye.

images

Real Paulites know that it makes little difference which guy gets in.

I mean, real, real paulites.
 
Thomas is anything but convincing.

Well, if you are okay with oppressing some people for the *possibility* of helping others I can't do anything for you

No "possibility" about it

Blacks have been helped immensely by Civil Rights legislation. If the Government stepping in and saying "You may no longer oppress blacks" is oppressing those who enforced Jim Crow for100 years....so be it

For the Pauls to believe therwise shows why they are unfit

Or that you are close minded.

Thomas Sowell is famous for having said blacks need to be "unprotected". His case was pretty compelling.

Don't piss in your pants....he didn't say repeal the 13th.
 
You belong to the American Republic, and either you comply with the law or you go to jail. To jail offenders is moral, because otherwise they are parasites on the rest of the population.

This epitomizes the perspective of the statist.

You have it backwards. The state doesn't own us. We own the state.
 
Last edited:
How can you be excited for a Rand presidency when he has as much experience as Obama had when he was elected? Simply because of his last name?
 
How can you be excited for a Rand presidency when he has as much experience as Obama had when he was elected? Simply because of his last name?

The kind of experience most politicians have is not the kind of experience I want. I'm excited because he will push us closer to a more minimal state and will strive to end the theft of property from citizens via government force.
 
How can you be excited for a Rand presidency when he has as much experience as Obama had when he was elected? Simply because of his last name?

The kind of experience most politicians have is not the kind of experience I want. I'm excited because he will push us closer to a more minimal state and will strive to end the theft of property from citizens via government force.

And how will he force congress to do that?
 
You belong to the American Republic, and either you comply with the law or you go to jail. To jail offenders is moral, because otherwise they are parasites on the rest of the population.

This epitomizes the perspective of the statist.

You have in backwards. The state doesn't own us. We own the state.

This is how it's supposed to be. Unfortunately, I don't think we can realistically say we own the state.
 
How can you be excited for a Rand presidency when he has as much experience as Obama had when he was elected? Simply because of his last name?

The earliest Rand could run is in 2016, when he would have more experience. Regardless, if experience is what you're going for, Obama has more experience as President than Romney does.
 
How can you be excited for a Rand presidency when he has as much experience as Obama had when he was elected? Simply because of his last name?

The earliest Rand could run is in 2016, when he would have more experience. Regardless, if experience is what you're going for, Obama has more experience as President than Romney does.

I disagree. Romney has economic experience that actually produces results.
 
I don't really care for Rand.

He gives me the impression that he wants the personal notoriety, the fame that comes with being a career politician.

Anyone else get that vibe from him?
 
How can you be excited for a Rand presidency when he has as much experience as Obama had when he was elected? Simply because of his last name?

Precisely! He needs much more experience in government. His views differ somewhat from his dad's though, but I have high hopes for him in his current capacity.
 
I don't really care for Rand.

He gives me the impression that he wants the personal notoriety, the fame that comes with being a career politician.

Anyone else get that vibe from him?

I haven't seen that. I believe he cares and could have a bright future in politics.
Obama and Romney seem far more obsessed with the lime light if you ask me.
 

Forum List

Back
Top