Who else is excited for Rand Paul's presidency?

[LibertyLemming]

Rand isn't perfect but what a step forward it would be

 

[bobcollum]

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.

Perhaps he has less than those two, I was thinking more about in comparison to his dad.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

The President does more than just deal with economic affairs, however, and so we can only conclude that after four years as President Obama is the more experienced of the two.

 

[rightwinger]

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.

The 13th amendment was in place for close to 100 years. Those who desired to oppress blacks found easy ways to circumvent it. Left to its own, the "free market" society found ways to relegate blacks to second class status both through official and "gentlemans agreement" means

The Pauls are perfectly fine with it

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

The 13th amendment was in place for close to 100 years. Those who desired to oppress blacks found easy ways to circumvent it. Left to its own, the "free market" society found ways to relegate blacks to second class status both through official and "gentlemans agreement" means

The Pauls are perfectly fine with it

Yeah, the "free market" oppressed blacks.

Government Jim Crow laws had nothing to do with it.

 

[rightwinger]

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.

The 13th amendment was in place for close to 100 years. Those who desired to oppress blacks found easy ways to circumvent it. Left to its own, the "free market" society found ways to relegate blacks to second class status both through official and "gentlemans agreement" means

The Pauls are perfectly fine with it

Yeah, the "free market" oppressed blacks.

Government Jim Crow laws had nothing to do with it.

The free market of society enacted and enforced Jim Crow. Jim Crow went beyond actual laws to the social interactions of the south. There were no laws that said a black man cannot act superior to a white man or stare at a white woman. But those who did took their lives in their hands

The Libertarian extremist Pauls were perfectly willing to let this society work out its own problems

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

Describe to me a functioning government, on the scale of the United States, or even the individual states for that matter,

that would not collect any taxes whatsoever from anyone who did not wish to pay them voluntarily.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Markets don't inact laws lol governments do

 

[NYcarbineer]

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

To deprive you of your ability to deprive someone else of their civil rights is not oppression.

If anything, it is an exercise of the core principles of upon which the Constitution exists to do the above.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Deciding who can and can't use my private property is my decision and should remain so

 

[dblack]

Describe to me a functioning government, on the scale of the United States, or even the individual states for that matter,

that would not collect any taxes whatsoever from anyone who did not wish to pay them voluntarily.

Just

 

[Ernie S.]

Yeah, 3 more Obama-appointed Supreme Court justices ... that would do wonders for the nation .....

that ain't no shit. sometimes I wonder about people like the OP who think it's gonna be better for all of us to swirl down the drain....

While I'm terrified at what would likely be the result of 4 more years of obama in the oval office, it would likely ensure that my lifetime will never see another Progressive President.

 

[Avatar4321]

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.

Why on earth would any of us be excited about something that, as of yet, there is no reason to believe will ever happen?

I like Rand and all. But the man isnt running for President. He has never announced any intention to. He may. And who knows who he will be or what our nation will be like by then.

How about we do what we can to make this nation freer now instead of worrying about who will be President 4 8 or even 12 years from now?

 

[dblack]

The free market of society enacted and enforced Jim Crow.

Nonsense. How does a free market impose Jim Crow laws on people? Pretty sure you need a government for that.

 

[midcan5]

The intellectual qualification for a Rand Paul supporter is you say 'freedom' no matter what the event or issue. It has to be one of the dumbest ideological frames in all of history. Think about any thing at all, and then say 'freedom' and you pretty much have the ideology's primary and secondary ideas summed up.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/189696-libertarian-flame.html

More below for the person whose depth and breath of knowledge extends beyond a single word.

"Libertarians - anarchists who want the police to protect them from their slaves." Kim Stanley Robinson

ck “Libertarianism and the workplace”?
http://crookedtimber.org/2012/07/01/let-it-bleed-libertarianism-and-the-workplace/

http://robertlindsay.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/types_of_libertarian1.jpg

Why I Am Not a Libertarian
Why is libertarianism wrong?
Critiques Of Libertarianism: So You Want To Discuss Libertarianism....
Marxism of the Right | The American Conservative
http://robertlindsay.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/types_of_libertarian1.jpg

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhZbX05YFGw]Why Libertarianism Is Wrong - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JakeStarkey]

The lack of ability to think her by the libertarian crowd by government, markets, and cultural oppression amazes me. Many must be undereducated or did not listen or do not care.

 

[jillian]

The intellectual qualification for a Rand Paul supporter is you say 'freedom' no matter what the event or issue. It has to be one of the dumbest ideological frames in all of history. Think about any thing at all, and then say 'freedom' and you pretty much have the ideology's primary and secondary ideas summed up.

well, that's what they say, anyway. you can't be a libertarian and be anti-choice.

they're just dumb.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The lack of ability to think her by the libertarian crowd by government, markets, and cultural oppression amazes me. Many must be undereducated or did not listen or do not care.

You can discuss without resorting to this nonsense, Jake.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The intellectual qualification for a Rand Paul supporter is you say 'freedom' no matter what the event or issue. It has to be one of the dumbest ideological frames in all of history. Think about any thing at all, and then say 'freedom' and you pretty much have the ideology's primary and secondary ideas summed up.

well, that's what they say, anyway. you can't be a libertarian and be anti-choice.

they're just dumb.

And you still don't get to define what a libertarian is, ignorant as you are on the subject.

 

[Ernie S.]

The lack of ability to think her by the libertarian crowd by government, markets, and cultural oppression amazes me. Many must be undereducated or did not listen or do not care.

You can discuss without resorting to this nonsense, Jake.

No. He can't.

I generally like Jake, but he is so impressed with his wishy-washy positions, he thinks anyone who isn't a milquetoast is intellectually inferior to him.