PDA

View Full Version : Rand Paul 2012 ?



Franco
05-20-2010, 02:57 PM
Yes, I know he's a Republican. But, as an Independent voter Dr. Paul looks to be the most independent.
http://www.randpaul2010.com/

A strict Constitutionalist is what we need right now.

When I look at where he stands on the issues, I agree with him on all but one issue. Not too bad as I doubt I would find a candidate that I would agree with on all issues.

So, what's the skinny on Dr. Paul?

road kill
05-20-2010, 03:12 PM
Yes, I know he's a Republican. But, as an Independent voter Dr. Paul looks to be the most independent.
http://www.randpaul2010.com/

A strict Constitutionalist is what we need right now.

When I look at where he stands on the issues, I agree with him on all but one issue. Not too bad as I doubt I would find a candidate that I would agree with on all issues.

So, what's the skinny on Dr. Paul?
He will be attacked visciously by the status quo.
He is not from Harvard, the center for the secular progressive movement in the USA!!
They "establishment" will NOT have it!!



rk

gman0046
05-20-2010, 04:10 PM
At least Paul is an American and not a Kenyan Muslim.

dnf777
05-20-2010, 04:20 PM
He will be attacked visciously by the status quo.
He is not from Harvard, the center for the secular progressive movement in the USA!!
They "establishment" will NOT have it!!



rk

I agree. I would add that he is not at the center of the far right either.

He didn't help himself on the Rachael Maddow show either. Although he made a good point, he was outspoken by a smooth-talker, and appeared befuddled at times. Not fairly, I would say. He was really backed into a corner, from which there was no smooth exit. I doubt you'll see anyone but progressive candidates on her show from now on.

Franco
05-20-2010, 04:47 PM
I agree. I would add that he is not at the center of the far right either.

He didn't help himself on the Rachael Maddow show either. Although he made a good point, he was outspoken by a smooth-talker, and appeared befuddled at times. Not fairly, I would say. He was really backed into a corner, from which there was no smooth exit. I doubt you'll see anyone but progressive candidates on her show from now on.

I saw the RM interview on video today. She is one dumb broad!

Dr Paul is a strict constitutionalist and they left can't handle not being able to tell people how they need to live.

dnf777
05-20-2010, 04:57 PM
I saw the RM interview on video today. She is one dumb broad!

Dr Paul is a strict constitutionalist and they left can't handle not being able to tell people how they need to live.

They were both attacking the issue from different standpoints, and both made sense to a degree, however she appeared more polished, and he allowed himself to get corralled into a difficult position to defend. He basically got himself (with her help) into a position of either having to contradict himself, or admit he would repeal or not support the Civil Rights Act. It was a check-mate position he NEVER should have gotten himself into.

While I certainly disagree with RM on many issues, I would NOT consider her a dumb broad by any stretch, any more than I would consider Glen Beck dumb. Evil, self-serving, diabolical...yes. Dumb...no.

aandw
05-20-2010, 05:05 PM
i saw part of the interview too. i was disappointed that he didn't answer the question. sounded like a typical politician dancing around an issue. i agreed with his comments about private bussineeses having the right to sell or serve who they want to.
before ya'll start throwing darts at me, i would not do business or want to be served by anyone who discriminated against customers. i think it would be extremely bad/stupid business on top of being immoral.

Sabireley
05-20-2010, 06:50 PM
Rand?
Hmm...wonder where if there is any significance to that name.

Franco
05-20-2010, 07:44 PM
i saw part of the interview too. i was disappointed that he didn't answer the question. sounded like a typical politician dancing around an issue. i agreed with his comments about private bussineeses having the right to sell or serve who they want to.
before ya'll start throwing darts at me, i would not do business or want to be served by anyone who discriminated against customers. i think it would be extremely bad/stupid business on top of being immoral.

That's fine but, the Feds have no business telling a private company who they can do business with. Public companies, yes. Private companies, no!

zeus3925
05-20-2010, 07:56 PM
RM got Paul to stick his foot in his mouth but he put ketchup, mustard and relish on it and swallowed deeper. He shucked and jived and obfuscated. No great change there from the incumbents that do the same thing.

aandw
05-21-2010, 08:22 AM
That's fine but, the Feds have no business telling a private company who they can do business with. Public companies, yes. Private companies, no!

i agree. i didn't see the whole interview with maddow but the part i saw he looked like he was dodging the question. i liked what he said on the radio, just wished he would have owned up to it. even if i don't agreee with a politician i wish they would just answer questions. i can respect someone who stands for what he thinks is right.
i am pulling for him, conservatives need somebody.

dnf777
05-21-2010, 09:26 AM
RM got Paul to stick his foot in his mouth but he put ketchup, mustard and relish on it and swallowed deeper. He shucked and jived and obfuscated. No great change there from the incumbents that do the same thing.

What he did would make Linda Lovelace blush! :shock:

Franco
05-21-2010, 09:45 AM
First of all, what does Rachael Maddow know about The Constituition?

Dr Paul was correct and I only fault him for not standing his ground firmly.

The Feds can NOT tell a private business who they have to do business with! Excluding a certain race may be bad business but, the rights to so should be protected.

I don't think anyone on the forum would qualify for a scholarship from the United Negro College fund, be invited to join the National Black Caucus or selected to be the King of Zulu at Mardi Gras time!

dnf777
05-21-2010, 05:38 PM
Dr. Paul was correct in saying that this needs to be discussed in the larger, philosophical sense of private ownership versus civil rights. Dr. Maddow skillfully narrowed the discussion to several specific examples such as sitting at a lunch counter or other horrible examples of segregation, and it was tough for him to stay on the bigger picture.

I thought that was unfair of her, but look at what Fox has done with the "a legal" versus "illegal" and tell me what is more conniving? After all, if you're going to jump in the water, you'd better know how to swim.

Hew
05-21-2010, 06:48 PM
The Feds can NOT tell a private business who they have to do business with! Excluding a certain race may be bad business but, the rights to so should be protected.
I'm inclined to that train of thought, too, but here's a very compelling argument against it from Conservative George Will:



(George) Will, in his 1983 book "Statecraft as Soulcraft: What Government Does," points out that segregationists like Lester Maddox, a proprietor of the Pickrick Restaurant in Atlanta before he was governor of Georgia, was exercising a real right when he denied service to black patrons. But that right had to be weighed against other, competing rights. So in 1964 Congress, in Will's words, "undertook a small but significant rearrangement of American rights. It diminished the rights of proprietors of public accommodations, and expanded those of potential users of those accommodations."

Will goes on to write this:

The simple truth is that in 1964, because of brave and skillful symbolic actions by civil rights forces shaping public opinion, an American majority was unusually aroused and conscious of what Congress was doing. Congress was coming to the conclusion that a right exercised meanly, with ugly consequences, should yield to another, better right. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/05/20/rand-pauls-civil-rights-stand-out-of-sync-with-republicans/



From the same article, here's what one of the few people you think are "true" Conservatives had to say:


William F. Buckley Jr., in an essay written in the 1960s, directly confronted the libertarian/Objectivist philosophy of Ayn Rand. "The conservative's distrust of the state, so richly earned by it,"Buckley wrote, "raises inevitably the question, how far can one go?" He went on to warn against those "whose passionate distrust for the state has developed into a theology of sorts, or at least into a demonology; to which they adhere as devotedly as any religious fanatic ever attempted to adhere to the will of the Lord."

K G
05-21-2010, 08:08 PM
Mr. Paul had best find himself a stylist and image coach if he intends to win in November. He's got the presence and personality of a postage stamp, which makes it VERY hard for him to be listened to.

If he'll keep the message and fine tune the presentation, he'll have at least an even chance. After all, experience and statesmanship is NOT what got our 44th President elected....;-)

k g

dnf777
05-21-2010, 08:16 PM
Mr. Paul had best find himself a stylist and image coach if he intends to win in November.
k g

Jim Traficant would be proud!

Franco
05-21-2010, 08:33 PM
Mr. Paul had best find himself a stylist and image coach if he intends to win in November. He's got the presence and personality of a postage stamp, which makes it VERY hard for him to be listened to.

If he'll keep the message and fine tune the presentation, he'll have at least an even chance. After all, experience and statesmanship is NOT what got our 44th President elected....;-)

k g

I appriciate the rough edges, demonstrates that he is NOt packaged.

zeus3925
05-21-2010, 11:58 PM
First of all, what does Rachael Maddow know about The Constituition?



Here you go Franco-

A graduate of Castro Valley High School in Castro Valley, Maddow earned a degree in public policy from Stanford University in 1994.[14] At graduation she was awarded the John Gardner Fellowship. She was also the recipient of a Rhodes Scholarship and began her postgraduate study in 1995 at Lincoln College, Oxford. In 2001 she earned a doctorate in philosophy (DPhil) in politics from Oxford University.[--Wikipedia