Majority of Americans want Ed Snowden charged

[Warlord]

Boobus wants him hung.

-


Sixty percent said they believe his disclosures harmed U.S. security, according to a November
Washington Post-ABC News poll (http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2013/11/21/National-Politics/Polling/question_12503.xml?uuid=CPizkFJqEeOe5iWACG2CVA).


And 55 percent said they think he did the "wrong thing" in leaking information to the media about the government's sweeping surveillance efforts.

More than half of Americans (52 percent) said that Snowden should be charged with a crime for disclosing the NSA's sweeping intelligence-gathering efforts. Just 38 percent said he should not be charged.




More:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/01/02/clemency-for-edward-snowden-the-public-is-skeptical/?tid=up_next

[Feeding the Abscess]

Not surprising, when even Rand Paul and the like are saying he broke laws and whatnot.

[A Son of Liberty]

I'm supposed to believe that an election is going to "save" this country, huh?

[thoughtomator]

I think Snowden should be charged - first, it puts the USG position legally on the record, which may be significant in the future treason prosecutions of various leaders of the national security state; and second, it provides the opportunity for a jury of his peers to acquit him.

[tod evans]

In my little sphere of people nobody wants him charged with anything..

[jtstellar]

i guess this is all somehow's rand's fault one way or another

[Anti-Neocon]

I think Snowden messed with Secret Service and FBI also. Snowden must be charged.
I think you're a loser troll who has nothing better to do than troll these forums with lame unfunny remarks.

At least that uber-Zionist guy from a few months ago was funny!

[DamianTV]

I'd charge him. With congratulations, and many many thanks.

[Origanalist]

I want to read it and see the demographics.


In this poll:
Click "detailed view" to see interactive results by political and demographic groups (i.e. Democrats, ages 18-39).

[mrsat_98]

Boobus wants him hung.
More:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/01/02/clemency-for-edward-snowden-the-public-is-skeptical/?tid=up_next

Buck Foobus


Not surprising, when even Rand Paul and the like are saying he broke laws and whatnot.

He certainly violated 18 USC 4 for not ratting the birdy dastards out earlier.

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both

[Feeding the Abscess]

Buck Foobus



He certainly violated 18 USC 4 for not ratting the birdy dastards out earlier.

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both

And if they come forward with those abuses, they get disappeared, face treason charges, or otherwise get thrown in a cage for a long, long time.

[qh4dotcom]

Edward Snowden is a great American Hero (my car)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJYi9rmPFPs

[Czolgosz]

Really, screw most Humans. Free yourself and help others who want actual freedom.

We need to stick together and defend each other from the other chimp factions. Welcome to the land of misfit toys.

[Warlord]

Edward Snowden is a great American Hero (my car)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJYi9rmPFPs

that's amazing! :)

[Origanalist]

Edward Snowden is a great American Hero (my car)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJYi9rmPFPs

Definitely worth a rep. :)

[Warlord]

Snowden is going to have to become a Russian citizen

[Origanalist]

Snowden is going to have to become a Russian citizen

Maybe.

Russia, the new preferred place for asylum.

[tod evans]

Snowden is going to have to become a Russian citizen

Seeking freedom and liberty?

Visit Russia..:o

[enhanced_deficit]

Our public is very bright and informed when it comes to important freedom issues.

Seventy-Two Percent of Americans Support War Against Iraq - Gallup (http://www.gallup.com/poll/8038/seventytwo-percent-americans-support-war-against-iraq.aspx)
www.gallup.com/poll/.../seventytwo-percent-americans-support-war-agai...‎
Mar 24, 2003 - Seventy-two percent of Americans interviewed in a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll conducted Saturday and Sunday favor the war against Iraq, while 25% are opposed. Roughly the same number approve of the job President George W. Bush is doing....34% thought it would be over in less than a month.


Iraq War Poll: 10 Years Later, Majority View Invasion As Mistake (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/18/iraq-war-poll_n_2899987.html)
Mar 18, 2013

[HOLLYWOOD]

The Onion Corporate Media again...

We have witnessed first hand the daily bombbardment of PROPAGANDA by Fascist Media and the Stasi-Nazis in government.

Last night reading the Top Secret NSA budget slides, $100s of millions for their "Corporate partnerships" each year... not only high tech but no doubt media.

[JK/SEA]

When the day comes, and it will, i would nominate Snowden to lead the Tribunal of three to judge all those who violated their oaths to the Constitution, and charge them with treason. Presiding over their trials and listen to prosecutors and defense lawyers before sentencing.

[chudrockz]

Most Americans have no problem being literally stripped and ass raped by jackboots in airports, "for their own safety."

Most Americans are fucking mentally handicapped sheep.

[matt0611]

Most Americans have no problem being literally stripped and ass raped by jackboots in airports, "for their own safety."

Most Americans are fucking mentally handicapped sheep.

Hahah, this ^^^.

[otherone]

Boobus wants him hung.

Media spin.
In other news:

Sixty percent Forty percent said they believe his disclosures in no way harmed U.S. security, according to a November
Washington Post-ABC News poll.

And 55 percent 45 percent said they think he did the "wrong right thing" in leaking information to the media about the government's sweeping surveillance efforts.

More than Only about half of Americans (52 percent) said that Snowden should be charged with a crime for disclosing the NSA's sweeping intelligence-gathering efforts. In fact Just 38 percent said he should not be charged at all.

[Danke]

Poll: 73 Percent Of Americans Unable To Believe This Shit


PRINCETON, NJ–According to the latest Gallup Poll, conducted Monday and Tuesday of this week, nearly three out of four Americans can no longer believe this shit.

In addition to the 73 percent of poll respondents who described this shit as "beyond belief," 9 percent said they could "hardly" believe this shit, with another 5 percent "just barely" believing it. An additional 13 percent said they "couldn't give a flying fuck about the whole goddamn thing."

The poll also found that the National Shit-Credulity Index (NSCI) has hit an all-time low, with only 2 percent of Americans describing themselves as "fully confident of [their] capacity to believe this shit."

"The American people have had to deal with this kind of shit for years," Gallup Organization president Lee Sanderson said, "but now, for the first time, it appears that the vast majority of them just can't fucking believe it anymore."

"In all honesty, who can blame them?" Sanderson added. "Regardless of one's political affiliation, socioeconomic status, religion or just about any other viewpoint, you've got to admit, the shit that's been going on lately is way out of hand."

In the wake of the poll, many activists are calling upon America's leaders to get their shit in gear.

"The American people have had it up to here with this shitheap," said James Schuerholz, president of the D.C.-based Heritage Foundation. "There is a public mandate for our leaders to cut this shit out, and it's high time they finally did."

Despite Americans' incredulity over this shit, historians note that this sort of shit has been going on for years and is unlikely to end anytime soon.

"Contrary to popular belief, this type of shit is hardly anything new," Harvard University American history professor Lawrence Coombs said. "The same shit was going down 50, 100 and 150 years ago. The only difference was, back then, you never read about that shit in the newspapers."

Calling the American people's enormous shit-belief capacity "one of the cornerstones of our democracy," U.S. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) stressed that it is the patriotic duty of all citizens to grant our leaders the benefit of the doubt with regard to their shit.

"If the American people are no longer willing to believe this shit, who will?" Kerry said. "Somebody's got to take this shit at face value. Otherwise, why are we even doing all this shit in the first place? I am truly saddened by the lack of faith that the citizens of this country are willing to put in my shit, as well as that of my esteemed colleagues. We must repair our society's fraying trust in the shit of our elected officials, or you would not believe the kind of hardcore, heavy-duty shit that will come down."

"America," conservative author and social critic Patricia Stouffer said, "is seriously losing its shit. But we've got to somehow hold our shit in place until all this passes. We've got to learn to believe in shit again. After this latest shitstorm, it may take years to accomplish, but we must somehow find the strength to put our trust back into the nation's shit."

Despite such impassioned calls for faith in the U.S. political system and all the shit that comes with it, if the Gallup Poll is any indication, the majority of Americans are no longer willing to put up with the shit.

"Fuck that shit," said Evansville, IN, day-care provider Helen Reiderer. "I'm tired of hearing about it. Do they actually expect us to still believe that load of shit?"

"If you ask me, the shit is about to hit the fan," said Reiderer's husband Frank. "As far as I'm concerned, all that shit is just too much to be believed."

Another disgruntled citizen, Wenatchee, WA, tractor salesman Tom Huard, summed up the sentiments of most Americans when, holding up the front page of the local newspaper to friend Benjamin Pritchard, he said, "Jesus, Ben, can you believe this?"

"Shit, no," Pritchard replied.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/poll-73-percent-of-americans-unable-to-believe-thi,1537/

[Suzanimal]

Edward Snowden is a great American Hero (my car)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJYi9rmPFPs

Love it! :)

[erowe1]

I think Snowden should be charged - first, it puts the USG position legally on the record, which may be significant in the future treason prosecutions of various leaders of the national security state; and second, it provides the opportunity for a jury of his peers to acquit him.

There's something to this. Having people publicly suffer from the regimes injustice while they expose that injustice to the world is the kind of thing that actually has a proven track record of making a difference, unlike politics and violence.

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[Anti Federalist]

Not surprised in the least.

Boobus will fight you as you try to free him.

We're not voting our way out of this.

[LibertyEagle]

I think Snowden messed with Secret Service and FBI also. Snowden must be charged.

Interesting. I don't see how he "messed with" either, but even if he had, tell me, is your allegiance to government employees or is it to the Constitution?

[Anti Federalist]

Interesting. I don't see how he "messed with" either, but even if he had, tell me, is your allegiance to government employees or is it to the Constitution?

I think you're responding to a re-tread troll, recently banned.

[Anti Federalist]

Interesting. I don't see how he "messed with" either, but even if he had, tell me, is your allegiance to government employees or is it to the Constitution?

I think you're responding to a re-tread troll, recently banned.

[Anti Federalist]

Interesting. I don't see how he "messed with" either, but even if he had, tell me, is your allegiance to government employees or is it to the Constitution?

I think you're responding to a re-tread troll, recently banned.

[aGameOfThrones]

I think Snowden should be charged - first, it puts the USG position legally on the record, which may be significant in the future treason prosecutions of various leaders of the national security state; and second, it provides the opportunity for a jury of his peers to acquit him.

it provides the opportunity for a jury of Their peers to convict him.

[Contumacious]

Boobus wants him hung.

-

More:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/01/02/clemency-for-edward-snowden-the-public-is-skeptical/?tid=up_next

The Majority of Americans , also vote for the welfare/warfare police state. They are narcotized.

.

[Keith and stuff]

I'm supposed to believe that an election is going to "save" this country, huh?

Certainly not a national election. Even 8 years of Rand Paul would only slightly reduce the size of the federal government. Some of those reductions might even be made up with increases in the size of state and local governments while he was still President. And then when he left, things could continue to get worse so... But, elections can sometimes help.

For example, when the GOP was given 70% of the NH legislature in 2010, many reforms such as jury nullification and a 11% actual cut in the state budget passed.
In Maine, the GOP was given a slight edge in the legislature and for the 1st time since the 1970s, fireworks were legalized.
In AR, a recent Republican majority in the legislature was able to push through gun reforms that the traditionally Democratic legislature refused to pass.

So yes, elections have consequences and sometimes, the consequences are even positive.

[jkob]

The majority of Germans supported Hitler too.

[Contumacious]

The majority of Germans supported Hitler too.

He was ELECTED to power.

[Dogsoldier]

I don't buy it. Anyone that I know who understand what he did consider him a hero. The government wants to cage him because he didn't respect their authoratah!!!

[Brian4Liberty]

Snowden should face the same level of punishment as General Alexander who lied to Congress. Apparently that would mean retiring Snowden next year with a generous retirement package.

[DamianTV]

Govt wants him caged because he was Disobedient to their Criminal Demands to commit Crimes against the People. So really, who's the bad guy? The guy that disobeyed unlawful orders? Or the guys that claim their unlawful orders are lawful because of manipulative wording?

[Christian Liberty]

Not surprising, when even Rand Paul and the like are saying he broke laws and whatnot.

Mike Lee said that he thought Snowden was a traitor but "he wasn't sure." That showed a basic ignorance of the constitution that is absolutely disgusting. Randd Paul, to his credit, took a middle of the road stance at least. That said, what he said still wasn't great. Snowden is a hero and anybody who doesn't realize that doesn't deserve to be free. This is basic stuff.

I'm supposed to believe that an election is going to "save" this country, huh?

It won't. I'm still going to gamble on Rand Paul though. hes' the one candidate that I actually believe wouldn't use the NDAA 2012 indefinite detention provision, bomb Iran, expand Federal gun control, or make the drug war even worse. Maybe I'm wrong about that.

[A Son of Liberty]

Mike Lee said that he thought Snowden was a traitor but "he wasn't sure." That showed a basic ignorance of the constitution that is absolutely disgusting. Randd Paul, to his credit, took a middle of the road stance at least. That said, what he said still wasn't great. Snowden is a hero and anybody who doesn't realize that doesn't deserve to be free. This is basic stuff.


It won't. I'm still going to gamble on Rand Paul though. hes' the one candidate that I actually believe wouldn't use the NDAA 2012 indefinite detention provision, bomb Iran, expand Federal gun control, or make the drug war even worse. Maybe I'm wrong about that.

Is that why he said he thought Snowden and James Clapper should share a prison cell?


http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/04/rand-paul-james-clapper-and-edward-snowden-should-share-a-prison-cell-video/?onswipe_redirect=no

[HOLLYWOOD]

This is America today...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0he0cqHH20&feature=share&list=PLa8S4Gilqo gQILnrvxLgZREFkebrMfJ3f

[Carson]

A misconception like this could be solved with a jury trial.

[A Son of Liberty]

Something like this could be solved with a jury trial.

According to the article, 9 people of 12 on that jury would find Ed Snowden "guilty", and he would be blindfolded, bound and shot for letting all 12 of them know that they were being spied on... thanks very much.

[DamianTV]

Grr. If you ask me, Majority of Americans were polled by Frank Lutz, a Pollster who phrases his questions to get the answers he wants. Now, which answer do you think the Dept of Truth wants people to express? A: Snowden is a Criminal, or B: Snowden is a Patriot?

[Anti Federalist]

Grr. If you ask me, Majority of Americans were polled by Frank Lutz, a Pollster who phrases his questions to get the answers he wants. Now, which answer do you think the Dept of Truth wants people to express? A: Snowden is a Criminal, or B: Snowden is a Patriot?

You're whistling past the graveyard there, brother.

There were no 'trick questions", no pollster "spin".

Your fellow AmeriCunts, by large majorities, WANT to be enslaved, abused by cops, spied on by the feds and taxed and regulated even more than they are now.

[Christian Liberty]

Is that why he said he thought Snowden and James Clapper should share a prison cell?


http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/04/rand-paul-james-clapper-and-edward-snowden-should-share-a-prison-cell-video/?onswipe_redirect=no

I think its iffy whether he really meant that Snowden should go to jail, or if he was just calling out the administration for hypocrisy because they said that Snowden should go to jail but that James Clapper shouldn't. Right now the administration is leaving Clapper alone and yet wants to lock up Snowden. Rand is calling them out for their hypocrisy.

Of course, that's the most positive spin on what he said. Maybe I'm giving Rand too much credit. I hope I'm right though.

[PaulConventionWV]

Not surprising, when even Rand Paul and the like are saying he broke laws and whatnot.

Where did he say that?

[Tod]

Has there been a shift in public opinion? Didn't, when the news first broke, most people hail him as a hero?

Are we witnessing the control mass media has over the mind of the public?

[Feeding the Abscess]

Where did he say that?

http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/04/rand-paul-james-clapper-and-edward-snowden-should-share-a-prison-cell-video/?onswipe_redirect=no

h/t to A Son of Liberty

[Carson]

I think its iffy whether he really meant that Snowden should go to jail, or if he was just calling out the administration for hypocrisy because they said that Snowden should go to jail but that James Clapper shouldn't. Right now the administration is leaving Clapper alone and yet wants to lock up Snowden. Rand is calling them out for their hypocrisy.

Of course, that's the most positive spin on what he said. Maybe I'm giving Rand too much credit. I hope I'm right though.


Well said.

[Dianne]

I don't believe it... same propaganda as that Korean dude feeding his uncle to the dogs.

[kpitcher]

I think Snowden should be charged - first, it puts the USG position legally on the record, which may be significant in the future treason prosecutions of various leaders of the national security state; and second, it provides the opportunity for a jury of his peers to acquit him.

Talk about a reason for jury nullification

[Teenager For Ron Paul]

If Snowden has compromised our national security, why aren't we seeing terrorist attacks left and right?

http://clearingthefogradio.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Snowden-hero.png

[Warlord]

A hero indeed

[WM_in_MO]

As long as it doesn't happen to them. In some cases they will let it happen to them cause they have nothing to hide.

[DamianTV]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4fNI80BWwXc/UsWVoiCBhkI/AAAAAAAADZE/UMrqQcrpxvo/s1600/nsasurveillance.jpg

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Is that why he said he thought Snowden and James Clapper should share a prison cell?


http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/04/rand-paul-james-clapper-and-edward-snowden-should-share-a-prison-cell-video/?onswipe_redirect=no

FF already beat me to it but I think Rand was joking and calling out the Obama administration for not walking the walk.

[Feeding the Abscess]

FF already beat me to it but I think Rand was joking and calling out the Obama administration for not walking the walk.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/rand-paul-snowden-clemency-clapper/2014/01/05/id/545260

That would go against that theory.

[puppetmaster]

No one I know does and I talk to hundreds of folks about this.....wait one guy did he was a Sonoma county deputy.

[ClydeCoulter]

Polls are to convince you that you have an enemy, and that enemy is everyone else.

[NIU Students for Liberty]

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/rand-paul-snowden-clemency-clapper/2014/01/05/id/545260

That would go against that theory.

Wow, buzz kill. Yeah, throw the guy in prison who sacrificed himself and gave you political ammunition.

[AngryCanadian]

Wow, buzz kill. Yeah, throw the guy in prison who sacrificed himself and gave you political ammunition.

Rand Paul is sounding like an RINO.

[Christian Liberty]

Rand Paul is sounding like an RINO.

Nope, this is typical Republican BS. I'm definitely not registering GOP to vote for him now (I probably wasn't going to anyway) and I'm seriously questioning whether I could vote for him in a general election. Is it time to throw Rand Paul in the woods?

Oh, and any idiots who defend Rand on this (I suspect there will be a few "law and order" moderates who agree with Rand) I will neg rep. I'm just saying that in advance. I hope any of you who love liberty will do the same thing.

[Natural Citizen]

Nope, this is typical Republican BS. I'm definitely not registering GOP to vote for him now (I probably wasn't going to anyway) and I'm seriously questioning whether I could vote for him in a general election. Is it time to throw Rand Paul in the woods?

Oh, and any idiots who defend Rand on this (I suspect there will be a few "law and order" moderates who agree with Rand) I will neg rep. I'm just saying that in advance. I hope any of you who love liberty will do the same thing.


That's dumb. He's the most liberty minded prospective candidate at the moment.

Aside from that, I think that the entire chicken dick attitude about everyone spying on them is over done. What we have is a society that are products of Industrial Age logic and know nothing of the Information Age. I think they are fearful of evolution of civilization. For many reasons. Of course, I think differently than most around here so take it with a grain of salt, I suppose.

There's no such thing as anonymity or privacy in the Information Age. So get out of the way already. If you don't you'll just get stepped on as change passes by.

If we want to complain about NSA then it's more practical do take the more relevant approach and seek to understand it's function in money manipulation. Go back to 2010 for example when everything crashed and then suddenly recovered. Proctor & Gamble for instance. This was external to the system. One that that big old building in Utah was advertised to deal with before hand but didn't. You think maybe that's what is still on some powerful minds in DC? I do.

[Christian Liberty]

That's dumb. He's the most liberty minded prospective candidate at the moment.

Apparently that's not saying a whole lot.

[Natural Citizen]

Apparently that's not saying a whole lot.

Well, heck. That's beside the point. Come on, man.

[Anti Federalist]

Rand Paul: No Clemency for Snowden, But Just 'A Few Years in Prison'

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/rand-paul-snowden-clemency-clapper/2014/01/05/id/545260#ixzz2pa5lPYSG

Stay in Russia Ed...these AmeriCunts are not worth it.

You've sacrificed enough.

Pray for us.

[Christian Liberty]

@AF- http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?438394-I-m-about-ready-to-throw-Rand-Paul-in-the-woods&p=5364039#post5364039

@Natural Citizen- I understand your point, but I don't agree with you.

I don't care so much about being on video on private property, and this would be doubly the case if the government didn't exist. If I go into Target and they put me on video, I suspect the primary reason is to prevent me from stealing from them. With the government... not so much.

That's not even really the point here though. Snowden EXPOSING the spying of the NSA wouldn't be an act of aggression even if the NSA itself weren't evil (Which it is.)

[Christian Liberty]

Well, heck. That's beside the point. Come on, man.

No, that's exactly the point. Rand may say he opposes warrantless spying, but not enough so to condone those who expose it. He opposes some interventions, but not all of them, he's promised to defend Israel if they attack Iran (Yes, you read that statement right, shows you how much of an idiot Rand is at least pretending to be.) Rand says he opposes big government, yet he's fine with drug laws and social security. I've read "The Tea Party goes to Washington" and that Rand was exciting, albeit flawed. 2013 Rand really isn't. Is he better than the establishment on some issues? Sure. But in the grand scheme of things, I don't think its really much. If 20% better is enough for you, go nuts, but for me its not. We need a serious paradigm shift in political opinions in this country before we can get anywhere, but frankly, playing to win means not trying to do that. Best of luck to those of you who support Rand, but I think I'm done unless any of you can give me a better argument than the whole "lesser of two evils" that I've also heard from the establishment.

[Feeding the Abscess]

No, that's exactly the point. Rand may say he opposes warrantless spying, but not enough so to condone those who expose it. He opposes some interventions, but not all of them, he's promised to defend Israel if they attack Iran (Yes, you read that statement right, shows you how much of an idiot Rand is at least pretending to be.) Rand says he opposes big government, yet he's fine with drug laws and social security. I've read "The Tea Party goes to Washington" and that Rand was exciting, albeit flawed. 2013 Rand really isn't. Is he better than the establishment on some issues? Sure. But in the grand scheme of things, I don't think its really much. If 20% better is enough for you, go nuts, but for me its not. We need a serious paradigm shift in political opinions in this country before we can get anywhere, but frankly, playing to win means not trying to do that. Best of luck to those of you who support Rand, but I think I'm done unless any of you can give me a better argument than the whole "lesser of two evils" that I've also heard from the establishment.

He played to the Tea Party and paleocons while winking to his dad's supporters to get elected, and now he's calculated that going after evangelicals and the establishment will get him elected president, when both groups have better options.

In the end, he'll have mostly cult of personality supporters after alienating everyone else. I just don't see his strategy paying off.

[Natural Citizen]

No, that's exactly the point. Rand may say he opposes warrantless spying, but not enough so to condone those who expose it. He opposes some interventions, but not all of them, he's promised to defend Israel if they attack Iran (Yes, you read that statement right, shows you how much of an idiot Rand is at least pretending to be.) Rand says he opposes big government, yet he's fine with drug laws and social security. I've read "The Tea Party goes to Washington" and that Rand was exciting, albeit flawed. 2013 Rand really isn't. Is he better than the establishment on some issues? Sure. But in the grand scheme of things, I don't think its really much. If 20% better is enough for you, go nuts, but for me its not. We need a serious paradigm shift in political opinions in this country before we can get anywhere, but frankly, playing to win means not trying to do that. Best of luck to those of you who support Rand, but I think I'm done unless any of you can give me a better argument than the whole "lesser of two evils" that I've also heard from the establishment.


Well. First...nobody is going to just walk in and attack Iran. These are the Persians. They have been around for a very long time and are almost 80 million people deep the last I checked. The entire narrative regarding Iran is fear porn in my opinion.

I've never been much on the two party system myself so tend to find it more practical to approach the issues outside of their platforms. I'm not going to support or attack him from within mainstream boundaries though. It's a loaded waste of time. Outside of that where the relevant things are regularly on the minds of prospective voters and discussed outside of mainstream narrative, that's a different story. But if I were a supporter of the two party system I'd most likely vote for him...assuming he ran.

Alternatively, I think we live in very special times where politics won't necessarily dictate change. These people are just kind of tagging along.

[Christian Liberty]

He played to the Tea Party and paleocons while winking to his dad's supporters to get elected, and now he's calculated that going after evangelicals and the establishment will get him elected president, when both groups have better options.

In the end, he'll have mostly cult of personality supporters after alienating everyone else. I just don't see his strategy paying off.

I get your point about Evangelicals, but that stereotype is a pet peeve of mine. I'm an evangelical, as is Ron Paul, as is Laurence Vance. That said, I mostly agree with you though. He's alienated me. Its possible that I'll be living in Virginia during the 2016 elections if I actually go to PHC, and if its a very swingy state, I might cut him a little slack and vote for him. But even then, I'm not sure, and I'm definitely not going to waste my time trying to convince people to vote for him anymore. I've decided its just not worth it. I don't demand perfection, but I'm not playing the "lesser of evils" game either. As much as I hope Rand is just playing the game and is really a Ron Paul in waiting, I don't think that's true. And even if its true intellectually, I don't see him saying "screw it" to his more moderate supporters and starting to use the presidential pardon for every victimless criminal. He's going to rule based on the platform he's running on. And if this is it, it ain't much.

Either way, I don't see Rand's middle of the road course working for anything useful. He could moderate, and win, but then it wouldn't really matter anyway. He could act more like his dad, and not win, but he could further educate people (To be honest, I'd love to run for congress some day just for that reason despite being unelectable.) But frankly, I think all this will accomplish is ticking off the standard Republicans AND the libertarians. The standard Republicans will be calling for Snowden's head, and supporting the guy who will give them the blood they want. libertarians and real conservatives are going to be annoyed that he's supporting the imprisonment of a national hero. Either way, it ain't gonna work.


Well. First...nobody is going to just walk in and attack Iran. These are the Persians. They have been around for a very long time and are almost 80 million people deep the last I checked.

That stopped the neocons since when?


I've never been much on the two party system myself so tend to find it more practical to approach the issues outside of their platforms. I'm not going to support or attack him from within mainstream boundaries though. It's a loaded waste of time. Outside of that where the relevant things are regularly on the minds of prospective voters and discussed outside of mainstream narrative, that's a different story. But if I were a supporter of the two party system I'd most likely vote for him...assuming he ran.

I'm no fan of the two party system either. I just thought Rand was an exception. I don't really think so anymore. I'm glad to see at least one person mostly agrees with me. I suspect most people won't. Oh well.

[Christian Liberty]

As much as I admire Ron, I really hope someone presses him into actually saying something about this. Can he really make the "99%" comment with a straight face after this? I don't see how he could. Someone should press him on it.

[Anti Federalist]

There's no such thing as anonymity or privacy in the Information Age. So get out of the way already. If you don't you'll just get stepped on as change passes by.

Then there is no such thing as liberty anymore...which is pretty much true.

If you do not have a way in which to live your life without being under the watchful eyes of a thousand government spooks, if every single thing you do is subject to recording and review, then you are in no way, shape or form a "free" man.

Well, good, glad that's over with...FFS, I'm tired.

Enjoy your brave new world kids...I'm done.

When's the ball game on?

[cajuncocoa]

As much as I admire Ron, I really hope someone presses him into actually saying something about this. Can he really make the "99%" comment with a straight face after this? I don't see how he could. Someone should press him on it.
He won't. It's not that he doesn't see it your way, but he's not going to do anything to compromise Rand's chances now.

[Natural Citizen]

Then there is no such thing as liberty anymore...which is pretty much true.

If you do not have a way in which to live your life without being under the watchful eyes of a thousand government spooks, if every single thing you do is subject to recording and review, then you are in no way, shape or form a "free" man.

Well, good, glad that's over with...FFS, I'm tired.

Enjoy your brave new world kids...I'm done.

When's the ball game on?

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have made it sound like I was excusing the government. I'm not. If they weren't in the mix and using technology in the manner in which they do against the people the world would be just fine with living in the information age as far as I can tell though.

[Christian Liberty]

He won't. It's not that he doesn't see it your way, but he's not going to do anything to compromise Rand's chances now.

There are a couple people in my family who would probably (they aren't really informed enough to actually know) prosecute Snowden if they know what he did. Their ignorance frustrates me as a layperson, but if any of them ran for SENATE, let alone the white house, I would disown them on TV, refuse to ever have anything to do with them, and publicly tell them to repent. Ron is too nice to do that. Don't know if that makes him a better man than me, or just too generous. At any rate, if Ron is reading this, he needs to realize that getting someone with the name "Paul" in the White House is not in and of itself a valid goal.

[Christian Liberty]

You're probably right that Rand is going to get worse in order to win. When you think about the things that Rand supports, he's really not THAT much better than the average Republican. He still supports unemployment benefits. He still supports Israel. He still support social security. He still supports drug laws.

The two areas I really thought Rand was a lot better is that I believed he'd be an improvement on the surveillance issues, and I thought he'd be less hostile to Iran. That's probably true to some degree, but its not enough. He's not serious enough about avoiding war to avoid voting for evil sanctions and for actions that will help Israel "defend itself" if it attacks Iran (There is no typo there, it sounds Orwellian but that's literally the piece of crap he signed.) I was going to give him one more chance even after that one. But then we find he's not serious enough about surveilance prevention to support freedom for the HERO who exposed the government.

Heck, even Obama promised protection for whistleblowers. I agree that it was a blatant lie, but the point is, he actually gave lip service to it. And look at him now. Rand is actually worse on this issue than Obama was in 2008.

Believe me, I wanted Rand to be the candidate. But, as Sola_Fide pointed out awhile ago, government corrupts. People get LESS pro-liberty as they go higher up, not more. Frankly, I think anyone who thinks Rand will actually get BETTER after he becomes President is deluding themselves. If the level of liberty that he supports is acceptable to you, go for it. You guys are smart people, and if you think its worthwhile, that's fine. But I just can't do it. I'll stick with educating people. No, it doesn't work, and Rand Paul getting elected won't work either. But at least I don't have to compromise my ethics to do it. If I were to vote for Rand at this point, it would be for the same "Lesser of evils" logic that people tried to use to defend Romney, McCain, etc. I won't do it.

[Natural Citizen]

You're probably right that Rand is going to get worse in order to win. When you think about the things that Rand supports, he's really not THAT much better than the average Republican. He still supports unemployment benefits. He still supports Israel. He still support social security. He still supports drug laws.

The two areas I really thought Rand was a lot better is that I believed he'd be an improvement on the surveillance issues, and I thought he'd be less hostile to Iran. That's probably true to some degree, but its not enough. He's not serious enough about avoiding war to avoid voting for evil sanctions and for actions that will help Israel "defend itself" if it attacks Iran (There is no typo there, it sounds Orwellian but that's literally the piece of crap he signed.) I was going to give him one more chance even after that one. But then we find he's not serious enough about surveilance prevention to support freedom for the HERO who exposed the government.

Heck, even Obama promised protection for whistleblowers. I agree that it was a blatant lie, but the point is, he actually gave lip service to it. And look at him now. Rand is actually worse on this issue than Obama was in 2008.

Believe me, I wanted Rand to be the candidate. But, as Sola_Fide pointed out awhile ago, government corrupts. People get LESS pro-liberty as they go higher up, not more. Frankly, I think anyone who thinks Rand will actually get BETTER after he becomes President is deluding themselves. If the level of liberty that he supports is acceptable to you, go for it. You guys are smart people, and if you think its worthwhile, that's fine. But I just can't do it. I'll stick with educating people. No, it doesn't work, and Rand Paul getting elected won't work either. But at least I don't have to compromise my ethics to do it. If I were to vote for Rand at this point, it would be for the same "Lesser of evils" logic that people tried to use to defend Romney, McCain, etc. I won't do it.


I actually stopped taking them seriously when they started toasting Super Big Gulps on political podiums while agribusiness, big pharma and biotech continues to run amok like cowboys on the human species.

[Anti-Neocon]

It could just be an attempt at incrementalism. Just like how most drug policy reform advocates first just focused on medical marijuana, and now on recreational marijuana. At some point once recreational marijuana becomes a normality they'll push the boundaries further, but if at the beginning they were like "legalize all drugs NOW no exceptions!!!" they'd be looked at as nuts. Hope that's the case anyway. Rand could be feeling that he might be able to get people to nod their heads to "only a few years" after looking at those public polls and seeing that the majority does support charges. Once people are thinking "only a few years" maybe they'll wise up...

or maybe, just maybe Rand isn't a real liberty advocate. But with him watching his father get attacked as he has (and even attacks on himself from douches like Peter King), I'm sure Rand feels a pressure to show to the people that he's not a terrorist sympathizer.

[FindLiberty]

...people in my family who would probably (they aren't really informed enough to actually know) prosecute Snowden if they know what he did. Their ignorance frustrates me ....

Help fix it?

Hero: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZbBGJZ2Wew&feature=share

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have made it sound like I was excusing the government. I'm not. If they weren't in the mix and using technology in the manner in which they do against the people the world would be just fine with living in the information age as far as I can tell though.

Eh, no worries...hey, Boobus is fine with it anyways.

I honestly think that most would thank a cop for raping their daughter.

"Thank you officer, I know it's a hard job keeping us safe...no no, don't mind her, she always wails and sobs uncontrollably. Thanks again officer!"

[Fredom101]

I'm supposed to believe that an election is going to "save" this country, huh?

Ha! Yeah see the definition of insanity!

[Fredom101]

You're probably right that Rand is going to get worse in order to win. When you think about the things that Rand supports, he's really not THAT much better than the average Republican. He still supports unemployment benefits. He still supports Israel. He still support social security. He still supports drug laws.

The two areas I really thought Rand was a lot better is that I believed he'd be an improvement on the surveillance issues, and I thought he'd be less hostile to Iran. That's probably true to some degree, but its not enough. He's not serious enough about avoiding war to avoid voting for evil sanctions and for actions that will help Israel "defend itself" if it attacks Iran (There is no typo there, it sounds Orwellian but that's literally the piece of crap he signed.) I was going to give him one more chance even after that one. But then we find he's not serious enough about surveilance prevention to support freedom for the HERO who exposed the government.

Heck, even Obama promised protection for whistleblowers. I agree that it was a blatant lie, but the point is, he actually gave lip service to it. And look at him now. Rand is actually worse on this issue than Obama was in 2008.

Believe me, I wanted Rand to be the candidate. But, as Sola_Fide pointed out awhile ago, government corrupts. People get LESS pro-liberty as they go higher up, not more. Frankly, I think anyone who thinks Rand will actually get BETTER after he becomes President is deluding themselves. If the level of liberty that he supports is acceptable to you, go for it. You guys are smart people, and if you think its worthwhile, that's fine. But I just can't do it. I'll stick with educating people. No, it doesn't work, and Rand Paul getting elected won't work either. But at least I don't have to compromise my ethics to do it. If I were to vote for Rand at this point, it would be for the same "Lesser of evils" logic that people tried to use to defend Romney, McCain, etc. I won't do it.

I can't see how a true libertarian could support Rand when he doesn't support liberty. Yes he is "better than most senators" but who cares? This is the biggest group of criminals in the world. How is being better than most of them even a good thing? I for one will not be supporting Rand in 2016 and instead will vote "No Confidence" by staying home and keeping my TV OFF!

[Christian Liberty]

It could just be an attempt at incrementalism. Just like how most drug policy reform advocates first just focused on medical marijuana, and now on recreational marijuana. At some point once recreational marijuana becomes a normality they'll push the boundaries further, but if at the beginning they were like "legalize all drugs NOW no exceptions!!!" they'd be looked at as nuts. Hope that's the case anyway. Rand could be feeling that he might be able to get people to nod their heads to "only a few years" after looking at those public polls and seeing that the majority does support charges. Once people are thinking "only a few years" maybe they'll wise up...

or maybe, just maybe Rand isn't a real liberty advocate. But with him watching his father get attacked as he has (and even attacks on himself from douches like Peter King), I'm sure Rand feels a pressure to show to the people that he's not a terrorist sympathizer.

Honestly, even most of the conservatives I've talked to (Admittedly a small sample size) are better than Rand on this. Mind you, these are mostly real conservatives, not neocons. I know if I went to the neocons in my family they'd think Rand was "Soft" on them, but frankly, those people just need to have Larken Rose thrown in their face, you can't "gradually" wake them up. I knew better than this even back in 2010.


I can't see how a true libertarian could support Rand when he doesn't support liberty. Yes he is "better than most senators" but who cares? This is the biggest group of criminals in the world. How is being better than most of them even a good thing? I for one will not be supporting Rand in 2016 and instead will vote "No Confidence" by staying home and keeping my TV OFF!

I've actually been criticized on epautos for being a little too tolerant of people who don't 100% jive with the philosophy. I don't have all the answers here, but I'm generally a little bit tolerant on domestic issues, especially state level ones. There are some that I am not, of course. But this was just ridiculous from Rand. Not to mention he still support Prohibition, Social Security, and "supporting Israel." Rand is seriously, seriously flawed, not just imperfect. Of course, some people will just take Ron's fatherly "99%" that we all know is crap to heart, but I'm looking at what Rand is saying and leaving Ron out of it... he falls short.

That said, I understand not everyone is going to agree on where to draw the line. Ron was not perfect either. He seriously goofed up in 2001. He voted for the partial birth abortion ban act even though it was blatantly unconstitutional (To be clear, for anyone who doesn't know me, my issue with this is that it was Federal, not because I believe any abortion whatsoever is actually "OK.") He endorsed some bad people. But at the end of the day, Ron consistently advocated for freedom the vast majority of the time. Rand's compromises are becomming "par for the course." I think I've just decided I've had enough of it.

[Christian Liberty]

Eh, no worries...hey, Boobus is fine with it anyways.

I honestly think that most would thank a cop for raping their daughter.

"Thank you officer, I know it's a hard job keeping us safe...no no, don't mind her, she always wails and sobs uncontrollably. Thanks again officer!"

I honestly think you're taking the very true problem of police worship a little TOO far.

That said, Chuck Baldwin says he met an evangelical pastor who said that Romans 13 means that if a cop tries to rape your wife you don't resist. That's the kind of thing I expect to hear from someone trying to make fun of Christianity, not someone who actually claims to believe in Christianity. Apparently that person takes "obey the powers that be" (An inaccurate translation of Romans 13 anyway) higher than the God-given duty to protect your family. I could understand that attitude from a pacifist, but a pacifist wouldn't need Romans 13 to justify it. In that case it was just badge worship and its insane.

[Christian Liberty]

Help fix it?

Hero: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZbBGJZ2Wew&feature=share

I'll watch the video, but I do try to fix it. Most people aren't willing to listen much, but I think I've beaten liberty into my dad's head enough that he's coming around, at least on foreign policy. he's still socially really conservative, but that doesn't bother me half as much. Education is what I try to focus on anyway, not politics. I'd throw a vote someone's way if they were good enough, though. I've decided Rand isn't.

[Natural Citizen]

Well. I suppose it's only a 'light' sentence.

http://cdn.rt.com/files/news/21/c0/20/00/rand_paul_wants__light__prison_term_for_snowden.si .jpg

They did a bang up job on the strategically placed photo, huh?I wonder who Rand Paul ticked off over at RT America.

http://rt.com/usa/rand-paul-snowden-sentence-242/

[Fredom101]

He ticked off Abby Martin a few months ago by refusing to answer her questions and then calling the guards on her. It was disgraceful on Rand's part and he is paying the price.

[Dianne]

I call bullchit on this ... That is true bullchit. Unfortunately, the majority of Americans don't even know who Snowden is, lmao.. The majority of Americans don't know who Obama is.

[AuH20]

You're probably right that Rand is going to get worse in order to win. When you think about the things that Rand supports, he's really not THAT much better than the average Republican. He still supports unemployment benefits. He still supports Israel. He still support social security. He still supports drug laws.

The two areas I really thought Rand was a lot better is that I believed he'd be an improvement on the surveillance issues, and I thought he'd be less hostile to Iran. That's probably true to some degree, but its not enough. He's not serious enough about avoiding war to avoid voting for evil sanctions and for actions that will help Israel "defend itself" if it attacks Iran (There is no typo there, it sounds Orwellian but that's literally the piece of crap he signed.) I was going to give him one more chance even after that one. But then we find he's not serious enough about surveilance prevention to support freedom for the HERO who exposed the government.

Heck, even Obama promised protection for whistleblowers. I agree that it was a blatant lie, but the point is, he actually gave lip service to it. And look at him now. Rand is actually worse on this issue than Obama was in 2008.

Believe me, I wanted Rand to be the candidate. But, as Sola_Fide pointed out awhile ago, government corrupts. People get LESS pro-liberty as they go higher up, not more. Frankly, I think anyone who thinks Rand will actually get BETTER after he becomes President is deluding themselves. If the level of liberty that he supports is acceptable to you, go for it. You guys are smart people, and if you think its worthwhile, that's fine. But I just can't do it. I'll stick with educating people. No, it doesn't work, and Rand Paul getting elected won't work either. But at least I don't have to compromise my ethics to do it. If I were to vote for Rand at this point, it would be for the same "Lesser of evils" logic that people tried to use to defend Romney, McCain, etc. I won't do it.

You do realize what country you live in? 100 years of socialism disguised with the stars, stripes and apple pie? You can't honestly expect someone to immediately reverse decades of conditioning and ruin overnight? Be happy that we even have an opportunity with someone as open minded as Rand Paul.

[DamianTV]

Justin Beiber!

Snowden? Yeah, hes a criminal. Poor Justin Bieber!

[69360]

I think he does need to be charged under the current laws to preserve the integrity of our system. But I think he should get a suspended sentence and be free to go. He did the right thing and is a hero.