Real Conservatives stand for private property

[nikcers]

The amount of shills in that comment section are too damn high!
Exclusive–Rand Paul: Real Conservatives Stand For Private Propertyhttp://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/24/real-conservatives-stand-for-private-property/





(http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/24/real-conservatives-stand-for-private-property/)

[r3volution 3.0]

The comments...

:eek:

...makes me rethink my opposition to eugenics.

[Valli6]

Been arguing with Trumpnumpskulls half the day! Incredibly ignorant bunch - particularly on breitbart!
I'm there!

[nikcers]

The comments...

:eek:

...makes me rethink my opposition to eugenics.

It's telling how fake the comments are Rand was just talking about property rights. No one has a good argument against a reverse robin hood type argument especially because Rand has championed the government bullies argument. Half of the negative comments are character assassination which is really just making trump by proxy look like a bully. The informed reader that knows right and wrong walks away thinking at the very least that trump doesn't know right from wrong.

[heavenlyboy34]

Rand is wrong in this claim. Republicans are traditionally fans of Commonwealth...private property in land, not so much. Except for the political and crony classes, of course. It's a legacy of English and British thought.

[65fastback2+2]

Rand is wrong in this claim. Republicans are traditionally fans of Commonwealth...private property in land, not so much. Except for the political and crony classes, of course. It's a legacy of English and British thought.

he's wrong that someone's property is their property? and that the government cant take it and give it to someone else? uhhh

[nikcers]

Rand is wrong in this claim. Republicans are traditionally fans of Commonwealth...private property in land, not so much. Except for the political and crony classes, of course. It's a legacy of English and British thought.

That's why he said real conservatives believe in private property. Its a great argument against people who say they are conservative but want to go to war all the time without paying for it, its an argument that does not say that he is genuine- but that he calls it like he sees it without saying that he calls it like he sees it. When he says real conservatives it goes with his argument that real conservatives believe in a strong national defense but by paying for it. It goes against all of those fake conservatives that people are tired of. It's a tactic that relies on the media to interpret the argument and try to spin it, and when they spin it they are spinning themselves in circular arguments that are easy to defuse and defeat.

[heavenlyboy34]

he's wrong that someone's property is their property? and that the government cant take it and give it to someone else? uhhh

No, he's wrong that "conservatives stand for private property". Some do, but they're exceptions. Respect for private property is a classical liberal position.

[hells_unicorn]

Great article, pity the comment section isn't loading for me at all. I was looking forward to angering me some Trumpskulls. By the way, great term there Valli6, I'll have to use this one from now on.

[heavenlyboy34]

That's why he said real conservatives believe in private property. Its a great argument against people who say they are conservative but want to go to war all the time without paying for it, its an argument that does not say that he is genuine- but that he calls it like he sees it without saying that he calls it like he sees it. When he says real conservatives it goes with his argument that real conservatives believe in a strong national defense but by paying for it. It goes against all of those fake conservatives that people are tired of. It's a tactic that relies on the media to interpret the argument and try to spin it, and when they spin it they are spinning themselves in circular arguments that are easy to defuse and defeat.

Ah! Nice variant on the old "No True Scotsman", Rand! :D :cool: 'Tis amusing to watch GOPers troll each other.

[hells_unicorn]

Ah! Nice variant on the old "No True Scotsman", Rand! :D :cool: 'Tis amusing to watch GOPers troll each other.

A person who is pushing the whole "vermin supreme" joke has not business yammering about people trolling each other.

Sorry, but you left yourself WIDE OPEN. :p

[heavenlyboy34]

A person who is pushing the whole "vermin supreme" joke has not business yammering about people trolling each other.

Sorry, but you left yourself WIDE OPEN. :p

Wut? I wasn't "yammering" about it. Just expressing my amusement. :D (it actually is a pretty good use of the NTS fallacy, as most GOPers aren't versed in logic enough to notice :) Like RP rhetoric, just slicker.) Now that you remind me...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g6Ba0Uc9bM&spfreload=10

[Sola_Fide]

The comments...

:eek:

...makes me rethink my opposition to eugenics.

These fools don't even know that Trump bought out their website.

[Henry Rogue]

Wut? I wasn't "yammering" about it. Just expressing my amusement. :D (it actually is a pretty good use of the NTS fallacy, as most GOPers aren't versed in logic enough to notice :) Like RP rhetoric, just slicker.) Now that you remind me...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g6Ba0Uc9bM&spfreload=10
Anyone who grew up on a Dairy farm, would recognize a classic Tingley boot, instantly.

[nikcers]

The interesting thing is if Rand keeps up his arguments all of them will stick at once. The more Trump legitimizes his candidacy the more his appeal drops. Trumps appeal is no one knows what is in the box, essentially he is Schrodinger's cat. If he was asked if he was a real candidate he would say of course I am a real candidate look at my polls (they look at the box it says cat on it). If he was challenged on positions he took he would say that was before I became a cat.

If he was called a turd he would say listen to the box don't you hear it meowing? Which is enough for some people because they don't want other people to know they don't smell a turd because everyone else doesn't smell it. He would then leap to the defense of these people by saying why do you hate these people, why do you keep saying that they cant smell shit you guys are horrible.

Everyone thought that this shtick was amusing but for different reasons, some people thought that whatever was in the box was it had to be what they wanted because they are optimistic. Others thought that there was a dead cat in the box because they are pessimistic and want the whole world to be ridiculed for being so stupid. The realist looks at the box and goes of course there isn't a cat in there, there is a turd but if he is able to fool all of you then he is smart enough to fix the problems we are having.

Rand Paul says that there is a big brown turd in the box because he can smell it, and now he just needs to qualify the argument enough by telling people what a turd smells like, he might even open the box and stomp on it just so he gets shit to stick to his boot, so he can show people what in the box. The question is will it turn off too many voters opening a box of turds and stomping on it, because what sane person would do that? Or will they think he is laughing at them for not being able to smell the turd. Or will they embrace him for his honesty and clean the shit that will be stuck to his boot off.

[heavenlyboy34]

The interesting thing is if Rand keeps up his arguments all of them will stick at once. The more Trump legitimizes his candidacy the more his appeal drops. Trumps appeal is no one knows what is in the box, essentially he is Schrodinger's cat. If he was asked if he was a real candidate he would say of course I am a real candidate look at my polls (they look at the box it says cat on it). If he was challenged on positions he took he would say that was before I became a cat.

If he was called a turd he would say listen to the box don't you hear it meowing? Which is enough for some people because they don't want other people to know they don't smell a turd because everyone else doesn't smell it. He would then leap to the defense of these people by saying why do you hate these people, why do you keep saying that they cant smell shit you guys are horrible.

Everyone thought that this shtick was amusing but for different reasons, some people thought that whatever was in the box was it had to be what they wanted because they are optimistic. Others thought that there was a dead cat in the box because they are pessimistic and want the whole world to be ridiculed for being so stupid. The realist looks at the box and goes of course there isn't a cat in there, there is a turd but if he is able to fool all of you then he is smart enough to fix the problems we are having.

Rand Paul says that there is a big brown turd in the box because he can smell it, and now he just needs to qualify the argument enough by telling people what a turd smells like, he might even open the box and stomp on it just so he gets shit to stick to his boot, so he can show people what in the box. The question is will it turn off too many voters opening a box of turds and stomping on it, because what sane person would do that? Or will they think he is laughing at them for not being able to smell the turd. Or will they embrace him for his honesty and clean the shit that will be stuck to his boot off.

He's dead and alive at the same time? :eek: (j/p)

[nikcers]

He's dead and alive at the same time? :eek: (j/p)

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/08/28/donald-trump-poop-mural-hansky/

https://cbsnewyork.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/trump-mural.jpg?w=620&h=349&crop=1