Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 33

Thread: Please, this is what the establishment wants. Divide and conquer. Please don't let..

  1. #1

    Default Please, this is what the establishment wants. Divide and conquer. Please don't let..

    Please, this is what the establishment wants. Divide and concur. Please don't let them succeed.

    Trey Grayson attacked Rand on the issue because he knew it would be divisive. Trey new Paul either had to say one thing, and make the people of Kentucky very unhappy, or say another thing and cause problems in much of his national base.

    Please read the two articles I've put together. This is definitely a very well orchestrated event by the Trey Grayson camp. And Rand, being a little green to the political process simply had trouble with handling it.

    Rand Paul and Guantanamo: First debate with Trey Grayson

    Clinton backer turned GOPer Grayson calling Rand Paul a "flip flopper"

    Remember people, this is why we LIKE Rand, because he ISN'T a career politician, lets not be angry because he's not savvy like one.

    Tracy
    http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=720941620
    http://www.myspace.com/anarkyisorder

    Tracy

    PS Please donate to our SD Liberty PAC and send as many Ron Paul delegates to Tampa from SD as possible.
    http://southdakotaforliberty.com/
    Like us on facebook
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/South...74626939256447



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skyorbit View Post
    Please, this is what the establishment wants. Divide and concur. Please don't let them succeed.
    I think the establishment would be just as happy if we abandoned our principles.

  4. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rp08orbust View Post
    I think the establishment would be just as happy if we abandoned our principles.
    Happier.
    Chris

    "Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are." Benjamin Franklin

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    I was a minarchist, but I ran out of excuses.

  5. #4

    Default

    And what is the point of backing him again if he is just going to say what he wants to get elected? With that in mind, we may as well back Grayson. If Rand wanted to avoid a catch-22, he should have just remained silent on the issue. His father never comprised his principles to win when he was running on the national stage.

  6. #5

    Default

    If you abandon some principles in place of others, you could vote for anyone. Obama ran on closing gitmo. We decided not to support him as a group because of his economic policies.
    "Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank...You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the grace of the Eternal God, will rout you out."- Andrew Jackson (The Guy on the 20)

    www.micahnelson.com

  7. #6

    Default

    This is really bad. I am going to support Rand Paul period. What good is it going to do us IF HE CAN"T GET IN?????"??? TO:NES

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by South Park Fan View Post
    And what is the point of backing him again if he is just going to say what he wants to get elected? With that in mind, we may as well back Grayson. If Rand wanted to avoid a catch-22, he should have just remained silent on the issue. His father never comprised his principles to win when he was running on the national stage.
    He couldn't keep quiet. Grayson made sure of that.

    I think the press announcement was worded badly too, but I do not see him as giving up any of his principles in it, either.
    I have many friends in the libertarian movement who look down on those of us who get involved in political activity,
    he acknowledged, but "eventually, if you want to bring about changes what you have to do is participate in political
    action.
    -- Ron Paul


    "We do have some differences and our approaches will be different, but that makes him his own person. I mean why should he [Rand] be a clone and do everything and think just exactly as I have. I think it's an opportunity to be independent minded. We are about 99% the same on issues." "People Try To Drive Wedges Between Rand And Me." --Ron Paul

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=pB5JgzBVHN0

    The Property Basis of Rights

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tonesforjonesbones View Post
    This is really bad. I am going to support Rand Paul period. What good is it going to do us IF HE CAN"T GET IN?????"??? TO:NES
    When you support a person and not principles you lose your credibility. If you just want to support winning candidates there are plenty of sell outs from which to choose.
    "Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank...You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the grace of the Eternal God, will rout you out."- Andrew Jackson (The Guy on the 20)

    www.micahnelson.com

  10. #9

    Default

    While Rand's comment was disturbing, I'm not going to stop supporting him just because of it. Although I have tons of respect for anyone who does. That's why I love you guys, you're hard-core and you stick to your principles.

  11. #10

    Default

    Meh, either you trust the man or you don't, and I think Rand knows that if he starts acting like a retarded necon, then the good Dr. Paul (the older one) will whip out the belt and give him a dose of attitude adjustment.

    And the infighting between liberty-minded people is just lame.

    Face it, Rand isn't Stefan Molyneux and I don't want him to be. He's a conservative constitutionalist and though he has yet to really prove himself like Ron has, I'm all for him.

    This is not a question of the lesser of two evils, it's the question of evil (Traitorson) vs. imperfect good (the eye cutter) IMO.

  12. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    4,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by micahnelson View Post
    When you support a person and not principles you lose your credibility. If you just want to support winning candidates there are plenty of sell outs from which to choose.
    As someone that likes Chuck DeVore and Jesse Kelly, I think its best to support the candidate willing to downsize government and restore the Republican Party back to its principles. Did the Progressive ideology rise to power by radical-leftists supporting 'purists' or by supporting candidates who share the majority of their views?

    I noticed a lot of the people who are criticizing Rand Paul's recent comments have never posted on this specific forum before, which I find interesting.
    Last edited by Flash; 11-21-2009 at 11:08 AM.

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    As someone that likes Chuck DeVore and Jesse Kelly, I think its best to support the candidate willing to downsize government and restore the Republican Party back to its principles. Did the Progressive ideology rise to power by radical-leftists supporting 'purists' or by supporting candidates who share the majority of their views?

    I noticed a lot of the people who are criticizing Rand Paul's recent comments have never posted on this specific forum before, which I find interesting.
    The Paul last name is a brand name. I don't go by brand names until I see results. I was holding out judgement until I knew better. Ron Paul didn't become popular because he said the right things. He said the politically incorrect thing, and those of us who agreed did everything we could to back him up.

    I dunno, I'm sure hes better than the next guy- but im not going to become passionately devoted to this campaign if i have to make excuses for it.
    "Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank...You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the grace of the Eternal God, will rout you out."- Andrew Jackson (The Guy on the 20)

    www.micahnelson.com

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tonesforjonesbones View Post
    This is really bad. I am going to support Rand Paul period. What good is it going to do us IF HE CAN"T GET IN?????"??? TO:NES
    You're right. I'm going to take a time machine back to 2007 and replace my Ron Paul signs with John McCain signs, because what good is political activism if your guy DOESN'T GET IN?!?!?!?!?

  15. #14

    Default

    Some of you self sabatoge..you sabatoge your own movement. Sad really. I guess that's why libertarians can only attain the status of dawg catcher. sad. tones

  16. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    4,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rp08orbust View Post
    You're right. I'm going to take a time machine back to 2007 and replace my Ron Paul signs with John McCain signs, because what good is political activism if your guy DOESN'T GET IN?!?!?!?!?
    Its about supporting guys across the country who represent our conservative views the best and who we want to represent the GOP. I want the Republican Party to be led by people like Chuck DeVore and Rand Paul as opposed to Lindsey Graham and John Mccain. This is how we make progress, one inch at a time. I would love to have Conservatives in the Senate who aren't spineless worms (Tom Coburn).

    There are plenty of 'purist' libertarians running for Congress but you guys don't seem to enthusiastic about them. When was the last time you donated to Kokesh or posted on his forum?

    And don't forget Pat Buchanan agrees with Rand Paul on this specific issue, just to point that out.

  17. #16

    Default

    To people who are worried about Rand's compromising:

    It worries me too. But, I know we can trust Rand. I know that when he gets elected, he will take his oath to uphold the Constitution seriously. Do you know how I know? Because we -own- him. He's our guy, he's our candidate. He wouldn't be running if not for us. He wouldn't be running without our money or without our support. Period. He -can't- ignore us when he gets to Washington, or he'll never get re-elected. He'd be tossing away his core constituency.

    He takes the message of liberty seriously, and when he gets to Washington, we're gonna know it. If he doesn't, we'll take our money bombs and abandon him in a second and he knows that.

    He needs us, and we need him. Be of good cheer, Ron Paulers! Rand is going to lead us to our greatest VICTORY yet.

  18. #17

    Default

    I agree..we have to get him there first! We need RAND PAUL in congress...he's the only libertarian minded one so far...tones

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rp08orbust View Post
    You're right. I'm going to take a time machine back to 2007 and replace my Ron Paul signs with John McCain signs, because what good is political activism if your guy DOESN'T GET IN?!?!?!?!?
    I agree with you that if you sell out your principles, what have you really won?

    However, don't you think there is a chance that you are misunderstanding Rand? I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt. I think we will find out quite a lot more AFTER the Republican primary is over. Note that this is before the general election actually takes place.

    I do not believe he has sold either us out, or his principles. But, that's just me.
    I have many friends in the libertarian movement who look down on those of us who get involved in political activity,
    he acknowledged, but "eventually, if you want to bring about changes what you have to do is participate in political
    action.
    -- Ron Paul


    "We do have some differences and our approaches will be different, but that makes him his own person. I mean why should he [Rand] be a clone and do everything and think just exactly as I have. I think it's an opportunity to be independent minded. We are about 99% the same on issues." "People Try To Drive Wedges Between Rand And Me." --Ron Paul

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=pB5JgzBVHN0

    The Property Basis of Rights

  20. #19

    Default

    Regardless I will stick by Rand even though the good feeling on him isn't as strong as it was. He is still better than all the rest.

  21. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    4,880

    Default

    You're right. I'm going to take a time machine back to 2007 and replace my Ron Paul signs with John McCain signs, because what good is political activism if your guy DOESN'T GET IN?!?!?!?!?
    Its very reasonable to only support viable candidates. Otherwise we would pointlessly donate to fringe candidates like John Dennis or RJ Harris. Have you donated money to their campaigns? The candidates that I'm looking at right now are Rand Paul & Chuck DeVore, they actually have a chance at becoming senators. I want them to be the new face of the Republican Party.

    Don't forget Ron Paul's mission was to educate, Rand's mission is to win.

  22. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    Happier.
    Not nearly as happy as they'd be to see us go 0-fer again in 2010 like our 2008 slate of non-incumbent liberty candidates for federal office did.
    "Ted Cruz has gone out of his way to tell people how much he agrees with me on national security." -John McCain

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by micahnelson View Post
    When you support a person and not principles you lose your credibility.
    The only ones who have no credibility are the ones who shout, scream and complain year after year after year and never win diddly-squat or do anything to bring even the slightest hint of the right kind of change to the government. This statement is the epitome of third party kool-aid; it's what the libertarian party, the green party, the constitution party, etc. have being saying forever as they continue to combine for like 1% in presidential elections. No one is ever going to take their "principles" seriously as long as they remain fringe and irrelevant...and they do that because the word compromise is apparently the great satan of the world. Indeed it's easy to shout about your oh-so-great "principles" while you're mired in 1% land with no hope of going up. Hell, I could do that.

    You got to hand it to Nate Hodson and Grayson's staff. They had this all perfectly planned out. They sent out a press release the day before the debate stating Grayson's firm support of keeping Guantanamo Bay prison open. Likewise they put up a petition for supporters to sign on their campaign website to support keeping Gitmo open, again the day before the debate.

    Armed with a screenshot of Rand Paul's website, Grayson laid the perfect trap: to either piss off his national libertarian-leaning donor base or committe political suicide. Well done.
    "Ted Cruz has gone out of his way to tell people how much he agrees with me on national security." -John McCain

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    Its very reasonable to only support viable candidates.
    That's not what I'm disagreeing with. Rand Paul appears much more viable than Peter Schiff, Adam Kokesh or R J Harris, which is why up until now, all my donations have gone to Rand. The question is whether he represents my principles enough for me to care whether he wins. If not, then I will look into supporting the next most viable candidate representing my principles.

    Speaking of which, I was not aware that R J Harris was polling in the high twenties against the Republican incumbent he's running against. I wonder what a half million dollar money bomb could do for him.

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RonPaulFanInGA View Post
    Not nearly as happy as they'd be to see us go 0-fer again in 2010 like our 2008 slate of non-incumbent liberty candidates for federal office did.
    C4L arguably made the difference for Tom McClintock's narrow victory in 2008.

  26. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rp08orbust View Post
    Speaking of which, I was not aware that R J Harris was polling in the high twenties against the Republican incumbent he's running against.
    I personally have sincere doubts about that poll (see thread in R.J. Harris section.) If an independent poll shows something like I could maybe start paying attention.
    "Ted Cruz has gone out of his way to tell people how much he agrees with me on national security." -John McCain

  27. #26

    Default GB is a very murky issue.

    This really is the dumbest issue ever.

    Rand's stance doesn't make him a war monger or neocon.


    I dont think closing is GB is a cut and dry libertarian issue either.


    same deal with either being pro choice / pro life. People commonly assume libertarians have to be pro choice. Also they assume that we have to be completely open borders. Issues such as Gitmo, abortion, and immigration have no libertarian consenus because in regards to liberty they are very murky issues.


    Libertarianism does have certain litmus tests such as balanced budgets, lower taxes, lower spending, less regulations, Gun rights, anti cap and trade, maximizing civil liberties of your own citizens (foreigners is debateable), and a strong understanding and following of the constitution.

    All of the above litmus tests rand passes exceptionally. He truly does believe and will represent the above values.

    Not supporting him based on the murky liberty issues is stupid. Most of those murky issues will never be resolved in libertarianism because they are based on emotions and peoples own prejudices. We will never be able to convince anyone out their stances on the murky libertarian issues, but on our litmus tests anyone can be convinced because they follow more logos esque arguments. And also on our litmus tests these are issues that really bring most and truest liberty to this country.

    -Chanda

  28. #27
    http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=720941620
    http://www.myspace.com/anarkyisorder

    Tracy

    PS Please donate to our SD Liberty PAC and send as many Ron Paul delegates to Tampa from SD as possible.
    http://southdakotaforliberty.com/
    Like us on facebook
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/South...74626939256447

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rp08orbust View Post
    I was not aware that R J Harris was polling in the high twenties against the Republican incumbent he's running against. I wonder what a half million dollar money bomb could do for him.

    When is RJ's primary?

  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skyorbit View Post
    Nice write-up on your blog.

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by South Park Fan View Post
    And what is the point of backing him again if he is just going to say what he wants to get elected? With that in mind, we may as well back Grayson. If Rand wanted to avoid a catch-22, he should have just remained silent on the issue. His father never comprised his principles to win when he was running on the national stage.
    You're assuming that Rand is compromising his principles. Maybe he actually believes it. After all, nobody is going to 100% lockstep libertarian. If we refuse a big tent, we refuse the ability to win anything major.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast





« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •