I do so wish, thanks in advance.Originally Posted by Natural Citizen
Well then I'll get to figgerin. Need to come up with a catchy thread title first though. One to really put the screws to folks so they actually feel obligated to respond with that elderly wisdom that us noobs so lack. I'll think of one.
Someone's got a chip on the e-shoulder.
The Bastiat Collection ˇ FREE PDF ˇ FREE EPUB ˇ PAPER Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)
- "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
-- The Law (p. 54)- "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
-- Government (p. 99)- "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
-- Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)- "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
-- Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)ˇ tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ˇ
Nah. Plus I was just eating a banana when I read your post. Got to chuckling actually. And had just complained to myself that the thing was still a little green. So was one of those double chuckles within a chuckle.
Seriously though, we have to be a little more thorough in scrutinizing our representatives relevant to what's on the plate for the long haul.
I don't know there, specs. Have only gotten started on Codex alone and have around six pages of issues that require addressing/asking as far as what Rand would or would not support that I think we'd do well to give a good once over if we are to back him. And that's just one thing that opens up the door to a rather tedious list of other legislation on the books. Kicking myself in the ass now for giving a flying fudge. I'll keep on trecking though. My word is my word after all.
Plus I'm always fond of a good learning what being a noob and all. I could probably support Rand if'n he's got the right stuff across the board but the only way to know is to ask the right questions, I suppose. Of which, there are a great many. I'm sure I'm not the only noob looking for a lesson so if we can get his take on the issues in scope from those who are more informed of his position(s) then perhaps we can get a step or two closer back to the old of, by and for gag. One thing though while I'm on the topic of codex. Is it fair to assume that prop 37 was not supported by the majority of Libertarian leaning conservatives? Only because I've gotten as far as my gnome and how it pertains to the pharmaceitical and food industries as well as this "device" that's in The President's healthcare plan.
Last edited by Natural Citizen; 11-13-2012 at 07:33 AM.
You haven't given his book a read have you? If you will only support Rand if his platform/position is abolishment of every big govt thing then you won't like him and should move on. He's playing the long game and exposing all the other politicians as the extremists while carving out a very healthy space for himself as the real moderate.I don't know there, specs. Have only gotten started on Codex alone and have around six pages of issues that require addressing as far as what Rand would or would not support that I think we'd do well to give a good once over if we are to back him. And that's just one thing that opens up the door to a rather tedious list of other legislation on the books. Kicking myself in the ass now for giving a flying fudge. I'll keep on trecking though. My word is my word after all.
Plus I'm always fond of a good learning what being a noob and all.
Nothing wrong with the long game. As long as it's mapped right. There's just a lot of bricks we have to step on if we follow that path is all. Beyond that, I typically understand big government a little differently than most others I talk too which is why I typically ask questions in a different perspective than the standard/historic notion. Frankly we have a merge between corporation and state that rescribbles the traditional notion of how the term is understood relevant to actual application/representation. "People" are a rather broad cast of characters these days and representation is scribbled a little differently than before Reagan came along. So...yeah.
But no, I haven't read the book. I've got two others I'm reading now but I think I have it. In fact I know I do.
Last edited by Natural Citizen; 11-13-2012 at 07:45 AM.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Yes, the media will do whatever it can. So will we. Yes, Congress is very important. But not only is the presidency just as 'bully' a 'pulpit' as Teddy Roosevelt says it is, but the presidential campaign trail has proven to be a pretty bully pulpit as well. Yes, Rand knows there will be resistance. But he is so far doing a magnificent job of pushing the envelope without doing anything to piss off the rank and file Republicans off too much. Yes, technically twenty Senators should have more power, but you're forgetting all of those executive branch bureaus, the wars the Commander in Chief is in charge of, and the rise of the Executive Order.
Yes, it is a very pessimistic approach. Almost trollish.
Name recognition counts. We have only four years to build his up. So, despite your best efforts to piss on the party, I have only one thing to say:
RANDPAUL2016!!
So take your own advice?
"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]." Ron Paul
Nothing against Rand.. I like Rand but when clicking for new posts - the board is kinda full of Rand atm
I just hate to miss something else because it fell off the Randcliff
Disclaimer: any post made after midnight and before 8AM is made before the coffee dip stick has come up to optomim level - expect some level of silliness,
The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are out numbered by those who vote for a living !!!!!!!
You don't seem to realize the way to get 20 liberty senators is only through a Republican superstar like Rand. We need him to be a prominent national player, and he can only do that by running for president. Once he reaches the stardom level of Sarah Palin, he can endorse senators and congressmen at will and will actually get a bunch of liberty candidates elected.
Otherwise it will not happen for the next decade. We are too small of a group to financially back 20 candidates at once. Gunny (he posted in this very thread) actually lost a race already due to lack of funding, because our pockets were split with the other candidates running....and this was maybe 5 candidates. So anyone who thinks we can suddenly get 20 senators in is dreaming. The only way is to get a sustainable system going - and that's through Rand Paul.
The Heart of Conservatism is Libertarianism - Ronald Reagan
But how many Sarah Palin endorsements have actually won?
I don't know who she endorsed off the top of my head...but Rand Paul, Michele Bachmann, Marco Rubio all seem to come to mind. I'm sure there are atleast a dozen others?
The Heart of Conservatism is Libertarianism - Ronald Reagan
Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Nikki Haley, Deb Fischer
Kelly Ayotte.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us