He might have said it in a joking manner, but he only mentioned Ted Cruz. I heard no mention of Kasich. If he does setup a pac against Cruz, can someone remember to put a link here? I'd donate.
I don't know what mark in the video he said it, but he ripped Cruz several times. Pretty funny
R∃VO˩UTION
Thank you for admitting that Governor Johnson did nothing to oppose the Iraq War.Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0
Please apologize to the forum for your lie saying otherwise.
Please stop posting lies to the forum.
Sounds a lot like Trump.Johnson opposed the Iraq War since he first became involved in federal politics.
Unlike Trump speaking out against the Iraq War in 2003, Johnson said nothing.Unlike Trump
Unlike Trump speaking out against the Iraq War in 2004, Johnson said nothing.
Unlike Trump speaking out against the Iraq War in 2005, Johnson said nothing.
Unlike Trump speaking out against the Iraq War in 2006, Johnson said nothing.
Unlike Trump speaking out against the Iraq War in 2007, Johnson said nothing.
Unlike Trump speaking out against the Iraq War in 2008, Johnson said nothing.
Unlike Trump speaking out against the Iraq War in 2009, Johnson said nothing.
Unlike Trump speaking out against the Iraq War in 2010, Johnson said nothing.
Trump could have his wife or children set up the super pac. he could also make life miserable for Cruz. no input for judges, US attorneys, and campaign for his opponent in 2018.
This would have made some kind of sense a year ago, but he's already beat them and day 1 of being the official nominee still acting like he's running in a primary. Ohio is a state he needs to win, he lost badly there in the primary and the state GOP says if he keeps going after Kasich, they are not going to help him. Cruz got over 1.2M votes in TX, Obama lost TX by the same margin in 2012. If Trump keeps $#@!ing with Cruz and his supporters, he won't just be the guy who lost 2016, he will forever be known as the guy who turned TX blue.
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
Lol well done.
The problem is Trump will not pick conservatives for the supreme court. Why would he? He's never been a conservative. I understand that some would rather take the chance because it's certain what Hillary will do. But I don't see why some believe Trump cares about conservative principles. The only thing that Trump may actually care about are the trade deals, i'll give you that. Eveything else, i doubt he cares at all. So I see him "negotiating" away everything we care about, to the democrats, should he win.
If TX went blue, then people would blame Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz is in a lose lose situation. Whether Donald wins or loses, Ted comes out looking bad. Even a sizeable portion of Texas delegates are furious with Cruz, saying that he didn't keep his word and that he's hurting the Party. I'm not sure if Ted is just really this dumb, or if his masters forced him to continue the NeverTrump agenda. No matter what, I think Ted is done for. He might have a chance in the Libertarian Party after his term is up in 2018.
R∃VO˩UTION
"While many of our liberties are threatened by a government grown too large and too intrusive, there are some fundamental freedoms that are under particular threat. The Patriot Act, for example, is a direct assault on both privacy and the due processes of law. It should be repealed."
Source: Seven Principles, by Gary Johnson, p.144 , Aug 1, 2012 http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Gary...d_Security.htm
Rand Paul for Peace
Vote Trump because Hillary is a disgusting pig.
That's pretty simple.
Who cares about Gary Johnson?
More people here wrote in Ron Paul in 2012 than voted for Gary Johnson, who was doing the same thing last time. And that was a situtation where the GOP and Romney screwed over Ron Paul and the delegates. This time around, Trump didn't screw Rand. We have no reason to be pissed at Trump.
Trump is just as disgusting of a pig as Hillary and equally bad (or worse) on policy (which is what actually matters, in any case).
Anyone who cares about advancing libertarianism.Who cares about Gary Johnson?
It sounds like you vote on the basis of emotions, personalities, fluff.More people here wrote in Ron Paul in 2012 than voted for Gary Johnson, who was doing the same thing last time. And that was a situtation where the GOP and Romney screwed over Ron Paul and the delegates. This time around, Trump didn't screw Rand. We have no reason to be pissed at Trump.
You should vote in the way which will most advance your ideology.
If your ideology is libertarianism, that would mean voting Johnson this cycle.
Not voting or voting CP is foolish, from a strategic point of view, but I can sympathize with the underlying motivation.
Voting Trump, on the other hand, is completely retarded in every respect.
Trump might not be good. Hillary definitely will be awful. All that stuff about Trump not being a Conservative sounds right to me. Same thing can be said for Romney, McCain, Bush, Dole, Bush.
Trump said a few things that some people here liked. I think that makes him the best GOP Nominee in a generation, right? He used the word "Peace" and not in some sneering neocon way, but as something that he was in favor of. That's good, right?
Hillary is sickening, and that's good enough for me. 4 years ago, Obama wasn't quite as sickening, Romney had less to distinguish himself from Obama, and Romney and the GOP screwed over our candidate and our delegates.
At least Trump is pretending to not be not in favor of constant war in the Middle East. When was the last time a GOP Nominee said that?
Him going after Kasich seems like a mistake but I won't be too surprised if repeats same performance in Kasich's hometown as he did with Rubio-Florida. He is dangerously reckless/fearless in his moves annd so far no career politician has been able to stand in a fight after attacking him.
But I see him going after Cruz as a healthy development, this zionists pup was even shunned by leading financier Sheldon. Cruz is finished in Senate.
Who is Ted Cruz?
Who is Rafael Edward Cruz?
Says Iraq invasion was based on nobel reasons - check
Called for US led invasion of Syria - check
Supports sanctions against Iran - check
Supports tax payers funded war with Iran - check
Supports tax payers funded oppression/occupation abroad - check
Opposed even tiny cut in NSA spying funding during "shutdown"- check
Champions Christian Zionism/CUFI/John Hagee - check
Salutes Iraq war sniper who wished he had killed even more Iraqis - check
Says Canada makes better Maple Syrup than US - uncheck
Can be used as a partisan "attack dog" against SWC droneking - check
Ted Cruz is either a stealth,opportunistic agent of Neoconservative Establishment or
a brainswashed Christian Zionist lacking critical thinking abilities... or both.
Will Kerry, McCain, Rafael Ted Cruz succeed in selling Syria military intervention?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...83YwkLAp0#t=39
“We know Assad has used these weapons, and there is good reason to suspect the al Qaida-affiliated rebels would use them as well if they could get their hands on them. This poses an intolerable threat not only to our friends in the region, but also to the United States. We need to be developing a clear, practical plan to go in, locate the weapons, secure or destroy them, and then get out. The United States should be firmly in the lead to make sure the job is done right.”- Rafael Cruz
Ted Cruz attacks Obama for not fully funding NSA spying during shutdown
January 14, 2016
Ted Cruz’s Goldman Sachs Problem
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-c...-sachs-problem
Last edited by enhanced_deficit; 07-23-2016 at 02:01 PM.
MAGA Allies: 'Bully Israel with undeclared nukes steals land'
Dangerous conspiracy theories on Right claim MAGA fake frontgroup
Poll: Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 80s?
Obama-Clinton Years: A Violent Chapter in World History
Trump: If (Neocon) Adelson Backs Rubio "He'll Have Total Control" Over Him
Delta variant, death of 9 Chinese engineers in terror attack led to airport chaos & quick Kabul fall?
Neither Johnson nor Trump were members of Congress, so neither had the opportunity to vote for/against the war.
The difference is that Johnson has always criticized the war, whereas Trump once supported it.
One could infer that, had they both in Congress, Johnson would have voted against it, and Trump for it.
It's as simple as that.
Trump is stupid to be going after Cruz right now, and getting his delegates to boo God and the Constitution during his speech (which didn't actually attack anyone). Cruz had 1.2 million votes in the TX primary, Trump needs every single one of those votes to win the general election. Anyone saying Cruz lost those supporters is being ignorant and irresponsible for believing the lies of the Trump campaign. Irresponsible because they would have people believe Cruz is not the biggest threat to a liberty presidential candidate in 2020.
After this election, Cruz is fair game, and Trump can start whatever PAC he wants, to fund a primary challenger. If he's serious, he will put $20-$50M into it, because that's the kind of money it takes to upend a sitting Senator. Going after him now just makes that task more difficult.
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that Trump is either (a) extremely incompetent, or (b) deliberately throwing the election.
...I lean toward all of the above.
Advancing the cause of Libertarianism?
How's that going?
Seems like it's been a complete and total failure to this point.
But hey, if Hillary wins, and Gary Johnson gets 1-2% of the vote, the GOP can point to the Libertarian Candidate and say "oh, look, it's the Libertarians fault that we have Hillary"
Since that same thing has been happening every 4 years (when the Ds win) and since we're getting farther and farther away from what we want in terms of limited constitutional government, you might want to rethink your strategy, because showing everyone that you're a tiny minority that is of little use does not make things better.
The neocons are pissed at Trump for suggesting that endless wars are not the answer. But is there a neocon party? No. If you want to advance the cause of libertarianism, found the neocon party. Get the neocons away from one of the 2 parties who can actually win, and actually influence the government. If the neocons are out of the GOP, it will be easier for others who are less distasteful to win.
That's just the theory. We're fcked it the truth of it, and nothing can be done.
I don't vote based on emotion. I explained why the Libertarian Party was stupid and counter productive. The Libertarian Party makes normal people who are very used to holding their nose and voting for the lesser of 2 evils dislike the Libertarian Party, and to a lesser extent, libertarian ideas.
Also, you should understand that Trump is better than Hillary. Hillary has her hands on all the wars in the Middle East. Or is your version of Libertarianism pro war in the Middle East. Yay Israel! and More Spying! were in Trumps speech and I didn't like them. But with Hillary, you'll get Yay Israel! and More Spying! too. But with Trump you'll get fewer wars.
I think Trump will probably suck. Hillary definitely will. Because we've already had 8 years of Hillary as "co-president" and she already has sucked for 8 years.
I might grant that the symptoms of physical distress I've had for 20+ years are emotional based symptoms.
But I can make the intellectual case that Hillary would be far worse than Trump.
You can't make the intellectual case that Trump would be worse than Hillary.
Hillary is a disgusting pig who should've been off the stage permanently 16 years ago. You want to argue the merits of Hillary? You think it's good that she's still around? We're all supposed to be Ron or Rand Paul supporters here. I slept on a floor in New Hampshire before the NH Primary in 2008. You sound like a Democrat.
And the fact is, each President has been successively worse and the people who run the suckoligopoly have gotten successively worse. There are fewer of them and they suck more. If you can't tell the difference between Trump and Hillary, great for you, but this time around, they aren't the same.
Have you met Trump's running mate? Because that's who would be in charge of foreign policy and domestic policy. Trump would be in charge of "Making America Great Again".
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/ma...ning-mate.htmlOne day this past May, Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., reached out to a senior adviser to Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, who left the presidential race just a few weeks before. As a candidate, Kasich declared in March that Trump was “really not prepared to be president of the United States,” and the following month he took the highly unusual step of coordinating with his rival Senator Ted Cruz in an effort to deny Trump the nomination. But according to the Kasich adviser (who spoke only under the condition that he not be named), Donald Jr. wanted to make him an offer nonetheless: Did he have any interest in being the most powerful vice president in history?
When Kasich’s adviser asked how this would be the case, Donald Jr. explained that his father’s vice president would be in charge of domestic and foreign policy.
Then what, the adviser asked, would Trump be in charge of?
“Making America great again” was the casual reply.
...
related:
Trump Adviser: Trump Will Outsource Being President to His VP
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
The "neocons" are embedded in all the major parties. The liberty contingent should also be embedded in all the major parties.
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
The libertarian movement is much larger now than, say, 10 years ago.
A record setting turnout for the LP would be help it continue to grow.
It doesn't matter, especially this year when a huge number of registered GOPers hate their own nominee as much as Libertarians do.But hey, if Hillary wins, and Gary Johnson gets 1-2% of the vote, the GOP can point to the Libertarian Candidate and say "oh, look, it's the Libertarians fault that we have Hillary"
And Trump has supported every one of them, and praised her performance as Sec. of State.Also, you should understand that Trump is better than Hillary. Hillary has her hands on all the wars in the Middle East.
Nope, you'll get exactly the same foreign policy.Or is your version of Libertarianism pro war in the Middle East. Yay Israel! and More Spying! were in Trumps speech and I didn't like them. But with Hillary, you'll get Yay Israel! and More Spying! too. But with Trump you'll get fewer wars.
I already have, ad nauseum.But I can make the intellectual case that Hillary would be far worse than Trump.
You can't make the intellectual case that Trump would be worse than Hillary.
I think that if the alternative is her long time friend and ideological ally Donald Trump, it makes no difference.You think it's good that she's still around?
* See my visitor message area for caveats related to my posting history here.
* Also, I have effectively retired from all social media including posting here and are basically opting out of anything to do with national politics or this country on federal or state level and rather focusing locally. I may stop by from time to time to discuss philosophy on a general level related to Libertarian schools of thought and application in the real world.
I don't really care. Hillary is a disgusting pig who should have gone away 16 years ago. You should know better than to defend Hillary.
Donald has borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars from every major Wall Street bank; and supported the TARP bailout of the those banks; and praised Bernanke for printing money and handing it to those banks; and recently named as his national campaign finance chairman Steve Mnuchin, a long time Goldman Sachs executive (where he worked under Hank Paulson, author of the TARP bailout that Donald supported), who later managed a $1 billion fund for George Soros.
xxx
How is pointing out the truth about Trump considered defending Hillary?
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
No, Trump has higher unfavorables (and lower favorables).
That's a nice way of rephrasing the problem to make it sound less bad.Well, when the worst thing you can say about the candidate is that he doesn't hate the opponent enough, that's a good reason to vote for the candidate.
It's not that Trump "doesn't hate" Hillary enough.
It's that he shares her views on all of the important issues facing the country, such that he would govern in the same way.
Again, you're ignoring the most serious problem.And, seriously, during and before Primary season, I ruled Trump out because he gave money to Clinton. But, now, it's a new ballgame. Yes, Trumps judgment in donating to Clinton is bad. But that doesn't make him as bad as the awful person he contributed to. Clinton is so awful that I'd rule someone out in the Primaries just for contributing to her. That is a very high level of awful.
It's not just about donations, it's about a long record of public statements in support of her terrible policies.
Those policies are always and everywhere terrible, whoever mouths them.
....yea, he started criticizing her around the time he started running in the GOP.He also, just 2 days ago, criticized her performance.
Yes we do.We really don't know what he'd do.
No, but Trump likely does.You work for the DNC?
It makes no difference who wins.ou sure are passionate and spend a lot of time on an issue that "makes no difference"
It does make a difference that ostensible libertarians/conservatives are getting suckered into supporting Trumpllary.
^^^ A progressive butt hurt that Trump doesn't support open borders and importing inadequately vetted "refugees" into our country; so that we can hurry up and become a 3rd world nation.
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
A complete and utter LIE.
They are opposed on a number of issues. Issues I have posted many, many times. But, since we are not supposed to support Trump here, I guess that means you get away with repeating your lie over and over again.
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
You're not pointing out the truth. What's funny is that many of your "sources" are in the DNC Leaks emails as having colluded with the DNC to lie and smear. Kind of makes you look "silly" or something.
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
These seem like plans that someone would have if they are not expecting to be President.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...Jo#.lwr5Wl8YKgBut in a 2002 interview with Howard Stern, Donald Trump said he supported an Iraq invasion.
In the interview, which took place on Sept. 11, 2002, Stern asked Trump directly if he was for invading Iraq.
“Yeah, I guess so,” Trump responded. “I wish the first time it was done correctly.”
Trump has repeatedly claimed that he was against the Iraq War before it began, despite no evidence of him publicly stating this position. On Meet the Press, Trump said there weren’t many articles about his opposition because he wasn’t a politician at the time.
“Well, I did it in 2003, I said it before that,” Trump said of his opposition to invading Iraq. “Don’t forget, I wasn’t a politician. So people didn’t write everything I said. I was a businessperson. I was, as they say, a world-class businessperson. I built a great company, I employed thousands of people. So I’m not a politician. But if you look at 2003, there are articles. If you look in 2004, there are articles.”
Trump’s comments on Stern are more in line with what he wrote in his 2000 book, The America We Deserve, where he advocated for a “principled and tough” policy toward “outlaw” states like Iraq.
“We still don’t know what Iraq is up to or whether it has the material to build nuclear weapons. I’m no warmonger,” Trump wrote. “But the fact is, if we decide a strike against Iraq is necessary, it is madness not to carry the mission to its conclusion. When we don’t, we have the worst of all worlds: Iraq remains a threat, and now has more incentive than ever to attack us.”
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/don...-the-iraq-war/Trump Timeline
Sept. 11, 2002: Howard Stern asks Trump if he supports invading Iraq. Trump answers hesitantly. “Yeah, I guess so. You know, I wish it was, I wish the first time it was done correctly.”
Jan. 28, 2003: Trump appears on Fox Business’ “Your World with Neil Cavuto,” on the night of President Bush’s State of the Union address. Trump says he expects to hear “a lot of talk about Iraq and the problems,” and the economy. He urges Bush to make a decision on Iraq. “Either you attack or you don’t attack,” he says. But he offers no opinion on what Bush should do.
There is no spoon.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us