RAND PAUL for 2016??

Started by Bluedog, December 05, 2012, 03:15:51 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Solar

#30
Quote from: Shooterman on December 05, 2012, 03:55:06 PM
My point is it changed with the wind over the years. At heart he is a liberal, and always has been.
What's your point? You said you would vote for him as well...

Quote from: Shooterman on October 20, 2012, 10:13:19 AM
So I have been told more times than I can say grace over.

Even though every fiber of my being says that Mitzi is but one turd higher on the political evolutionary scale than Obama, I am being forced to make a choice between conscience and hoping for the best. I've made my choice to squeeze out a big one, on the mail in ballot, for Romney. I am hoping he doesn't turn out to be a Romnaba.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Shooterman

Quote from: Solar on December 05, 2012, 04:16:50 PM
What's your point? You said you would vote for him as well...

Yeah, I did, though it mattered little in Texas.  I was hoping to buy a little time. With that said, though, I certainly will not berate any that didn't vote for him.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

Yawn

That's where I may be in 2016.  I can't even say I'd have to "hold my nose" and vote for a Rubio or a Paul.  I honestly like them both, but I'm watching the Republicans (both those in power and the Republican voter, slipping to the left on so many issues. 

1) Legalize 20 million new Democrat voters HOPING a FEW will vote with us (they won't).
2) Stop bringing up Abortion (what's 50 million dead human lives?)
3) Change society's definition of Marriage (it'll make those with serious mental issues FEEL better)

These are basic MORAL issues the Republican Party is willing to sacrifice for political power. It gets easier as we throw Christianity out the window.

Voting for a Republican who caves on these issues MAY buy the Republic a LITTLE time, but if we cave, it's guaranteed OVER.  I wouldn't withhold my vote to CAUSE the Republic to crash, but I won't give my approval by voting for someone who will work to push any of these things on the nation.

kramarat

Quote from: Yawn on December 05, 2012, 04:42:34 PM
That's where I may be in 2016.  I can't even say I'd have to "hold my nose" and vote for a Rubio or a Paul.  I honestly like them both, but I'm watching the Republicans (both those in power and the Republican voter, slipping to the left on so many issues. 

1) Legalize 20 million new Democrat voters HOPING a FEW will vote with us (they won't).
2) Stop bringing up Abortion (what's 50 million dead human lives?)
3) Change society's definition of Marriage (it'll make those with serious mental issues FEEL better)

These are basic MORAL issues the Republican Party is willing to sacrifice for political power. It gets easier as we throw Christianity out the window.

Voting for a Republican who caves on these issues MAY buy the Republic a LITTLE time, but if we cave, it's guaranteed OVER.  I wouldn't withhold my vote to CAUSE the Republic to crash, but I won't give my approval by voting for someone who will work to push any of these things on the nation.

It's not the government's job to dictate morality, one way or the other.
The supreme court ruled on abortion. The case is closed. The people that engage in abortion can take the conversation up with their maker.

The duties of the government are spelled out in the constitution. It is intended to be a limited government..............not one that rules according to religious morals. Nor is it one that is allowed to make the determination on whether gays should be able to get married. If anything, it's a state issue.

This is the issue I'm having with the GOP and their weakness. They have no intention of attempting to return to a limited government. In fact, they are kicking conservatives to the curb.

All the GOP is doing, is licking their damned chops in hopes that it will be their turn to rule again. This is utter BS. Our government is working hand in hand to steal our money and our freedom. Only the faces change. Party affiliation seems to mean less and less with every election cycle.

Shooterman

Quote from: kramarat on December 05, 2012, 05:56:11 PM
It's not the government's job to dictate morality, one way or the other.
The supreme court ruled on abortion. The case is closed. The people that engage in abortion can take the conversation up with their maker.

The duties of the government are spelled out in the constitution. It is intended to be a limited government..............not one that rules according to religious morals. Nor is it one that is allowed to make the determination on whether gays should be able to get married. If anything, it's a state issue.

This is the issue I'm having with the GOP and their weakness. They have no intention of attempting to return to a limited government. In fact, they are kicking conservatives to the curb.

All the GOP is doing, is licking their damned chops in hopes that it will be their turn to rule again. This is utter BS. Our government is working hand in hand to steal our money and our freedom. Only the faces change. Party affiliation seems to mean less and less with every election cycle.

That, Kram, earns you a coveted ATTA BOY!
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

Darth Fife

Quote from: kramarat on December 05, 2012, 05:56:11 PM
It's not the government's job to dictate morality, one way or the other.
The supreme court ruled on abortion. The case is closed. The people that engage in abortion can take the conversation up with their maker.

I beg to differ with you! The Supreme Court did not rule on abortion, it ruled on a mythical "Right to Privacy" which is found nowhere in the Constitution.

...a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion...

Most people who practice law, even left leaning types, will tell you that Roe v Wade is "bad" law based on the flimsiest of premises.

Most of the problems facing the U.S. today can be traced (IMHO) to the 14th Amendment.

Just sayin'...

Yawn

Quote from: kramarat on December 05, 2012, 05:56:11 PM
It's not the government's job to dictate morality, one way or the other.
The supreme court ruled on abortion. The case is closed.
The people that engage in abortion can take the conversation up with their maker.

The duties of the government are spelled out in the constitution. It is intended to be a limited government..............not one that rules according to religious morals. Nor is it one that is allowed to make the determination on whether gays should be able to get married. If anything, it's a state issue.


ABSOLUTELY WRONG.

Murder is a moral issue.  So is stealing.  There are many others.  In fact, ALL law is a reflection and imposition of SOMEBODY'S morality. You're also wrong that because a Supreme Court renders a decision, it's final. It is not.  Supreme Courts make mistakes. They made one in 1973. EVERYBODY knows it was wrong. It can be overturned.  Do a little homework and discover why for yourself--has to do with state's rights. 

As far as the Gay issue that seems so important to you, MARRIAGE HAS A DEFINITION.  What the queers and their supporters are demanding is that the federal government impose their definition on us by CHANGING that definition.  Again, you support THAT imposition of homosexual "morality."

Like it or not, I still have the right to vote according to my concept of morality.  You do too.  I can see you will work to put people in office who will impose YOUR morality on the rest of us--the right to kill your child, and to change the definition of marriage.  Those are principles I will oppose just as every generation has until this century (2000 to 2012)

redlom xof

Yawn you're the definition of neo-conservatism.

You claim to hate government, but want it to change anything you don't like in the country. Including what other people do with their bodies and with each other.

Let me guess, you think people who smoke pot should be in prison ?
"Christians are expected to pacify angry Muslims, Communist brats and homosexual radicals and Mexicans who convinced themselves that they own our land. That tells me the Christians are the better people among brutal and violent beasts."  Yawn - 15th May, 2013

taxed

Quote from: redlom xof on December 05, 2012, 08:37:47 PM
Yawn you're the definition of neo-conservatism.

You claim to hate government, but want it to change anything you don't like in the country. Including what other people do with their bodies and with each other.

Let me guess, you think people who smoke pot should be in prison ?

Please show where he said that, or retract it.
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

redlom xof

Really taxed ?

This whole forum is based around the belief that government is the problem.

At least libertarians are consistent with their beliefs.
"Christians are expected to pacify angry Muslims, Communist brats and homosexual radicals and Mexicans who convinced themselves that they own our land. That tells me the Christians are the better people among brutal and violent beasts."  Yawn - 15th May, 2013

taxed

Quote from: redlom xof on December 05, 2012, 09:10:16 PM
Really taxed ?

This whole forum is based around the belief that government is the problem.

At least libertarians are consistent with their beliefs.

You said he hates government.  Limiting government is not hating it.  You are misrepresenting him.  Please correct it.
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

Darth Fife

I hate the government!

But then, I'm in good company...

"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." -

-- Thomas Paine


:rolleyes:

Yawn

Quote from: redlom xof on December 05, 2012, 08:37:47 PM
Let me guess, you think people who smoke pot should be in prison ?

I think it should remain illegal.

The thing that bothers me about this issue (other than a few of you guys who obsess over your "right" to be stoned, I NEVER think about the issue) is that with all of the serious issues facing us, the liberals and the anarchist libertarians spend their days debating about their "right" to go through life stoned.  That tells me we're in deep trouble.

Yawn

Quote from: taxed on December 05, 2012, 09:12:28 PM
You said he hates government.  Limiting government is not hating it.  You are misrepresenting him.  Please correct it.

I love the government the Founders gave us.  I HATE the government and the morality the Democrat Party is IMPOSING on us -- always moving to the left toward Communism.

redlom xof

QuoteYou said he hates government.  Limiting government is not hating it.  You are misrepresenting him.  Please correct it.

ROFL. Out of all the bullshit that goes through this forum, you chose to attack semantics.

" Yawn believes government is the problem for the majority of this countries problems, but he also wants to use government to shape the country he wants." Is that okay ?
"Christians are expected to pacify angry Muslims, Communist brats and homosexual radicals and Mexicans who convinced themselves that they own our land. That tells me the Christians are the better people among brutal and violent beasts."  Yawn - 15th May, 2013