March 10, 2014
— DrewM Ukraine is quickly becoming a proxy war. Not between the West and Russia but between Ted Cruz and Rand Paul on foreign policy.
Yesterday on ABC's This Week Ted Cruz followed up on a position he brought out at CPAC trying to walk a line between the John McCain school of Bomb all the Places and what many believe to be Rand Paul's libertarian Leave Them All Alone And We Can Be Friends approach to the world.
"I think U.S. leadership is critical in the world. And I agree with him that we should be very reluctant to deploy military force aboard," Cruz explained. "But I think there is a vital role, just as Ronald Reagan did."Last month, Paul suggested that some Republicans were "stuck in the Cold War era" because they wanted to "tweak Russia all the time."
During the interview, Cruz pointed out that Reagan "changed the course of history" with his aggressive stance towards Russia, suggesting that perhaps a perspective like Paul's might have led to different results.
Today Paul hits back in a piece at Breitbart's Big Peace.
I donÂ’t claim to be the next Ronald Reagan nor do I attempt to disparage fellow Republicans as not being sufficiently Reaganesque. But I will remind anyone who thinks we will win elections by trashing previous Republican nominees or holding oneself out as some paragon in the mold of Reagan, that splintering the party is not the route to victory.I met Ronald Reagan as a teenager when my father was a Reagan delegate in 1976. I greatly admire ReaganÂ’s projection of "Peace through Strength." I believe, as he did, that our National Defense should be second to none, that defense of the country is the primary Constitutional role of the Federal Government.
There is no greater priority for Congress than defense of the nation.
I also greatly admire that Reagan was not rash or reckless with regard to war. Reagan advised potential foreign adversaries not to mistake our reluctance for war for a lack of resolve.
What America needs today is a Commander-in-Chief who will defend the country and project strength, but who is also not eager for war.
Paul also points out that hawks considered Reagan's willingness to negotiate with the Soviets as proof he was soft on Communism. One prominent conservative of the time even went so far as to call Reagan "a useful idiot" for the Soviets (sorry kids, you didn't build the "true con" vs the rest of the world fight. It's old. Very old.)
I can't tell you how much I hate the idea of the GOP focusing on foreign policy, especially Russia (unless things change a lot between now and then) but it looks like we're going to have at least a temporary fight over it.
I want to like Rand Paul but he just makes me nervous.
It's hard to shake the feeling that if you just scratch the surface enough his dad's craziness will be there.
On the other hand, I like his shrink the government instincts and his attempt to round off some of the harsher edges of the various GOP voting blocs to try and get them to fit together better. I don't know if you can square social conservatism with the more secular leaning fiscal-con wing but at least Paul is trying. Casting drug legalization and prison reform as moral issues of failure and forgiveness might be a bridge between social-cons and his more libertarian base. They don't have to love each other, just see one another as people who aren't directly opposed to the other's goals or hostile on a personal level.
Paul is really good at this stuff and does it in way that isn't condescending or more true-con than you.
Look at his invocation of his dad in that piece. People like me who are freaked out that Rand may just bit a chip off the old crazy bloc get a subtle reminder that Ron Paul maybe a kook but he was an early adopter of the thing we profess to hold dear. Now he skirts over the fact that Reagan would have been appalled by a lot of the things we know Ron Paul was writing about at the time but that's details most people who aren't political junkies will know about. They'll just get the message that the Paul family are old time Reaganites, isn't that nice!
The same goes for Paul's outreach to black voters. He knows he's not going to win a significant number of black voters (but an insignificant number in the right place could help a lot). It's about being "a different kind of Republican". He's not saying Republicans are racists he's just showing that he's a different kind of Republican. And who will be impressed by the nice young man who isn't like all those other crazy Republicans? White swing voters.
There's a lot I like about Paul (and Cruz) but I just can't shake the feeling we're one slip away from the mask slipping and finding out it's really Ron in there. That may not be fair and it may not be true but it's something I think a lot of people who might be incline to support him feel. If his name was Rand Smith it would be a lot easier to get on board with.
Of course there's also the whole, first term Senator with no executive experience hasn't worked out too well recently thing. That obviously cuts against both Paul and Cruz.
Either way, you don't need a time machine to get to 2016. It's here and the fight is on.
Added: Via @allahpundit, Rand Paul's been busy. He also has a piece in Time urging the US to be tough on Putin over Ukraine.
Posted by: DrewM at
06:26 AM
| Comments (446)
Post contains 1012 words, total size 6 kb.
Posted by: grammie winger at March 10, 2014 06:29 AM (oMKp3)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 10, 2014 06:31 AM (GjYxB)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, new socks! at March 10, 2014 06:31 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: grammie winger at March 10, 2014 06:31 AM (oMKp3)
Posted by: t-bird at March 10, 2014 06:32 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 06:32 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Dr. Shatterhand at March 10, 2014 06:32 AM (n/ogz)
That said, he's not the guy you want with the nuclear football.
That's why, between the two, Cruz is my guy. I believe he gets the domestic AND foreign policy needs of this country.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/u][/i][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 06:32 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Bitchy Rich at March 10, 2014 06:33 AM (ihRMJ)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 06:33 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at March 10, 2014 06:33 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/u][/i][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 06:34 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: John McCain at March 10, 2014 06:34 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 06:34 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: CSMBigBird at March 10, 2014 06:35 AM (jsWA8)
Posted by: Citizen X at March 10, 2014 06:35 AM (7ObY1)
It's hard to shake the feeling that if you just scratch the surface enough his dad's craziness will be there."
This is where I am too.
-----
DITO.
Additionally.... the Democrats are going to do their damnedest not to have the campaign framed on the issues of foreign policy.... or Obamacare, entitlements, or the debt and deficit, or the military, or the role of the State in managing our daily lives.
Theyre going to run on War on Women, income inequality, social justice, and legal pot for everybody.
We need to at least have an answer for that.
Posted by: fixerupper at March 10, 2014 06:35 AM (nELVU)
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit at March 10, 2014 10:34 AM (4df7R)
This. Walker / Perry or Walker / Cruz.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 10, 2014 06:35 AM (zF6Iw)
I like a lot of what I see with Rand Paul, but I do think he has a tendency to own-goal in an attempt to make himself look like that "different kind of Republican."
A "different kind of Republican" apparently can't hesitate to condemn someone who is on his own team, even when the offense has nothing to do with him. The Nugent issue had nothing to do with Rand Paul, and yet he saw the need to score some points by getting out there as one of the first to condemn! Look how high-minded he is!
All it means is that he is a political life form slightly more advanced than an ambulance chaser.
This kind of political positioning is very greasy, especially when the alternative is to keep his mouth shut and stay above it. I don't think it is "smart politics." I think people see it for what it is - opportunistic patronizing.
Posted by: grognard at March 10, 2014 06:36 AM (/29Nl)
Posted by: grammie winger at March 10, 2014 06:36 AM (oMKp3)
Posted by: eman at March 10, 2014 06:36 AM (AO9UG)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 10, 2014 06:36 AM (0Jb7F)
Posted by: Citizen X at March 10, 2014 06:37 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Not everything is a conspiracy at March 10, 2014 06:37 AM (jl269)
"I also greatly admire that Reagan was not rash or reckless with regard to war."
Lebanon and Iran/Contra. For all his strengths, Reagan did make some boneheaded decisions on occasion.
One might also note that Rand seems very focused and prepared for this run. He's executing a plan, rather than making it up as he goes along. None of that "Well, I haven't decided. I need to talk to my wife, who is my closest advisor" nonsense.
Man is a shark, in a good way.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at March 10, 2014 06:37 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 06:37 AM (gmeXX)
The more I look at all the almost declared and potential candidates, the more I like Scott Walker. Maybe it's just that he'd really piss off AFSCME. In any case a governor with some actual governing experience (coff, Rick Perry, Jindal, Nikki Haley, Susana Martinez) seems like a more successful candidate than another first term senator.
I sound like Harry Reid on Romney's taxes, but Rand has to prove to me he isn't bat shit crazy like his daddy.
Posted by: Jim in Virginia at March 10, 2014 06:37 AM (2mJbG)
"I want to like Rand Paul but he just makes me nervous.
It's hard to shake the feeling that if you just scratch the surface enough his dad's craziness will be there."
And this is the issue for me too. It's not fair, it's not rational, and it overwhelms my opinion of Rand Paul.
His father it's batshit crazy, and if Rand inherited even 1% of that.....
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 06:38 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: whyme at March 10, 2014 06:38 AM (l9mF2)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, found the old house key at March 10, 2014 06:38 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 10, 2014 06:39 AM (GjYxB)
Posted by: Kinley Ardal at March 10, 2014 06:39 AM (9LuAk)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, found the old house key at March 10, 2014 10:38 AM (naUcP)
^This.
Posted by: Insomniac at March 10, 2014 06:39 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: toby928© at March 10, 2014 06:39 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: joncelli at March 10, 2014 06:40 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Ted Cruz at March 10, 2014 06:40 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: ScoggDog at March 10, 2014 06:40 AM (wC6OR)
And that's not going to happen until and unless markets are freer.
By the way, why aren't the Democrats being forced into taking sides of the wedge when it comes to Ukraine/Russia?
Posted by: Phinn at March 10, 2014 06:40 AM (KOGmz)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 06:40 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 06:40 AM (gmeXX)
He impressed me a lot.
But.....I can't seem to get past his father.
I want to like the guy, I really do.
But right now, it isn't working for me.
Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at March 10, 2014 06:40 AM (si68n)
Posted by: Ted Cruz at March 10, 2014 10:40 AM (SY2Kh)
All of them do it. Only some of them do it to fellow Republicans to score points.
Posted by: grognard at March 10, 2014 06:41 AM (/29Nl)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, matching the socks again at March 10, 2014 06:42 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at March 10, 2014 06:42 AM (GjPnA)
Posted by: .87c at March 10, 2014 06:43 AM (qZPXs)
Posted by: grognard at March 10, 2014 10:41 AM (/29Nl)
And by some, you mean all, right?
Posted by: Kinley Ardal at March 10, 2014 06:43 AM (9LuAk)
Posted by: grognard at March 10, 2014 10:36 AM (/29Nl)
Yes, I didn't like the Nugent attack from rand. He's a bit jittery.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at March 10, 2014 06:43 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Strange Bedfellow at March 10, 2014 06:43 AM (QCc6B)
Posted by: Hollowpoint at March 10, 2014 06:43 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 06:43 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at March 10, 2014 06:43 AM (DrWcr)
For whatever reason Subaru's here are called "Lezzy Limos." And it seems to fit all too well....
Posted by: backhoe at March 10, 2014 06:44 AM (ULH4o)
==
Dang, I'm out of popcorn.
Posted by: mrp at March 10, 2014 06:44 AM (JBggj)
Posted by: Beagle at March 10, 2014 06:44 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/u][/i][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 06:44 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 06:44 AM (gmeXX)
Walker/ Condi.
Yep I know , Iraq war baggage, but she's in her late 50's and still looks hot in black leather boots.
Re trying to out Reagan Reagan: Ronald Reagan did not run as the next Barry Goldwater.
Posted by: Jim in Virginia at March 10, 2014 06:45 AM (2mJbG)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 06:45 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: whyme at March 10, 2014 06:45 AM (l9mF2)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, matching the socks again at March 10, 2014 06:45 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 10:43 AM (zDsvJ)
I think the media have so thoroughly poisoned the well with W that a Jeb presidential campaign is a non-starter. That being said, the media will savage the Republican presidential candidate, no matter who they are.
Posted by: Insomniac at March 10, 2014 06:45 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: Kinley Ardal at March 10, 2014 10:43 AM (9LuAk)
Depends. Fighting against entrenched Republicans in pursuit of conservative principles is not the same as calling the Tea Party "whacko-birds" in an effort to get more media knob polishing.
Fighting against an existential threat to freedom >>>> taking potshots at conservatives that threaten the status quo.
Posted by: grognard at March 10, 2014 06:45 AM (/29Nl)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 06:46 AM (zDsvJ)
TWITCHY: http://tinyurl.com/pgoz85s
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/u][/i][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 06:46 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 06:46 AM (gmeXX)
I would be down with that, if I thought for a moment they'd leave us alone. I don't believe that, so it doesn't work for me.
Posted by: Brother Cavil, found the old house key at March 10, 2014 10:38 AM (naUcP)
Yes , if you leave a power vacuum , there's always someone who tries to be the big boss.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at March 10, 2014 06:47 AM (AWmfW)
Whatever he is, he is no SCOAMF.
Posted by: grognard at March 10, 2014 06:47 AM (/29Nl)
Posted by: jwest at March 10, 2014 06:47 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, whose bobby socks are these? at March 10, 2014 06:47 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Kinley Ardal at March 10, 2014 10:43 AM (9LuAk)
Not fair.
There is one who is head and shoulders above all other Republicans when it comes to shitting on the party.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 06:47 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: Mainah at March 10, 2014 06:48 AM (659DL)
TWITCHY: http://tinyurl.com/pgoz85s
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit at March 10, 2014 10:46 AM (4df7R)
Hipsteriffic douchetasticness!
Posted by: Insomniac at March 10, 2014 06:48 AM (DrWcr)
Risk getting Godbotherer cooties on them? Never happen.
Posted by: HR at March 10, 2014 06:48 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: grammie winger at March 10, 2014 06:48 AM (oMKp3)
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at March 10, 2014 06:48 AM (q6kaG)
Depends. Fighting against entrenched Republicans in pursuit of conservative principles is not the same as calling the Tea Party "whacko-birds" in an effort to get more media knob polishing.Fighting against an existential threat to freedom >>>> taking potshots at conservatives that threaten the status quo.
Posted by: grognard at March 10, 2014 10:45 AM (/29Nl)
Concur wholeheartedly. In honesty, I had read that the other way around, and was about to point out Tea Party whacko-birds as a counterpoint. O_o My apologies for the confusion.
Posted by: Kinley Ardal at March 10, 2014 06:49 AM (9LuAk)
100 quatloos says Hillary Rodham is not the Dem nominee in 2016.
.
Posted by: Jim in Virginia at March 10, 2014 10:48 AM (2mJbG)
Red-skinned, rested, and ready!
Posted by: Elizabeth Warren at March 10, 2014 06:49 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: backhoe at March 10, 2014 06:50 AM (ULH4o)
Posted by: stace at March 10, 2014 06:50 AM (9PXzx)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, burning plaid socks at March 10, 2014 06:50 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: ScoggDog at March 10, 2014 06:50 AM (wC6OR)
Posted by: Kinley Ardal at March 10, 2014 10:49 AM (9LuAk)
Hehe, no worries. I actually thought it was a test.
Posted by: grognard at March 10, 2014 06:50 AM (/29Nl)
Posted by: Not everything is a conspiracy at March 10, 2014 06:51 AM (jl269)
Posted by: whyme at March 10, 2014 06:51 AM (l9mF2)
God I hate this "executive experience" meme. Has everyone forgotten this guy named Bush, a governor with "executive experience" who was an absolute disaster? Obama is a bad president because he's a leftist, not because of his resume.
Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at March 10, 2014 06:51 AM (DPMu1)
Posted by: jwest at March 10, 2014 06:51 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at March 10, 2014 10:43 AM (AWmfW)
AFAIC, any Dem scumbag or media whore (BIRM) who whines about "attacks" should have chapter and verse of the Palin attacks thrown back in their faces, ending with, "get apologies from them first or FOAD. Next question!"
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 10, 2014 06:51 AM (zF6Iw)
There is one who is head and shoulders above all other Republicans when it comes to shitting on the party.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 10:47 AM (QFxY5)
Aye, I thoroughly misunderstood the post. I blame it on today being a Monday with me locked in the office, instead of outside in the finally-kinda-warm weather after a really damn cold winter.
I also blame it on daylight savings time losing me an hour of my day, which is rather a sore point. o.- Is there any point at all to this DST nonsense?
Posted by: Kinley Ardal at March 10, 2014 06:52 AM (9LuAk)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 06:52 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 06:52 AM (gmeXX)
Look at me!!
Posted by: Peter King at March 10, 2014 06:52 AM (IV4od)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 10, 2014 06:52 AM (GjYxB)
Posted by: phoenixgirl @phxazgrl at March 10, 2014 06:53 AM (u8GsB)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, found a left sock at March 10, 2014 06:53 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 06:53 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: stace at March 10, 2014 06:54 AM (9PXzx)
100 quatloos says Hillary Rodham is not the Dem nominee in 2016.
.
Posted by: Jim in Virginia at March 10, 2014 10:48 AM (2mJbG)
Not unless she dries out first. She always looks like she's on the 6th day of a 5-day bender these days.
Posted by: joncelli at March 10, 2014 06:55 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 06:55 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, Syrias You Guys at March 10, 2014 06:55 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: jwest at March 10, 2014 10:51 AM (u2a4R)
Your antipathy toward religion is palpable.
Your inability to see any gradations in opinions is indicative of your lack of critical thinking skills.
Your obvious and childish rhetorical techniques have been used by smarter people to greater affect.
But keep chugging away....you'll learn...eventually.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 06:55 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, burning plaid socks at March 10, 2014 10:50 AM (naUcP)
I think his fashion sense WAS taken out and shot, and that's why he's wearing that godawful outfit. No one with eyes could ever believe that THAT look suits the doughy turnip.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/u][/i][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 06:57 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes C'est Magnifique at March 10, 2014 06:58 AM (6fg3O)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 10, 2014 06:58 AM (GjYxB)
Actually, you were correct.
I was just pointing out that McCain is the undisputed master at shitting on his own party, and that he deserves appreciation for what is a skill that he has honed over the years.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 06:58 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) (No Really!) at March 10, 2014 06:59 AM (hq5sb)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 06:59 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Gary from Providence, A Touch Askew at March 10, 2014 06:59 AM (yhJhK)
is for all 2016 GOP hopefuls to completely IGNORE EACH OTHER until it is decided.
Put out their views, be congenial if the media tries to start a fight, hammer Obama et. al., and let the people pick based on positive agenda, not fucking Tardisil-level bullshit.
Oppo research has lost sight of the big picture. Sure, it could score some points you need to win, but it's fundamentally unserious to bring up something like Guardasil mandates in the midst of a SCOAMF-reign.
Posted by: grognard at March 10, 2014 06:59 AM (/29Nl)
Posted by: Phelps at March 10, 2014 06:59 AM (45jz9)
Posted by: Beagle at March 10, 2014 06:59 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: Matthew "The state predates private property" Yglesias at March 10, 2014 06:59 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, whose webcam is this? at March 10, 2014 07:00 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Mainah at March 10, 2014 07:00 AM (659DL)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 07:01 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 07:01 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:01 AM (zDsvJ)
Don't split the anti-establishment vote (let them do that for once with Jeb/Christie/Ryan).
Hash it out behind closed doors and present a united front, perhaps a join ticket.
Posted by: Jose at March 10, 2014 07:01 AM (zc/sw)
Maybe it's just an actual full field ... for a damn change.
I have my preferences, but I'd cast a vote for Paul, Cruz, Perry, or Walker. I see them all as a step in the right direction. Huckster, Jeb, or Christie ... not so much.
Posted by: ScoggDog at March 10, 2014 07:01 AM (wC6OR)
DrewM made the point in the second paragraph, and I think it's a good one.
And...he got a shot in on McCain, which is always worth a few points.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:01 AM (QFxY5)
"I want to like Rand Paul but he just makes me nervous."
It's pretty clear that many conservatives are going to differ with him on foreign policy and social issues. He is a libertarian.
But, at least you get some fiscal control and regulatory push-back. Half a loaf, as opposed to the nada the Reps have offered since '88.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at March 10, 2014 07:02 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: ARL at March 10, 2014 07:02 AM (HN6JB)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) (No Really!) at March 10, 2014 07:02 AM (hq5sb)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, found a Kemp '88 sticker! at March 10, 2014 07:02 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: grammie winger at March 10, 2014 07:02 AM (oMKp3)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 11:01 AM (IXrOn)
Look into his stance on the 2nd Amendment.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:02 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: Jose at March 10, 2014 11:01 AM (zc/sw)
Why the conservative wing cannot grasp this fundamental principle is beyond me! And it applies to many such policy details.
Posted by: Hrothgar at March 10, 2014 07:03 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: jwest at March 10, 2014 07:04 AM (u2a4R)
"I want to like Rand Paul but he just makes me nervous."
Tell us about it. Any minute we keep expecting him to just lose it and start going public with the truth about our ongoing DNA spider-goat hybridization experiments or our super-secret water fluoridation mind control program or our alliance with the Evil Jewish Banker (TM) Syndicate. It gets downright nerve-racking sometimes.
Posted by: The Illuminati at March 10, 2014 07:04 AM (O66NZ)
George Bush is a good man, he loves his country, and is someone I would be proud to have in my home.
[Little Black Duck? Please to explain!]
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:04 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at March 10, 2014 07:05 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: kartoffel at March 10, 2014 07:05 AM (sWwJZ)
Posted by: Avi at March 10, 2014 07:05 AM (p/izY)
People who don't have to get out of bed in the morning to go earn a living can go golfing at night.
Posted by: HR at March 10, 2014 07:05 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: grammie winger at March 10, 2014 07:05 AM (oMKp3)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 07:05 AM (gmeXX)
***
If you presume that Obama wanted to make America strongly economically, politically, socially, etc then he is an abject failure, and I guess grounds to question how other Senators would fair.
On the other hand if you presume that Obama, at best, doesn't care about making America stronger in an way, shape or form and is instead focused on "transforming" America to be something alien he has been incredibly successful, which tends to call into question the notion that Senators have a problem governing...
It seems clear to me that the latter is true based on not only what Obama has said, but more importantly what he has done.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 07:06 AM (P3U0f)
I've been suspicious of Rand ever since his stupid airport meltdown.
However, he is the only one who can win. In our current culture, the standard GOP brand is terminally uncool. We need the freshness of the libertarian label to win this. Fair or not, its the truth. Perry? Are you that massochistic? Love Cruz but he lacks the image / charisma. Walker- maybe but I doubt it. It has to be Rand or we lose.
Posted by: Cat-Snatch-Beavaar at March 10, 2014 07:06 AM (cquH6)
Posted by: Not everything is a conspiracy at March 10, 2014 07:06 AM (jl269)
I think Carson would be an excellent choice for VP, but I do not know if he could raise the funds needed for POTUS.
Anybody who thinks the Second Amendment should be restricted based on where you live has no business on a GOP ticket.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 10, 2014 07:06 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:06 AM (zDsvJ)
I'm totally concerned that the mask will slip, and Ron will pop out. Moreover, my recent experience with limited-experience politicians who are Senators being elected President is not positive.
Can we please have Scott Walker?
Posted by: MTF at March 10, 2014 07:07 AM (LISuA)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 07:07 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Deja Vu All Over Again at March 10, 2014 07:07 AM (yhJhK)
People who don't have to get out of bed in the morning to go earn a living can go golfing at night.
Posted by: HR at March 10, 2014 11:05 AM (ZKzrr)
Which is why I love it! FORE, you peasants!
Posted by: King Barky XIV at March 10, 2014 07:07 AM (RD7QR)
BTW, this little black duck is NOT going to jump on the "W was the worstest president evah" bandwagon.
He did a lot of good under difficult circumstances. He was not perfect, but he was by no means the worst GOP POTUS in my lifetime.
---
He was arguably the second-best of our lifetime, which is quite depressing.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 10, 2014 07:07 AM (0Jb7F)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 07:08 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: jwest at March 10, 2014 11:04 AM (u2a4R)
FYI: Many chess grandmasters in the past such as Lasker and Morphy and Alekhine (!) were also world-class checkers players. Calling someone a 'world-class checkers player' isn't an insult. You might want to bone up on your snappy repartee.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 07:08 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:09 AM (zDsvJ)
Some of the things I'm kind of concerned about between the two are the issues of legalizing drugs and reforming criminal laws/sentencing. I don't know really where each one stands, but the meme at CPAC that certain federal crimes are non-violent bothers me. Of course being prosecuted and convicted for selling a whale's tooth on E-bay is ridiculous, but how can one say that any ill-gotten gains from fraud (imbezzling/stealing millions of dollars from investors to writing bad checks) is not violent?
I would trust Cruz with these issues more than Paul.
Posted by: joanne at March 10, 2014 07:09 AM (s/quq)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, found a Kemp '88 sticker! at March 10, 2014 07:09 AM (naUcP)
***
For 20 years now the conservative wing has been told that if we elect "moderate Republicans" we'll get change in a conservative direction, just slower then if we elected "true cons".
However in this time frame, every time the Republican party has had the political power to push an agenda it has, under "moderate Republican" leadership instead pushed the country in a leftwing direction.
Based on their record, I do not trust the current "moderate Republican" leadership to suddenly change its stripes, and it isn't even claiming it will...Boehner, for example, wants Amnesty.
So one cannot help but see this group as blocker in advancing conservative change. We aren't on the same team with different priorities...we are on separate teams.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 07:10 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Not everything is a conspiracy at March 10, 2014 11:06 AM (jl269)
The Gridiron dinners are Exhibit A in the accusation that politics is all one big incestuous joke. Cruz went down in my estimation by being there.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 10, 2014 07:10 AM (zF6Iw)
I wonder how many other people are in my corner. Math has to win, one of these days, right?
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 11:07 AM (HVff2)
What's the official ELCA policy on gay marriage? I'm not being snarky.
Posted by: joncelli at March 10, 2014 07:10 AM (RD7QR)
I think that Ron Paul long ago moved beyond tacit acceptance of anti-semitism in his supporters and is a full blown anti-Semite.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:10 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at March 10, 2014 07:10 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 11:02 AM (QFxY5)
Yeah, that pretty much kills the deal for me.
Posted by: Insomniac at March 10, 2014 07:10 AM (DrWcr)
I dse "Snappy Repartee" open for "REO Speedwagon" in 1976 at the Orpheum..... before Speedwagon went all bubblegum and shit. Good show.
Posted by: fixerupper at March 10, 2014 07:11 AM (nELVU)
It means our ideas have no merit.
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 11:08 AM (gmeXX)
It means ideas don't matter. Elections have devolved into American Idol, like it or not, this is the game we have to compete in.
Posted by: Cat-Snatch-Beavaar at March 10, 2014 07:11 AM (cquH6)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:11 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Paul Zummo at March 10, 2014 07:12 AM (Ud5vq)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at March 10, 2014 11:10 AM (aDwsi)
The money people like them. That's all that matters to the GOP.
Posted by: joncelli at March 10, 2014 07:12 AM (RD7QR)
***
35% or so of the electorate will go out and vote for the conservative candidate based on his political philosophy.
30% or so of the electorate will go out and vote for the liberal candidate based on his political philosophy.
The remaining 35% don't care about political philosophy and will decide who to vote for based on, primarily, the charisma of the two candidates that they see through the filter of the State Media.
Sadly, it won't be ideas that win or lose the next presidential election...it will be who the LIVs would rather have a beer with.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 07:13 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:13 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: LadyS at March 10, 2014 07:13 AM (tMTsS)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:13 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 07:13 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 07:14 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) (No Really!) at March 10, 2014 07:14 AM (hq5sb)
It's simply irrational to assume that an inward focus will signal that we are peaceful and that all we desire is to be left to our own devices.
3,000 years of human history says that's nuts.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:15 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: grammie winger at March 10, 2014 07:15 AM (oMKp3)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 07:15 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Not everything is a conspiracy at March 10, 2014 07:15 AM (jl269)
Posted by: acat at March 10, 2014 07:16 AM (gGEmy)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:16 AM (zDsvJ)
We've tried a womanizing lying POS, a couple of 'compassionate conservatives', and an outright socialist -- maybe it's time to give a libertarian a turn.
I also think it's patently unfair to attribute everything bad about the father to the son. I love my dad, but I think he's a bonehead on quite a few topics. This has led to many interesting 'discussions'.
But I'll happily vote for Cruz if he's the nominee. My enthusiasm goes down from there.
Posted by: GnuBreed at March 10, 2014 07:16 AM (wNF3N)
I see Neocons like Drew M are upset Rand took apart their little golden boy Teddy Cruz.
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 11:13 AM (Eimoe)
Point of order: the word "neocon" is to be replaced with "filthy Joo" wherever it occurs.
Get back to Stormfront, troll.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 10, 2014 07:16 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, found his Green Bay schedule at March 10, 2014 07:16 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 07:17 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:17 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at March 10, 2014 07:17 AM (1hM1d)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:17 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:17 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 11:13 AM (zDsvJ)
As long as there are Christian babies so I can make matzoh I'll be fine.
Paul's hinting at shadowy organizations that control the money supply and pull the strings is not particularly new.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:17 AM (QFxY5)
176 ... I concur.
Times really have changed in one respect ... the public gives not a shit about these "above the fray" candidates.
If any GOP guy wants to win - he better be willing to fight. No points will be given for being the better man.
Posted by: ScoggDog at March 10, 2014 07:17 AM (wC6OR)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 07:17 AM (t3UFN)
Interesting that Palin would support Ben Carson.
Even hint at him as POTUS.
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 11:17 AM (IXrOn)
She's fully embracing her role as outsider now, and all her endorsements will be for outsiders.
Posted by: joncelli at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) (No Really!) at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (hq5sb)
Of course there's also the whole, first term Senator with no executive
experience hasn't worked out too well recently thing.
Different situation. The Puppymuncher won his Senate seat in an easy election when the Illinois Republican Party imploded, and he was a backbencher who missed something like half his scheduled Senate votes. His only claim to competance was taking out Hillary, and that was really the Democrats deciding which aggrieved minority group to give the nomination to.
Cruz and Paul had more challenging primary/general election experience and have taken leadership roles in the conservative insurgency. Much better training for the center chair.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (kdS6q)
I did not know Ben Carson's exact quote on gun control.
Here it is:
http://tinyurl.com/p4wqfqs
It's vague.
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 11:15 AM (IXrOn)
Dr. Benjamin Carson said: “It depends on where you live. I think if you live in the midst of a lot of people, and I’m afraid that that semi-automatic weapon is going to fall into the hands of a crazy person, I would rather you not have it.”
Posted by: Insomniac at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (DrWcr)
This is why these foreign policy threads are fun. You never know who's secretly Hitler.
Posted by: kartoffel at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (sWwJZ)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: grammie winger at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (oMKp3)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (T0NGe)
I like Rand.
Posted by: Geraldine Ferraro at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (epWQP)
Posted by: Not everything is a conspiracy at March 10, 2014 11:15 AM (jl269)
That's not the point, and I don't care that Reagan went. The Democrats and the State Media (BIRM) are the enemy. How much goddamn "fundamental transformation" of this country has to happen before you see it?
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 10, 2014 07:18 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: t-bird at March 10, 2014 07:19 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: backhoe at March 10, 2014 07:19 AM (ULH4o)
Posted by: My cousin Vinnie at March 10, 2014 07:19 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:19 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: Hector, Full of Troof at March 10, 2014 07:20 AM (Aif/5)
Posted by: Beagle at March 10, 2014 07:20 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: Insomniac at March 10, 2014 07:20 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at March 10, 2014 07:20 AM (1hM1d)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) (No Really!) at March 10, 2014 07:20 AM (hq5sb)
Posted by: Washington Nearsider at March 10, 2014 07:21 AM (fwARV)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:21 AM (zDsvJ)
------
Neocon.
You keep using that word. You have no earthly idea what it means..... except it sounds all evil and bad.
You are officially an idiot.
Posted by: fixerupper at March 10, 2014 07:21 AM (nELVU)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:21 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: Paul Zummo at March 10, 2014 07:21 AM (Ud5vq)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 10, 2014 07:21 AM (DmNpO)
***
Gay marriage is troubling for two reasons - the more immediate one is that it is a proxy for the left to continue to assault social conservatives with the power of the state...as you note...and this has been raised quite a bit recently.
I think there is a second aspect though that hasn't gotten enough coverage. Namely, the state media built this as an issue from the ground up.
If you asked someone 20 years ago, even in the gay movement, whether there was a fundamental right to "gay marriage" they would have likely laughed at you.
And yet 20 years of propaganda now has made a majority support it. This should be troubling to anyone not part of the hard left...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 07:22 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at March 10, 2014 11:20 AM (kdS6q)
-----
She's awesome!!!!
Posted by: BJ Clinton at March 10, 2014 07:22 AM (nELVU)
sorry kids, you didn't build the "true con" vs the rest of the world fight
Most people think that history started the day they were born. Everything before that was in the "Dark Ages" and never thought about.
Watch Reagan's 1964 speech in support of AuH2O. (Do people still do that? Just channeled my 'early days of interweb'). That wing of the party went into retrograde because of the landslide, but the ideas held up.
It surprises me that it took only 16 years for RR to make it to the top. (Because those 16 years were most of my life at the time, so it was forever).
People come and go. Ideas matter.
Posted by: Frumious Bandersnatch at March 10, 2014 07:22 AM (A0sHn)
Posted by: grammie winger at March 10, 2014 07:22 AM (oMKp3)
Posted by: naturalfake at March 10, 2014 07:23 AM (0cMkb)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 07:23 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 10, 2014 07:23 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 07:23 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies with whipped cream. at March 10, 2014 07:23 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Hector, Full of Troof at March 10, 2014 11:20 AM (Aif/5)
You say that like it's a bad thing...
Posted by: Romans eyeing the Sabine women at March 10, 2014 07:23 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:23 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) (No Really!) at March 10, 2014 11:20 AM (hq5sb)
And he shouldn't try.
Carson is like Palin; much more effective on the outside.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:23 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at March 10, 2014 07:24 AM (gBnkX)
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 11:22 AM (P3U0f)
I thought I'd omit the specific subject and just repeat the bottom line.
This is true for several issues today.
Posted by: jwb7605 [/i][/u][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 07:24 AM (ZALPg)
If I become a Libertarian, does that mean I need to start believing in bullshit antisemitic conspiracy theories and a coin money only monetary policy? Do I need to believe--as Ron Paul has publicly stated--that Iran is a victim of behind-the-scenes Zionist *cough*Joooish*cough* influence on American foreign policy?
Ron Paul is/has been/always will be batshit crazy, and his son softly echoes that same batshit craziness. All it takes for Hillary to beat Rand Paul is to take off the gloves and identify the father with the son, saturate the airwaves with the old man's more loony-tunes Crazy Uncle In The Attic moments, from which there are many to choose.
There's a reason why big 'L' Libertarians typically garner 2% or less of the vote. Because crazy conspiracy stuff. Because foreign policy idiocy. Because 18th Century monetary and economic policy.
The antisemitism is the worst, though. That whole Ron Paul-based libertarian 'movement' reeks of it.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 07:24 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: blaster at March 10, 2014 07:24 AM (4+AaH)
Posted by: Hector, Couch Fucker at March 10, 2014 07:24 AM (Aif/5)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 07:24 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:25 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) (No Really!) at March 10, 2014 07:25 AM (hq5sb)
appear moderate to low info voters.
La Palin had a meaty red meat thing at CPAC. One of the things she name-checked was LiVs. I didn't realize that was a thing outside of the horde.
Posted by: Frumious Bandersnatch at March 10, 2014 07:25 AM (A0sHn)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 07:25 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: ScoggDog at March 10, 2014 07:26 AM (wC6OR)
We got involved in WW2 because we were attacked...
***
Well, FDR started an "illegal war" with Germany in 1940 before Pearl Harbor in the North Atlantic.
FDR used Pearl Harbor and Germany's following DOW, but he was committed to war with Germany before that point.
Interestingly FDR also arguably ran as the more isolationist candidate in 1940 even as he was trying to provoke Germany into a full fledged war.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 07:27 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Jen at March 10, 2014 07:27 AM (JqB3t)
Posted by: Parteagirl at March 10, 2014 07:27 AM (Plx/u)
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at March 10, 2014 07:27 AM (1hM1d)
Posted by: fastfreefall at March 10, 2014 07:27 AM (2d969)
Posted by: Beagle at March 10, 2014 07:27 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:27 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:27 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 07:28 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Hector, Couch Fucker at March 10, 2014 11:24 AM (Aif/5)
I'm hot and ready, baby. . .
Posted by: The Toaster at March 10, 2014 07:28 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 07:28 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Paul Zummo at March 10, 2014 07:29 AM (Ud5vq)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:29 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:29 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 10, 2014 07:29 AM (84gbM)
La Palin had a meaty red meat thing at CPAC. One of the things she name-checked was LiVs. I didn't realize that was a thing outside of the horde.
Did she call them "lo-fo mofos?" Because that would have been awesome.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at March 10, 2014 07:30 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 10, 2014 07:30 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 11:29 AM (t3UFN)
What the hell does that mean? I don't speak Austrian!
Posted by: Joe Biden at March 10, 2014 07:30 AM (DrWcr)
Too much shorthand....
I was agreeing with you.
But I like Palin's position as the critical outsider, and Carson can fill that role with respect to ObamaCare and the looming catastrophe in health care.
Sort of like how Al Gore has become the Left's go-to guy on climate. He's obviously completely full of shit, but the veneer of expertise is impressive to the LIVs
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:30 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 07:30 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 07:31 AM (gmeXX)
The "gay movement" would have called you a "homophobe" for thinking gay people should "act straight."
Posted by: HR at March 10, 2014 07:31 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, considering a nap at March 10, 2014 07:31 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 11:30 AM (HVff2)
And did they serve matzoh at the concession stand? Hmmm? I KNEW IT!
Posted by: Hector the Serbian at March 10, 2014 07:31 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Phinn at March 10, 2014 10:40 AM (KOGmz)
What side?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 10:45 AM (t3UFN)
Any side against Obama. The MFM loves to play up in-fighting in the GOP, but don't force the Dems to draw blood on each other.
Posted by: Phinn at March 10, 2014 07:31 AM (KOGmz)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 10, 2014 07:32 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Conservative Crank's iPhone at March 10, 2014 07:32 AM (R+XDI)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at March 10, 2014 07:32 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: corilianus snow at March 10, 2014 07:33 AM (VYGs9)
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 11:27 AM (P3U0f)
Always nice to hear from Nazi-sympathizing America Firsters teleported from November, 1941. Now get back in your fucking time machine and see how the rest of it played out.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 07:33 AM (O66NZ)
Of all the days to forget my giant sippy cup of Val-U-Rite.
Posted by: HR at March 10, 2014 07:34 AM (ZKzrr)
Do so because of his Father...
Yet continue to say that being a Bush is not a 'disqualifier'...
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 10, 2014 11:32 AM (84gbM)
Sorry, got to disagree with you on that. I think the membership of the "Ron Paul is batshit" and "No Bush dynasty" sets overlap heavily.
Posted by: joncelli at March 10, 2014 07:34 AM (RD7QR)
Jeb?
I'll say it.
The is America. We do not need dynasties, and should carefully reject any hint of them.
No More Bush!
[wait....what?]
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:34 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 07:34 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 07:34 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 07:34 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 10, 2014 07:35 AM (GjYxB)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:35 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: Beagle at March 10, 2014 07:35 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 07:35 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 07:35 AM (HVff2)
See, we found him! Hitler shows up in every foreign policy thread.
Posted by: kartoffel at March 10, 2014 07:35 AM (sWwJZ)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) (No Really!) at March 10, 2014 07:35 AM (hq5sb)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 10, 2014 07:35 AM (GjYxB)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at March 10, 2014 07:36 AM (aDwsi)
And, yup, I did used to roll my eyes so hard at the thought of 401k seizures that I'm surprised they didn't fall out. Now I can't believe it hasn't happened yet. See re: Insty's we are all conspiracy theorists now.
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies with whipped cream. at March 10, 2014 07:36 AM (VtjlW)
287 ... No respect for the Racing Stripe ? The Top Knot ?
This No More Bush thing is getting out of hand.
Posted by: ScoggDog at March 10, 2014 07:37 AM (wC6OR)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 10, 2014 07:37 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 10, 2014 07:38 AM (DmNpO)
***
So...history offends you? Life must be tough.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 07:38 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 07:38 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:39 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: phoenixgirl @phxazgrl at March 10, 2014 07:39 AM (u8GsB)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:39 AM (T0NGe)
How much does a W-80 cost? I'm asking for a friend...
Posted by: Anthony L. at March 10, 2014 07:39 AM (34n6F)
Posted by: Jen at March 10, 2014 07:39 AM (JqB3t)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 10, 2014 07:39 AM (GjYxB)
Posted by: Not everything is a conspiracy at March 10, 2014 07:40 AM (jl269)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:40 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: t-bird at March 10, 2014 07:40 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 11:38 AM (P3U0f)
No, ignorance offends me. Claiming that FDR was somehow 'provoking' Der Fuhrer is just fucking idiocy. You've been reading too much Patrick 'Hitler was a great man' Buchanan, who makes essentially the same arguments you do.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 07:40 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at March 10, 2014 07:40 AM (gBnkX)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:40 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 11:34 AM (HVff2)
good God!!! huntsman isn't thinking of running again is he?
Posted by: phoenixgirl @phxazgrl at March 10, 2014 11:39 AM (u8GsB)
He's filthy rich and has nothing better to do. Plus his hot daughters might want some media exposure.
Posted by: joncelli at March 10, 2014 07:40 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Soona at March 10, 2014 07:41 AM (y92mV)
Posted by: Hillary! at March 10, 2014 07:41 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at March 10, 2014 07:41 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 10, 2014 07:41 AM (DmNpO)
Posted by: Hector's Dick Hurts at March 10, 2014 07:41 AM (Aif/5)
Well, I guess in the sense that supporting our allies was provoking Hitler.
That's ridiculous, but it's the only thing I can think of.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:41 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:42 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: phoenixgirl @phxazgrl at March 10, 2014 07:42 AM (u8GsB)
2016 is a long long time away in Baraka-years.
Posted by: Soona at March 10, 2014 11:41 AM (y92mV)
But not in Hillary, Biden, or DNC years. Those of us who aren't Demonrats don't have the luxury of only focusing on the midterms. We have to focus on midterms AND 2016. I hate it with the power of 1000 suns, but it's the truth.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/u][/i][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 07:42 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, found the Good Stuff at March 10, 2014 07:42 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Lincolntf at March 10, 2014 07:42 AM (ZshNr)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 10, 2014 07:42 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/u][/i][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 07:43 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Not everything is a conspiracy at March 10, 2014 07:43 AM (jl269)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at March 10, 2014 07:43 AM (gBnkX)
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 07:43 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: Baldy at March 10, 2014 07:43 AM (2bql3)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:44 AM (Eimoe)
Come to think, also ban current officeholders from running for anything again, or being appointed to anything, or even just hired.
Time to clean house.
Posted by: Brother Cavil, found the Good Stuff at March 10, 2014 11:42 AM (naUcP)
I'm actually surprised that the founders didn't put something like this in the Constitution in the first place. Maybe Adams already had John Quincy penciled in for his successor.
Posted by: joncelli at March 10, 2014 07:44 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/u][/i][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 07:44 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: backhoe at March 10, 2014 07:44 AM (ULH4o)
Rand? Well, his dad would probably get a cabinet slot or the Fed Reserve chairmanship or something. Who else would be in his circle?
Posted by: Y-not
You're reaching there. By 2017 Paul the Elder would be 81. The actuarial tables say his most likely position at that time will be horizontal.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at March 10, 2014 07:44 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Establishment RINO at March 10, 2014 07:44 AM (ofmrm)
Posted by: Establishment RINO at March 10, 2014 07:44 AM (ofmrm)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 10, 2014 07:45 AM (659DL)
Posted by: Costanza Defense at March 10, 2014 07:45 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Reptilian Shape Shifters at March 10, 2014 07:45 AM (Aif/5)
You say that like it's a BAD thing.
Posted by: physics geek at March 10, 2014 07:45 AM (MT22W)
Posted by: Beagle at March 10, 2014 07:46 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: Reptilian Shape Shifters at March 10, 2014 11:45 AM (Aif/5)
Dude. The Elders of Zion are totally bogarting the bong.
Posted by: The Grays at March 10, 2014 07:46 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/u][/i][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 07:47 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:47 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 10, 2014 11:41 AM (DmNpO)
I have fewer issues with Rand Paul's support of his father than I do with Sarah Palin's support of McCain's last Senate run.
That said, I like them both.
Posted by: jwb7605 [/i][/u][/s][/b] at March 10, 2014 07:47 AM (ZALPg)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, DST sux, kthxbye at March 10, 2014 07:47 AM (naUcP)
I am not my Dad, Rand Paul is not his. Sure I understand gut feelings, can't fault that.
But why compromise? Rand/Cruz or Cruz/Rand would be fine with me.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at March 10, 2014 07:47 AM (gorVZ)
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/03/that-rabbit-is-nuclear.php
Just to chase away all the Carter vibes
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at March 10, 2014 07:47 AM (m1gXb)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 10, 2014 07:47 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 10, 2014 07:48 AM (DmNpO)
Evil Republicans make political hay from the suffering of those with illness!
Posted by: Hrothgar at March 10, 2014 07:48 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: Avi at March 10, 2014 07:48 AM (p/izY)
Posted by: SH at March 10, 2014 07:48 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 10, 2014 07:48 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, DST sux, kthxbye at March 10, 2014 07:48 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:48 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 10, 2014 07:49 AM (659DL)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 10, 2014 07:49 AM (t3UFN)
He's a troll.
Don't bother, unless you need to tune up for other places.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 10, 2014 07:50 AM (QFxY5)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:50 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 10, 2014 07:50 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:50 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: X at March 10, 2014 07:51 AM (KHo8t)
Posted by: TexasJew at March 10, 2014 07:53 AM (hnFK/)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:53 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: Titanium at March 10, 2014 07:53 AM (5Zp+E)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 07:55 AM (Eimoe)
Posted by: steve walsh at March 10, 2014 07:56 AM (xDQNc)
Posted by: Big T Party at March 10, 2014 07:56 AM (tE2TK)
Posted by: Beagle at March 10, 2014 07:57 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: Cruz is Lame at March 10, 2014 11:53 AM (Eimoe)
You don't know this place very well. Many who post here have served, some in combat. That 'Neocon chickenhawk' Ron Paul bullshit doesn't fly here.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 07:59 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: Jen at March 10, 2014 08:00 AM (JqB3t)
***
Are you really that big of a fool? While people at the time didn't know FDR brought the US into WWII before Pearl Harbor, preciously because he wanted to keep it secret, this is currently no dispute that he now.
See for example
FDRÂ’s UNDECLARED WAR Naval History magazine (U.S. Naval Institute) February 2004
Unknown to Congress and the American people, months before Pearl Harbor the U.S. Navy secretly hunted Axis warships in the North Atlantic. Six decades later, that simple but unassailable fact continues to elude the public, decades of written scholarship, and almost all historians. Declassified by the National Archives, the once secret documents – including operational plans and orders originating with the Chief of Naval Operations and Commander-in-chief-Atlantic Fleet – confirms that the U.S. Navy throughout most of 1941, was clearly belligerent.
But does this new knowledge make FDR complicit in a plot to bring America into World War Two through the disaster at Pearl Harbor? Readers may draw their own conclusions, but because of another infamous day – September 11, 2001- it is again evident that the first duty of the people’s President is to protect the American people. Thus, contemporary readers may draw analogies between the events leading to December 7, 1941 with those of September 11, 2001, and conclude that this lesson from the past is as instructive now as it was then.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 08:06 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Avi at March 10, 2014 08:11 AM (p/izY)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at March 10, 2014 08:21 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Harrison Bergeron at March 10, 2014 08:25 AM (JQuNB)
He's his old mean ( the only way to disprove this is if Ron disowns him) he recently said his Foreign policy was most in line with Bush I.
That's a hoot considering Ron ran against Bush as the LP candidate in 88'
He a he also ignored the fact that the isolationists hated Reagan far more then the "hawks" thought he was "soft"
In fact Ron cited Reagan "starting wars" as a Reason he left the GOP in 84.
Lets' consider the wars Reagan started. Grenada, and nobody but a commie sympathizer thinks that was some sort of mistake or "crime"
Posted by: midwestconservative at March 10, 2014 08:29 AM (5K/Ca)
Posted by: Fringe at March 10, 2014 08:31 AM (oWl4T)
For example, odds favor another GDP recession (we are technically in the fifth year of a recovery despite the observed problems), odds favor some country doing something that causes international repercussions either internally or externally, and odds tremendously favor that the fiscal policy of the US will continue to borrow and spend in a futile attempt at Keynesian stimulation.
Other trends will probably be nationwide imposition of gay marriage and the attendant religious/civil rights implications, increased financial difficulties for many state and local governments regarding pensions, decreasing abortions and support thereof, declining school enrollment, increasing costs of higher education coupled with decreasing real knowledge, and significant numbers of prisoners being released due to sentencing reforms and fiscal realities. Republicans and the Tea Party continue to be vilified as racist, sexist, greedy, heteronormative, evil, stupid, etc. by both the media/popular culture and its Democrat Party affiliate.
K12 education will continue its losing mediocrity streak and still cost more with little improvement. However, students knowledge of cultural and economic Marxist memes will excel. Energy prices will continue (other than natural gas if export limits continue) to rise and commodity prices will reflect the degree of currency debasement throughout the world.
The U.S. military will continue to shrink in worldwide deployments and numbers. Partisan animosity and presidential action without a legal/constitutional basis will accelerate in Congress, the Courts, and the White House. These are things I can readily predict with better than track odds.
Also the odds of whether a black swan event happens--massive terrorist attack, destruction or serious damage of the world monetary system, a significant war e.g. China-Japan, fusion power, massive solar flares, SMOD, dogs and cats living together in peace, hurricanes, volcanoes, and earthquakes, etc. is not zero.
What I cannot at this point pick is who to support for president because we will need a candidate to fit the times of 2016 and not 2000, 1988, 1980, 1968, etc. It also depends on who Democrats pick as far as the ideal candidate.
Posted by: wg at March 10, 2014 08:31 AM (EYRbJ)
But more Pauls are OK.
Rand Paul's daddy was a bullshit artist who railed against government spending while loading up the budgets he voted against with pork for his own district. His idiot followers think that stuffing straw polls and starting counterfeit Republican County Committees will win elections. Putting aside the absolute inability of any Paulie I've ever met to avoid saying something so batshit stupid and crazy about foreign policy and social engineering that it immediately cancels out any common sense they may have on fiscal policy.
And now that crowd has transferred its affections to the kid. That means I'm done with him/
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at March 10, 2014 08:32 AM (XO6WW)
And to me the "executive experience" thing (which I tend to agree is a bit overstated) is mostly about "the buck stops here." The problem with legislators is that they often have to vote based on party/political allegiances, so their records are difficult to interpret. Hell, even an Atty General like Christie was In Charge of something (and people). (Not that I'm considering Christie for POTUS.)
So it's not about management experience, per se. It's about accountability. At least for me it is.
Posted by: Y-not at March 10, 2014 11:21 AM (zDsvJ)
I used to think of exec experience in terms of management and accountability, but I've come to the conclusion that it's simply a matter of playing the odds. Fact is, Senators uniformly make bad Presidents, while Governors just usually make bad Presidents. Consider the list of winners in the Senator column since WWII.
JugEars
Nixon
LBJ
JFK
Truman
Four awful Presidents and one borderline awful/mediocre (Truman gets points for nuking Japan in the war)
Governors, on the other hand....
Dubya
Bubba
Reagan
Carter
One great president, one mediocre, two awful.
The numbers are still pretty bad, but Governors seem to better the odds a teeny bit.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at March 10, 2014 08:32 AM (TIIx5)
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 12:06 PM (P3U0f)
Given that Germany was busy digesting Europe and attacking Russia at the time and given that the Japanese were equally busy conquering China and other countries in Asia, it doesn't take a strategic genius to figure out that the Axis powers and their satellites were going after global domination by means of military conquest. Therefore, it was imperative to those leaders (such as FDR) whose countries had not yet been attacked that they prepare for that eventuality. If you think FDR's preparatory actions--institution of the draft, heightened alert status and naval exercises and the like--were unnecessarily provocative, then you are willfully blinding yourself to the realities of that era.
So tell me, is your moderately insane view of world history common among those in the Rand Paul camp? I'd really like to know. And before you start calling me a neocon chickenhawk or some such thing, know that I'm a combat infantry veteran who is not Jewish, although I wouldn't mind overmuch if I was Jewish. Jewish women are hot.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 08:32 AM (O66NZ)
***
It is fascinating that if you look at American history over the last hundred years that the country has generally had poor to terrible leadership out of its presidents.
To your point there have been only two presidents you could make any sort of reasonable claim were good in both national and international policy in the run between 28 and 44, and in the same time frame there have been 5 abject failures (Wilson, Hoover, Johnson, Carter, Obama).
If you tried to assemble a list of those that just reach competent outside of the two that were positive (Reagan, Coolidge) you'd perhaps be able to add Eisenhower...and that's it.
That is pathetic...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 08:39 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at March 10, 2014 08:40 AM (5xmd7)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at March 10, 2014 12:40 PM (5xmd7)
Formal declared neutrality allowed our country--woefully weak militarily--time enough to arm and prepare, although it was a near-run thing once hostilities did start. People make it sound like winning the war was a sure thing from the beginning. It wasn't. Far from it.
*holds forefinger and thumb about a centimenter apart* It was that close.
The lesson I thought we had learned is peace through strength. That Obama has committed to reducing our military capabiltiies to pre-WW II levels while the Russians are going full Stalin in the Ukraine and the Baltic states and the Chinese are tripling their own military spending is just plain insane.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 08:47 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: tangonine at March 10, 2014 08:50 AM (x3YFz)
***
Meh, you've demonstrated rank ignorance, arguably willful - and that is a far greater insult then the latest leftwing buzz words.
I find it odd that now presented with the facts that you apparently didn't know, your inclination is not to reconsider your original calumny but to double down. This is why your ignorance appears willful.
That FDR attacked Germany before they declared war on us (and note the formation of the Flying Tigers in China also) is a fact. You disputed this. You were wrong.
I used the formulation "illegal war" because by the standards held by the modern Left, in doing this FDR was a far bigger war criminal then Bush and yet FDR is one of their heroes. Getting liberals to discuss this point is a fascinating view into cognitive dissonance.
That FDR prosecuted the war against the Axis powers fairly well is a positive to me, though his handling of the Soviet Union left much to be desired. I do especially like his handling of German spies and saboteurs during the war, and his how he put few restrictions on how the military could fight...a lesson Bush 43 should have considered...
I currently support Cruz more than Rand Paul, but at least for now could live with either. In relation to the Ukraine, the US has few cards to play, and the difference between the two men on the issue is of no real importance. The larger picture of how either would handle Russian policy overall (and Iranian, Chinese, etc) is of more interest.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 08:50 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: tangonine at March 10, 2014 08:52 AM (x3YFz)
Has executive experience, pretty good at the range, and can make a freakin fist. Tired of a girly man in my White House.
Posted by: NCwoof at March 10, 2014 09:00 AM (aUQgu)
Posted by: Greg at March 10, 2014 09:08 AM (swCnG)
Posted by: panzernashorn at March 10, 2014 09:16 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: NCwoof at March 10, 2014 09:19 AM (aUQgu)
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 12:50 PM (P3U0f)
'...FDR was a far bigger war criminal then [sic] Bush...? Really? Talk about cognitive dissonance.
You're just fucking nuts. That whole Buchanan 'Paleo-con' contingent, along with the Ron Paul libertarians, are just one big steaming pile of Jew-hating, Hitler-loving crazy.
If this is the kind of supporter that gravitates to Rand Paul, there is no conceivable way I'm voting for the guy, either in the primaries or--if he wins the primaries--in the general election. No way.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 09:42 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: Y-not on the phone at March 10, 2014 10:00 AM (K5Csv)
***
Ignorant and functionally illiterate is no way to go through life son.
In addition to reading a history book I suggest you actually read comments before respond to them so you look less of a fool. Though if you are just trying to embarrass yourself, bravo, you've done about as well as you could have done after your initial idiocy.
Just a pro tip.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 10:04 AM (P3U0f)
Rand went around the country several times over two campaigns for Ron and repeatedly stated there was no room between him and Dad on the issues. If he has changed that stance, he needs to say specifically where and how.
Because the Paulian policy, had it been in force after WWII, would have given the Soviets and Red Chinese a free hand as long as they didn't directly attack us. NO US missiles in Europe as deterrents. NO US troops as tripwires. No US bases around the world. The USSR could have taken over Europe and the Middle East and made great headway in the Western Hemisphere without us lifting a finger other than diplomatic protests under the Pauls. They would fight until the enemies were coming up the Mississippi River.
Rand Paul is not only NEVER the GOP nominee, he is never on the ticket, either. PERIOD. So all the little fanboys can rush back to LP now if that's their dream.
Posted by: Adjoran at March 10, 2014 10:12 AM (QIQ6j)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at March 10, 2014 10:15 AM (5xmd7)
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 02:04 PM (P3U0f)
I got your pro-tip right here, champ. Claiming FDR was a war criminal--oh, wait, sorry: 'less of a war criminal than Bush'--for anticipating and reacting to Japanese and German aggression (and obvious malevolent intent)--is just off-the-beam. No one provoked the Germans or Japanese into conquest and invasion. That's who they were and what they did, especially since conquest formed the core of their respective ideologies.
You're also a big reason why Rand Paul's candidacy is going nowhere politically, although he might do well in early Iowa given his father's network there. All a political opponent in the primaries or general election needs to do is interview a roomful of Ron Paul true believers or just broadcast a few choice snippets from a few of the old man's greatest hits, and he's done.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 10:20 AM (O66NZ)
***
Let's try this again.
Go back to the comment you think you are responding to.
Copy the whole sentence.
Read it.
Wait two minutes.
Read it again.
Then come back and apologize. Or continue showing yourself to be a fool...your choice.
Non-willful ignorance is where we all start from...but you aren't even there yet, and frankly you are an embarrassment to the moron horde at the moment.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 10:26 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: rfichoke at March 10, 2014 10:27 AM (9Xs1s)
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 02:26 PM (P3U0f)
Explain to the class again how FDR provoked Hitler and Tojo into attacking the United States. That shit never gets old.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 10:30 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: rfichoke at March 10, 2014 02:27 PM (9Xs1s)
Does Rothbard believe in evil Jewish banker conspiracies? Ron Paul does, and he's even been prominently featured in Alex Jone's conspiracy movie, 'Endgame', publicly espousing such ideas. You can watch it for yourself, if you like, since it's available in its entirety on YouTube. I especially like the part about spider-goat DNA hybridization experiments conducted by the Illuminati.
Ron Paul is crazy, and craziness doesn't require a philosophical underpinning. It just is.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 10:34 AM (O66NZ)
***
Weak jackass.
Does your level of ignorance physically hurt?
Let's repeat
You are ignorant about the period in history we are discussing...as has been proven.
You celebrate being ignorant (Ignorance is strength for you...right?)
And you can't comprehend simple words.
My only question is do you spend more time on AoS on Koz? And if the former, why? Shouldn't you be playing with all the other ignorant fools there celebrating diversity in idiocy?
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 10:38 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: rfichoke at March 10, 2014 10:39 AM (9Xs1s)
That being said, I strongly believe that in electing a chief executive, we need a person with executive experience: someone who's had to hire and fire people, manage budgets, and take of the minutiae of governance. This will be especially important in the next administration, because one of the most pressing issues facing a reform-minded president will be de-politicizing federal bureaucracy - the most pressing, and the most difficult.
So, much as like the speeches that Cruz and Paul give, we should be looking at people who have either been governors or held high-ranking cabinet positions. Jindal, Walker, Daniels, Perry are all better chief-executive material than Cruz or Paul.
Posted by: Brown Line at March 10, 2014 10:40 AM (a5bF3)
Posted by: YFS at March 10, 2014 10:40 AM (evUpK)
Posted by: ThisBeingMilt at March 10, 2014 10:48 AM (7mQyC)
Posted by: ThisBeingMilt at March 10, 2014 10:49 AM (7mQyC)
Posted by: ThisBeingMilt at March 10, 2014 10:51 AM (7mQyC)
Posted by: YFS at March 10, 2014 10:52 AM (evUpK)
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 02:38 PM (P3U0f)
You've been reading entirely too many comic books or whatever it is you kids do nowadays when alone in your rooms without adult supervision. Your word choices and syntax seem to come right out of Marvel's Golden Age, back when Ditko and Kirby were in their prime; e.g., 'Shouldn't you be playing with all the other ignorant fools celebrating diversity in idiocy, Bwah hah hah hah!'
It's Kos, not Koz, and I don't think one needs to be a moonbat liberal to question anyone's claim that FDR was a war criminal. Like I said: that's just nuts. In case you've forgotten, we were fighting Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan If you can't tell the good guys from the bad guys in that scenario, I don't know what to tell you.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 10:54 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: ThisBeingMilt at March 10, 2014 02:49 PM (7mQyC)
Ron Paul's claim that the mullahs of Iran are persecuted innocents and victims of evil Zionist machinizations isn't 'unrealistic'. It's insane.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 10:56 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at March 10, 2014 11:03 AM (5xmd7)
***
Says the man that can't, or at least won't, read.
Perhaps we can find you a picture book of WWII? And then you can share it with all your other leftist friends? It can have pictures of American destroyers in the Atlantic in 1940-41 on submarine interdiction missions...then pictures of Japan bombing Pearl Harbor (no, not the Germans as *you* might think)!
Another pro tip - admitting when you are wrong is what the big boys do (see, I'm trying to reach the level you seem to be at). Also, while you and your Kos friends (thanks for pointing out my typo in your favorite website) might still think you can wish away history...you can't...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 11:06 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: ThisBeingMilt at March 10, 2014 11:13 AM (7mQyC)
Semi quote " you (the GOP voters) need to stop being afraid(? worried about? looking down on?) of other people just because they don't look like you, and they don't speak the same language as you do."
Fuck you, bitch. I don't give a damn what they look like or what language they speak. I want the Rule of Law to be respected. I want no one here, and certainly no one voting here) who isn't willing -- nay, eager! -- to assimilate. I care about their character, and if their character doesn't include the previous two sentences, then I want them out of my home.
The longer I think on what he said, the more I think that Rand Paul is a shit head.
Posted by: Troll Feeder at March 10, 2014 11:15 AM (xJTVU)
Classic Hedge your bets strategy Ace? Very brave stance...
"I want to like Rand Paul but he just makes me nervous.
It's hard to shake the feeling that if you just scratch the surface enough his dad's craziness will be there."
We can NOT allow the Neo-Cons and the Social Cons to continue to drive the Republican party into the ditch. Our focus needs to remain on: drastic spending cuts, flat/fair tax, unwinding OCare, encouraging free market principles, etc. In other words, Rebuilding OUR economy! Not reclaiming/remaining the World's Police Man and rebuilding other country's economys. We economically compete with the countrys (Japan, SKorea, EU) that we defend, yet our competitors are not encumbered with the percentage (of GDP) of Defense spending we are burdened with. Time to end that gravy train for them.
There are too many NeoCon and SocialCon Morons here at AOSHQ that are blind to the reality that these positions are not only moronic but political losers. The voters will not vote for POTUS a saberrattler that is staking out positions that puts us balldeep into additional sandbox wars. We tried that and it directly led to the election of the Kenyan Redistributionist.
Posted by: HarshTruth at March 10, 2014 11:20 AM (GBl2T)
Also, while you and your Kos friends (thanks for pointing out my typo in your favorite website) might still think you can wish away history...you can't...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 03:06 PM (P3U0f)
Attempting to portray me as a leftwing agitator-type doing a little astroturfing won't get you very far. For one thing, I understand those Leftwing astroturfing guys get paid real money from a big pile of Soros cash, and I haven't seen a dime (and how does one get a gig like that, anyway?). For another (again), accusing FDR of war crimes in WWII doesn't gain any traction on any sites other than Alex Jones' PrisonPlanet or wherever fringe part of the Interwebs you come from.
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 11:21 AM (O66NZ)
Posted by: jimmy page's ax at March 10, 2014 11:50 AM (CPppb)
Posted by: Doom at March 10, 2014 11:56 AM (CWh1u)
Posted by: Whatever at March 10, 2014 12:01 PM (V17cY)
"I want to like Rand Paul but he just makes me nervous.
It's hard to shake the feeling that if you just scratch the surface enough his dad's craziness will be there."
We can NOT allow theNeo-Cons and the Social Cons to continue to drive the Republican party into the ditch. Our focus needsto remain on:drastic spending cuts,flat/fair tax, unwinding OCare, encouraging free market principles, etc. In other words, RebuildingOUR economy! Not reclaiming/remaining the World's Police Man and rebuilding other country's economys. We economically compete with the countrys (Japan, SKorea, EU) that we defend, yet our competitors are not encumbered with the percentage (of GDP) of Defense spending we are burdened with. Time to end that gravy train for them.
There are too many NeoCon and SocialCon Morons here at AOSHQ that are blind to the reality that these positions are not only moronic but political losers. The voters will not vote for POTUS a saberrattler that is staking out positions that puts us balldeep into additional sandbox wars. We tried that and it directlyled to the election of the Kenyan Redistributionist.
Posted by: HarshTruth at March 10, 2014 12:01 PM (GBl2T)
Posted by: HarshTruth at March 10, 2014 04:01 PM (GBl2T)
Recent Ron Paul quote: 'Sanctions against Russia would be criminal.' You're telling me that's a political winner?
Another thing: you Ron Paul acolytes need to lighten up on the 'Neocon' pejorative. You don't have Bush to kick around any more. He's no longer President. Those dreaded Jews--oh, sorry, 'Zionists'--no longer exercise all of their influence to sway American foreign policy in Israel's favor. You know, because Jewish. And Jews. And you know how those people are, amirite?
Posted by: troyriser at March 10, 2014 12:11 PM (O66NZ)
Posted by: Blake at March 10, 2014 12:11 PM (2IqjF)
There are things I like about Rand. But there is the fear factor, too (I believe he's an amnesty supporter).
Posted by: Aslan's Girl at March 10, 2014 01:28 PM (KL49F)
Posted by: NeoCon Killer at March 10, 2014 01:52 PM (Eimoe)
Posted by: NeoCon Killer at March 10, 2014 01:53 PM (Eimoe)
Posted by: 18-1 at March 10, 2014 02:17 PM (M3hAT)
Posted by: Peppermintpattysclitring at March 10, 2014 03:14 PM (mzD0X)
Posted by: Peppermintpattysclitring at March 10, 2014 03:18 PM (mzD0X)
Posted by: Peppermintpattysclitring at March 10, 2014 03:20 PM (mzD0X)
Posted by: Peppermintpattysclitring at March 10, 2014 03:25 PM (mzD0X)
That's all I care about. F Rand! And F your batzh*t crazy, nigra-hating daddy too, son.
Posted by: mnw at March 10, 2014 04:52 PM (68RU9)
Posted by: mnw at March 10, 2014 05:02 PM (68RU9)
Posted by: rfichoke at March 10, 2014 06:18 PM (2G73v)
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at March 10, 2014 08:05 PM (AQTz3)
Posted by: Sam at March 10, 2014 10:08 PM (Tgd6y)
Posted by: Blake at March 11, 2014 07:24 AM (WuGBT)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3144 seconds, 574 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: t-bird at March 10, 2014 06:28 AM (FcR7P)