He doesn't have morals. He charged his neighbor for assaulting a member of congress over a yard waste dispute. Then he sued the guy for 500k dollars. The dude is a joke, who uses federal law when it suits him.
He doesn't have any morals because he sued a guy who physically assaulted him and broke 7 of his ribs? Are you mental or just high?
Again, Libertarians think it's the man's fault that they are losers, while fully banking on the power of the state to get their way. I think the biggest problem is that he charged a guy with assaulting a congressmen while it was a dispute about yard waste.
Why would I be scared of an old man who got his ass handed to him by another old man? The dude has no backbone, evident of 7 of his ribs being broken so easily.
I actually like Rand and Ron, but that doesn't change anything that I said.
He doesn't have morals. He charged his neighbor for assaulting a member of congress over a yard waste dispute. Then he sued the guy for 500k dollars. The dude is a joke, who uses federal law when it suits him.
He doesn't have any morals because he sued a guy who physically assaulted him and broke 7 of his ribs? Are you mental or just high?
Again, Libertarians think it's the man's fault that they are losers, while fully banking on the power of the state to get their way. I think the biggest problem is that he charged a guy with assaulting a congressmen while it was a dispute about yard waste.
What part of he broke 7 of Rand Paul's ribs do you not understand?
Why don't you come to my house, and have a dispute with me, and I'll back over you with my car a few times. And see if you sue me.
If Rand was a libertarian of morals, he would understand that his position in federal office shouldn't grant him more legal protections than any other American. Instead, he gets his butt whooped on for not discarding his brush better, and then charges the dude with assaulting a congressmen instead of simple assault.
Whether or not he uses the States' power to further punish the guy is another issue altogether.
I think we can pretty much give up trying definitions to describe what a party stands for these days. I mean the term conservative was supposed to be about spending. As we can see, that has nothing to do with it anymore.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I think we can pretty much give up trying definitions to describe what a party stands for these days. I mean the term conservative was supposed to be about spending. As we can see, that has nothing to do with it anymore.
The first time conservatism was used in a political context was about restoring the French monarchy after the liberals won equal rights for everyone. Conservative is the truest definition out of any of the mainstream political ideologies, because unlike liberalism, it's not fixed to an actual political position. It never had anything to do with spending, although that is clever wordplay probably developed by some ad agency.
Sure, sure. We heard about how that was one of the principal things they stood for for decades. And now you try to deny that's true. Mmmmmm, hmmmmm.
Because they shortened 'fiscally conservative' to 'conservative' doesn't mean that they superseded 'conservative' philosophy. Again, more of an ad agency gimmick than anything else.
Didn't you self identify as a socialist or communist at one point? Below is my boy Rand talking about Libertarianism if you need additional information. I hope he runs in 2020, I think that would be the tops.
Let's go Rand! Run for the Libertarian Party!
The voice of reason for the American People! And the only politician with any kind of morals!
Oh it's the loco libertarians! The NO GOVERNMENT PARTY. Yep, you can bash libs and socialist all you want, but libertarians beat their ass in the wackadoodle department. Go ahead and eat your young because you are free and the government is far too big! Sickos.
Nah, hopefully all the "New Democrats" join the Republican party so you guys can stop hating gays and women. You'll still hate black people, but that's inevitable.
Nah, hopefully all the "New Democrats" join the Republican party so you guys can stop hating gays and women. You'll still hate black people, but that's inevitable.
Could you imagine the uproar if AOC and Omar announced they were going to caucus with GOPers... lmao
But seriously the GOP needs somebody to shift them a bit to the left again.
"new democrats" is the term the new Democrats in the 80's called themselves. Biden, Clintons, even Obama were all "new democrats" or "third way" democrats. Either way, they need to move to join the Republican party and leave the left wing alone.
"new democrats" is the term the new Democrats in the 80's called themselves. Biden, Clintons, even Obama were all "new democrats" or "third way" democrats. Either way, they need to move to join the Republican party and leave the left wing alone.
Yeah - because extremism and isolationism and divisiveness obviously works so well! Lets go from extreme Trumpism and divisiveness to the extreme left .... that'll cure everything. Not.
Middle ground and compromise is needed unless we simply want to divide the country more and more.
Last edited by mgh888; 03/11/1909:18 AM.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
We got 12 years to address climate change before it's really too late. We need some radical ideas. If we can fracture the Democratic party and push the most "moderate" Democrats into the Republican party, it's a win for everyone.
