Paul v. Christie

1. 77

   Mighty Momposted 10 years ago

   The mud is flying between tea partier Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Gov. Chris Christie of NJ.
   Who's winning the fight?
   Will either end up as the GOP candidate in 2016?

   replyreport
   1. 57

      retief2000posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Given the self destructive proclivities of the GOP-PTB(Republican Powers That Be), I would put my money on Christie.

      replyreport
   2. 78

      Credence2posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      The orthodox libertarian philosophy has no near enough adherents to be viable anytime soon. I will put my moey on Christie.

      replyreport
2. 59

   A Troubled Manposted 10 years ago

   Paddle faster, I'm hearing banjos!

   replyreport
3. 77

   Mighty Momposted 10 years ago

   Christie is definitely the bigger man!
   
   Seriously, I had a big problem with Paul dissing NJ for asking for Sandy relief.
   I wonder if Paul feels the same way about Texas now getting FEMA relief for their plant explosion.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      retief2000posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I find it entertaining when people who would never vote for a specific person say things like "I have a problem with" and then follow it with something specific when what should be said is "I wouldn't vote for him no matter what."

      replyreport
      1. 77

         Mighty Momposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         There would be no need for this thread in that case.
         Of COURSE I personally would not vote for Rand Paul under any circumstances.
         I might consider voting for Christie except for some very fundamental disagreements.
         But we're not there yet.
         I had been watching the name calling between Paul and Christie.
         "King of Bacon" on one level is pretty funny.
         Or one could, if so inclined, find it personally offensive to Christie.
         
         http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/30/r … -of-bacon/
         
         Where it gets interesting is what they are really accusing each other of.
         When you look at the benefits of federal dollars ($1.51 back for every dollar put in by Kentucky) and the federal programs KY gets funded more than NJ.
         Paul wants no military -- except the bases in his state.
         He wants no Medicaid -- except the money that comes to his state.
         He wants no infrastructure spending -- except there, too, KY got more $ per capita than NJ. If you've ever driven the NJ Tpke or Garden State Hwy, I rest my case there.
         
         http://www.economist.com/blogs/democrac … -rand-paul

         replyreport
   2. 74

      Jeff Berndtposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      "I wonder if Paul feels the same way about Texas now getting FEMA relief for their plant explosion."
      If he's consistent, he does. But I haven't heard him saying anything about it.
      
      The orthodox libertarian philosophy would say that the owners of the fertilizer plant should have to pay reparations to all of the people who were hurt, and the families of those who were killed, and anyone whose property was damaged (including loss of value to their homes/other real estate).
      
      But those rules only seem to apply to people who don't have a big bag of money.

      replyreport