jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (91 posts)

Rand Paul tried to end Tyranny

  1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago

    Rand Paul recently tried to filibuster the passage of the continuation of completely tyrannical aspects of the Patriot Act. But both the House and the Senate were able to end it and pass the bill.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-201 … e_facebook

    Obama signed it into law just a few minutes before the law would have expired.

    Obama lied to us - he said he would end the Patriot Act, end the wars, and shut down Guantanamo Bay.

    http://rt.com/usa/news/broken-promise-o … authorize/

    I hate W. But EVERYONE must agree that Obama is just Bush Jr. Jr.

    Vote him out, vote for Ron Paul.

    1. profile image0
      Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Good for Rand Paul. I applaud his efforts. I wish it would have worked.

    2. kerryg profile image89
      kerrygposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I actually am rooting for Ron Paul to win the Republican nomination. I disagree with many of his actual policies (though agree with others, such as his stances on the wars, the Patriot Act, etc.) but I think he'd be just the shot of new ideas this country needs to get a real debate going.

      Of course, for that reason alone, the Republican establishment will never let him get anywhere near the nomination. mad

      1. profile image0
        Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        I just can't get into a guy who believes that we should inspect meat, should end public education, and the Department of Energy, as well as any regulation. Deregulation of the markets has led to an escalating crisis every few years. However, I support some of his stances.

        1. lovemychris profile image76
          lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          And he's pro-life.....does not believe in freedom really---I mean really. Freedom for all. As a woman, pro-life is my litmus test.
          Cause all it really means is--we will force you to have that baby, then you are on your own.

          1. kerryg profile image89
            kerrygposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Technically, I think he believes the question should be returned to the states, but I agree that it's a cop-out. Not everybody is free to just pick up and move across state lines if they think they might ever need an abortion, and by the time you actually need one, it's pretty much too late. Plus, if there's no doctors left in your state who perform them and you need one for bona fide medical reasons, you're completely screwed. Someone shared a horrible story just the other day on LiveJournal about being left bleeding in an emergency room for hours due to placental abruption because the baby wasn't actually dead yet and none of the doctors on call would perform abortions. Complete nightmare!

            1. lovemychris profile image76
              lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              Yes--they are criminally charged, I think.

              The anti-abortioners are such sadists...wonder if they enjoy others suffering?

              Bottom line: They want to dictate what I do with my own self.
              They criminalize decent doctors who swear an oath to help others.
              They stick their noses where they don't belong, and where they can really help--they bail!

              No tax money for poor kids. Only corporations and the top 2%, thank you.

              1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
                Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                "They want to dictate what I do with my own self"

                Actually, Ron Paul does NOT want to "dictate" anything. her der.

                You clearly have never looked into his arguments. He wouldn't write laws -- BECAUSE HE'D BE PART OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT -- and he would leave the issue up to the state where you live -- WHERE YOU HAVE MORE CONTROL OVER THE LAWS.

                1. lovemychris profile image76
                  lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  If it was up to the states, we'd still have slavery and children working in coal mines.....
                  Who knows WHAT they would do now, to "save a buck".

                  1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
                    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    well that's just nonsense

                2. profile image54
                  djanedoposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  Mr. Rogers (couldn't resist) what Ron Paul says, his people obey.

                  1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
                    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    I love the way that "enforcing the constitution" is seen as cult-like.

                    Yes, America, it's gotten that far.

            2. Evan G Rogers profile image76
              Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              It's not a cop-out!! that's what the damned constitution says!!!

              1. kerryg profile image89
                kerrygposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                It's a medical procedure. A controversial one, granted, but nevertheless one that can save lives. By your logic, perhaps we should start letting states decide whether to allow quadruple bypass heart surgery. After all, people who spend their lives eating junk food need to take responsibility for their actions, too. Why should the rest of us have to pay higher premiums because they're too stupid to keep their mouths shut? roll

                1. lovemychris profile image76
                  lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  Don't forget people who drink alcohol.Perhaps alcohol should be out-lawed? It kills for sure.
                  And we MUST outlaw WAR, as it kills people--too many to count. Kills babies too. Lots of em.

                  Let's see...what else......old people who drive--we MUST butt in and force them to walk or take a bus--as they are known to just drive into people and buildings...killing at random.

                  Meat! Ooohhh, that's a huge killer.
                  Fluoride...proven to poison. Cell phones! Cause cancer, which equals death....How much more do we need the "freedom-loving" libertarians to be involved in telling us what and what not to do?

                  1. profile image54
                    djanedoposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    I am not sure where your being sarcastic or when you are being serious. First, particularly old men have a hard time giving up the drivers license and needs to have the DMV (RMV) revolk it. My mother after 2 rearends, volunteered to give hers up, but my father I-L, let's just say he scares the bejesus out of his passagers. So far, no one has been injured or died.
                    My point being, when it comes to social issues, there needs to logic, reasoning, and knowlable sense in play. Oh, and by the way "Freedom-Loving Libertarian"  in the same phrase is an oxymoron. Freedom to fit personal interests, pleasures, and what-nots, is more accurate of a Libertarian, not what is good for social structure.

                2. Evan G Rogers profile image76
                  Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  last time I checked you weren't removing any potential-future-individuals from a heart during heart surgery.

                  ...Yeah...

                  (Please note, I'm not sure which side of the debate I fall under. i just know damned well that heart surgery and abortions shouldn't really be compared in the way you suggest)

          2. Evan G Rogers profile image76
            Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Lovemychris, you really have not listened to me correct you on this "pro-life" thing.

            He states his position clearly in just about every one of his writings:

            No matter what his belief is, he will likely leave it to the states individually to decide what to do, unless it is a truly federal issue.

            Sure, he's pro-life, but not only does he admit that the president is NOT the king, he admits that, as president, he would only ENFORCE the laws, not WRITE them.

            So, keep trying that "he's pro-life, and thus will make abortions illegal" nonsense. It only shows that you haven't actually looked into his ideas.

            1. lovemychris profile image76
              lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              I'll let him speak for himself:

              In 1981, he went on to argue, "Pro-life libertarians have a vital task to perform: to persuade the many abortion-supporting libertarians of the contradiction between abortion and individual liberty; and, to sever the mistaken connection in many minds between individual freedom and the 'right' to extinguish individual life."

              Lest you think it's just a minor issue for him, consider the obscure fact that Ron Paul has written not one but two books arguing for the necessity of a pro-life libertarianism: 1983's Abortion and Liberty and 1990's Challenge to Liberty: Coming to Grips with the Abortion Issue. And lest you think he has since changed his views on abortion, ponder what he's saying now. On June 4, 2003, speaking in the House of Representatives, Paul described "the rights of unborn people” as “the greatest moral issue of our time."

              Other such quotes aren't hard to find. On March 29, 2005: " I believe beyond a doubt that a fetus is a human life deserving of legal protection, and that the right to life is the foundation of any moral society." Jan. 31, 2006: "The federalization of abortion law is based not on constitutional principles, but rather on a social and political construct created out of thin air by the Roe court." On that note, he has referred to a "federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn." Just before the Ames straw poll, he came out with an Iowa ad touting his pro-life credentials, although in slightly more subdued terms: "I find it difficult not to defend a life a minute before birth just as I would defend that life a minute after birth. To me, it's recognizing the importance of life."

              Apparently it was dramatic enough to cause Paul to author H.R. 1094, a bill that declares that "human life shall be deemed to exist from conception," a standard Christian Right viewpoint.

              *****

              He does NOT believe I have the right to an abortion! I DO NOT want that man as president!

              1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
                Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                So, all that you've quoted is in complete agreement with what I've written. Good job on that one.

                He would still leave it to states, and would not write the law unless he were in a state legislative governing body.

                Yes, he's against abortions. No, he won't cram it down your throat.

                Unlike Obama's health care.

                Hell, I bet that if a pro-life piece of legislation went through US Congress, he'd veto it on grounds that such an issue is not a Federal issue.

                I'll let that one sink in a bit: If the Paul's were president, they would VETO Pro-life legislation because it is not a federal issue.

                1. lovemychris profile image76
                  lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  No--he would veto it because MY Constitutionally guarenteed rights, he would leave up to the gvr of a state to decide!!

                  NO THANK YOU! Rights are not delineated state by state...they are THERE FOR ALL, ALWAYS.

                  1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
                    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    I don't know if you knew this, but the phrase "right to have an abortion", or anything similar, is not mentioned ANYWHERE in the Constitution.

                    Thus, with the 10th Amendment, your "constitutional right" is that abortion is up to the states.

                    Yep. That's how it works. Reading.

        2. kerryg profile image89
          kerrygposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Oh sure. I oppose many of his domestic policies pretty strongly, I just think things need to be shook up a bit in Washington, and if he managed to get the nomination we might actually get some decent policy debates instead of the usual circus.

        3. profile image0
          Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Oops...meant "not inspect meat."

    3. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image97
      Wesman Todd Shawposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!






      (I used to think you were completely insane)

    4. Shadesbreath profile image83
      Shadesbreathposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Or else it's more complicated than you are willing to accept.

      1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
        Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        I'm trying to figure out how "filibustering an act of tyranny" could be complicated...

    5. profile image56
      tajiatalposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed! "Bush Jr Jr" That was great.

    6. profile image56
      tajiatalposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed! "Bush Jr Jr" That was great.

  2. knolyourself profile image61
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "Obama signed it into law just a few minutes before the law would have expired."
    Actually according to the news it was a machine called an auto-signer that did it.
    Fitting a machine signed it.

  3. Moderndayslave profile image60
    Moderndayslaveposted 6 years ago

    Rand Paul reportedly caved in,,,Why?

    1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
      Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      He didn't cave in

      http://www.unelected.org/democrat-harry … atriot-act

      sorry to burst your bubble. The Paul's actually hate tyranny.

      1. Moderndayslave profile image60
        Moderndayslaveposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        I got bad info,Thanks

      2. DTR0005 profile image82
        DTR0005posted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Evan, I think it could be said the Pauls also hate government. I guess I have never understood why so many, mainly conservatives and Neo-Libertarians, are so attracted to a "profession" that they hate - at least philosophically. Clearly, a true Neo-Libertarian, once in government, would do his or her best to dismantle the very aparatus of government much like the last stage of communism where leadership disappears and anarchy steps in to take its place. There are both wonderful ideas, but they are both, in my opinion, "unworkable fantasy."
        I like the Pauls personally, I have real issues with laissez-faire capitalism.

        1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
          Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Ron and Rand Paul are not anarchists.

          I am.

          That being said, I'm glad that no one is denying that Obama has failed to deliver the most important parts of his campaign promises.

          1. Jeff Berndt profile image87
            Jeff Berndtposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            No, Obama's .... No, I couldn't do it with a straight face.

            This is indefensible, and it looks like Congress might just cede its most important check on Presidential power: the power to declare war and conclude peace. The House just recently approved a bill to let the president prosecute the so-called War on Terror anywhere in the world, including the USA, that the Prez decides to send the troops.

            This is worse than the Patriot Act, and I don't say that lightly.

            If the Senate doesn't block it, Obama will probably sign it, and we'll be royally screwed.

            1. tony0724 profile image61
              tony0724posted 6 years agoin reply to this

              But I thought everybody liked Obama ? We were warned and didn't listen. And in the meantime Hillary is giving our bestest buddies in Pakistan a boatload of money we borrowed from China so they can buy Chinese fighter Jets. Ask Hillary herself !

              1. lovemychris profile image76
                lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                We were warned back in 2001, before the 1st unpatriot act was passed.

                Plenty of people on the right said; "Give the president whatever he wants, he's saving us from terrorists."

                You are getting exactly what you asked for, only it's not the president you expected.

            2. profile image60
              C.J. Wrightposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              Indeed, SCARY!

          2. profile image0
            Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            There are dozens of people on here who essentially fight with each other, Evan and I being two.
            However, of all the people I disagree with, Evan is nearly the only one I actually like as a person, based upon what I have read. The cat is as linear in his thinking as they come, always informed and honest.
            Hats off to you Evan...for all the junk I give you, you are a solid guy. I still disagree most of the time though, but informed and consistent guy for sure.

            1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
              Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              rofl, thanks. We both want evil to be stopped, we just disagree on how to do it.

        2. lovemychris profile image76
          lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          David Sirota:

          If Rick Perry runs for prez he'd make history - the 1st major-party candidate hoping to run a country he wants to leave.

          1. profile image0
            Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            As a guy from Texas, I am telling you, this guy is the dangerous. He could win. When you hit a point that the actual voter means nothing, as there aren't 10 people in the state who like him, but he wins by landslides. The day they announce we have a higher debt than California, he goes on live TV and tells the state we have a surplus. This guy will stab you in the face, and then look you right in the eye, and tell you he is here to save you from whomever stabbed you, while he is still holding the knife. It is incredible. He is the definition of power insider, very dangerous, and he can win.

            1. lovemychris profile image76
              lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              Yeah--he's got the Romney "look' thing going....handsome, debonaire....and just as rotten inside.(imo)
              Romney is dangerous too.
              Kofer Black was his advisor....NUFF SAID.

              Perry--selling off the highways to foreign countries? How much of a cut did he get?

              Tejas...big oil, big corruption. And I agree...dangerous to kids and all living things.

              1. profile image0
                Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                Romney scares me because he actually believes he is going to be a God of a planet. He scares me because he actually believes that there is a living prophet, which he must and I mean must, follow instruction. Mormons are much more into forming an entire society based upon religion than even Catholics are. I know this because I was Mormon. This isn't a misconception. Romney believes he is going to run a planet, and be their Jesus. I can't trust a guy who believes that, or that magical underwear will protect him from evil spirits....or that Joseph Smith was anything but a con artist. It is like the black thing though...yes, I can say this because technically, if you ask the Mormon church, I am still a Mormon. I can talk about my peeps like that.
                About Perry - good lord! Yes, this guy sold potentially the most important and well traveled highway in Dallas, one that was ALREADY BUILT, made it into a toll rode and sold it to an Italian company. He HAD to have made millions personally of that one.

                1. profile image56
                  tajiatalposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  I agree with all of that.

  4. Moderndayslave profile image60
    Moderndayslaveposted 6 years ago
    1. profile image0
      Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Jeff Rense! Wow...talk about a blast from the past.

  5. Evan G Rogers profile image76
    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago

    I'm glad to see some of the liberal side angry at these actions of Obama.

    Please remember these deeds of his when it next November comes around.

    1. Doug Hughes profile image58
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      If there is a more liberal candidate than President Obama on the ticket in November, I will vote for him/her.

      If the choice is between President Obama and any of the announced GOP candidates, I will vote for our president. He's a moderate, but that's better than a lunatic.

      1. kerryg profile image89
        kerrygposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Same. I hate voting for the lesser of evils, but given a choice between sometimes getting angry about decisions I disagree with and constantly getting angry about decisions I disagree with, I'm gonna have to go with sometimes.

    2. profile image0
      Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Yep, even me. Obama is actually quite centric on the political spectrum. It is just that our political spectrum has shifted away from the standard, to the far right over the last 30 years. Line it up on a sheet of paper, and he isn't too far off of Reagan actually. So, no...he is not the left wing savior by any means. I like him though. This was a horrible decision.

    3. profile image0
      Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I know he isn't perfect, but all in all, I fully support Obama still. He has done several things I disagree with, but I know my President isn't going to follow exactly what I personally want. I fear Ron Paul more than I like him.

      1. Druid Dude profile image60
        Druid Dudeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Rand Paul defender against tyranny. I thought King GeorgeIII died. Are we still at war w/ britain? Aren't we overstating things...like just a smidge?

        1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
          Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          I don't remember King George ever forcing the colonists to get frisked to enter a boat...

          ... But a lot of the other things he did are very similar to what we have now.

      2. lovemychris profile image76
        lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        I fully support him too.

        Anyone that the right hates so much has got to be good.

        If his ideas get implemented,and have a chance to seed, we as a country will soar.

        1. Moderndayslave profile image60
          Moderndayslaveposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Or if American's snap out of it?

          1. lovemychris profile image76
            lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            We have to remember we are all in this together.
            We had that feeling once...I remember it!
            It has stayed with me all my life.
            We can get it back again.
            We are SO much better than what we have become.

            1. Moderndayslave profile image60
              Moderndayslaveposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              We no longer have a sense of country or humanity, only  the worship of a dollar or what it buys.

              This was interesting:
              http://thecrowhouse.com/nwofs.html

              1. Druid Dude profile image60
                Druid Dudeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                Donald Trump is way scarier. Rand looks like my grandfather. I geuss that could be scary. President candidates are always promising more than they can deliver. PR            They are limited by congress and the supreme court. Some things they can do, some they know they can't.

                1. profile image0
                  Texasbetaposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  True, Trump is a 10 yr old with a horrible attitude and a God-like sense of entitlement. That is the kind of guy who starts world wars.

            2. Evan G Rogers profile image76
              Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              "We have to remember we are all in this together..."

              This quote was brought to you by the same person who, just a few hours earlier, said:

              "I fully support him too. Anyone that the right hates so much has got to be good."

              Brilliant. Utterly brilliant.

              I'm not trying to pick on lovemychris, but this is the kind of demagogue-ing that should make all liberals realize that they've been lied to.

              You just can't make this stuff up, folks!

              1. lovemychris profile image76
                lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                What is the problem you have with what I said?

                The right does not think we are in this together--they think it is one for oneself, screw the other guy.

                They don't think they owe their fellow citizens anything.

                1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
                  Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  "The right does not think we are in this together -- they think it is one for oneself, screw the other guy"

                  I love it, she thinks she's digging up, but she's going down!!

                  How can "we be in this together" if you keep singling "them" out and talking about how evil "they" are?

                  Your argument is clearly nonsense.

                  1. lovemychris profile image76
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    Liberals are in this country to help each other AS a country.
                    One for all, and all for one.

                    Righty's are in it for themselves. "Let me make as much money as I can, pay the least taxes, and let me be free from regulations."
                    "I don't give a hoot about my neighbor--just as long as he leaves me alone."

                    Nothing nonsense about it--it's obvious.

    4. profile image56
      tajiatalposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I will be voting for the candidate who has a track record of following through with his promises. There is one. Look for that.

      1. profile image56
        tajiatalposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Just a hint, it's not Obama.

  6. Reality Bytes profile image83
    Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago

    What has Obama done that is in any way different then W.?

    Anything?

  7. lovemychris profile image76
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    I just WATCHED them!

    Here is their plan:

    End Medicare.....end it.

    Lower taxes on corporations.

    Cut spending, while keeping the Bush tax cuts.

    ****

    Obama said he wants to invest in America...they said, Not a chance in Hell.

    1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
      Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Here's an article that shows a direct relationship to government intervention in the health care market and a dramatic rise in prices.

      http://mises.org/daily/5320/How-the-Exp … Healthcare

      Obama says he wants to "invest in America", but every time that the government steals money from part of its population to give to another part, things just end up more expensive and complicated.

      If you look at the third chart, you can see that health care costs were rising SLOWER than the CPI. But right around 1965, when medicare legislation was signed, the rate of the cost of health care begins to rise sharply.

      The CPI includes costs of medical services, and thus the rate of change of CPI inflation would actually be LESS if it didn't include the medical costs.

      1. lovemychris profile image76
        lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Bull. We need to invest in infrastructure, green energy, and education--just take the gd banks out of it, and we'll be fine.

        Medical costs are high because of greed. Same reason for the high cost of everything.

        You know, I work with a woman from Moldava....she said today was "Childrens Day" in her country. Parades, dances, ice cream, festivals...and the parents take the day off to celebrate kids.

        I had to laugh at that ever happening here...a day off? For what? You saw the STINK the R's caused for CHIPS. For anything that costs money.

        We don't have a spending problem, we have a revenue problem....and the R's will make it 100,000 times worse on 95% of us.

        What will people do when there's no money for the Nursing Home? What of a disabled person? Who will quit work and watch them? How will they pay for the meds---since the COST is astronomical...due to GREED.

        Money is their God, not mine.I personally could shove it down  Boehner/Cantor/Ryan's throats....but they are too busy COLLECTING it to care!

        1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
          Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          GREED!! GREED!! GREED!!!

          Show me one person in this world who isn't greedy, and I'll know you're a liar.

          1. lovemychris profile image76
            lovemychrisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            My mother....but you'll have to take my word for it.

            All the churches around here....but you'll have to take my word for it.

            My high-school English teacher.....but you'll have to tkae my word for it.

            Plenty of people are not greedy. In fact, it used to be looked down on!!

            But we've had 30 years of "greed is good" philosophy bs.
            It is not how I was raised.
            Nor my fellow generation.---Until they killed off all the idealists, then we lost our way, IMO.

            1. Evan G Rogers profile image76
              Evan G Rogersposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              those churches only operate to benefit themselves - they WANT to spread the word of god.

              Your high school teacher was only working at the school for a pay-check.

              Deal with it.

  8. lovemychris profile image76
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    $197,000 a year, cheap, high-quality medical for them and their families.
    Tax cut for them continued.
    Iron Dome for Israel we'll pay for, along with that Iron Wall.

    But YOUR mother? Out on her Keester!

 
working