Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-18-2014, 11:15 AM
 
Location: St Paul
7,713 posts, read 4,747,999 times
Reputation: 5007

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
Frankly the Libertarian wing is terrifying to me as a Democrat. I think the majority of my generation (Millenials) are libertarians, but detest Republicans because of the social backwardness of that party. As soon as the Republicans figure that out the votes will flock to them. And those of us who are socially liberal, but who like Scandanavian-style Social Democracy, find that threatening.
I think this is a good point. It's better for Democrats if the Republicans are extremist & far right. When a Republican like Rand Paul is more liberal than the Democratic candidate on half the issues that's going to create an awkward situation. Personally I'll root for that to happen because the Democrats are so far off the path now that the only thing they now differ with some the Bush Admin seems to be gay marriage. This would force the Dems to get behind legalization & ending the 'War on Drugs', which is the worst thing to happen to Black people since slavery. It would also force the Dems to either explain why the Patriot Act, NSA spying, secret kill lists, suspension of due process, indefinite detention, etc are needed or force them to shift back away from the Bush/Cheney approach. Lastly, it would force the Dems to either embrace being the war hawks or stop attacking a new country every year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-18-2014, 11:21 AM
 
Location: St Paul
7,713 posts, read 4,747,999 times
Reputation: 5007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fancy-Schmancy View Post
So to ensure life for the fetus, you're going to deny liberty to the woman? By Federal Law?

This is a no-win for libertarians. But if Paul's personhood amendment were to go through, he'd be the hero of the GOP...which is all he cares about. He knows perfectly well that he can't win the Presidency on the Libertarian vote. His dad got a whopping 5% when he ran on that ticket, which is why he went scurrying back to the GOP. In today's climate, Paul might pull 10% on a libertarian ticket, almost all of which would come from Republican voters. So he's figured the angles and knows that if he runs GOP, he'll get all those voters plus the Libertarians ('cause where are they gonna go?) But to get the GOP base on his side, he has to do something they've wanted...thus, the personhood amendment. Even if it never gets off the ground -- and it won't -- it makes him look like he's pro-life.

And he doesn't much care who he has to hurt to get that cred.

Rand Paul Fetal Personhood Amendment Stalls Flood Insurance Bill (UPDATE)
So if your wife was pregnant & I punched her in the stomach, killing the fetus, that's not murder right? It's just a zygote after all. Just a misdemeanor for punching someone?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2014, 05:47 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fancy-Schmancy View Post
Fine, let him believe it. But he should stop making believe he's a libertarian when he manifestly is not one.
Without life there is no liberty.

Quote:
Ron Paul was a libertarian, at least most of the time. He stood by his beliefs...looney though many of them were.

Rand Paul seems only interested in Rand Paul, President.
As noted, they hold the same position here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2014, 05:51 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas View Post
Dumping the Fed and going back to the gold satndard.
Not using military actions for any reason other than the defence of the Nation.
Phasing out SS
Rejecting the idea of Seperation of Chirch and State
His idea that those sujected to sexual harrasment at work should simply quit their job.
His opposition to Non-Discrimination laws.
His oppostion to gays being allowed to adopt.
His opposition to gay marriage.
His support of Sodomy Laws
His anti-abortion views
His opposition to the Federal government being able to use the Death Penalty
His desire to abolish the Public School System
His oppostion to government loans for higher education
His opposition to the Federal Government owning land which would lead to the dismantaling of all National Forests and Parks.
His support for tax breaks for the Oil Industry
His opposition to government funding for medical research
His opposition to Tax credits for healthcare expenses & Children's Health Insurance Program
His support of discrimination based on genetic predisposition to disease
His opposition to requiring that those seeking emergency medical care get it no matter a persons ability to pay.
His proposal to end Medicare
His wanting to kill of the FDA
His opposition the civil right act
His oppostion to the right of the US government to kill terrorists when ever and where ever they are found.
The list goes on and on but those are few of the things he believes that I oppose.
Sounds like you are likely a big John McCain fan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2014, 04:47 PM
 
Location: Orlando
8,276 posts, read 12,859,732 times
Reputation: 4142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
all these are incorrect. Doesn't surprise me are uninformed just that you are THIS uninformed
The bolded statement is the biggest joke of all the uninformed things you posted.

Actually, You apparently have no clue of what you speak. Here are references validating his positions.

Senate: OnTheIssues.orgRand_Paul.htm

http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Pro...nate/Kentucky/Rand_Paul/Views

All I see from you is an opinion backed by nothing.

Our economy almost imploded from the failure of bailing out Lehman... That came from those in charge in the Bush administration.... the ones that caused the problems You can search Frontline for those reports.

Allowing the largest banks to fail would have ended our economy as we know it. When 1/2 of our businesses derive some or all their income from the auto industry one can only guess the economic devastation that would have occurred had they been allowed to fold. While you might not like the idea of a bailout, it did keep our economy afloat long enough for the current administration to revive it, and yes it was Obama and his crew that saved our economy. The right has sat on their hands for 5 years and done ZERO.... with all the cognitive dissonance in here that is pretty hard to argue.

for the record, the jab with inaccuracies and plant the seed of doubt is a typical right approach, but it still doesn't make anything they say true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2014, 05:43 PM
 
Location: Home is Where You Park It
23,856 posts, read 13,749,968 times
Reputation: 15482
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
I know of women who believe just that. They wouldn't change a thing if it meant they didn't have their child any longer. What would you say to them?
I say more power to them. AFAIK, no one in this country is supporting government-forced abortions, and I'd drop a bucket of rotten tomatoes on anyone that did. Likewise, I do not support government-forced childbearing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2014, 07:06 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE View Post
Actually, You apparently have no clue of what you speak. Here are references validating his positions.

Senate: OnTheIssues.orgRand_Paul.htm

http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Pro...nate/Kentucky/Rand_Paul/Views

All I see from you is an opinion backed by nothing.

Our economy almost imploded from the failure of bailing out Lehman... That came from those in charge in the Bush administration.... the ones that caused the problems You can search Frontline for those reports.

Allowing the largest banks to fail would have ended our economy as we know it. When 1/2 of our businesses derive some or all their income from the auto industry one can only guess the economic devastation that would have occurred had they been allowed to fold. While you might not like the idea of a bailout, it did keep our economy afloat long enough for the current administration to revive it, and yes it was Obama and his crew that saved our economy. The right has sat on their hands for 5 years and done ZERO.... with all the cognitive dissonance in here that is pretty hard to argue.

for the record, the jab with inaccuracies and plant the seed of doubt is a typical right approach, but it still doesn't make anything they say true.
Just think of all the people that would have lost their jobs if GM had filed for bankruptcy? It would have created a real mess wouldn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2014, 07:23 PM
 
Location: Texas
5,012 posts, read 7,873,116 times
Reputation: 5698
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
Frankly the Libertarian wing is terrifying to me as a Democrat. I think the majority of my generation (Millenials) are libertarians, but detest Republicans because of the social backwardness of that party. As soon as the Republicans figure that out the votes will flock to them. And those of us who are socially liberal, but who like Scandanavian-style Social Democracy, find that threatening.
I think a substantial number of partisans (people who actually like the status quo) on the left and right feel this way too. The failure of Scandinavian style "Social Democracy" in America is the corruption in how money is actually used, accounted for, and administered. Not that I'm particularly supportive of things like social security and medicare, but greedy self serving politicians have made disaster of those programs.

I would pay good money to see Hillary (the presumptive nominee) and Rand (it'll be interesting to see whether he can actually secure the nomination against the billions of dollars that will flood in against him) debate foreign policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2014, 07:32 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Strange Bedfellows: Silicon Valley Techies ‘Like’ Conservative Senator Rand Paul

Strange Bedfellows: Silicon Valley Techies ‘Like’ Conservative Senator Rand Paul « CBS San Francisco

They know what is at stake.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:43 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top