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.
So Mr. Paul says something that the left have been saying for year 'the police are too militarized' and suddenly he's Mr. Wonderful to the Libertarian crowd again. And it's amusing how suddenly the police are the Right's friend when during the Bundy stand-off, LEO were jack-booted thugs.
Wait five minutes and Paul will throw you under the bus once again.
Rand like his dad Ron, have been saying it since the patriot act was passed. Did the progressive liberals just wake up?
Both him and Ron Paul the leprechaun betrayed their supporters in 2012 when Ron made the deal that he did with Mitt Romney and little Rand endorsed Romney.
Rand like his dad Ron, have been saying it since the patriot act was passed. Did the progressive liberals just wake up?
Many of the 'liberals' have been saying the police have too many powers since...oh, Jim Crow or even earlier, during the early labor movements when the police were used as the enforcer arm of the corporate powers -- kind of like now.
Food for thought since you equate Rand Paul with Sarah Palin.
It’s time to stop calling Rand Paul a tea partier - The Washington Post
As we've written before, the "tea party" tag has been vastly over-applied throughout the last few years. It was basically used on every Republican who won office in 2010, even as many of them had little to do with the movement -- either ideologically or in their actions.
..
The trouble with Paul is that no well-known labels seem to fit him well. While his dad, Ron Paul, is a pretty straight-line libertarian, that's not really who the younger Paul is. He's not an establishment Republican, a neo-conservative, an arch-conservative or a moderate Republican.
We still don't know what label would be better than "tea party," but it's becoming clearer and clearer that this label doesn't really fit. Maybe he's just a Rand Paul Republican.
I would label Rand Paul as right in the middle
he is a mix has libertarian ideas and some regular conservatism.
so he is more pro war than his dad Ron Paul.
but more anti big government than any party in existence.
better than most politicians at least.
and we know all politicians are still making backroom deals.
never the less I would not hold my breath
but better him than a worse person getting the power at least
lets see the play the elites put up for us
The US government let me rephrase that every government picks winners and losers.
More representative societies attempt to lessen this function of government.
But just on a strict basis America was built on the backs of enslaved black labor, with another 100yrs of extremely cheap black labor until the 1960's.
I used to think that statement was hyperbole, but I have done a lot more reading.
Now we are trying to import cheap Mexican labor or cheap labor over seas.
The US economy has never really worked with out exploiting a huge number of people's labor.
What made the USA unique, for so long? 100 years ago, everything changed.
Many of the 'liberals' have been saying the police have too many powers since...oh, Jim Crow or even earlier, during the early labor movements when the police were used as the enforcer arm of the corporate powers -- kind of like now.
While the 'conservatives' cheered them on.
Wasn't it Obama who said that we need a civilian national security force just as strong as the Army? Why, yes it was. Isn't it liberals who support Obama? Why, yes it is. I'm afraid what you're saying here doesn't track well with actual reality.
So Mr. Paul says something that the left have been saying for year 'the police are too militarized' and suddenly he's Mr. Wonderful to the Libertarian crowd again. And it's amusing how suddenly the police are the Right's friend when during the Bundy stand-off, LEO were jack-booted thugs.
Wait five minutes and Paul will throw you under the bus once again.
That is the problem with black or white, either or thinking. People who think in absolutes allow no room for varying degrees. Hardliners from both sides like OP and the the author of the post I quote are the problem.
A am a fiscal conservative yet believe in some social spending. We can have a streamlined efficient government. We can have good law enforcement and we can still have freedom.
It is only those who dwell in absolutes that refuse to compromise in any meaningful way.
Mr. Paul is correct. We shouldn't militarize our LEOs.
The Fed has acted like jack booted thugs. Ruby Ridge and Waco for example. DHS raiding a house in full body armor to confiscate a land rover. 8 year old child getting Tasered. I mean I can go on and on.
Thrown under the bus? Look no further than the man who dwell in the White house for that.
Many of the 'liberals' have been saying the police have too many powers since...oh, Jim Crow or even earlier, during the early labor movements when the police were used as the enforcer arm of the corporate powers -- kind of like now.
While the 'conservatives' cheered them on.
But they voted for someone that has expanded the police state. A lot of good it does to say you are against something only to support someone that expands it.
Have not seen the OP since the 1st post.....
Hit & Run! Typical, when black feathers are in the corners of your mouth.
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.
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.
