Rand Paul was always a Piece of Shit

[Nivek 17331]

Hopefully his neighbor beats his ass again.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Has Paul ever asked his constituents what they want? Nvr mind, who am I kidding?

[Anastasis 23700]

 

 

[Anastasis 23700]

35 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Has Paul ever asked his constituents what they want? Nvr mind, who am I kidding?

Wait, you mean you want to have the people of this country engage in the decision, through their representatives in Congress, to take military action in Syria?  How would this actually work?

Maybe one way it could work is if the "deliberative" body in Congress actually took up and debated an authorization for the use of force.  Exactly the debate that Paul is trying to force. No, no, no.  The better way to ensure that the American electorate is represented in the debate is to abdicate their Congressional responsibility and cede the decision to the executive branch. 

[HenryJames 67124]

 

[Brisketexan 106635]

 

And congress could have done that. It didn’t. The executive doesn’t get to make that call. In summary, fuck off with your continued support of an imperial presidency, Rand.

[elfenix 34659]

34 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

 

[Anastasis 23700]

Yeah, disagree with Rand's take.  The Ukraine thing is impeachable and should result in removal from office.  He would be losing his shit if a Democrat did that. Stick to attacking arms sales and war mongering Rand. At least demonstrate that you are getting something meaningful out of the political kowtow. 

[Brisketexan 106635]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

Yeah, disagree with Rand's take.  The Ukraine thing is impeachable and should result in removal from office.  He would be losing his shit if a Democrat did that. Stick to attacking arms sales and war mongering Rand. At least demonstrate that you are getting something meaningful out of the political kowtow. 

Psssst....what Rand has demonstrated is that he actually ISN'T principled.  At all.  That's kinda the point here.  He's just another partisan politician, devoted only to the path he thinks best secures him a long-term grip on power.

I know you think that THIS time, the stripper is sincere, and really, really loves you....but she's just in it for the $20 table dances like the rest of em

[XYZ 2154]

Fuck Rand Paul. Tried to pass a bill to explicitly exempt the medical industry from antitrust law.

[triplehorn 2664]

Rand striking the exact same corrupt note as Pompeo last week defending Trump's bribery of Ukraine:

“Nations work together and they say ‘Boy, goodness gracious, if you can help me with ‘X,’ we’ll help you achieve ‘Y.’ This is what partnerships do.”

---> That's an excellent description of both international diplomacy and organized crime, depending upon the "X."

In this case eXtortion.

 

[Anastasis 23700]

 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13619]

"...so, since we've expended in support of our allies establishing these defensive positions, let's convince them to abandon them, then SURPRISE!, we're withdrawing."

 

 

 

Edited October 26, 2019 by Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

[Brisketexan 106635]

 

Psssst....again...he’s playing you. He. Doesn’t. Have. Principles. Except for “keep rand in office.”

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13619]

13 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Psssst....what Rand has demonstrated is that he actually ISN'T principled.  At all.  That's kinda the point here.  He's just another partisan politician, devoted only to the path he thinks best secures him a long-term grip on power.

I know you think that THIS time, the stripper is sincere, and really, really loves you....but she's just in it for the $20 table dances like the rest of em

I've got the normalest boner.

[Aqua Buddha 14782]

Takes a page out of Chapter One of the Paul Family Playbook.  Vote for a budget with a massive deficit, later propose spending bills you know will fail, then claim moral superiority:

https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/467817-senate-rejects-paul-effort-to-cut-spending

The Senate on Monday rejected an effort by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to place an across-the-board spending cut in a domestic funding package being debated by lawmakers. 

 

Senators voted 24-67 on the amendment from Paul, which would reduce spending by 2 percent compared to fiscal 2019 levels. 

he amendment, had Paul been successful, would have been added to a spending package that includes commerce, science and justice; transportation and housing and urban development; agriculture; and interior. 

 

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, urged senators to oppose Paul's amendment. 

 

"His amendment will slash spending below the bipartisan budget act that we all negotiated," Leahy said from the Senate floor ahead of the vote. 

[Anastasis 23700]

3 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Takes a page out of Chapter One of the Paul Family Playbook.  Vote for a budget with a massive deficit, later propose spending bills you know will fail, then claim moral superiority:

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=116&session=1&vote=00262

 

[Aqua Buddha 14782]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=116&session=1&vote=00262

 

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=1&vote=00303

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Defend this Rand defenders!  

Edited November 5, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[seven 1368]

Why doesn't sir rand tell us? Deep state? 

[wildcat09 29561]

19 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Defend this Rand defenders!  

Paging @Anastasis to the red courtesy phone. Anastasis to the red courtesy phone.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[WBT 20886]

*Representative

Edited November 5, 2019 by WBT

[Anastasis 23700]

9 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Paging @Anastasis to the red courtesy phone. Anastasis to the red courtesy phone.

I am not going to defend calling out for the name to be published. That’s stupid. I do however think that the whistleblower should step forward and voluntarily testify to Congress. I also still think, like I posted 10 or so pages back, that aligning with trunp only served short term politic interests at the expense of the longer terms political consequence. I think rands gonna have to deal with that. 

Edited November 5, 2019 by Anastasis

[Pig Bellmont 8867]

 

[Pig Bellmont 8867]

12 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Just wait until he hears about the President’s son in law

[hayden_horn 11401]

1 hour ago, Pig Bellmont said:

 

any idea that rand paul was a man of principle is now completly shattered. anyone left supporting this man is a simple partisan like he is.

libertarian my ass.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Then name him, Rand. If it’s totally legal to do so, spit it out.

[JimmyJames 12271]

Just another day Rand Paul’s keeping on acting like a piece of shit. Nothing new to see here. 

[hayden_horn 11401]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

 

[Brisketexan 106635]

I am not going to defend calling out for the name to be published. That’s stupid. I do however think that the whistleblower should step forward and voluntarily testify to Congress. I also still think, like I posted 10 or so pages back, that aligning with trunp only served short term politic interests at the expense of the longer terms political consequence. I think rands gonna have to deal with that. 

Dude. Stop. Rand is completely indefensible now. Not “gonna have to deal with that.” He HAS. NO. PRINCIPLES.

[yoladu 4187]

Truly weird Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky reminds me of a spoiled brat without a properly functioning brain. 

just saying.

[Tom 2960]

2 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

any idea that rand paul was a man of principle is now completly shattered. anyone left supporting this man is a simple partisan like he is.

libertarian my ass.

Libertarians in general always end up falling in line with Republicans.  Rand is no different.  Self proclaimed libertarians on this board and back on Shaggy were consistently outspoken and critical of Obama and Hillary yet tend to be silent or find some kind of defense when it comes to holding Trump and the GOP to the same standards.

At the end of the day, Libertarians are just Republicans who smoke weed and like to name their kids after crappy authors.  

Edited November 5, 2019 by Tom

[jimmyjazz 46982]

13 minutes ago, Tom said:

Libertarians in general always end up falling in line with Republicans.  Rand is no different.  Self proclaimed libertarians on this board and back on Shaggy were consistently outspoken and critical of Obama and Hillary yet tend to be silent or find some kind of defense when it comes to holding Trump and the GOP to the same standards.

At the end of the day, Libertarians are just Republicans who smoke weed and like to name their kids after crappy authors.  

This is true.  A true libertarian would put individual liberty above virtually all else.  Not the modern day version.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Someday we’ll probably look back on the libertarian movement as nothing more than a less misanthropic but more intellectual version of the Tea Party.  

Edited November 5, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[wildcat09 29561]

15 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

This is true.  A true libertarian would put individual liberty above virtually all else.  Not the modern day version.

A lot of self-proclaimed libertarians in 2010 are now part of the alt-right. They weren't opposed to rules for others, they just wanted there to be no rules for them.

[jimmyjazz 46982]

I could never see myself identifying as a Libertarian because even decades ago most of them were fucking nuts.

[Longhorn_Fan68 34080]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

A lot of self-proclaimed libertarians in 2010 are now part of the alt-right. They weren't opposed to rules for others, they just wanted there to be no rules for them.

accurate

[yoladu 4187]

Why would anyone in Kentucky listen to failed presidential candidate Rand Paul?

just saying

[Anastasis 23700]

2 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

This is true.  A true libertarian would put individual liberty above virtually all else.  Not the modern day version.

I think most would put non aggression above virtually all else, including individual liberty. When individual liberty conflicts with non aggression, NA typically overrides. 

[jimmyjazz 46982]

16 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think most would put non aggression above virtually all else, including individual liberty. When individual liberty conflicts with non aggression, NA typically overrides. 

I don't disagree.

[Huckleberry 34407]

3 hours ago, Tom said:

Libertarians in general always end up falling in line with Republicans.  Rand is no different.  Self proclaimed libertarians on this board and back on Shaggy were consistently outspoken and critical of Obama and Hillary yet tend to be silent or find some kind of defense when it comes to holding Trump and the GOP to the same standards.

At the end of the day, Libertarians are just Republicans who smoke weed and like to name their kids after crappy authors.  

Yeah, uh, you've got that a bit wrong in a few spots amigo.

[Brisketexan 106635]

33 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think most would put non aggression above virtually all else, including individual liberty. When individual liberty conflicts with non aggression, NA typically overrides. 

Where does supporting an authoritarian executive with absolute and unquestionable power fit into the whole "libertarian" thing?

Just stop.  Rand had a persona that he tried to sell -- "I'm a principled limited government libertarian."  Turns out, that product wasn't what the market wants.  What the GOP market wants is "MAGA!  Support Trump in all things or die!"  So, he started selling THAT persona.  Which means that all such personas are fucking fake -- he's just another whore selling a persona for one interest, and one interest only: keeping his position of power.  A person who cares only about holding onto power is not a public servant - he's a tyrant.

He's not a libertarian.  He's a tyrant.  So, like, the OPPOSITE of a libertarian.

Never defend him again.  It just makes you both look ridiculous.

[NameAlreadyInUse 5166]

3 hours ago, Tom said:

Libertarians in general always end up falling in line with Republicans.  Rand is no different.  Self proclaimed libertarians on this board and back on Shaggy were consistently outspoken and critical of Obama and Hillary yet tend to be silent or find some kind of defense when it comes to holding Trump and the GOP to the same standards.

At the end of the day, Libertarians are just Republicans who smoke weed and like to name their kids after crappy authors.  

I used to call myself a Libertarian.  I spent most of my time back then talking shit about Bush II.  The problem is, I saw that most people who called themselves Libertarian were either fucking crazy or they were Republicans but didn't want to admit it.  So I quit calling myself that.  I guess my party now is the Never Vote Republican party...

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Every time I here someone describe and defend libertarianism as a political ideology, I think of the Amish for some reason.   

[formermav43 4607]

17 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Every time I here someone describe and defend libertarianism as a political ideology, I think of the Amish for some reason.   

You say that like it’s a bad thing.

[bolverk 30244]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

I think most would put non aggression above virtually all else, including individual liberty. When individual liberty conflicts with non aggression, NA typically overrides. 

I would say "non agression" is the wrong term. From what I can tell, the more accurate description of a coherent and consistent foreign policy stance (trade and defense) among Libertarians appears to be "isolationism."

[Bama Chick 28596]

Go for it, poodledick.

Your constituents are apparently feeling sporty.

[jimmyjazz 46982]

Outside of high school wrestling, I've never been in a fight in my life.

If Rand Paul were to want to throw down, I would so relish the chance.  What a despicable, insolent little pussy he is.