2016 Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1,301
#1,301
n_huffhines said:
That's a great reason to dislike him.

Either you are a fiscal, small government conservative and you choose Rand Paul or you are a RINO looking to rattle shields in the name of God and country.

You don't like me and Rand because we make you face that truth.
Click to expand...

:eek:lol:

So if I disagree with him on various points I'm a RIHNO? Randinits are apparently no better than Obamanites, don't agree with Obama you're a racist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#1,303
#1,303
hog88 said:
:eek:lol:

So if I disagree with him on various points I'm a RIHNO? Randinits are apparently no better than Obamanites, don't agree with Obama you're a racist.
Click to expand...

It's not that we disagree. It's that you are choosing big government over little government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,304
#1,304
n_huffhines said:
Well, here we are with our disconnect again.

Executives are not supposed to write or sponsor legislation. It's the executive branch. Separation of powers. Checks and balances. Constitution.

Legislators are supposed to write legislation. We don't want more presidential legislation. We want government officials to stick to their roles.

Paul is just following the constitution. His outline is a proposal or a framework for congress and America to work off. He is is saying he is looking for something along these lines, now go write and pass a budget.

That's the way it's supposed to work.
Click to expand...
I think it's been so long since we have had a president that actually followed The Document that we have all forgotten how it should work.
 
#1,305
#1,305
SpaceCoastVol said:
OK. The lapdog didn't send anything of note other than his Death to America legislation. Better?
Click to expand...

I don't understand how your point relates to my point.

My point is that Obama didn't use the veto much. Government got a lot bigger, and I am saying we should think about using the presidential veto more.

So what are you saying in relation to that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,306
#1,306
n_huffhines said:
It's not that we disagree. It's that you are choosing big government over little government.
Click to expand...

Channeling your inner LG I see.

Rand has been able to do nothing to shrink the size of government, so no record of accomplishment to back up your claims.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#1,307
#1,307
hog88 said:
:eek:lol:

So if I disagree with him on various points I'm a RIHNO? Randinits are apparently no better than Obamanites, don't agree with Obama you're a racist.
Click to expand...

There's a lot of truth to this. They are very rabid. Disagree with a point he makes and a lot of them will shout you down and call you names...just like Obama's supporters do.

And this is coming from someone who actually likes the man. But his supporters can often be their own worst enemy.
 
#1,308
#1,308
hog88 said:
Channeling your inner LG I see.

Rand has been able to do nothing to shrink the size of government, so no record of accomplishment to back up your claims.
Click to expand...

LG? Yeah, pining for small government is so LG.

What claims can I not back up?

Has he not sought out smaller government with his rhetoric and his deeds? What more can you ask for from a senator?

You're disqualifying him because of the failure of the system and you're choosing the types of people that have made the system a failure over him.

They've accomplished ****tiness and he hasn't been able to achieve awesomeness, therefore they win.

Hooray for perpetuating big government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#1,309
#1,309
n_huffhines said:
LG? Yeah, pining for small government is so LG.

What claims can I not back up?

Has he not sought out smaller government with his rhetoric and his deeds? What more can you ask for from a senator?

You're disqualifying him because of the failure of the system and you're choosing the types of people that have made the system a failure over him.

They've accomplished ****tiness and he hasn't been able to achieve awesomeness, therefore they win.

Hooray for perpetuating big government.
Click to expand...

I'm not disqualifying him. He has a tough row to hoe to get my vote simply because his only experience is as 1 term Senator. We've been down that road and know how that's worked out. You don't normally promote someone who has only been a functionary to CEO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,310
#1,310
n_huffhines said:
I don't understand how your point relates to my point.

My point is that Obama didn't use the veto much. Government got a lot bigger, and I am saying we should think about using the presidential veto more.

So what are you saying in relation to that?
Click to expand...

lol. I think maybe we are agreeing in some ways, but talking past each other in another. I was saying that harry protected Obola from ever having to use his veto pen by not sending him any legislation that he knew would require use of it. The only things that got sent to 1600 Pa were those that he KNEW der fuhrer would sign. And yes, government did get bigger. Kind of proves the point that gridlock is not necessarily a bad thing in some ways I guess. Of course the problem arises when you have a sympathetic legislature that will bow to the president's every wish to grow the government, and will NEVER sign on to reduce it, and that explains how we got into this mess.
 
#1,312
#1,312
AirVol said:
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...ebate-schedule-rigged-to-aid-hillary-clinton/
Click to expand...

I know he is correct. And I'm sure it's very frustrating to have the all powerful party elite snuff you out.

But after living under O'Malley's idea of state government, I have zero sympathy for him. In Maryland, the difference was he was part of the party elite. Now on the national stage he's complaining about being on the outside looking it.

Boo hoo, Martin. Take your ass back to Baltimore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,313
#1,313
hog88 said:
I'm not disqualifying him. He has a tough row to hoe to get my vote simply because his only experience is as 1 term Senator. We've been down that road and know how that's worked out. You don't normally promote someone who has only been a functionary to CEO.
Click to expand...

Rand Paul = Obama because of experience

you're unbelievable

We've had experienced guys, and they suck too. Experience just means they've had more opportunity to be corrupted, and it's why all of them are corrupted to some degree.

Get somebody who hasn't been bought yet.

What are Rand Paul's accomplishments? Winning a senate seat with mostly libertarian views. That's by far the highest office anyone with mostly libertarian views has held in my lifetime. It's pretty amazing when you think about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,314
#1,314
hog88 said:
I'm not disqualifying him. He has a tough row to hoe to get my vote simply because his only experience is as 1 term Senator. We've been down that road and know how that's worked out. You don't normally promote someone who has only been a functionary to CEO.
Click to expand...

Rand's experience is not a problem at all. Rand's problem is his stances on several key issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,315
#1,315
n_huffhines said:
Rand Paul = Obama because of experience

you're unbelievable

We've had experienced guys, and they suck too. Experience just means they've had more opportunity to be corrupted, and it's why all of them are corrupted to some degree.

Get somebody who hasn't been bought yet.

What are Rand Paul's accomplishments? Winning a senate seat with mostly libertarian views. That's by far the highest office anyone with mostly libertarian views has held in my lifetime. It's pretty amazing when you think about it.
Click to expand...

Keep drinking the Rand kook-aid Huff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#1,322
#1,322
The entire thing is worth a read. Keep in mind he needs congress either way. In fact, he says take border protection away from DHS for starters and let congress control it.

Q: Does a "pathway to citizenship" mean amnesty in your book?
PAUL: I think that that's the whole point: What is amnesty? Because, [for those who say] "no deportation and no amnesty," well, if you're not going to deport people you are somehow changing the current law because the current law says everybody must go.
Q: But you've said that the party should give up this word "amnesty"?
PAUL: I think we need to get beyond it. We need some form of immigration reform.
Q: And a path to citizenship?
PAUL: Well, the path to citizenship is a longer, more difficult goal.
Q: But you don't rule it out as an end game?
PAUL: What I would say is that at this point in time I don't think any type of immigration reform will get out of Washington that includes a path to citizenship. But I do think that there is a path to a secure border and an expanded work visa program.
Click to expand...

Rand Paul on Immigration
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top