Okay so this butt munch does an end run on the ol republitards, and gets himself elected, then starts spewing about the CRA of 1964 only hours after jumping up in front of a crowd and regurgitating the tea party mantra. . .
Then he "complains" about not having a honeymoon because of his spewing. . .
Then he backs out of a Meet The Press commitment because he stuck his crusty jock in his mouth and can't figure out how to spit it out! :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
The only "tea" party these guys are having involves exclusively Texas Tea; as evident by this first time candidate's statements that were critical of the POTUS and his administration's "treatment of BP" over the environmental FUBAR disaster they created, wherein Rand Paul likened it to "putting the heel of a boot to their throat".
The guy is a closet nazi if he thinks any American is worthy of the level of trust required to repeal the CRA of 1964 when it comes to private enterprise. :rolleyes:
He is a Libertarian and the Tea Party did not endorse him to my knowledge they endorsed the Republican who also lost. And where do you keep getting that he wants to repeal the CRA?
Quote from: me on May 23, 2010, 02:42:18 PM
He is a Libertarian and the Tea Party did not endorse him to my knowledge they endorsed the Republican who also lost. And where do you keep getting that he wants to repeal the CRA?
So why'd he get up in front of that crowd and spew,. . . "I have a message from the tea party,. . . we are here to take our government back"? Why where the tea party leaders blathering all over him until he said he would
change (NOT repeal) the 1964 CRA if he could to eliminate its application to private enterprise?
He has made that statement several times, and I have previously supplied the links to it. Read/view them.
And the tea party DID back him
Washington (CNN) – In the wake of Rand Paul's win last week in Kentucky's Republican Senate primary, both national parties are trying to figure out just what to make of the Tea Party movement, the conservative, grassroots movement that backed Paul and has coalesced in opposition to policies of the Obama administration and congressional Democrats.
Quote from: me on May 23, 2010, 02:42:18 PM
He is a Libertarian and the Tea Party did not endorse him to my knowledge...
Moose Hunter Barbie did.
http://www.randpaul2010.com/2010/02/sarah-palin-endorses/
National political icon and conservative leader Sarah Palin has endorsed Dr. Rand Paul in his bid for United States Senate from Kentucky. The Paul campaign has received a generous donation from Governor Palin's PAC.
Alrighty then I honestly thought they backed the Republican. I still wouldn't have voted for him.
Quote from: LOsborne on May 23, 2010, 04:08:29 PM
Moose Hunter Barbie did.
http://www.randpaul2010.com/2010/02/sarah-palin-endorses/
National political icon and conservative leader Sarah Palin has endorsed Dr. Rand Paul in his bid for United States Senate from Kentucky. The Paul campaign has received a generous donation from Governor Palin's PAC.
Quote from: me on May 23, 2010, 04:39:19 PM
Alrighty then I honestly thought they backed the Republican. I still wouldn't have voted for him.
He ran on the Republican Ticket against another Republican.
So they had two Republicans and a Democrat running?
Quote from: Palehorse on May 23, 2010, 05:00:16 PM
He ran on the Republican Ticket against another Republican.
Quote from: me on May 23, 2010, 05:03:34 PM
So they had two Republicans and a Democrat running?
Kentucky Republicans were voting for the candidate to replace that bastard senator, Jim Bunning. Primary.
Quote from: me on May 23, 2010, 05:03:34 PM
So they had two Republicans and a Democrat running?
They had one Libertarian, one Republican and one Democrat running to be the Republican canidate in a Republican primary? :confused: :confused: :confused:
And they chose Rand Paul? :spooked:
Quote from: The Troll on May 23, 2010, 05:43:00 PM
They had one Libertarian, one Republican and one Democrat running to be the Republican canidate in a Republican primary? :confused: :confused: :confused:
Quote from: me on May 23, 2010, 07:28:59 PM
And they chose Rand Paul? :spooked:
How can a Democrat run for senator on the Republican ticket unless he changes party. I never heard that before. I have heard of a Republican saying that he was a Democrat and run as a Democrat, but can't fool all of the people all of the time. They voted him out.
Apparently the conservative brain-trust has decided to throw Rand Paul under the bus. But here's what's really funny: they are blaming the Liberal Media for his victory.
It's also possible that Stephanopoulos (a former Clinton aide), Maddow (an unabashed leftist) and the rest of the liberal-leaning press wanted to nurture Paul's candidacy in the primary in order to strike a blow against Republican prospects in the general election, knowing that the inexperienced contender with his provocative positions and oddball associations would be easy to defeat and discredit.
Yeah, how could anyone know he is a racist, elitist, advocate for robber barons and soul-less corporations if Rachel Maddow and George Stephanopoulos don't tell us? As if the I Hate Obama crowd would believe anything Rachel or George said. Too funny.
http://www.aolnews.com/opinion/article/opinion-rand-pauls-amazing-meltdown/19488905?icid=main
AWWWW, C'mon Lolly, Maddow badgered him into a confession after hours of "sweating" him on her show, don't 'cha know.
Oh, wait. He "misspoke."
Ummm......yeah. Let's go with that.
:) :) :) :) :)
Quote from: followsthewolf on May 26, 2010, 10:12:34 AM
AWWWW, C'mon Lolly, Maddow badgered him into a confession after hours of "sweating" him on her show, don't 'cha know.
Oh, wait. He "misspoke."
Ummm......yeah. Let's go with that.
:) :) :) :) :)
I was watching a little of Fox News yesterday, a little is all that I can stand, watdhing one of the actors on one of their faux new shows. He was crying about how Liberal media and MSNBC amd Maddow was killing his chance to be Senator of Kentucky and his standing with the Teabagger Party with all of those tough questions. :doh:
What is killing Rand Paul is his big mouth and his stupiid line of thinking. :blah: :blah: :blah:
The Troll, I just love it. :biggrin: :yes:
Quote from: followsthewolf on May 26, 2010, 10:12:34 AM
AWWWW, C'mon Lolly, Maddow badgered him into a confession after hours of "sweating" him on her show, don't 'cha know.
Oh, wait. He "misspoke."
Ummm......yeah. Let's go with that.
:) :) :) :) :)
I think Paul junior, like far too many people, doesn't understand that 'private enterprise' only means that it's privately owned, and that once that 'private' enterprise opens it's doors to the public the owner becomes subject to public regulation - one of those being you cannot pick and choose your customers based on 'racial' criteria.
Either that or he's just another closet racist (like Paul senior) who fugged up and let the cat out of the bag. :biggrin:
< played to the sounds of "Who's Sorry Now?" > :rotfl:
It just keeps getting better!
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2010/may/26/rand-paul-faces-possible-challenge-staff-shake-/
The Kentucky Libertarians are embarrassed, and planning to run their own candidate this fall.
University of Louisville political scientist Laurie Rhodebeck said if the Senate race were to be close, a Libertarian candidate could potentially take enough votes from Paul to affect the outcome.
And he is shuffling his staff around ...
Rand Paul on Wednesday named one of his father's former aides, Jesse Benton, as campaign manager, replacing David Adams who made campaign chairman in a reshuffling.
... cause somebody has to take the blame for all those stupid on-camera remarks.
Ain't this fun?
Quote from: LOsborne on May 26, 2010, 07:51:59 PM
It just keeps getting better!
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2010/may/26/rand-paul-faces-possible-challenge-staff-shake-/
The Kentucky Libertarians are embarrassed, and planning to run their own candidate this fall.
University of Louisville political scientist Laurie Rhodebeck said if the Senate race were to be close, a Libertarian candidate could potentially take enough votes from Paul to affect the outcome.
And he is shuffling his staff around ...
Rand Paul on Wednesday named one of his father's former aides, Jesse Benton, as campaign manager, replacing David Adams who made campaign chairman in a reshuffling.
... cause somebody has to take the blame for all those stupid on-camera remarks.
Ain't this fun?
The sad part is this jackass is possibly opening the door to another jackass that will be just as bad or worse, and the citizens of Kentucky will be the real losers in all of this. . . Just proves that killing an idiot is useless; there is no shortage of replacements!
And this, of course, is the best the tea party can offer.
Even sadder is that the tea party (consisting of sooooo many reg'lar folk) is proud to have this pathetic slug as their representative.
Screams volumes.
And scares the hell out of me! :spooked: :yes:
QuoteSenate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has some advice for Kentucky Republican Senate nominee Rand Paul: Keep your mouth shut. At least when it comes to the national media.
Paul had a disastrous national debut after winning last week's Republican Senate primary in Kentucky, coming under intense scrutiny after he defended his past criticism of the Civil Rights Act during an appearance on the Rachel Maddow Show.
Last night on CNN, John King asked McConnell for his advice to Paul. "All newcomers to the big stage make mistakes," King said. "He has made a few. My understanding is that you were among those who, through your aides and allies, convinced him not to show up Meet The Press this past Sunday, to go dark for a little bit."
McConnell: "My advice to him is to speak to the people who are gonna actually be voting in this election. I think he's said quite enough for the time being, in terms of national press coverage."
McConnell On Paul: 'I Think He's Said Quite Enough For The Time Being' (http://dscc.me/Kxc4)
You got to say one thing, old Mitch McConnel is true to his black Republican heart.
You tell the Hicks in the Sticks what what they want to hear. You keep your mouth shut and keep all of your black secrets to yourself and your Republican leaders. You really don't want the Hicks to know what you're really up to. :sneaky:
The Troll :flag: :no1: :salute:
Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul is once again making waves, this time for saying he opposes citizenship for U.S. born children of undocumented immigrants.
In an interview posted Wednesday on RT.com, a Russian television station that broadcasts in English, Paul said he favors modifying current law.
"We are the only country I know of that allows people to come in illegally, have a baby, and then that baby becomes a citizen," Paul said. "And I think that should stop also."
Paul, a Tea Party movement favorite, captured the Kentucky GOP primary last week, defeating establishment candidate Trey Grayson.
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution guarantees citizenship to individuals born in the United States, but Paul's position is not an unpopular one in Congress.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/?fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/?fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P)
That fugger just will not STFU! :rolleyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on May 28, 2010, 03:29:17 PM
Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul is once again making waves, this time for saying he opposes citizenship for U.S. born children of undocumented immigrants.
In an interview posted Wednesday on RT.com, a Russian television station that broadcasts in English, Paul said he favors modifying current law.
"We are the only country I know of that allows people to come in illegally, have a baby, and then that baby becomes a citizen," Paul said. "And I think that should stop also."
Paul, a Tea Party movement favorite, captured the Kentucky GOP primary last week, defeating establishment candidate Trey Grayson.
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution guarantees citizenship to individuals born in the United States, but Paul's position is not an unpopular one in Congress.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/?fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/?fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P)
That fugger just will not STFU! :rolleyes:
You know even an asshole can be right some of the time. Just like a stopped clock is right two time a day.
This is one I agree with. If the people are illegal so is the baby. Flat out not a citizen.
That law was not intended for illegal's it was written for the babies of slaves.
Quote from: Palehorse on May 28, 2010, 03:29:17 PM
Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul is once again making waves, this time for saying he opposes citizenship for U.S. born children of undocumented immigrants.
In an interview posted Wednesday on RT.com, a Russian television station that broadcasts in English, Paul said he favors modifying current law.
"We are the only country I know of that allows people to come in illegally, have a baby, and then that baby becomes a citizen," Paul said. "And I think that should stop also."
Paul, a Tea Party movement favorite, captured the Kentucky GOP primary last week, defeating establishment candidate Trey Grayson.
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution guarantees citizenship to individuals born in the United States, but Paul's position is not an unpopular one in Congress.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/?fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/?fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P)
That fugger just will not STFU! :rolleyes:
Quote from: me on May 28, 2010, 05:22:19 PM
That law was not intended for illegal's it was written for the babies of slaves.
MEDIC, MEDIC, SOME GET ME A NITRO PILL TO SLIP UNDER MY TONGE.
"ME" is right, it was meant for slave babies. Not Illegal alien. Not to long a go the women from Mexico was hiring ambulances and coming over the border to give birth and slipping out of the hospital with a legal Baby and stiffing the hospital.
Only in America. The Troll :seeya2:
Quote from: The Troll on May 28, 2010, 05:34:37 PM
MEDIC, MEDIC, SOME GET ME A NITRO PILL TO SLIP UNDER MY TONGE.
"ME" is right, it was meant for slave babies. Not Illegal alien. Not to long a go the women from Mexico was hiring ambulances and coming over the border to give birth and slipping out of the hospital with a legal Baby and stiffing the hospital.
Only in America. The Troll :seeya2:
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y286/deerladie/unsure.gif) (http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y286/deerladie/oh.gif)
Quote from: me on May 28, 2010, 05:22:19 PM
That law was not intended for illegal's it was written for the babies of slaves.
Those "slaves" were technically illegal aliens; since you want to get technical. No citizenship, no taxes, no land ownership, no rights, no governmental acknowledgement other than the property of a citizen, and no commitment.
One main difference....they were brought here against their will they didn't sneak across the border to get here illegally.
Quote from: Palehorse on May 28, 2010, 06:45:41 PM
Those "slaves" were technically illegal aliens; since you want to get technical. No citizenship, no taxes, no land ownership, no rights, no governmental acknowledgement other than the property of a citizen, and no commitment.
Amen!
Quote from: me on May 28, 2010, 06:55:32 PM
One main difference....they were brought here against their will they didn't sneak across the border to get here illegally.
Doesn't matter how they got here, they are
still illegally here if they did not properly immigrate.
Section 1. . . .nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
And I have pointed this out before in discussing the draconian immigration law of AZ, that pesky little phrase of the 14th amendment. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on May 28, 2010, 07:05:04 PM
Section 1. . . .nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
And I have pointed this out before in discussing the draconian immigration law of AZ, that pesky little phrase of the 14th amendment. . .
show me exactly WHERE the immigration law of AZ, violates the 14th amendment........
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 28, 2010, 07:10:24 PM
show me exactly WHERE the immigration law of AZ, violates the 14th amendment........
In part, you just quoted it yourself!
And they will have equal protection until they are picked up for breaking a law so what's yer point.
Quote from: Palehorse on May 28, 2010, 07:01:28 PM
Doesn't matter how they got here, they are still illegally here if they did not properly immigrate.
It wasn't illegal to bring them in, even George Washington had legal slaves. All of the rich had them. My family was never rich enough to own one.
Quote from: me on May 28, 2010, 07:19:21 PM
And they will have equal protection until they are picked up for breaking a law so what's yer point.
And then there's this little phrase that opens the amendment, (as it relates to Rand Paul's position):
All persons born . . . it does not say "all persons born to citizens or legal immigrants, it says "all persons born"!
You know damned good and well what my point is as I have sufficiently stated it elsewhere within this forum, so lets not get off topic here shall we. You want to argue AZ's law then bump the topic. You want to argue Rand Paul's position then this is the place. . .
Ever read the 14th amendment? No mention of slavery in it!
Quote from: The Troll on May 28, 2010, 07:19:45 PM
It wasn't illegal to bring them in, even George Washington had legal slaves. All of the rich had them. My family was never rich enough to own one.
I guess that depends upon your place of residence at the time; we after all, fought a bloody civil war in part over that very point!
I think someone needs a time out.... :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 28, 2010, 07:27:08 PM
I think someone needs a time out.... :yes:
:lipsrsealed2: