Rand Paul, thrilled with Palin endorsement 2-3-10

I know there are a lot of Ron/Rand Paul fans here on ATS, myself included, but what do you all think of this??




I'm assuming that many of the same people who support Rand paul are NOT Palin fans, and possibly vice versa. This tea party thing is shaking everything up.

Comments?
questions?

I believe the two parties are attempting to divide the TPM. That is about the whole kit and kabootle.

Anyone that is an Incumbent this year better not go purchasing or leasing a place, they will not need it following November.

I do hope some independents get in and I hope all the people elected are outsiders.

When will the asshats realize they HAVE to spend within the budget. It IS really that frelling simple!

reply to post by endisnighe

I believe the two parties are attempting to divide the TPM.

I'm assuming that TPM means tea party movement..
It looks mostly like republicans are tryin to divide it, or maybe just swallow it up. Makes sense since most of the TPM are PO'd republicans anyways. I just don't understand why everyone is so quick to embrace Palin.

I do hope some independents get in and I hope all the people elected are outsiders.

This sounds like a good idea, but I have evidence that maybe just the fact that one is in power creates corruption and loss of morality..
check it out....
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't have to like Palin to know how I feel about the Paul family. She is supporting Rand, not the other way around. That was her decision not theirs. I wonder which one of her advisers suggested so do that to try and win over a few pleople who currently don't care for her.

The tea party movement has always been iffy from day one. It's amazing how easy it is to discredit something once it's a movement. Throw a racist or some sort of whackjob into the fray and you turn so many off to it. The TPM is not our answer, with all it's pros and it's cons. The Republican party obviously hijacked what was a great grassroots idea.

Actually we don't have an answer. The masses have been taught in school that we are in a democracy, when truly we are a constitutional republic. You elect officials based on their ability to do the JOB of upholding the constitution and making decisions within the rules. Not on their motives and agendas.

Sadly, it's too late. If freedom ever finds a new face, it will in fact be a new face. America is gone, bought and sold.

First of, GO RAND.... GO!!!

Now my take on Palin is this....

I don't agree with her on many issues. Mainly the issue on the war on terror and the empire building of America. What I do find appealing about Sarah is that she seems genuine. She seems as if she truely believes in what she's saying. She wants to make this country a better place and she seems like a true, down to roots American. Maybe she's the spark to push the Republican party back in it's "middle right" place in which it belongs. Right now the party is taken over by a bunch of neo-cons and progressives. I do agree that angry republican racists and single-minded people have definitely hurt the tea party movement but lets remember who started this movement in the first place.... RON PAUL and his rEVOLution! Keep it going with the right reasons in mind. Not just dissatisfaction from Obama but also from congress and the justices. TERM LIMITS FOR ALL!!! STAY BOUND BY OUR CONSTITUTION!!!

I think we are walking the tight rope of a revolution/civil war to be honest with you. Peace.

reply to post by Locoman8

First of, GO RAND.... GO!!!

yer a dead ringer for sarah palin.

I don't agree with her on many issues. Mainly the issue on the war on terror and the empire building of America. What I do find appealing about Sarah is that she seems genuine. She seems as if she truely believes in what she's saying. She wants to make this country a better place and she seems like a true, down to roots American.

I can kind of see that. I just think there are better options. I'm not a right or left thinking kind of guy, I'm just fan of common sense. If yer on the left Kucinich makes a lot of sense, if yer on the right, Paul. Those 2 cover every major perspective from multiple angles yet still apply a huge dosage of common sense. More than I can say for Palin. She doesn't appeal to any particular side, she's just a pop culture megastar, and what a stupid reason to be voted for....Someone like this will just get manipulated buy the staff around her a la Bush. She's way to weak to be a good president.

Maybe she's the spark to push the Republican party back in it's "middle right" place in which it belongs.

who's to say where it belongs, maybe it simply doesn't belong?

Right now the party is taken over by a bunch of neo-cons and progressives.

explain

I do agree that angry republican racists and single-minded people have definitely hurt the tea party movement but lets remember who started this movement in the first place.... RON PAUL and his rEVOLution! Keep it going with the right reasons in mind. Not just dissatisfaction from Obama but also from congress and the justices. TERM LIMITS FOR ALL!!! STAY BOUND BY OUR CONSTITUTION!!!

the tea party movement has been a complete failure. It in fact might even be Ron Paul's undoing. Check this out....
www.dallasnews.com...

I think we are walking the tight rope of a revolution/civil war to be honest with you. Peace.

it'll be an interesting decade huh?

reply to post by liquidsmoke206


Rand Paul is a political nobody.
Sarah Palin is a media whoredarling.

of course he's thrilled. he must feel like the fat kid getting a handjob from the head cheerleader right now.

'Course, it's kind of a moot point, since the Republican Party is sinking like an iceberg hit it.

Originally posted by Novise
The masses have been taught in school that we are in a democracy, when truly we are a constitutional republic.

if you're done dislocating your shoulder to pat yourself on the back?

A constitutional republic is a form of democracy.

I hear this silly "The United States isn't a democracy" canard all the time and it always makes me laugh. The United States is very democratic. we vote on damn near everything. Our elected officials vote on things. Their committees and appointments vote on stuff. It's a very varied, and very democratic democracy.

What it isn't is a direct democracy. And there's a very good reason for that; if the American citizenry were casting ballots for everything that needs a vote, we would be doing absolutely nothing else with our time.

[edit on 9-2-2010 by TheWalkingFox]

I don't think Palin's endorsement will hurt Rand Paul much. He's looking to get as much support as possible from all quarters. For me, Palin's opinion is a non-starter but it wouldn't keep me from voting for Paul either.

The TPM my dump Paul themselves whenever/if ever he disagrees with them, on even the slightest thing. They're like that. And Paul being Paul, he will not be afraid to cross them.

It's my impression that libertarians are picking up more and more support around the country. IMO they don't necessarily need to depend on the TPM for votes.

Originally posted by Locoman8
She seems as if she truely believes in what she's saying.

So long as she remembers to write down what she believes on her hand.

(I wonder why she scratched out budget...guess she decided she doesn't believe in balancing the budget considering she wants to cut taxes)..

If you truely believe in something, you don't need to scratch it on your hand and use it as some cheat sheet. Not slamming her for bringing notes (however, index cards for issues is always a good move verses pen on hand...hell, even a napkin seems more professional), but what she had on her hands was core beliefs...and if you gotta write it down and sneak peeks to remind you what you believe in...then chances are, your not really believing it verses stroking the populist retoric.


and incidently, Ron Paul was on Maddow last night...he was at best, indifferent about Palin and her endorcement. Of course he generalized it saying he is given pause when any republican lately gives him endorsements, however he was very cordial and diplomatic about it...and he did ultimately point out he is in the republican party so he certainly wont trash talk the rest.
He did trash talk neocons a bit, but not to a extreme point...he simply said neocons took over the tea party and took it from a focused message to a general talking points platform for right wing only. He said this was bound to happen as people like to jump on popular parties and then alter the vision to tailor their concerns, which therefore removes the initial intent. the bigger the movement, the less focused the message.

reply to post by SaturnFX

So long as she remembers to write down what she believes on her hand.

I know it's still early, but this the funniest thing I've heard all day.

You made some good points about Palin, I too thought the notes were odd....why would she need to write that stuff down? and on her hand?

I missed Paul on Maddow, I'll have to look that up, embed it if you want, it's relevant to this thread.

reply to post by liquidsmoke206


Judging by the turnout at Palin's Tea Party Convention, I think the only ones

who think she is the leader , is her and the MSM.

Rand speaks the langauge of the TPM, he mirrors their concerns.

Palin is just a distraction used by the GOP to fracture the TPM, and hope

to swing those votes toward it.

Palin will be no where near the ticket in 3 years , her 15 minutes will be

long over.

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
reply to post by Locoman8

 

First of, GO RAND.... GO!!!

yer a dead ringer for sarah palin.

What is that suppose to mean? My support is with Rand and Ron Paul. I am a Libertarian natured kind of guy. I don't see myself as a republican or democrat.

I don't agree with her on many issues. Mainly the issue on the war on terror and the empire building of America. What I do find appealing about Sarah is that she seems genuine. She seems as if she truely believes in what she's saying. She wants to make this country a better place and she seems like a true, down to roots American.

I can kind of see that. I just think there are better options. I'm not a right or left thinking kind of guy, I'm just fan of common sense. If yer on the left Kucinich makes a lot of sense, if yer on the right, Paul. Those 2 cover every major perspective from multiple angles yet still apply a huge dosage of common sense. More than I can say for Palin. She doesn't appeal to any particular side, she's just a pop culture megastar, and what a stupid reason to be voted for....Someone like this will just get manipulated buy the staff around her a la Bush. She's way to weak to be a good president.

Of course there are better options. If only people would actually vote for them. Palin still identifies with many Americans despite all her flaws. She reminds me of a (forgive me for saying it) Bill Clinton connecting with people as a small town governor of a small southern state. Take away the small, southern part of the state and make it less populated, then change the gender and shed 20 years and you'll have Sarah Palin. I don't agree with her but I understand her motives which aren't bad.

Maybe she's the spark to push the Republican party back in it's "middle right" place in which it belongs.

who's to say where it belongs, maybe it simply doesn't belong?

Maybe it doesn't. Maybe the political system in this country should be based on more than just 2 parties. I hate the 2 party system. You're always stuck choosing between the lesser of two evils such as Obama or McCain. Sure there are other third-party candidates but we know write-ins will never get the support they need by the media.

Right now the party is taken over by a bunch of neo-cons and progressives.

explain

Neo-cons such as Bush, Cheney, and many other republicans out of touch with the American people. They only play politics. The R next to the name of someone is all that matters to them.
Progressives are people who believe in the better good of the collective at the expense of our individual freedoms. If person A makes more money than Persons B and C then Person A has to give up some of his/her money and distribute it to Persons B and C. It's the Robin Hood effect. It's Socialism at its worst. Obama, Pelosi, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Tim Geithner, Cass Sunstein, Van Jones, Hllary Clinton, etc... are all progressives.

I do agree that angry republican racists and single-minded people have definitely hurt the tea party movement but lets remember who started this movement in the first place.... RON PAUL and his rEVOLution! Keep it going with the right reasons in mind. Not just dissatisfaction from Obama but also from congress and the justices. TERM LIMITS FOR ALL!!! STAY BOUND BY OUR CONSTITUTION!!!

the tea party movement has been a complete failure. It in fact might even be Ron Paul's undoing. Check this out....
www.dallasnews.com...

Maybe so, but the true root of the tea party movement is still alive and well. Most are libertarian minded or independents tired of the same old game being played and our debt getting way out of hand.

I think we are walking the tight rope of a revolution/civil war to be honest with you. Peace.

it'll be an interesting decade huh?

Yes, if the 2012 doomsday doesn't hit us first

[edit on 2/11/2010 by Locoman8]

reply to post by Locoman8

What is that suppose to mean?

I was making a funny, since the thread is about palin supporting Rand, and then you also come out supporting Rand. Hence yer a dead ringer..get it? no? aw nevermind.

Palin still identifies with many Americans despite all her flaws.

I just find it so hard to believe that people are dumb enough to get behind a media blitz of cheap rhetoric, and actually be able to identify with it. We're very likely doomed...

Sure there are other third-party candidates but we know write-ins will never get the support they need by the media.

screw the media, they get my support. Not that I strictly vote third party, but I research all the people on my ballot and pick accordingly. A candidates media status means nothing me. Some people might say I'm wasting my vote, but often times the 2 major parties act like one in the same...how can you call it not wasting a vote when you vote for the same thing either way? Thats a true waste.

Neo-cons such as Bush, Cheney, and many other republicans out of touch with the American people. They only play politics. The R next to the name of someone is all that matters to them.
Progressives are people who believe in the better good of the collective at the expense of our individual freedoms. If person A makes more money than Persons B and C then Person A has to give up some of his/her money and distribute it to Persons B and C. It's the Robin Hood effect. It's Socialism at its worst. Obama, Pelosi, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Tim Geithner, Cass Sunstein, Van Jones, Hllary Clinton, etc... are all progressives.

I think it works more like this...both parties are out of touch with you(try this thread for more on power and how it corrupts).calling people progressives and neocons just adds to the division of the populace...it doesn't actually mean anything as they both want essentially the same thing in terms of economics, foreign policy, liberty to name a few. So where do they differ? On a few social issues to keep you busy(after all economics, foriegn policy and suck is too difficult to understand for the average person) such as...abortion, gay rights, guns, to name a few.
To address socialism...well I'm not necessarily against it, I just dont think its needed. I certainly don't understand how someone could be more scared of socialism than of the person at the top of the company making thousands of times what the person at the bottom makes. It's frightening that all these socialismphobes to find that frightening in my opinion. See how bass akwards they have you thinking?

Maybe so, but the true root of the tea party movement is still alive and well. Most are libertarian minded or independents tired of the same old game being played and our debt getting way out of hand.

I guess time will tell, but if you ask me it's looking like it's DOA.

Yes, if the 2012 doomsday doesn't hit us first

nothing would be more interesting than that.



-liquid

reply to post by liquidsmoke206


Socialism is bad in the fact that the government takes your money and gives it to someone else. The guys on the top making a butt load of money did it by living the American dream under capitalism. I know many of these folks are corrupt since money does that to people but to take money from someone who earns it and give it to someone who didn't earn it is wrong in my opinion. It's forced charity. I'm charitable but I don't want people making me give money to someone I don't know. That's what's wrong about socialism. Not to mention the government control of nearly every aspect of our lives. Peace.

reply to post by Locoman8


it's the idea that you think these insanely rich people actually earned or deserve the amount of money they make is disturbing. Thats very naive on your part. We're kind of off topic now, but it seems to me yer priorities all whacked.

they may have earned the money "fair and square" in terms of the law, but that doesn't make it right unless yer mindless robot who believes that system can do no wrong.
You seem to think it's worse to pay into a system that supplies needs for everyone then to let a few people make an unjust amount of money simply because they have the right.

there's a bigger picture happening and your not seeing it.

to take money from someone who earns it and give it to someone who didn't earn it is wrong in my opinion.

you can't tell me this is not what happens in your typical multibillion dollar corporation. The guy at the bottom works his butt off the guy at the top pays him enough to live, if that, and keeps the rest for himself. Then they tell you they "earned" it because they are the ones deciding their own salaries......and you just buy right into it hook line and sinker....

and again, I'm not an advocate of socialism in general, but you can't justify the salaries and bonuses of rich scumbags...

[edit on 12-2-2010 by liquidsmoke206]

I don't see this, specifically, as a serious problem.

It could as easily be that he will accept the publicity and votes that might come with the endorsement and simply use it to get in office. Once in office he could very easily ignore Club Palin and continue the work of his father.

Being strictly principled doesn't normally get the job done. Sometimes you need to take support where you can get it and follow your own agenda.

It's hard to say what he will do until he gets elected and starts voting.

reply to post by KrazyJethro


well, lets not forget Rand is his own man, and he does in fact disagree with Ron Paul on some pretty serious topics. You gotta kind of take an endorsement from Palin as a good thing if you're Rand, but I just think that anything she touches will become toxic so to speak...

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
you can't tell me this is not what happens in your typical multibillion dollar corporation. The guy at the bottom works his butt off the guy at the top pays him enough to live, if that, and keeps the rest for himself. Then they tell you they "earned" it because they are the ones deciding their own salaries......and you just buy right into it hook line and sinker....

and again, I'm not an advocate of socialism in general, but you can't justify the salaries and bonuses of rich scumbags...

[edit on 12-2-2010 by liquidsmoke206]

funny how your example pretty much describes socialist governments perfectly. The guys at the bottom works his butt off while the guy at the top keeps the rest for himself.

the only difference is, is that contrary to your belief the majority of business aren't the large corporations. Small and mid sized business are by far the majority. The people that put that small/mid sized business together probably did bust his butt getting to where he got.

With socialist governments all business is run by the same "corporation"
You are the one not seeing the big picture