Inside Boehner's Debt Limit Surrender...

[bendog]

Again, it seems like it's 'All or Nothing' for you. All i can do is suggest you give the man more of a chance. He's been leading the way on very important issues. I'm not sure how much more you can demand of the guy.

you confuse hucksterism with leadership. A google search would reveal dozens of respected insiders who bipartisanly oppose the program ... only without filing a law suit to get attention.

I don't have a problem with filing a lawsuit over the issue, as the ACLU has also done, and I don't even have a problem with Rand doing it. I think the simple truth, however, is that he's doing it as a political stunt more than he is in an attempt to change the law. I don't have a problem with political stunts in and of themselves, but I do object to the hypocrisy of his position regarding Edward Snowden.

Well, it's sort of the ACLU's job. But Judge Patricia Wald, and Jeffrey Stone (an Obama guy) among dozens of others have criticized the program. Paul is simply grandstanding because the legality of the program has already been tested. Change will/has come from insiders questioning whether the negatives out weigh the benefits. And, I really don't think many people really object to tracking INCOMING intl calls, but rather the storing of metadata. Paul's actions are simply to identify himself to the base as the guy who'll fight Obama, and of course Obama ain't running in 16.

 

[Foxfyre]

Boehner needs to also be Repealed AND replaced.

Are you sure T? As I previously posted, what do we gain by staging another bitter debt limit ceiling fight that the Dems and their surrogate media will be able to use to savage Republicans and bring their approval down further into the basement? We've lost the war if we don't regain the Senate in 2016. It would be nice to win the House with a true Tea Party conservative too, but the Senate is the biggie. If we don't do that, we're pretty well screwed anyway.

Far better to choose not to fight a battle or two and get more blood on our hands in the process and meanwhile keep our sights squarely on winning the war. To do that we have to keep the winning issues on top and let the rest just simmer for awhile.

 

[paulitician]

I think getting stuck on one issue is fine if the issue is one of such importance. I support any lawsuit that takes on the NSA's spying, though I don't see much hope for victory there, but I think Rand's lawsuit is just more political posturing. He wants to be seen going after the Obama administration but doesn't want to publicly support the man who made it possible, Edward Snowden. That tells me he's just playing politics ahead of 2016.

Again, it seems like it's 'All or Nothing' for you. All i can do is suggest you give the man more of a chance. He's been leading the way on very important issues. I'm not sure how much more you can demand of the guy.

you confuse hucksterism with leadership. A google search would reveal dozens of respected insiders who bipartisanly oppose the program ... only without filing a law suit to get attention.

Seems that your guys are the real Hucksters. Filing a Lawsuit is actually doing something. It's just not enough to say you oppose something. You have to do something. Rand Paul's doing something. I have to respect him for that.

 

[paulitician]

Again, it seems like it's 'All or Nothing' for you. All i can do is suggest you give the man more of a chance. He's been leading the way on very important issues. I'm not sure how much more you can demand of the guy.

you confuse hucksterism with leadership. A google search would reveal dozens of respected insiders who bipartisanly oppose the program ... only without filing a law suit to get attention.

I don't have a problem with filing a lawsuit over the issue, as the ACLU has also done, and I don't even have a problem with Rand doing it. I think the simple truth, however, is that he's doing it as a political stunt more than he is in an attempt to change the law. I don't have a problem with political stunts in and of themselves, but I do object to the hypocrisy of his position regarding Edward Snowden.

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I don't think it's a 'Political Stunt' to put your money where your mouth is. He's not just talking, he's doing something. And that's much more than i see most other Politicians currently doing.

 

[paulitician]

Boehner needs to also be Repealed AND replaced.

Are you sure T? As I previously posted, what do we gain by staging another bitter debt limit ceiling fight that the Dems and their surrogate media will be able to use to savage Republicans and bring their approval down further into the basement? We've lost the war if we don't regain the Senate in 2016. It would be nice to win the House with a true Tea Party conservative too, but the Senate is the biggie. If we don't do that, we're pretty well screwed anyway.

Far better to choose not to fight a battle or two and get more blood on our hands in the process and meanwhile keep our sights squarely on winning the war. To do that we have to keep the winning issues on top and let the rest just simmer for awhile.

Yes, that does seem to be the logic in this surrender. 'Just don't rock the boat, and the Communist assholes will fall on their own.' The People probably have had enough of them. So while not being comfortable with it, i do get it. There is a strategy behind it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

That's just it, he probably will be the best candidate. Regardless, under no circumstances will I vote for a person who thinks Guantanamo Bay Prison should remain open. His political posturing is just embarrassing and dumb, but the fact that he supports indefinite detention is where I draw the line.

Yeah but that's just more of that 'All or Nothing' approach. You have to look at his overall record. He has taken stands that very few others have been brave enough to take. Like i said, the Son is not the Father. But People are just gonna have to let that go. I'm willing to listen though. Who out there would you consider to be a better viable Candidate?

Again, I doubt there will be a better candidate. I'm willing to compromise, but there has to be a line somewhere. Supporting the indefinite detention of people who we know have committed no crimes is one of those lines for me.

And opposing indefinite detention of detainees, he said, would strike a chord with groups that historically have been persecuted.

Rand Paul?s Republican revolution - Katie Glueck - POLITICO.com

Is Rand changing his mind on Guantanamo and indefinite detention? If so he might gain my support.

 

[Foxfyre]

Boehner needs to also be Repealed AND replaced.

Are you sure T? As I previously posted, what do we gain by staging another bitter debt limit ceiling fight that the Dems and their surrogate media will be able to use to savage Republicans and bring their approval down further into the basement? We've lost the war if we don't regain the Senate in 2016. It would be nice to win the House with a true Tea Party conservative too, but the Senate is the biggie. If we don't do that, we're pretty well screwed anyway.

Far better to choose not to fight a battle or two and get more blood on our hands in the process and meanwhile keep our sights squarely on winning the war. To do that we have to keep the winning issues on top and let the rest just simmer for awhile.

Yes, that does seem to be the logic in this surrender. 'Just don't rock the boat, and the Communist assholes will fall on their own.' The People probably have had enough of them. So while not being comfortable with it, i do get it. There is a strategy behind it.

Ever heard the term, "throwing the baby out with the bathwater?" or "cutting off your nose to spite your face?"

The Paulistas have been shooting themselves in the foot for decades now by verbally savaging the concepts and policies of those they disagree with--people they need the votes from to accomplish necessary goals. The Tea Partiers commit the same error when they stubbornly dig in to defend a particular hill while elsewhere they lose the war. There is one Tea Party group or person on Facebook who makes me absolutely cringe by employing the same kinds of tactics and rhetoric utilized by the most hateful and rabid left. It embarrasses me and definitely damages the emphasis true Tea Partiers wish to focus on.

What does it accomplish to stand on principle alone on something we can fix later while we lose all ability to fix what MUST be fixed now lest we lose our representative republic altogether?

Goal one right now must be to defang the rush to socialist Marxism and that requires sufficiently winning enough seats in Congress to stop it. Being stubborn about everything else just diminishes our chance to do that.

 

[Contumacious]

[

The Paulistas have been shooting themselves in the foot for decades now by verbally savaging the concepts and policies of those they disagree with--people they need the votes from to accomplish necessary goals.

HUH? WTF?

So you have been diagnosed with lung cancer. Should your doctor recommend that you continue smoking because that's what you like?

So you have been diagnosed with breast cancer, should your doctor recommend to keep your breasts because is important for you to look sexy?

.

 

[Foxfyre]

[

The Paulistas have been shooting themselves in the foot for decades now by verbally savaging the concepts and policies of those they disagree with--people they need the votes from to accomplish necessary goals.

HUH? WTF?

So you have been diagnosed with lung cancer. Should your doctor recommend that you continue smoking because that's what you like?

So you have been diagnosed with breast cancer, should your doctor recommend to keep your breasts because is important for you to look sexy?

.

Maybe you should read my entire post and respond to that instead of cherry picking one line out of it and using it to build a straw man?

 

[Contumacious]

[

The Paulistas have been shooting themselves in the foot for decades now by verbally savaging the concepts and policies of those they disagree with--people they need the votes from to accomplish necessary goals.

HUH? WTF?

So you have been diagnosed with lung cancer. Should your doctor recommend that you continue smoking because that's what you like?

So you have been diagnosed with breast cancer, should your doctor recommend to keep your breasts because is important for you to look sexy?

.

Maybe you should read my entire post and respond to that instead of cherry picking one line out of it and using it to build a straw man?

look bud, there is no fucking way that you are going to stop the parasites from voting against whomever offers them the most benefits.

Libertarians must NOT compromise principles.

Once FDR decided to start the welfare/warfare state there is no way of stopping it other than through a bloody bloody revolution.

.

 

[paulitician]

Yeah but that's just more of that 'All or Nothing' approach. You have to look at his overall record. He has taken stands that very few others have been brave enough to take. Like i said, the Son is not the Father. But People are just gonna have to let that go. I'm willing to listen though. Who out there would you consider to be a better viable Candidate?

Again, I doubt there will be a better candidate. I'm willing to compromise, but there has to be a line somewhere. Supporting the indefinite detention of people who we know have committed no crimes is one of those lines for me.

And opposing indefinite detention of detainees, he said, would strike a chord with groups that historically have been persecuted.

Rand Paul?s Republican revolution - Katie Glueck - POLITICO.com

Is Rand changing his mind on Guantanamo and indefinite detention? If so he might gain my support.

I'm not sure about that particular issue. But i do know the man has stood up, while most others have laid down. He's led the way on many very important issues. I won't allow just one issue to end my support for him. His overall record is in line with my beliefs. I just don't see any other Candidates out there who are more in line right now. I mean, other than his Father. I'm hoping the 'All or Nothing' approach doesn't get in the way of booting the Communists. I think it would be very wise to avoid making that same mistake again.

 

[Spoonman]

Boehner needs to also be Repealed AND replaced.

Are you sure T? As I previously posted, what do we gain by staging another bitter debt limit ceiling fight that the Dems and their surrogate media will be able to use to savage Republicans and bring their approval down further into the basement? We've lost the war if we don't regain the Senate in 2016. It would be nice to win the House with a true Tea Party conservative too, but the Senate is the biggie. If we don't do that, we're pretty well screwed anyway.

Far better to choose not to fight a battle or two and get more blood on our hands in the process and meanwhile keep our sights squarely on winning the war. To do that we have to keep the winning issues on top and let the rest just simmer for awhile.

the key element now is regaining control. elections this fall are critical. I agree we need to silence the press and not give them any more fodder.

 

[hazlnut]

Go, please go. And take Sarah with you.

I think they should and form a third party like we did up here and have nothing to do with the giant flushing sound of your economy going down the shitter.

Do it, form your third party already.

Stop dragging the GOP down the shitter.