Do you like Rand Paul. If so, what do you like about him? If not, what don't you like about him?
I'll answer all three questions by saying:
Rand Paul is not a true Libertarian because he's a RINO GOP Small n-neocon-liberal in disguise
One more response looks good.
@nefarious: No like I said before, I'd vote for Gary Johnson! Even thought Trump is a good candidate and most likely option for president since he can bombard America with the truth is does like and the truth it doesn't like
@royj0_1: Lol how is he a liberal in disguise? He's a right leaning Libertarian that says he's a Republican so he doesn't get shrugged aside like all of the rest of the Third Party candidates.
@royj0_1: Lol how is he a liberal in disguise? He's a right leaning Libertarian that says he's a Republican so he doesn't get shrugged aside like all of the rest of the Third Party candidates.
Rand Paul is a Neocon/RINO/GOP Loser/Small c-conservative aka a Liberal pretending to be a moderate republican pretending to be a Libertarian....Yeah it's COMPLICATED!
@royj0_1: Lol how is he a liberal in disguise? He's a right leaning Libertarian that says he's a Republican so he doesn't get shrugged aside like all of the rest of the Third Party candidates.
Rand Paul is a Neocon/RINO/GOP Loser/Small c-conservative aka a Liberal pretending to be a moderate republican pretending to be a Libertarian....Yeah it's COMPLICATED!
@royj0_1: Lol how is he a liberal in disguise? He's a right leaning Libertarian that says he's a Republican so he doesn't get shrugged aside like all of the rest of the Third Party candidates.
Rand Paul is a Neocon/RINO/GOP Loser/Small c-conservative aka a Liberal pretending to be a moderate republican pretending to be a Libertarian....Yeah it's COMPLICATED!
@royj0_1: Lol how is he a liberal in disguise? He's a right leaning Libertarian that says he's a Republican so he doesn't get shrugged aside like all of the rest of the Third Party candidates.
Rand Paul is a Neocon/RINO/GOP Loser/Small c-conservative aka a Liberal pretending to be a moderate republican pretending to be a Libertarian....Yeah it's COMPLICATED!
So basically he's a person and not a party? He has ideals that fit whatever he objectively believes rather than what the party says he should believe?
Don't even know who he is but sounds cool if he's refusing this BS dual party system.
@royj0_1: Lol how is he a liberal in disguise? He's a right leaning Libertarian that says he's a Republican so he doesn't get shrugged aside like all of the rest of the Third Party candidates.
Rand Paul is a Neocon/RINO/GOP Loser/Small c-conservative aka a Liberal pretending to be a moderate republican pretending to be a Libertarian....Yeah it's COMPLICATED!
So basically he's a person and not a party? He has ideals that fit whatever he objectively believes rather than what the party says he should believe?
Don't even know who he is but sounds cool if he's refusing this BS dual party system.
@royj0_1: Lol how is he a liberal in disguise? He's a right leaning Libertarian that says he's a Republican so he doesn't get shrugged aside like all of the rest of the Third Party candidates.
Rand Paul is a Neocon/RINO/GOP Loser/Small c-conservative aka a Liberal pretending to be a moderate republican pretending to be a Libertarian....Yeah it's COMPLICATED!
So basically he's a person and not a party? He has ideals that fit whatever he objectively believes rather than what the party says he should believe?
Don't even know who he is but sounds cool if he's refusing this BS dual party system.
It's always fun to watch how communism is viewed as a worse thing that can happen, and all because the russians went wrong way with it (or without knowing what it means).
What communism means is, that there is no money. Everyone works and "pay" things with their product or work, just like communes, only in bigger scale. sadly, in todays money grabbing mentality it will never work.
@sophia89: That's the thing, they all went wrong way to obtain their goals. Communism does not equal killing in princple, that is all on those "leaders" and their bad decisions. Lets take Nationalism for example, just because Hitler went too far with it, does not mean the initial definition of the word comes with mass killing and gaschambers.
Edit: also to clarify, I'm not defending the people who have used those ideologies, just the word in itself.
It's always fun to watch how communism is viewed as a worse thing that can happen, and all because the russians went wrong way with it (or without knowing what it means).
What communism means is, that there is no money. Everyone works and "pay" things with their product or work, just like communes, only in bigger scale. sadly, in todays money grabbing mentality it will never work.
Can you really not see that in either of these examples, the countries weren't ready culturally (turning from one cult of personality to another) or economically, regardless of which particular system was going to be implemented (and communism wasn't implemented in any of these countries)?
But yeah, communism wouldn't work either way. What I find more funny is how triggered Americans get when you mention socialism or social democracy.
@sophia89: Pfff... please, tell me what do you know about french revolution. You know, that one with lot of guillotine and Marat right before Bonouparte in the name of freedom, equality and brotherhood.
@sophia89: That's the thing, they all went wrong way to obtain their goals. Communism does not equal killing in princple, that is all on those "leaders" and their bad decisions. Lets take Nationalism for example, just because Hitler went too far with it, does not mean the initial definition of the word comes with mass killing and gaschambers.
Edit: also to clarify, I'm not defending the people who have used those ideologies, just the word in itself.
According to Marx's Communist Manifesto, people should form a dictatorship of the proletariat and after awhile the dictatorship would end and Communism would be established. He gave no real guidance on how any of this should happen. Consequently, everybody who tries Communism forms a dictatorship ruled either by a single person or a small group of people, and these people, having dictatorial powers, abuse those powers and refuse to forfeit them. Thus, the magical place where there is no money is never reached.
It's not that the Communists are not following Marx's plan but that Marx's plan was and always will be a bunch of nonsense with no basis in reality.
@sophia89: My point is that all revolutions that led to civil wars have same consequences such as lot of repressions and dead civilians and it's not really dependent on ideology of rebels be they communists or republicans as in France) By the way at least one of real (not imaginary or exaggerated for the sake of propaganda) Stalin's purges have a purpose of clearing security agencies of uncontrollable hot heads that gain a taste for mass shootings after revolution and long civil war and another was in fact a fight for power between two fractions with different plans for USSR future, one led by Stalin and one led by Trotsky. So that's not that simple and schematic as it can look from outside) But Pol Pot was a crasy bastard, that's for sure.
Log in to comment