Rand Paul: "Obama should be nice to BP over oil spill"

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 07:56 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100521/...e/us_rand_paul

like a true lover of big business and pollution...

like a true hater of the American people and a clean Earth.

daredelvis · 21st May 2010, 08:00 AM

The nation's best defense against extremist and idiots, is their own words. How anyone can support any part of this defective blood line is beyond me.

Quote:

And I think it's part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that it's always got to be somebody's fault instead of the fact that maybe sometimes accidents happen,

Daredelvis

pgwenthold · 21st May 2010, 08:02 AM

Originally Posted by Thunder

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100521/...e/us_rand_paul

like a true lover of big business and pollution...

like a true hater of the American people and a clean Earth.

But not like a true libertarian, is it?

I mean, a TRUE libertarian would say that BP has the right to run as shoddy of an operation as they want, BUT that they are also responsible for their actions, so if they cause damage, they are responsible for taking care of it. If their shoddy operations cause such a big problem that it causes them to go out of business, then that is only the market doing what it should.

I wonder, how many people who complain about the government bailout of banks also think that BP should have limited liability in cleaning up the effects of their spill?

KingMerv00 · 21st May 2010, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by Thunder

like a true hater of the American people and a clean Earth.

Oh come on. Look, I don't like the guy either but is this really necessary?

Rand Paul is not a villain from Captain Planet.

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 08:07 AM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

Oh come on. Look, I don't like the guy either but is this really necessary?

is it neccessary for him to call Obama's criticism of BP "unAmerican"?

since when it is "unAmerican" for criticizing a major oil company for spilling millions of gallons of oil into our waters?

why does BP seem to be dragging its heals to try to save their well...rather then just killing the thing and saving our environment and fisheries?

who's side is Paul on.....the rich and powerful..or the American people?

daredelvis · 21st May 2010, 08:10 AM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

Oh come on. Look, I don't like the guy either but is this really necessary?

Rand Paul is not a villain from Captain Planet.

I beg to differ. The guy is a first class *******. He just recently came out against the ADA, and there is this little gem.

Quote:

n a May 30, 2002, letter to the Bowling Green Daily News, Paul's hometown newspaper, he criticized the paper for endorsing the Fair Housing Act, and explained that "a free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin."

Jr.'s vision of America is one where the weakest have no government protection from discrimination. If he wants to live in a free market Libertarian paradise I would rather he moved to Somalia, than work his magic to turn this great country into one. It is best for people to know what warped views he holds before voting for him.

Daredelvis

Darth Rotor · 21st May 2010, 08:12 AM

Quote:

"What I don't like from the president's administration is this sort of, 'I'll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,'" Paul said in an interview with ABC's "Good Morning America." "I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business."

Actually, it sounds like any number of American politicians I've heard in my life, to include Jimmy Carter's windfall profits tax rhetoric, and some of Dick Cheney's saber rattling in re Iran recently. Some pols talk tough when they think the timing is right.

I'd have prefer he added Haliburton and Transocean to boot stomping, if he's sincere about taking action. IN a remark I heard on radio a week or so ago, President Obama clearly stated that the governmental oversight was insufficient. He needs to save some of his boot for the government's neck.

Rand Paul is being a windbag.

In other news, Saddam Hussein is still dead.

DR

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 08:19 AM

Quote:
"In a May 30, 2002, letter to the Bowling Green Daily News, Paul's hometown newspaper, he criticized the paper for endorsing the Fair Housing Act, and explained that "a free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin."

you stay classy, Rand Paul.

thaiboxerken · 21st May 2010, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

Oh come on. Look, I don't like the guy either but is this really necessary?

Rand Paul is not a villain from Captain Planet.

He does have some rather cartoonish views. I think he's a moron.

KingMerv00 · 21st May 2010, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by Thunder

is it neccessary for him to call Obama's criticism of BP "unAmerican"?

since when it is "unAmerican" for criticizing a major oil company for spilling millions of gallons of oil into our waters?

Tu quoque.

Criticize him all you want. He deserves it. But you run the risk of appearing histrionic when you say he "hates a clean Earth".

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

Tu quoque.

Do you seriously think Rand sits around cackling with glee over every dead otter?

no. but I also think he values "the free market" more than clean air, clean water, and healthy wildlife.

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 08:36 AM

he also seems to think the right to discriminate and be a racist, is more important than the right to a job, a home, and to buy food at a restaurant.

headscratcher4 · 21st May 2010, 08:38 AM

Best understand that Paul is only a limited "libertarian"...for example, when it would allow a business to discriminate based on race (which, btw, is a completely stupid misreading of the situation in 1964 that the Civil Rights Act was trying to correct...for example, discrimination was sanctioned by the state, a business that said it wanted to integrate its lunch counter would have been shut down by Government...that's why the law was necessary among other reasons). He's ok with the Federal government restricting abortion or even restricting the right of states to liberalize abortion laws. He's opposed to government healthcare mandating that people buy health insurance, but seemingly would be ok with those who are without insurnance getting essentially free services that the taxpayers must pay for... or else, he's for hosptials being able to choose to not serve uninsured sick people, but is afraid to say so. He was also supportive of the effort to up Medicaid payments to doctors (saying doctors like him deserve a good living) but one would think that he has to oppose Medicaid on principle if he is a real libertarian...one wonders how a campaign in a poor state like Kentucky against Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security will go over (because those are the places where you'd have to go and cut deep to achieve any meaningful budget balancing effort).

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by headscratcher4

He's ok with the Federal government restricting abortion or even restricting the right of states to liberalize abortion laws.

He was also supportive of the effort to up Medicaid payments to doctors (saying doctors like him deserve a good living) but one would think that he has to oppose Medicaid on principle if he is a real libertarian...one wonders how a campaign in a poor state like Kentucky against Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security will go over.

Rand Paul......***hole, hypocrite, and faux-Libertarian extraordinaire.

timhau · 21st May 2010, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by Thunder

since when it is "unAmerican" for criticizing a major oil company for spilling millions of gallons of oil into our waters?

Not just a major oil company, but a British major oil company.

headscratcher4 · 21st May 2010, 08:47 AM

Also, opposed to drug (pot) legalization....one wonders, as an MD, if he is opposed to the FDA? Doesn't the FDA get in the way of free enterprise and build in cost to the medical system? Shouldn't he be out there saying abolish the FDA and just make drug companies completely liable for their failures? Wouldn't that be t he libertarian way?

daredelvis · 21st May 2010, 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by headscratcher4

Also, opposed to drug (pot) legalization....one wonders, as an MD, if he is opposed to the FDA? Doesn't the FDA get in the way of free enterprise and build in cost to the medical system? Shouldn't he be out there saying abolish the FDA and just make drug companies completely liable for their failures? Wouldn't that be t he libertarian way?

But if a drug goes wrong and kills a bunch of people, wouldn't that just be a bunch of people making a mistake? Don't want to play the blame game here.

Daredelvis

headscratcher4 · 21st May 2010, 09:06 AM

You got me. They were free not to take it...so the manufacturer shouldn't have any responsibility whatsoever.

ravdin · 21st May 2010, 09:14 AM

There's no need to misquote Paul. Here's what he really said: "I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business."

See- you can still make him look like a lunatic without putting words in his mouth!

dudalb · 21st May 2010, 09:30 AM

Rand Paul might be the best thing to the happen to the Democrats this year........

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 09:53 AM

Sarah Palin and Rand Paul may secure Obama's victory in 2012.

Chaos · 21st May 2010, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by Thunder

Sarah Palin and Rand Paul may secure Obama's victory in 2012.

Sarah Palin and Rand Paul could secure the victory of a dustbin painted blue, if it came to that.

dudalb · 21st May 2010, 10:41 AM

Rand Paul might be a Win/Win for the Dems.
If he loses,they pick up a GOP Senate Seat
If he wins, he will be a constant emabarssment to the GOP for at least six years.

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Rand Paul might be a Win/Win for the Dems.
If he loses,they pick up a GOP Senate Seat
If he wins, he will be a constant emabarssment to the GOP for at least six years.

daredelvis · 21st May 2010, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Rand Paul might be a Win/Win for the Dems.
If he loses,they pick up a GOP Senate Seat
If he wins, he will be a constant emabarssment to the GOP for at least six years.

I see what you are saying, and even agree but a Win/Win for the Democrats is not necessarily a Win/Win for the citizens of the U.S.. An embarrassment to the GOP would not justify the damage of this pickle-head being in the Senate. I don't know anything about his opponent, but I hope whoever it is, they have an IQ above room temperature.

Daredelvis

dudalb · 21st May 2010, 11:12 AM

I agree that picking up a Senate Seat would be the best outcome.
But having a total loon who will constantly embarass the GOP in the Senate is a nice consolation prize.
Not to mention Rand is going to be at odds with the GOP Senate leadership all the time. If nothing else, his ultra isolationist foreign affairs viewponts will make his a nagging headahce to the GOP Senate leadership.

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 11:15 AM

Palin-Paul 2012!!!!!!!!!!

MikeMangum · 21st May 2010, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Thunder

Quote:
"In a May 30, 2002, letter to the Bowling Green Daily News, Paul's hometown newspaper, he criticized the paper for endorsing the Fair Housing Act, and explained that "a free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin."

you stay classy, Rand Paul.

A free society will abide unofficial, private speech, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to say dispicable things.

Disagree?

Do we necessarily endorse the speech of every group whose speech we don't find worthy of criminal sanction?

For what it's worth, Jim Crow only survived because it was enforced by state governments.

pgwenthold · 21st May 2010, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by MikeMangum

A free society will abide unofficial, private speech, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to say dispicable things.

Disagree?.

No, but what does free speech have to do with discrimination in housing?

That is an action, not speech. You can say what you want, but when you start preventing citizens opportunities based on race, then you are acting, not talking.

KingMerv00 · 21st May 2010, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by headscratcher4

He's ok with the Federal government restricting abortion or even restricting the right of states to liberalize abortion laws.

That's not necessarily an anti-libertarian stance. If you think the baby is alive and has rights, then it has the right to life.

I'm pro-choice but I don't see that as hypocritical.

drkitten · 21st May 2010, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by MikeMangum

A free society will abide unofficial, private speech, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to say dispicable things.

Unless, of course, there's an actual impact on the person who hears the words, in which case he can sue for damages, the First Amendment not withstanding. One of the reasons we can get away with "freedom of speech" is because, as your mother put it, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me."

Following this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, we might choose to allow anyone to discriminate in housing. With the understanding that if they do, they can and will be sued for the value of the house plus triple damages as punitive damages, plus attorney's fees and costs. I.e. it's your choice. Show me (and sell me) a $200,000 house or pay me $800,000 plus costs.

I suspect that would bother Mr. Paul much and the corporations for whom he shills a lot more than the FHA does.

headscratcher4 · 21st May 2010, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

That's not necessarily an anti-libertarian stance. If you think the baby is alive and has rights, then it has the right to life.

I'm pro-choice but I don't see that as hypocritical.

Possibly, but I see it as a government interference arguement...if you want small government, you wouldn't be an advocate for national anti-abortion laws, IMO.

KingMerv00 · 21st May 2010, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by headscratcher4

Possibly, but I see it as a government interference arguement...if you want small government, you wouldn't be an advocate for national anti-abortion laws, IMO.

I never hear libertarians talk about big STATE government. Anything the feds can take from you can be taken by the local government too.

Seems to me a lot of "libertarians" are actually anti-federalists.

thaiboxerken · 21st May 2010, 12:30 PM

I wonder if Rand Paul believes that the free market would correct this failure of BP and it's partners.

Chaos · 21st May 2010, 12:53 PM

I guess in a free market, oil would not spill, but instead offer itself for sale to the highest bidder.

Darth Rotor · 21st May 2010, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by Chaos

I guess in a free market, oil would not spill, but instead offer itself for sale to the highest bidder.

Only if you assume oil as a rational actor in that market.

dudalb · 21st May 2010, 01:31 PM

Guess what? Rand Paul buys into Conspiracy Theories, just like his old man:

http://gawker.com/5544827/rand-paul-...gaffes-suggest

The guy is a full service nutcase, and no matter what is going to be albatross around the neck of the GOP.

daredelvis · 21st May 2010, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Guess what? Rand Paul buys into Conspiracy Theories, just like his old man:

http://gawker.com/5544827/rand-paul-...gaffes-suggest

The guy is a full service nutcase, and no matter what is going to be albatross around the neck of the GOP.

From dudalb's link.

Quote:

Rand Paul, it seems, is the political-contender version of the mouth-breathing conspiracy theorist with missing teeth and a torn plastic bag full of photocopies who you hope doesn't sit next to you on public transport.

If it weren't for the "public transport" qualifier, I would have thought that the author and I hung out at the same rifle range in Arizona.

Daredelvis

lomiller · 21st May 2010, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by MikeMangum

Jim Crow only survived because it was enforced by state governments.

Can you support this? From what I can see these laws existed because there was a large section of the population that wanted them. Furthermore this population was clearly is a position to enforce segregation with or without State laws.

To me this reflects an all to common hole in libertarian philosophy. They wrongly assume no one will ever collude to get their way if it were not for the existence of the State when if fact the modern State exists primarily to bring such agenda’s into a framework where they can be fairly dealt with.

MattusMaximus · 21st May 2010, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by ravdin

There's no need to misquote Paul. Here's what he really said: "I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business."

See- you can still make him look like a lunatic without putting words in his mouth!

Agreed. Rand Paul is doing a good enough job with his own words making himself out to be a moron.

Between this, his comments about the Civil Rights Act, and his kerfluffle with Mitch McConnell this moron is proving to be a nightmare for the GOP... and a blessing for the Democrats.

21st May 2010, 07:56 AM	#1
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Rand Paul: "Obama should be nice to BP over oil spill" http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100521/...e/us_rand_paul like a true lover of big business and pollution... like a true hater of the American people and a clean Earth.

21st May 2010, 08:00 AM	#2
daredelvis Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 1,876	The nation's best defense against extremist and idiots, is their own words. How anyone can support any part of this defective blood line is beyond me. Quote: And I think it's part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that it's always got to be somebody's fault instead of the fact that maybe sometimes accidents happen, Daredelvis
	__________________ People like Coldplay and voting for the Nazis. People can't be trusted. -Jez

21st May 2010, 08:02 AM	#3
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 12,074	Originally Posted by Thunder http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100521/...e/us_rand_paul like a true lover of big business and pollution... like a true hater of the American people and a clean Earth. But not like a true libertarian, is it? I mean, a TRUE libertarian would say that BP has the right to run as shoddy of an operation as they want, BUT that they are also responsible for their actions, so if they cause damage, they are responsible for taking care of it. If their shoddy operations cause such a big problem that it causes them to go out of business, then that is only the market doing what it should. I wonder, how many people who complain about the government bailout of banks also think that BP should have limited liability in cleaning up the effects of their spill?
	__________________ "Baseball is a philosophy. The primordial ooze that once ruled our world has been captured in perpetual motion. Baseball is the moment. Its ever changing patterns are hypnotizing yet invigorating. Baseball is an art form. Classic and at the same time...progressive. Baseball is pre-historic and post-modern. Baseball is here to stay." (Stolen from the side of a lava lamp box, and modified slightly)

21st May 2010, 08:03 AM	#4
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Originally Posted by Thunder like a true hater of the American people and a clean Earth. Oh come on. Look, I don't like the guy either but is this really necessary? Rand Paul is not a villain from Captain Planet.
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust?

21st May 2010, 08:10 AM	#6
daredelvis Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 1,876	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 Oh come on. Look, I don't like the guy either but is this really necessary? Rand Paul is not a villain from Captain Planet. I beg to differ. The guy is a first class *******. He just recently came out against the ADA, and there is this little gem. Quote: n a May 30, 2002, letter to the Bowling Green Daily News, Paul's hometown newspaper, he criticized the paper for endorsing the Fair Housing Act, and explained that "a free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin." Jr.'s vision of America is one where the weakest have no government protection from discrimination. If he wants to live in a free market Libertarian paradise I would rather he moved to Somalia, than work his magic to turn this great country into one. It is best for people to know what warped views he holds before voting for him. Daredelvis
	__________________ People like Coldplay and voting for the Nazis. People can't be trusted. -Jez

21st May 2010, 08:07 AM	#5
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 Oh come on. Look, I don't like the guy either but is this really necessary? is it neccessary for him to call Obama's criticism of BP "unAmerican"? since when it is "unAmerican" for criticizing a major oil company for spilling millions of gallons of oil into our waters? why does BP seem to be dragging its heals to try to save their well...rather then just killing the thing and saving our environment and fisheries? who's side is Paul on.....the rich and powerful..or the American people?

21st May 2010, 08:12 AM	#7
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,279	Quote: "What I don't like from the president's administration is this sort of, 'I'll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,'" Paul said in an interview with ABC's "Good Morning America." "I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business." Actually, it sounds like any number of American politicians I've heard in my life, to include Jimmy Carter's windfall profits tax rhetoric, and some of Dick Cheney's saber rattling in re Iran recently. Some pols talk tough when they think the timing is right. I'd have prefer he added Haliburton and Transocean to boot stomping, if he's sincere about taking action. IN a remark I heard on radio a week or so ago, President Obama clearly stated that the governmental oversight was insufficient. He needs to save some of his boot for the government's neck. Rand Paul is being a windbag. In other news, Saddam Hussein is still dead. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

21st May 2010, 08:19 AM	#8
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Quote: "In a May 30, 2002, letter to the Bowling Green Daily News, Paul's hometown newspaper, he criticized the paper for endorsing the Fair Housing Act, and explained that "a free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin." you stay classy, Rand Paul.

21st May 2010, 08:22 AM	#9
thaiboxerken Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 20,993	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 Oh come on. Look, I don't like the guy either but is this really necessary? Rand Paul is not a villain from Captain Planet. He does have some rather cartoonish views. I think he's a moron.
	__________________ All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

21st May 2010, 08:32 AM	#10
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Originally Posted by Thunder is it neccessary for him to call Obama's criticism of BP "unAmerican"? since when it is "unAmerican" for criticizing a major oil company for spilling millions of gallons of oil into our waters? Tu quoque. Criticize him all you want. He deserves it. But you run the risk of appearing histrionic when you say he "hates a clean Earth".
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust? Last edited by KingMerv00; 21st May 2010 at 08:35 AM.

21st May 2010, 08:34 AM	#11
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 Tu quoque. Do you seriously think Rand sits around cackling with glee over every dead otter? no. but I also think he values "the free market" more than clean air, clean water, and healthy wildlife.

21st May 2010, 08:36 AM	#12
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	he also seems to think the right to discriminate and be a racist, is more important than the right to a job, a home, and to buy food at a restaurant.

21st May 2010, 08:38 AM	#13
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	Best understand that Paul is only a limited "libertarian"...for example, when it would allow a business to discriminate based on race (which, btw, is a completely stupid misreading of the situation in 1964 that the Civil Rights Act was trying to correct...for example, discrimination was sanctioned by the state, a business that said it wanted to integrate its lunch counter would have been shut down by Government...that's why the law was necessary among other reasons). He's ok with the Federal government restricting abortion or even restricting the right of states to liberalize abortion laws. He's opposed to government healthcare mandating that people buy health insurance, but seemingly would be ok with those who are without insurnance getting essentially free services that the taxpayers must pay for... or else, he's for hosptials being able to choose to not serve uninsured sick people, but is afraid to say so. He was also supportive of the effort to up Medicaid payments to doctors (saying doctors like him deserve a good living) but one would think that he has to oppose Medicaid on principle if he is a real libertarian...one wonders how a campaign in a poor state like Kentucky against Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security will go over (because those are the places where you'd have to go and cut deep to achieve any meaningful budget balancing effort).
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

21st May 2010, 08:42 AM	#14
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Originally Posted by headscratcher4 He's ok with the Federal government restricting abortion or even restricting the right of states to liberalize abortion laws. He was also supportive of the effort to up Medicaid payments to doctors (saying doctors like him deserve a good living) but one would think that he has to oppose Medicaid on principle if he is a real libertarian...one wonders how a campaign in a poor state like Kentucky against Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security will go over. Rand Paul......***hole, hypocrite, and faux-Libertarian extraordinaire.

21st May 2010, 08:43 AM	#15
timhau NWO Litter Technician Join Date: May 2004 Location: East of Sweeden Posts: 9,694	Originally Posted by Thunder since when it is "unAmerican" for criticizing a major oil company for spilling millions of gallons of oil into our waters? Not just a major oil company, but a British major oil company.
	__________________ When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

21st May 2010, 08:47 AM	#16
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	Also, opposed to drug (pot) legalization....one wonders, as an MD, if he is opposed to the FDA? Doesn't the FDA get in the way of free enterprise and build in cost to the medical system? Shouldn't he be out there saying abolish the FDA and just make drug companies completely liable for their failures? Wouldn't that be t he libertarian way?
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

21st May 2010, 09:04 AM	#17
daredelvis Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 1,876	Originally Posted by headscratcher4 Also, opposed to drug (pot) legalization....one wonders, as an MD, if he is opposed to the FDA? Doesn't the FDA get in the way of free enterprise and build in cost to the medical system? Shouldn't he be out there saying abolish the FDA and just make drug companies completely liable for their failures? Wouldn't that be t he libertarian way? But if a drug goes wrong and kills a bunch of people, wouldn't that just be a bunch of people making a mistake? Don't want to play the blame game here. Daredelvis
	__________________ People like Coldplay and voting for the Nazis. People can't be trusted. -Jez

21st May 2010, 09:06 AM	#18
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	You got me. They were free not to take it...so the manufacturer shouldn't have any responsibility whatsoever.
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

21st May 2010, 09:14 AM	#19
ravdin Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 3,568	There's no need to misquote Paul. Here's what he really said: "I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business." See- you can still make him look like a lunatic without putting words in his mouth!
	__________________ If wishes were horses, we'd all be eating steak. -Jayne Cobb Believe what you're told. There would be chaos if everyone thought for themselves. -Top Dog slogan

21st May 2010, 09:30 AM	#20
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,848	Rand Paul might be the best thing to the happen to the Democrats this year........

21st May 2010, 09:53 AM	#21
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Sarah Palin and Rand Paul may secure Obama's victory in 2012.

21st May 2010, 10:38 AM	#22
Chaos TAM Chocolate Dispenser Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Heart of Old Europe Posts: 9,782	Originally Posted by Thunder Sarah Palin and Rand Paul may secure Obama's victory in 2012. Sarah Palin and Rand Paul could secure the victory of a dustbin painted blue, if it came to that.
	__________________ Grand Master, Knights of the Question Mark Illusion: too good to be true - Reality: too true to be good Authors build castles in the sky, readers live in them and publishers collect the rent. - Maxim Gorki Folks enjoy a witch-hunt as long as they are on the blunt end of the pitchfork. - Suezoled You can't use logic to talk a man out of a position that he didn't use logic to get himself into - passed down by Nyarlathotep Kids these days are better than their parents since they constitute the newest edition, the beta version of our societies - Cleopatra YouÂ´ll have to accept the fact that some people are just plain nuts. - Paul C. Anagnostopolous

21st May 2010, 10:41 AM	#23
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,848	Rand Paul might be a Win/Win for the Dems. If he loses,they pick up a GOP Senate Seat If he wins, he will be a constant emabarssment to the GOP for at least six years.

21st May 2010, 10:46 AM	#24
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Originally Posted by dudalb Rand Paul might be a Win/Win for the Dems. If he loses,they pick up a GOP Senate Seat If he wins, he will be a constant emabarssment to the GOP for at least six years.

21st May 2010, 10:50 AM	#25
daredelvis Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 1,876	Originally Posted by dudalb Rand Paul might be a Win/Win for the Dems. If he loses,they pick up a GOP Senate Seat If he wins, he will be a constant emabarssment to the GOP for at least six years. I see what you are saying, and even agree but a Win/Win for the Democrats is not necessarily a Win/Win for the citizens of the U.S.. An embarrassment to the GOP would not justify the damage of this pickle-head being in the Senate. I don't know anything about his opponent, but I hope whoever it is, they have an IQ above room temperature. Daredelvis
	__________________ People like Coldplay and voting for the Nazis. People can't be trusted. -Jez

21st May 2010, 11:12 AM	#26
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,848	I agree that picking up a Senate Seat would be the best outcome. But having a total loon who will constantly embarass the GOP in the Senate is a nice consolation prize. Not to mention Rand is going to be at odds with the GOP Senate leadership all the time. If nothing else, his ultra isolationist foreign affairs viewponts will make his a nagging headahce to the GOP Senate leadership.

21st May 2010, 11:15 AM	#27
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Palin-Paul 2012!!!!!!!!!!

21st May 2010, 11:40 AM	#28
MikeMangum Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 1,725	Originally Posted by Thunder Quote: "In a May 30, 2002, letter to the Bowling Green Daily News, Paul's hometown newspaper, he criticized the paper for endorsing the Fair Housing Act, and explained that "a free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin." you stay classy, Rand Paul. A free society will abide unofficial, private speech, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to say dispicable things. Disagree? Do we necessarily endorse the speech of every group whose speech we don't find worthy of criminal sanction? For what it's worth, Jim Crow only survived because it was enforced by state governments.
	__________________ "If someone is so fearful that, that they're going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, makes me very nervous that these people have these weapons at all!" -- Henry A. Waxman, U.S. Congressman (D-CA)

21st May 2010, 11:43 AM	#29
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 12,074	Originally Posted by MikeMangum A free society will abide unofficial, private speech, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to say dispicable things. Disagree?. No, but what does free speech have to do with discrimination in housing? That is an action, not speech. You can say what you want, but when you start preventing citizens opportunities based on race, then you are acting, not talking.
	__________________ "Baseball is a philosophy. The primordial ooze that once ruled our world has been captured in perpetual motion. Baseball is the moment. Its ever changing patterns are hypnotizing yet invigorating. Baseball is an art form. Classic and at the same time...progressive. Baseball is pre-historic and post-modern. Baseball is here to stay." (Stolen from the side of a lava lamp box, and modified slightly)

21st May 2010, 12:01 PM	#30
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Originally Posted by headscratcher4 He's ok with the Federal government restricting abortion or even restricting the right of states to liberalize abortion laws. That's not necessarily an anti-libertarian stance. If you think the baby is alive and has rights, then it has the right to life. I'm pro-choice but I don't see that as hypocritical.
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust?

21st May 2010, 12:15 PM	#31
drkitten Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Wits' End Posts: 21,647	Originally Posted by MikeMangum A free society will abide unofficial, private speech, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to say dispicable things. Unless, of course, there's an actual impact on the person who hears the words, in which case he can sue for damages, the First Amendment not withstanding. One of the reasons we can get away with "freedom of speech" is because, as your mother put it, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me." Following this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, we might choose to allow anyone to discriminate in housing. With the understanding that if they do, they can and will be sued for the value of the house plus triple damages as punitive damages, plus attorney's fees and costs. I.e. it's your choice. Show me (and sell me) a $200,000 house or pay me $800,000 plus costs. I suspect that would bother Mr. Paul much and the corporations for whom he shills a lot more than the FHA does.

21st May 2010, 12:24 PM	#32
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 That's not necessarily an anti-libertarian stance. If you think the baby is alive and has rights, then it has the right to life. I'm pro-choice but I don't see that as hypocritical. Possibly, but I see it as a government interference arguement...if you want small government, you wouldn't be an advocate for national anti-abortion laws, IMO.
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

21st May 2010, 12:28 PM	#33
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Originally Posted by headscratcher4 Possibly, but I see it as a government interference arguement...if you want small government, you wouldn't be an advocate for national anti-abortion laws, IMO. I never hear libertarians talk about big STATE government. Anything the feds can take from you can be taken by the local government too. Seems to me a lot of "libertarians" are actually anti-federalists.
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust? Last edited by KingMerv00; 21st May 2010 at 12:30 PM.

21st May 2010, 12:30 PM	#34
thaiboxerken Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 20,993	I wonder if Rand Paul believes that the free market would correct this failure of BP and it's partners.
	__________________ All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

21st May 2010, 12:53 PM	#35
Chaos TAM Chocolate Dispenser Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Heart of Old Europe Posts: 9,782	I guess in a free market, oil would not spill, but instead offer itself for sale to the highest bidder.
	__________________ Grand Master, Knights of the Question Mark Illusion: too good to be true - Reality: too true to be good Authors build castles in the sky, readers live in them and publishers collect the rent. - Maxim Gorki Folks enjoy a witch-hunt as long as they are on the blunt end of the pitchfork. - Suezoled You can't use logic to talk a man out of a position that he didn't use logic to get himself into - passed down by Nyarlathotep Kids these days are better than their parents since they constitute the newest edition, the beta version of our societies - Cleopatra YouÂ´ll have to accept the fact that some people are just plain nuts. - Paul C. Anagnostopolous