Dr. Rand Paul

[Mr. Happy]

So I haven't been payin much attention to politics over the last year and a half,but Dr. Rand Paul was just live on CNN and I gotta say I like this guy. Sure, he's a Tea Harty Republi-nut, but he's really even headed and I know personnally I liked and donated a lil bit to his Dad (even though there was no way in hell I was gonna vote for the older man).

I'm not in Kentucky FYI. Anyway, I'm curious about him.

Let's Tea-Fag Oh-Llama,
MrHCS

[korge]

So I haven't been payin much attention to politics over the last year and a half,but Dr. Rand Paul was just live on CNN and I gotta say I like this guy. Sure, he's a Tea Harty Republi-nut, but he's really even headed and I know personnally I liked and donated a lil bit to his Dad (even though there was no way in hell I was gonna vote for the older man).

I'm not in Kentucky FYI. Anyway, I'm curious about him.

Let's Tea-Fag Oh-Llama,
MrHCS

[Noodles]

So I haven't been payin much attention to politics over the last year and a half,but Dr. Rand Paul was just live on CNN and I gotta say I like this guy. Sure, he's a Tea Harty Republi-nut, but he's really even headed and I know personnally I liked and donated a lil bit to his Dad (even though there was no way in hell I was gonna vote for the older man).

I'm not in Kentucky FYI. Anyway, I'm curious about him.

Let's Tea-Fag Oh-Llama,
MrHCS

WTF just happened?

[Mr. Happy]

You happened.

[Simpletool]

Is Dr. Rand Paul a modern day Jekyll and Hyde with the ability to sway between being a "Tea Harty Republi-nut" and an "even headed" politician?

And why make a political donation to someone who you'll never vote for?

What is it you like about a man who opposes the 1964 Civil Rights Act, opposes abortion in cases of rape and incest, and supports eliminating the Department of Education.

Civil Rights Act
http://www.npr.org/blogs/politicaljunki ... -recanvass
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#37244354

Abortion
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapp ... n_abortion

Education
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer ... views.html

[Unstoppable Florence]

Ouch.

[MayheM]

I think people are reading into it too much, or not understanding him correctly. I do not think he is saying things should be segregated or people with disabilities should not be treated as equals. He is saying that it should not be forced upon free people. It is one thing to have a public school which accepts money from the government being told they must have all races represented, however it is totally different if you have a privately owned school being told to do the same thing. I do find it odd that there are school which are totally black yet there can not be schools that are totally white. I am not saying there should be either, since I believe we are all equal. I do feel though that it should not be forced upon privately owned businesses since they should have the freedom to do as they wish. If people have issues with the business practices such as that they will show their disapproval by not doing business with them. A good example of this is the boycott many people are establishing against Arizona since its new immigration law is so controversial.

As for the Abortion thing, I saw what he had to say. I can not fault a man for having beliefs. I for one can understand abortion in those cases you listed above, however I do not necessarily condone it.

As for education, he is for people paying less taxes and having control over their own money. Doing so would partially eliminate the need for those vouchers. But eliminating the Dept of education which was established under Jimmy Carter has done nothing but spend money since it was created. If memory serves me correctly it was established in 1979 and since then the numbers for testing have been a flatline. So for all the money spent, we have not gotten any results. In other words they are wasting money. Money that quite frankly the country can not afford. The original point of the Board of Ed was to take money and level the playing field. Giving money to schools who do not have it. The problem is, the money if still given to schools who do not need help. Schools in the wealthiest areas of the country still get government assistance. I personally believe, and I would imagine he thinks the same way, that local government should handle such things.

But to clarify, the Tea Party people even though they are labeled as Republicans are made up of many Democrats and even more Independents. Since when is questioning your government crazy, or wrong. For 8 years people on the left screamed bloody murder about the Knucklehead in office and it was touted as the "highest for of patriotism" (Hilary Clinton's own words) Yet the moment the shoe is on the other foot the tone quickly changes and those who question are "Racist" "Radicals" "Terrorists" etc... There is no doubt Washington is broken. Obama campaigned on the very promise of changing the way Washington is run. But he has not change a damn thing. It has been business as usual since he has taken office. Bush spent tons of money and started us on the road to shit town, but Obama shifted gears and nailed the peddle to the floor.

I will be totally honest, when Bush was in office I did not pay any attention to politics. So I did not see the shitstorm he started. I now look back and can see it. I see that Republicans "F"ed up, but I can also say the the Democrats have "F"ed up too. Both parties are to blame and there are people on both sides that are all about big government. People like Rand Paul and he Dad are about bringing things back to what our founders planned for us. Where people are free to live their lives with little government interaction. Where the constitution protects the people from the government instead of it giving more power to the government. The best way to say how I feel is in the words of Thomas Jefferson. "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty"

[Zabiela]

Since when is questioning your government crazy, or wrong.

Personally, I see a big difference between questioning your government, and showing up to a "tea party" to listen to Sarah Palin chant "drill baby drill".

The whole fact that it is based on the Boston tea party is almost disgraceful to the original revolt.

I don't see them making any good points, or getting anything done. Its just a bunch of people standing around saying "We're unhappy." I have a hard time believing that any majority of tea party protesters were marching the streets in protest of the war in Iraq.
I'm unhappy with Obama as well, I'm a duped democrat. Nothing has "changed". Everything business as usual in America.

At this point I think democracy in America is broken and unfix-able, and am pretty much disillusioned with the entire system.

[coder0xff]

That's because we don't have a democracy.

[Simpletool]

It is one thing to have a public school which accepts money from the government being told they must have all races represented, however it is totally different if you have a privately owned school being told to do the same thing...I do feel though that it should not be forced upon privately owned businesses since they should have the freedom to do as they wish.

If you were a senator in 1964, would you have voted to pass the Civil Rights bill? It's a yes or no question.

If people have issues with the business practices such as that they will show their disapproval by not doing business with them. A good example of this is the boycott many people are establishing against Arizona since its new immigration law is so controversial.

What happens to a person living in a low income area (25% of those families living in poverty are African American) who is denied a service because of their race, without having access to other options?

http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/ma ... ghborhoods
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?art ... nk_failure

I for one can understand abortion in those cases you listed above, however I do not necessarily condone it.

So you're sympathetic with a woman who's been raped and seeks an abortion but you still feel it's immoral? You perform some amazing mental gymnastics.

As for education, he is for people paying less taxes and having control over their own money. Doing so would partially eliminate the need for those vouchers. But eliminating the Dept of education which was established under Jimmy Carter has done nothing but spend money since it was created. If memory serves me correctly it was established in 1979 and since then the numbers for testing have been a flatline. So for all the money spent, we have not gotten any results. In other words they are wasting money. Money that quite frankly the country can not afford. The original point of the Board of Ed was to take money and level the playing field. Giving money to schools who do not have it. The problem is, the money if still given to schools who do not need help. Schools in the wealthiest areas of the country still get government assistance. I personally believe, and I would imagine he thinks the same way, that local government should handle such things.

The Department of Education was formerly part of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, until being established as it's own department in 79. It's also the smallest cabinet-level department with a 68 billion dollar operating budget (9.5% of the DoD's operating budget).

I personally believe, and I would imagine he thinks the same way, that local government should handle such things.

The Department of Education is already highly decentralized with much of the curriculum and education standards being determined by the states.

http://education.stateuniversity.com/pa ... stems.html
http://www.msubillings.edu/caer/quality ... ion_in.htm
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/lrcpubs/RR345.pdf

If memory serves me correctly it was established in 1979 and since then the numbers for testing have been a flatline. So for all the money spent, we have not gotten any results. In other words they are wasting money.

You completely made that up.

http://nces.ed.gov/Pressrelease/reform/

Giving money to schools who do not have it. The problem is, the money if still given to schools who do not need help. Schools in the wealthiest areas of the country still get government assistance.

States determine how federal funds for education are spent. In what way would eliminating the Department of Education change how funds are spent other than creating a larger divide in quality between lower and upper income area schools.

But to clarify, the Tea Party people even though they are labeled as Republicans are made up of many Democrats and even more Independents.

I don't know where you got the idea that the Tea Party consists of large portions of Democrats and Independents when the core values of its followers have been rigid conservative and libertarian ideas.

Polls show the Tea Party's demographic is primarily middle aged white males with conservative values.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/127181/tea-p ... phics.aspx

The Tea Party also has the support of many Republican politicians and media stars. People like Newt Gingrich, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Rick Perry, Tom Price, and Rush Limbaugh have all publicly praised the movement, with several who have attended and given speeches at rallies.

[coder0xff]

I don't even remember what this topic is about... but I see a new post, and the first part I read is:

So you're empathetic with a woman who's been raped and seeks an abortion but you still feel it's immoral? You perform some amazing mental gymnastics.

That tone is unnecessary in a debate. By all means, support your position - but stop being a troll while doing it.

[NBRXXN]

Interesting how Simpletool uses actual data from actual studies to support his informtion and MayheM provides absoluly no back up for his claims.
I'm just sayin.

[Hollow]

Yeah, funnily enough i was thinking the same thing. Everything i've seen from Simpletool has been very informative and precise...seems you really have your head screwed on with politics.

[Simpletool]

That tone is unnecessary in a debate.

I'll make you a deal, I'll take whatever advice you offer when you learn to engage in a debate and not avoid criticism of whatever nonsense happens to be discharging from your mouth that particular week.

As for the portion of my post you quoted, I already reconsidered my response concerning the quoted portion of Mayhem's post. I understand better what he was trying to convey. I still don't believe he's taking the most pragmatic approach, but I will try to take a more nuanced approached toward his views on abortion. It was unfair of me to attack him that way.

By all means, support your position - but stop being a troll while doing it.

If you're going to engage in a political discussion you had better have some tangible support for your beliefs, otherwise you'll quickly find that those without tolerance for misinformation will have no respect for your views.

...seems you really have your head screwed on with politics.

I don't want to claim I'm an expert in politics, law, or any of the other subjects we've had discussions on because I'm not. I do however spend an inordinate amount of time writing and reviewing anything that I submit to these threads and see it as an opportunity to educate myself on a subject I may not know much about. I don't claim to be 100% accurate and I hope no one takes my word as absolute on an issue without first educating themselves further. I really try my best to present the most accurate information I can, and if someone corrects me or I discovered I've made an error I will repost a correction. I also understand there is nothing I can say that would sway Mayhem from the views he's already made comfortable for himself. I do however wish for others to attempt to take the most pragmatic approach as they begin forming their own beliefs.

I once had views that paralleled those of people like Mayhem and Mr. Happy. My entire belief system was built into me by the insular community I lived in. I was complacent with my own intelligence, arrogant, and certain of my beliefs. It took a little embarrassment for me to begin reconsidering all my previous assumptions.

[coder0xff]

I'll take whatever advice you offer when you [more offensive language that has nothing to do with the validity of my advice]

vs.

I will try to take a more nuanced approached toward his views on abortion. It was unfair of me to attack him that way.

I suppose I'm satisfied anyway.

p.s.

...have no respect for your views.

Which is near the problem I'm trying to address. Having no respect for someones view is fine. Sometimes peoples stupidity pisses me off too. But don't disrespect the person. There is a lot in how you say things.

[/derail]