Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

    A flaming train wreck, I'm tellin' ya.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

      Originally posted by kuha
      A flaming train wreck, I'm tellin' ya.
      From Paul Krugman:

      You know, if Rand Paul loses his Senate race, in a way I’ll be sorry. He’s been so much fun in such a short period of time!

      http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0 ... es-change/

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

        I think Mighty Favog really brought up a good point, which is how does Paul square his opposition to gay rights and a woman's right to choose with his so-called pure libertarian ideology. If I were an interviewer, after exposing how his libertarian ideology was at odds with the 1964 Civil Rights Bill, I would have swiftly moved on to his gay rights and abortion politics, rather than get bogged down trying to get a sound bite the way Maddow did. I would have also reminded him that Barry Goldwater supported gay rights and abortion rights, and in his later years said that his opposition to the Civil Rights Bill was the biggest regret of his political career.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

          A lot of Rand Paul's pure libertarianism is nonsense.
          On GMA today Paul dismisses oil spills and mining disasters are just 'accidents will happen' and it is un-American to criticize BP.

          "I’m sure that in his own mind Rand Paul sees himself as a principled libertarian, applying the same standard of personal responsibility to everyone. In practice, however, it’s only the poor and powerless who get held to that standard; when it’s a big coal or oil company — and we already know that both Massey and BP were severely negligent — well, “sometimes accidents happen.”

          Funny how that works"

          http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0 ... k-part-n1/

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

            Paul stated no abortion ever, not even rape or mothers survival, WOW! :shock:
            phsstt!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

              The more I learn about Rand Paul, the more he seems less a principled libertarian like his father and Barry Goldwater and more a pro-business Christian Fundamentalist. Does he believe in OSHA and the EPA? After all, these government agencies exist to tell private businessmen how they must run their businesses. Does he believe in fire codes such as mandatory fire exits, smoke detectors, doors that open outward and maximum occupant load?

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

                As Ezra Klein wrote in the Washington Post:

                "What's gotten Paul in trouble, however, is that he's so skeptical of government power that he's not even comfortable with the public sector telling private businesses that they can't discriminate based on race. That, I fear, does have public policy implications.

                For instance: Can the federal government set the private sector's minimum wage? Can it tell private businesses not to hire illegal immigrants? Can it tell oil companies what safety systems to build into an offshore drilling platform? Can it tell toy companies to test for lead? Can it tell liquor stores not to sell to minors? These are the sort of questions that Paul needs to be asked now, because the issue is not "area politician believes kooky but harmless thing." It's "area politician espouses extremist philosophy on issue he will be voting on constantly."

                http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-k ... _spla.html

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

                  Originally posted by Conor Dary
                  the issue is not "area politician believes kooky but harmless thing." It's "area politician espouses extremist philosophy on issue he will be voting on constantly."
                  Absolutely. It's pathetic that in our current political climate, a watered down version of social progressivism is roundly attacked as "radical," while genuinely radical and dangerous ideas are par for the course from the other side of the aisle. It's an Alice in Wonderland world.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

                    Originally posted by kuha
                    Originally posted by Conor Dary
                    the issue is not "area politician believes kooky but harmless thing." It's "area politician espouses extremist philosophy on issue he will be voting on constantly."
                    Absolutely. It's pathetic that in our current political climate, a watered down version of social progressivism is roundly attacked as "radical," while genuinely radical and dangerous ideas are par for the course from the other side of the aisle. It's an Alice in Wonderland world.
                    Your "watered down version of social progressivism" may seem like genuinely radical and dangerously kooky ideas to me. All in how you look at it, really.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

                      There are plenty of histories of radical thought in America. They are interesting, and they make it clear that what's called "radical" (in a leftist sense) today is a pale shadow of the "real thing"...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

                        Isn't it great that partisan politics are verboten on this forum?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

                          Originally posted by lonewolf
                          Isn't it great that partisan politics are verboten on this forum?
                          Hopefully, I'm not one of the offenders. I try to be careful in my posts. By the way, how do conservatives like you feel about libertarianism in general, and Rand Paul in particular?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

                            I consider myself conservative rather than Republican or Libertarian. I'm not sure I know what Libertarianism is. I agree with some tenets of professed Libertarians and disagree with others. The same is true of my response to Republicans and Democrats. I did not agree with the platform of Ron Paul. I only recently became aware of the existence of Rand Paul. He has not grabbed my attention or interest. (Nearly) all politicians say dumb, contradictory things..
                            I will not offer an example but some have it down to a science..

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

                              When I saw the title of this thread, I thought sure it was going to be about John Calipari.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Kentucky: Most Embarrassing

                                Originally posted by kuha
                                There are plenty of histories of radical thought in America. They are interesting, and they make it clear that what's called "radical" (in a leftist sense) today is a pale shadow of the "real thing"...
                                I was just reading about the trial of Susan B. Anthony, convicted in a criminal case without being able have a jury for trial because a judge ruled so, (and within the trial proceedings her attorney cites where women had no rights on her own to protest or to provide competent testify and could not sue - they would have to rely on their husbands or families). It is hard to see what she wanted in terms of rights was very radical, but that tells us about the power of government to eventually prod us in certain directions and the power of people to prod their government as well. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...00522202326865

                                While ostensibly a different topic, the position of some parties in both South Carolina and Texas as regards the Civil War I find disturbing (although more disturbing than unexpected).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X