Rand Paul

[McLovin]

McLovin, you got your wish:



Unfortunately for Mr. Barber, George "Gather Your Armies" Washington, America's first president, signed the first federal tax (a whiskey tax) into law. He famously ordered federal marshals to arrest tax protestors, and sent a federal militia as backup, effectively crushing the resulting "whiskey rebellion." This is something that every child should have learned in high school. that's right, our founding fathers were a bunch of pinko-commie/socialist/ big-government apologists who hated our freedom.

The IRS cannot raise taxes, only Congress can do that, and they are an elected, representative body. This is called taxation with representation.

Still, a loud 'n' proud teabagger will probably do very well in Alabama.

Oh, that's a good 'un. Makes me wanna climb on top of my sister...or something. And the acting is so riveting.


You might've caught wind of this one already, but in case you haven't, my boy Dale's been at it again. He really doesn't like Dorman Grace:




Lord, I'm coming home to you...

[Dave]

He is saying some disgusting things but as someone stated above, both sides are full of shit. The "liberals" are allowing Obama to continue all of Bush's worst policies, destroy our civil rights, and being pretty apologetic on Obama's lack of action on the Gulf Catastrophe, so I can't take their viewpoints on this guy too seriously.

He's probably a fix anyway, like Sarah Palin, because Obama desperately needs someone ridiculously stupid and offensive to oppose him. No one really is for Obama, they are against the "other side." So this guy will do his little act, and probably be defeated, and he'll be well paid for it.

That's right. It's a Conspiracy Theory, so it can't possibly be true, but how else to explain this? He's saying what he honestly believes to a constituency that has a significant number of people that agree? Well, maybe... If he'd not been on British Petroleum's side, the "you don't have to rent to queers" part would have been a lot more popular, I'll bet.

Lots of people patting themselves on the back for being against this guy but he is designed for you to be against.

[McLovin]

grrrr....

[McLovin]

Perhaps you should unplug for just a bit, Dave. Certainly there's more to life than...here, no?

[McLovin]

Not a lot. It's midnight and this is one of the things I'm doing. I'm also eating dinner. Might go for a bike ride when I'm done. Anyway, back on topic... ?

Well, I get the feeling that unplugging in general would do wonders for you, Dave. I think that would be a real positive first step for you especially since nothing much seems to be happening around these parts as I gather.

But regardless, you certainly don't expect me to get "back on topic" with you, do you Dave? Surely you should know by now that I don't put much stock into almost anything that you have to say. I mean, you're post above is yet another perfect example why that is: Conspiracy?

But hey, I'm sure Theo is game. Perhaps you should sidle up next to him. I'm sure he won't mind. It seems that he could use some company right about now. In any event, enjoy the rest of your morning.

[McLovin]

I don't really mind if you choose not to discuss the subject of the thread but why do you have to write like a fake little bitch? I don't care what you think of me. We covered this. I tried to be pleasant but you want to do your little routine on me, and it's just dull. You're dull. fuck off.

OSER

Dave, you poor bastard. Lighten up, son!

[Anaesthesine]

He's probably a fix anyway, like Sarah Palin, because Obama desperately needs someone ridiculously stupid and offensive to oppose him. No one really is for Obama, they are against the "other side." So this guy will do his little act, and probably be defeated, and he'll be well paid for it.

That's right. It's a Conspiracy Theory, so it can't possibly be true, but how else to explain this? He's saying what he honestly believes to a constituency that has a significant number of people that agree? Well, maybe... If he'd not been on British Petroleum's side, the "you don't have to rent to queers" part would have been a lot more popular, I'll bet.

Lots of people patting themselves on the back for being against this guy but he is designed for you to be against.

So, there is a secret cabal of liberal operatives who have infiltrated the Republican political machines of several states to ensure that a bunch of far-right, blatantly idiotic nutcases not only run but actually win their primaries, thus ensuring that Democrats will be reelected in November?

A) I wish the Democrats were that well-organized.

B) Unfortunately, that's not a safe bet.

C) That's more than a little crazy.

[Dave]

So, there is a secret cabal of liberal operatives who have infiltrated the Republican political machines of several states to ensure that a bunch of far-right, blatantly idiotic nutcases not only run but actually win their primaries, thus ensuring that Democrats will be reelected in November?

A) I wish the Democrats were that well-organized.

B) Unfortunately, that's not a safe bet.

C) That's more than a little crazy.

That's not what I said. I don't believe in liberals and conservatives. I think it's more than a little crazy that Obama chose Rick Warren to give the "invocation" at his inaugural address. I think it's more than a little crazy that Sarah Palin was thought to be the best choice for John McCain's running mate. It's more than a little crazy that Obama is protecting the Bush administration and not looking into their policies of torture and secret prisons, and it's more than a little crazy that he has had language made law that declares the President and the Department of Justice have "Sovereign Immunity" and can tap your phone and read your email at will.

It's not the "Democrats" and the "Republicans". It's one machine that uses both parties as it best suits it's needs.

Otherwise, explain Sarah Palin.

Now, I offered an alternative which you seem to have overlooked, that maybe this guy is actually saying what he believes, and that he has come this far in his career because a significant number of people agree with him. As I said, his mistake was standing up for British Petroleum. He's a little behind the curve and missed the memo that "environmentalist" is no longer such a dirty word.

[Anaesthesine]

That's not what I said. I don't believe in liberals and conservatives. I think it's more than a little crazy that Obama chose Rick Warren to give the "invocation" at his inaugural address. I think it's more than a little crazy that Sarah Palin was thought to be the best choice for John McCain's running mate. It's more than a little crazy that Obama is protecting the Bush administration and not looking into their policies of torture and secret prisons, and it's more than a little crazy that he has had language made law that declares the President and the Department of Justice have "Sovereign Immunity" and can tap your phone and read your email at will.

It's not the "Democrats" and the "Republicans". It's one machine that uses both parties as it best suits it's needs.

Otherwise, explain Sarah Palin.

Now, I offered an alternative which you seem to have overlooked, that maybe this guy is actually saying what he believes, and that he has come this far in his career because a significant number of people agree with him. As I said, his mistake was standing up for British Petroleum. He's a little behind the curve and missed the memo that "environmentalist" is no longer such a dirty word.

Dave, you offered the opinion that Rand Paul was "probably a fix" who would "do his act" and be well paid. You said he was "designed for you to be against," and part of some sort of conspiracy (your word) to get his opponent elected (Just like Sarah Palin). That is what you said (OK, it's a non-partisan conspiracy in your mind).

I happen to think that Rand Paul is very sincere and believes every word he says, which makes him something of an honest person, but a delusional, naive and dangerous politician. He is also a huge liability for the Republican party, who immediately shut him up. He is popular with Democrats, who (like their Republican counterparts) feel that every time he opens his mouth, he alienates a majority of voters.

I happen to agree with you about Rick Warren.

As for Sarah Palin, I find her completely inexplicable.

[Dave]

Okay, we agree that he is a Republican that is popular with Democrats. the details don't really matter, it's just my gut feeling that it's not that unlikely that someone could be placed in a position to lose. I don't think that they tell him to act like Jesse Helms or anything like that. They simply find someone, like they did with Sarah Palin, that is already saying all kinds of offensive, divisive, ignorant, and crazy things as a matter of course, and they put them in a position where they are an alternative to the designated winner. In this way they would control both parties.

This may not be what actually occurs. I'm putting it out there as a possibility. I'm not enough of a fan of conspiracy theories to ever claim to know the truth. I just think that it is healthy to have a certain detachment and look at the whole thing with a cynical eye. The Democratic Party is not going to save us. Pointing out flaws in some hillbilly politician's policies might be amusing and might make you feel better about being a liberal, but the whole system is corrupt and any insider with any amount of power is part of the machine.

[Anaesthesine]

Okay, we agree that he is a Republican that is popular with Democrats. the details don't really matter, it's just my gut feeling that it's not that unlikely that someone could be placed in a position to lose. I don't think that they tell him to act like Jesse Helms or anything like that. They simply find someone, like they did with Sarah Palin, that is already saying all kinds of offensive, divisive, ignorant, and crazy things as a matter of course, and they put them in a position where they are an alternative to the designated winner. In this way they would control both parties.

This may not be what actually occurs. I'm putting it out there as a possibility. I'm not enough of a fan of conspiracy theories to ever claim to know the truth. I just think that it is healthy to have a certain detachment and look at the whole thing with a cynical eye. The Democratic Party is not going to save us. Pointing out flaws in some hillbilly politician's policies might be amusing and might make you feel better about being a liberal, but the whole system is corrupt and any insider with any amount of power is part of the machine.

There is no "Them" gaming the system and pulling the strings. The neocons from the Weekly Standard discovered Sarah Palin, liked what they saw *schwing* and the rest is a bad, cosmic joke. All these ridiculous candidates are the result of a failing, broken system combined with those unique quirks in American character that trend towards isolationism, religious fundamentalism and anti-intellectualism.

There are only the Democrats and the Republicans - no third party is going to ride over the hill to save us. I'm backing the only party that has even advocated for limits on corporate power. You will see the entire circus come to life with the Kagan Supreme Court confirmation hearings: the Republicans will try to paint her as the enemy of freedom-loving Americans everywhere, and the Democrats will tout her as a antidote for the reigning conservative legal agenda, which is to empower corporations to the detriment of the average American. It pains me to say it, but I happen to agree with the Democrats on this one.

I am laughing at these boneheads through tears, believe me.

[Dave]

If you can use a phrase like "cosmic joke" you should be able to imagine a "them." Have you ever read any Robert Anton Wilson? "Everything is Under Control" is a great place to start.

I recently found a hardcover copy of Helter Skelter and I'm reading it again after many years. My original interest was Charles Manson and the alleged mind control he exercised over his "family", but what I am discovering now that I didn't remember is just how close the Tate and LaBianca murders came to being unsolved, mostly because the police made error after error in collecting evidence. The murder weapon was discovered by a 10 year old boy playing in his backyard in the Hollywood Hills, and was not recognized as such for something like a year, until the boy's father read an interview with Susan Atkins and realized what his son had discovered. The police were unaware whether they even still had the gun. The same interview led a television crew of reporters to discover the clothing the killers had worn on the night of the Tate killings and tossed over the same cliff.

Sometimes things just happen and coincidences can add up and lead the more paranoid types to construct a theory of some vast conspiracy. I understand that. But it's also true that it's foolish to laugh off any hint of conspiracy simply because these theories appeal to the lunatic fringe. History is full of conspiracies. The Mexican-American War was the result of a conspiracy to get Mexican soldiers to fire on US soldiers, and when it was over we'd gained the southwest United States. That's just one major documented conspiracy that comes to mind.

The current Pope is known to have participated in conspiracies to silence victims of child molesting priests, and to allow these priests to continue on in their careers. This sounds incredible, like something a complete madman would come up with, and yet it's a documented fact.

I just can't see why it's so difficult to accept the possibility that, in wanting one candidate to win an election, some powerful organization would not also secretly back a sure loser as their opponent. I'm not trying to convince you or anyone. However, I think you couldn't help but benefit from considering other possibilities, even if to reassure yourself in the end, that Sarah Palin really did seem like the best Vice-Presidential candidate the Republican Party had to offer. I find your sensible explanation to be much harder to accept in that case.

Anyway, it's been fun discussing it.

[Anaesthesine]

I just can't see why it's so difficult to accept the possibility that, in wanting one candidate to win an election, some powerful organization would not also secretly back a sure loser as their opponent. I'm not trying to convince you or anyone.

In the case of Alvin Greene, the opposition put up an unelectable candidate (how stupid IS South Carolina?). It happens all the time. My problem with your theory is that it presupposes some highly organized, non-partisan, all-powerful "Them" that is simply irrational. What would be the point?

However, I think you couldn't help but benefit from considering other possibilities, even if to reassure yourself in the end, that Sarah Palin really did seem like the best Vice-Presidential candidate the Republican Party had to offer. I find your sensible explanation to be much harder to accept in that case.

Dave, you didn't understand my point about Sarah Palin. There is no mystery about who discovered her or where she came from; it's well-documented, and it's been corroborated by many, many sources. It's not my "sensible explanation," it's what actually happened. Sarah Palin didn't seem like the best candidate to anyone with any sense, she seemed like a good choice to a bunch of cynical, neoconservative morons like William Kristol who couldn't out-wit a paper bag. John McCain was desperate enough (and enough of a dim bulb) to think that it could work.

I wish I could believe that an all-powerful shadow government (or extraterrestrials) are controlling things. It would be preferable to the truth.