So whoever hates Ron/Rand Paul the most, "wins" every DU argument?

[99th_Monkey]

Is this really a rational position to take, from which to hurl "guilt-by-association"
insults and derision at people who are simply scrambling to salvage some shred
of constitutional democracy in the US, as it's being dismantled in broad daylight
now, right before our very eyes?

If Ron or Rand want to join with true Democrats and other Progressives (which
the Pauls assuredly are not) to help save America from tyrannical rule by the 1%
elite, then more power to them in that regard, and for their support to legalize
pot as well.

I am a Democrat. I have always been a Democrat, except when I went Green
for a little while. I want the Democratic Wing of our party back at the helm, like
Howard Dean talked about.

[Purveyor]

1. Oh you are in trouble now. You are officially registered on THE LIST!!! ;) EOM

[99th_Monkey]

26. I know the ice is getting thinner every day

and probably will, until I skate away from it all.

[Thegonagle]

61. Doubly so, since you admitted to being green, and it just stands to reason

that you voted for Nader in 2000... I assume... And even if you didn't... Well... That's still not right... Because I want to blame every Paulite and Naderite for... Everything!

[Yavin4]

2. Rand Paul on Civil Rights

[99th_Monkey]

6. So? Tell me something new.

or at least tell me what this has to do with the OP.

Did you miss where I said "If Ron or Rand want to join with true Democrats and other
Progressives (which the Pauls assuredly are not) ... more power to them"

[Jim Lane]

24. What this response has to do with the OP is that it proves your point.

Guilt by association is now widely accepted as a argument strategy on this forum. A criticism of Obama on one issue can be answered by showing that someone who agrees with the criticism holds reprehensible views on some other issue.

I'd go beyond your OP, however, and say that it's part of a more general problem: DU doesn't deal well with nuance. "On one particular issue, Rand Paul says some things that I agree with" becomes "Rah! rah! Rand Paul!" to all too many DUers.

[sabrina 1]

84. What did it have to do with your post? It provided exhibit # one of what you were talking about.

It's getting creepy here frankly, loyalty lists, blanket labeling of all those who re not 'loyal' enough sort of like the old 'Commie' label back in the McCarthy era.

[KittyWampus]

89. like dumping on DU'ers who post in a subforum?

[sabrina 1]

93. Like dumping on DUers? Glad you are as disgusted by that as I am.

[JoePhilly]

3. They'd also cut taxes on the 1% to about 0%, and then kill all social programs given

half the chance.

How exactly is that "saving us"?

And if our government is so tyrannical, why would we want that government to be responsible for disaster relief or other social programs in the first place?

Why would the tyrants in our government even try to run social programs effectively, if at all?

[99th_Monkey]

7. The OP was not about taxes, it was about leaks, spying on Americans, etc.

Please see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3079152

[JoePhilly]

12. You claim they are helping to save us from the tyrants. And they are not.

You can't make that claim and then try to tie it to only one issue. Well, you can, but you'd be wrong.

Those two are not trying to save us from anything ... their entire ideology has nothing to do with helping, or saving, anyone.

[99th_Monkey]

13. Do you think Ron and Rand think the earth is round or flat? eom

[JoePhilly]

14. No idea ... but I do know they would end all social programs if they could ...

giving the money to the same 1% you refer to.

[99th_Monkey]

21. I'm betting they think it's round

so do you AGREE with Ron & Rand Paul about that????

[Bradical79]

15. I think you misread

Ron or Rand want to join with true Democrats and other Progressives (which
the Pauls assuredly are not) to help save America from tyrannical rule by the 1%
elite, then more power to them

[geek tragedy]

37. You said it was about saving America "from the 1%"

You know who Rand Paul's champions are?

The Koch Brothers.

The notion that they would ever be considered allies in fighting the 1% is utterly delusional.

[freshwest]

40. +1,000

[Autumn]

4. Can't see why the republicans joining with Democrats on an issue is highly praised

yet a libertarian siding with Democrats on an issue like the 4th amendment is evillllllllllllllllllll !!!!!!



oh yeah, I forgot Fuck Rand Paul and his little boy too.

[busterbrown]

57. When Rand Paul really speaks to truth and honesty...

I wouldn’t give a shit.... He is the enemy.. Period.

[HooptieWagon]

5. I agree.

The "no government" aspect of Libertarian thought is an unrealistic utopian ideal. It counts on businesses operating in consideration of workers, consumers, and enviroment of their own volition. Its a fantasy...most businesses will operate on behalf of their own self-interest...with devastating results for others. Only govt regulation will compell business to operate as "good neighbors".
Where the Libertarians gain much support is in the area of personal liberty. This is very comparable to the position of the Democratic Left on most issues. If the Democratic Party returns to traditional liberal values, much of the Libertarian support can be drawn in.

[thelordofhell]

8. They need to bring the Meta forum back.........

[Cha]

9. Oh, Snowden's buddies.. he's the one who's in

bed with flees but he's pure. right.

"..simply scrambling to salvage some shred of constitutional democracy in the US".. bullshit.

The Chinese government was pleased that Mr. Snowden disclosed the extent of American surveillance of Internet and telephone conversations around the world, giving the Chinese people a chance to talk about what they describe as American hypocrisy regarding surveillance practices...But in the longer term, China’s overall relationship with the United States, which spans global economic, military and security issues, was more important than the feelings of the public in China and Hong Kong, who felt that the contractor should be protected from the reach of the United States, analysts said.

- more -

h/t ProSense http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/world/asia/china-said-to-have-made-call-to-let-leaker-depart.html

[99th_Monkey]

18. So once Manning, Assange, Hastings, Shwartz, Greenwald, Pauls, et. al. are silenced

for good, then can we have our 4th Amendment back? Will there still be anything like
a "free press" in the USA? ... you know, where real reporters have real sources who's
identity can often NOT be revealed? We BOTH know the unfortunate answers to these
questions.

I say this sadly, and take no glee in it whatsoever.

[ProSense]

10. "Is this really a rational position to take, from which to hurl 'guilt-by-association'

No, only when accusing people of agreeing with Cheney.

[ljm2002]

38. You really have no shame, do you?

You make it a practice to claim that other DUers are followers of Rand Paul (as in, "Sorry if I offended Rand Paul supporters&quot because they agree with him on the surveillance issue. Then when someone points out that you agree with Cheney on the surveillance issue, so that must mean you're a Cheney supporter? Then you cry foul.

Tit for tat is a fair strategy, particularly for pointing out rank hypocrisy. If you will persist in hurling accusations of DUers supporting Rand Paul, then you must expect to be called on it. The fact that your continual accusations against fellow DUers are allowed to stand is shameful and has only served to increase the acrimony here.

[ljm2002]

51. Oooooh, looks like I got under your skin there...

...good.

You are a piece of work, you really are. You ought to hang your head in shame for the tactics you have displayed around here recently.

Re: "shit made up completely in your head". I guess I did slightly misquote you so let's just review this thread of yours:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023065177

entitled:

"The leak was an attempt to bolster the libertarian brand."

When another poster objected to that idiotic framing, you replied:

"I'm not sorry if I offend any Rand Paul fans."

"I'm not."

You can try to deny that you accuse others of being Rand Paul fans, but your own words are there for all to see. You think that because of the coy wording, you can wiggle out. You think that the smilie that you use so frequently, strengthens your argument. You are full of it.

I take your insults as a badge of honor.

[Marr]

65. The hypocrisy... it burns...

You constantly argue that anyone who agrees with Rand Paul's stated position on civil liberties is a Paulite, but cry when its pointed out that you agree with John Bolton on the drone program and Dick Cheney on domestic surveillance.

Now really-- which of those do you think is actually out of line with the Democratic Party's stated values? Be honest, now.

[MNBrewer]

16. It appears to be that way, also

and even when they wind up on the right side of an issue, it's for the wrong reasons, so they therefore cannot be worked with, and instead must be scorned.

[99th_Monkey]

19. I think the Pauls should be ignored, not scorned necessarily

but there are many on DU who cannot even converse about the Snowden
affair without forcibly dragging Ron/Rand Paul into the discussion, like
some kind of weird litmus test for being "pure" and above reproach.

I don't give a rats ass what the Pauls think about anything, but Snowden
bashers insist, so there you have it.

[rhett o rick]

17. Does this mean poor ole Ralph Nader is off the hook? nm

[99th_Monkey]

20. Yes. Apparently the Pauls have up-staged Ralph in the villainy department. ~nt

[dgauss]

27. I don't think so. "Fuck Ralph Nader" is still the party over principle trump card.

[rhett o rick]

59. When Meta was going strong, about once a week one of them would post a "How Much Do We Hate

Ralph Nader" and all the righteous Bullies (aka Bullying for the Lord), would mob-up and heaven help anyone that might not show the hatred level to avoid attack.

[Rex]

25. It's always the same people.

They seem to worship these guys that they protest so much against, since no one else is mentioning them.

[bobduca]

30. Blue Dogs don't wear seatbelts

because Nader advocated for them!

[flamingdem]

56. I suggest you make a post about him to find out

[rhett o rick]

60. And give the haters an excuse to froth at the mouth. No thanks. nm

[DisgustipatedinCA]

94. Graham4Anything is going to blow a gasket if he reads your post.

Nader's name gets G4A's heart rate up to about 250/min.

[bvar22]

22. There are several issues I strongly support:

*Ending the Failed & expensive War on Drugs

*Shutting Down our Military Empire,
slashing "Defense" Spending,
and bringing our troops home.

*Protecting the Bill of Rights

*Auditing The FED and requiring transparency in that organization

*Immunity for Whistle Blowers

*Absolute Habeas Corpus under EVERY circumstance

*Repeal the Patriot Act

*Strongly Oppose Domestic Surveillance on Constitutional Grounds

I believe in the last election, Ron Paul had joined with me in my stand on these issues,
and I was grateful that he gave voice and national attention to them.

On other issues, I strongly OPPOSE his positions,
and those are big enough to prevent me from ever Voting FOR, Endorsing, or supporting him in any way.

I would love to take the above issues,
and combine them with FDR's Economic Bill of Rights!
Now THAT is a Political party I could get excited about.

I really don't have any personal feelings about Ron Paul one way or the other,
beyond my evaluation that he is an honest man, sincerely dedicated to his beliefs,
who will do exactly what he says without equivocation.
That is much MORE than I can say for most politicians.

[ucrdem]

31. You believe that Ron Paul "an honest man, sincerely dedicated to his beliefs"?

Did you know that Ron Paul's honest beliefs include opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act?

In May 2011, Paul told MSNBC that he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended Jim Crow. He questioned the act because it took authority away from property owners.

[Blue_In_AK]

77. You may disagree with him, and you may not like his beliefs,

but that sounds like an honest man expressing his beliefs to me. Wrong, yes, but his honest beliefs.

[ucrdem]

79. Okay but what he honestly believes in is keeping Jim Crow laws.

He says it's because the CRA interfered with landlords' rights, presumably their "right" to discriminate against minorities, and if that's what Libertarianism is -- and it is -- the sincerity of beliefs make him even more repellent.

[Blue_In_AK]

82. I'm not disagreeing with that.

I find much that the Pauls believe to be abhorrent, but there are a few -- very few -- issues that we agree on.

[Rex]

23. I guess if you are willing to accept that as a win.

nt.

[99th_Monkey]

28. You're right. More like "win". eom

[Ian David]

29. The important thing is, that we all have something to fight about. n/t

[malokvale77]

32. I hate the patriot act...

and the powers it allowed the NSA. I think Snowden did us a favor by forcing the conversation.

I hate Ron/Rand Paul infinity X infinity. Do I win? Please, pretty please.

Good OP. Thank you.

[geek tragedy]

33. You just have to hate him more than you hate Obama.

A test failed by many at DU, including apparently the OP.

[ljm2002]

44. Another disgusting post...

...implying that the OP and "many at DU" hate Obama, merely because they disagree with him on the issue of surveillance.

Here's another litmus test:

You just have to hate Cheney more than you hate your fellow DUers...

...a test failed by many at DU, including apparently you.

[geek tragedy]

48. The OP got a thread hidden earlier because it was gratuitous Obama hating.

Well over a dozen recs.

There are plenty of Obama haters around here.

[ljm2002]

52. I'm not surprised that post was hidden...

...the diary it linked to was harsh indeed, and I thought when I first read it that it might be locked or hidden.

So I can see where you were coming from with your remarks. I still disagree with your assessment of your fellow DUers, but I'll retract my characterization of your post as "disgusting". It's getting mighty heated around here, that's for sure. I can hardly expect others not to be express themselves pointedly, just as I have been doing.

Cheers.

[geek tragedy]

53. Curious question:

how much Republican bashing goes on here these days?

Cheers

[ljm2002]

54. No one is stopping you, are they?

Have at it, hoss.

[geek tragedy]

55. Hoss?

Wasn't meant to be a complaint about either side in the current brouhaha, but rather the fact that in general there's not a lot of bashing Republicans. I'm assuming they haven't improved their behavior.

Maybe it's because Darrel Issa shut up.

[ljm2002]

63. I guess you don't watch Cenk Uyger...

...of the Young Turks then? It's one of his expressions, and it seemed to fit so I used it: "Have at it, Hoss."

You do have a point. Lately there has been more criticism than usual of the Democratic party and various Democrats, Obama included, and less Republican-bashing. I think it's because we have been overtaken by the firestorm about the surveillance state brought on by Snowden's leaks. It has exposed some very fundamental differences in our world views here at DU. Also the Snowden trek is a rather compelling story: it is hard to turn away.

It has certainly served to divide us here in a big way. The whole thing is fascinating, really (raising eyebrow) (but I'm no Spock, and am as prone to emotional response as the next human).

[truebluegreen]

62. A dozen! Out of 200,000? nt

[freshwest]

81. *snort*

[Cali_Democrat]

34. Yes...Ron and Rand are here to help save America

oh lawd

[geek tragedy]

35. From the 1%!!!! nt

[Cali_Democrat]

36. Yes...they want to cut taxes to virtually zero

surely that will save America from the 1%

[geek tragedy]

39. Rand Paul will help deliver us from the Koch Brothers!!!! LMAO.

http://boldprogressives.org/2013/02/rand-paul-introduces-national-anti-union-right-to-work-bill-to-the-senate/

There has never been a serious push for a national “right to work” law, making Paul’s effort fairly unique. The National Right To Work Committee gave $7,500 to Paul’s campaign, and Koch Industries — which bankrolls state-wide efforts to install these laws — is his third largest contributor.

[99th_Monkey]

58. Actually, this is a discussion about Snowden & national security

not about who donates how much to a random Libertarian who happens to be
into the 4th Amendment.

[Cali_Democrat]

64. In your post, you said.....

If Ron or Rand want to join with true Democrats and other Progressives (which the Pauls assuredly are not) to help save America from tyrannical rule by the 1% elite, then more power to them in that regard.

Own it.

[99th_Monkey]

67. I DO own it, those are my words and I stand by them, but that's not what you posted upstream

Now I guess it's your turn to own it.

[geek tragedy]

71. Why did you cite the 1% then?

Rhetorical flourish?

[99th_Monkey]

75. Ron Paul sez he's into auditing the FED, etc., but this Koch funding suggests otherwise?

Ya think? Could be. Probably is.

On the other hand, Paul "donations" from Koch Bros. might be just so much
funny money like the "big boy$" are inclined to throw around wildly in the
political arena, as if by sport, sometimes just for show; as if to make some
obscure "point" that only a few people actually get. <- This also may be the
case.

Interesting how as the 4th Estate starts going dark, we are more and more
only left to mere speculation about what's really going on, because so much
information is being withheld by the Corporate M$M.

[geek tragedy]

76. The 1% don't give a shit about Fed audits.

They'd love it if Paul got his way and disbanded the fed. Then there would be no governmental ability to make monetary policy--that power would belong exclusively to the banks.

You think the anti-fed stuff is about freedom?

[99th_Monkey]

83. Do you think that Bernanke works for POTUS?

or for Congress?

Not for the banks?

[freshwest]

95. Rand is ALEC gone federal. All the same Koch game plan, No deviation. Not. Cool.

[freshwest]

68. Odd how the 1% is funding Rand. Not in their best interests, huh. Who's kidding who?

[jazzimov]

41. What a misalligned post!

as evidenced by your "guilt by association" reference.

IF Ron or Rand were to join with true Democrats and other Progressives as asked in your post, we would embrace them.

But, your post also points out "which the Pauls assuredly are not".

Of someone says they support Ron/Rand Paul, the at is NOT simply "guilt by association" as you claim - for one thing they may or may not actually know them.

By making that statement they are saying that they believe the same things that the Paulites believe. It is not a matter of guilt by association, it is a matter of "this is my belief".

I find it disappointing that anyone would make such a grievous error and still call themselves a Democrat.

[99th_Monkey]

47. I try to never disappoint, but in your case, I'm making an exception.

I promise to not give a rats ass about your "disappointment".

[UTUSN]

42. I ********WIN******** !1 n/t

[Notafraidtoo]

45. I dislike Rand and Ron

I really hate the patriot act always have,but I dislike rand and ron just as much. Even though they may hate the patriot act as much as i do what we would replace it with would be polar opposites,i would be for better government over site with full probability covering the warrants,they don't want government doing anything.

I think pot should be legal but very regulated and taxed properly and studied by the government for health effects,they do not think government should have a roll.

Even though we both may be anti military complex,They would have no issue with private contractors or corporations raising army's and fighting for their personal interest something i would very much be against.

Being a Socialist democrat i will almost always favor community liberty over personal liberty and they will always choose personal over community.

Those comparing rand and ron supporters with Community liberty Democrats have a extremely shallow view of politics and sound very silly.

They also don't seem to see how far right Democrats have moved in the past 30 years on economic issues,our party used to be pro labor now they are scared to stand up for it.

Our party used to stand up for social security and welfare but now they are always on the table for cuts.


Our party used come out against the military industrial complex ,hell even clinton a centrist Democrat closed bases but now thats always off the table.

I am really proud of our party on social issues and we are at least still left and fighting for those causes but on economic issues and military issues we have lost our way.

[99th_Monkey]

49. I agree.

thank you for your thoughs.

[Buzz Clik]

46. I certainly didn't win any friends when I confessed to not believing Ron is the devil incarnate.

I am a bad Democrat.

[99th_Monkey]

50. Was it the Rack or the Iron Maiden?

... that made you crack, to "confess"?

[Nanjing to Seoul]

69. A stopped clock is correct twice a day. But, is the same Rand Paul that defended Apple's tax

evasion and told people that the mining companies that enabled the deadly collapses should not bare any responsibility for their lax safety procedures because "accidents happen?"

Is this the same Ron Paul that believes in individual liberty, except in cases of abortion, where he is pro-life?

Any supporter of these two jackholes on DU really needs to self-reflect and determine whether supporting Republicans that agree with us 5% of the time (Iraq War, Drug War) is worthy of support on a website called DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND?

Want to support these two shitstains, go to LIBERTARIAN UNDERGROUND!

[freshwest]

73. Thank You.

[Nanjing to Seoul]

78. Paulbots piss me off. Especially DU Paulbots.

[freshwest]

80. I've answered people who get offended if I don't like Libertarians/Paulbots and make abusive replies

Or claim there are no DU Paulbots.

It's hard to be polite when they play games. I appreciate your *cough* direct language.

They hone in any thread not supportive of their cult. They make DU suck.

[Cronus Protagonist]

70. I absolutely despise them both the most of all here !!1!

I win!!1!!!

[Spitfire of ATJ]

72. Don't you know how it works?

The people who want clean air hate and despise the people who want clean water because it draws attention away from their cause.

[Douglas Carpenter]

74. only a real Paulite troll would deny being a real Paulite troll

except of course for those who have the unmitigated gall to admit it. So that's how we know who the Paulite trolls are - they either deny it or they admit.

[Whisp]

85. Fuck Ron Paul and his evil Spawn.

[JoeyT]

86. Apparently.

Even if it means having to rehabilitate Cheney's image because he came down on the "right" side.

Edited to add: I doubt many here have much tolerance for either of the Pauls. I have to assume one or both dislike the NSA because I've heard people here on DU bring it up a bunch of times. Most of the time, unless one of them has said something horrible that I can make fun of I don't make a habit of paying attention to either of them.

[99th_Monkey]

87. The Pauls are not even on my radar

until I get attacked out of the blue, because I say the earth is round,
and Ron Paul also once said he believed the world to be round; so
ipso facto, I am a Libertarian AlexJones-loving troll.

[JoeyT]

90. Same here.

Off the top of my head the last thing I remember of Ron Paul was that he published a racist newsletter, last I remember of Rand was opposing federal anti-discrimination laws. Either of which are enough to make them someone that has nothing useful to say.

[KittyWampus]

88. wait, you are complaining about "guild by association" yet lauded a post that did just that

with Bill Clinton by using crap from a Paul website.

[NYC Liberal]

91. Fuck Ron Paul and Rand Paul. There are better allies to have, who are right on more than just

a few issues. We don't need either of them. They are extreme right-wingers.

[BumRushDaShow]

92. Ayn Rand bullshit doesn't belong on DU. eom