But they are "pretending" to be liberals if that means anything!

I remember the thread last week were, the last time I looked, 13 of them admitted they supported Rand Paul. At least they were honest, or course I am not sure they knew people could click and find out just who they were.

on civil rights (but is nothing like the Repub party's position). Of course, he doesn't believe in civil rights extending to women -- no equal pay rights for them!

people who smoke pot which I like to refer to MJ, IQ's are below average - LOL

What he says and what he really thinks are two different things. I know he has a large following of young people, not sure about all he tactics he uses, but they seem to really idolize him, and he loves that. Rand is far worse than his father, as far as I can see, and will also say anything to get the people he is talking to at the time to listen. Kind of like old Mitt, he changes his view depending on who he is talking to.

"What he says and what he really thinks are two different things. I know he has a large following of young people..."

He is a con man. He knows that in order to have any chance in 2016, he has to have the
youth vote. He's hitting all the right buttons where this is concerned. Wasn't his son arrested for something recently?

For them, it's "government intrusion".

They have disdain for women AND minorities.

I'm a Rand Paul follower.

Admitting you have a problem is the first step to fixing that problem.

And the OP is an absolutist fallacy.

So the "problems" are not with me.

And the idea that I am a Libertarian with a capital L is so laughable that if you knew what you were talking about you would be embarrassed.

I assumed your "confession" was humor, so was my response. I was not accusing you of being a Rand Paul follower. I wouldn't accuse anyone of that. I did not mean to offend you.

But on this one, and only one, issue I am with him 100%

Because the reason he is against aforementioned issues is wildly different from the reason I am against them. He is against the NSA crap because Obama is for it and because of Alex Jones conspiracy theories. When Bush did the same things, except worse, Rand Paul was silent.

I am against it because I am against totalitarianism and censorship.

I offer an analogy. Suppose there is a young woman who is pregnant. If people were trying to hurt her, it would be the right thing to protect her. However, if one of those people that helps you is only doing so for the sake of the unborn child, then there will be a point where you have to part ways with this temporary ally, preferable sometimes before you take her to the sort of Women's care clinics the Pauls are trying to ban.

and so true...

and especially the black man who's running it.

Don't get it twisted. Ron/Rand Paul is no liberal. Not even close.

I re-examne my thoughts on the issue.

issues, they then become Paul supporters. It doesn't matter if the Pauls' bigotry persists. If there are one or two issues for which they agree, they become staunch supporters. The bigotry and anti-government sentiment doesn't matter. The "Paulites" are right here on DU.

That's all on you.

As someone who has a problem with bad arguments.

You didn't get here last week, so why paint yourself as a newcomer Paulite?

That's the crux, here.

That's the crux.

People literally JUMPING up to protest their "innocence" when no one accused them of being guilty. And then wonder why so many black posters are laughing our asses off right now.

Poster A: If you engage in right wing smears/lies/outright bullshit to attack this president, we can't rule out that racism may be one of the reasons for it
Poster B: STOP CALLING ME A RACIST!1

I can't help it! I am DYING!!!!

n/t

Both situations are racist.

I don't think either.

So (THANK GOD) you and I are not in agreement. A good day indeed.

I said "Implications"

Imply: Strongly suggest the truth or existence of
Accuse: Claim that (someone) has done something wrong.

explicit or implicitly called ANYONE a racist.

I'm still shaking my head on the blow up from last week.

There's a lot of guilt going on 'round these parts.

that there were some people who did not like being so blatantly busted. And I don't know if it's "guilt" or what. But it is damn sure SOMETHING.

Is your ego that fucking huge. I made a point about Rand Paul, not you. Get over yourself.

If you want to be more specific, then be specific.

Is that specific enough for you sparky?

Lots of people being accused of being what they're not.

You "might" be a Rand Paul follower. This conveniently makes everyone who is mad about the NSA a 'suspect'. That's what I'm gleaning from this. Pretty wacky stuff lol

Amazes me how people read themselves into every damn post.

calm down

If you're not a Paul-bot why do you care so much? Why do you care that I tore into a Republican.

Yeah, I'm a Paul-bot.

and mix it up with the Dick Cheney fan club.

Gee, the "Snowden is a Hero" club includes that fine stalwart, never-met-an-egg-white-he-didn't-like, Matt Drudge!

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/41483660@N04/6657578499/][img][/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/41483660@N04/6657578499/]libertarianism-anarchy-for-rich-people[/url]

but they may as well have a post it note on their forehead to identify themselves as such. So obvious. Each and every one, lots of newcomers but the old guard too.

They must wet their pants in glee when they see the Ron Paul ads here on DU.

He thought he could expose the evils of Obama's admin and strike a blow against the Empire. I find it funny how so many here gobbled it up without hesitation.

That there are so many gullible people who don't bother to get the "facts" before going ballistic.

critics on DU who I am sure know exactly what they are doing and what their purpose for being here is. Their objective is to make democrats look as bad as republicans, even though there is monumental evidence generated everyday that equivalence is not only false, but making it shows an enormous evil core. The objective of the two, likely to make so called progressives throw away their votes on third party candidates during the upcoming midterms, thereby perpetuating republican hold of The US House and State Houses and Legislatures. The unfortunate fact is that those two have a blind amen chorus that gives glowing approval to anything they write.

I see a score of chin nodding "yup yup" sycophants on those threads.

Reagan Democrats

him a slap on the wrist.

He's on Intel Oversight. He would have LOVED to showcase this issue in the right way, without revealing sources and methods. And since Santa, er, Snowden, has given money to his daddy, he would have gotten a meeting immediately.

Woulda been a win-win for the two of 'em. A real Homer Simpson "D'oh!" moment...

idea?

Instead of Homer it's turned into an OJ moment.. according to Greenwald that is..

TheObamaDiary.com @TheObamaDiary

No, no, not a joke - @ggreenwald actually likened Snowden situation to OJ Simpson. Before, it was MLK & Rosa Parks. pic.twitter.com/iQLHHi895P4:33 AM - 23 Jun 2013

GG: "I hope the media excitment over this White Bronco moment sustains and re-focuses on what the US government is doing in the dark"

http://theobamadiary.com/2013/06/23/rise-and-shine-535/#comments

Bet, Rand Paul is fooking Pissed he didn't get to run with this.. oh well, China and Russia are happy. And, he's got Matt Drudge rooting for Putin.

GOPathetic @GOPathetic

So, Matt @Drudge is now rooting for Putin over his own country. Keep it classy.

https://twitter.com/drudge/status https://twitter.com/drudge/status/348812517356748800

Thank you.

Makes one start to wonder how he REALLY feels...!

libertarian head of his.

And Greenwald is the biggest tool they have for doing that.

Bought and paid for with Koch Brothers money professional toady furthering their agenda by using those so easily duped on the left to flank actual Democrats from that side.

I still think this was a set up like the other scandals except this one only seems to be helping Rand Paul, not the republicans. Just a thought.

Being able to raise hell without revealing sources/methods would have been preferable to the situation now. Paul would have been at the center of the story, directing the solution--now he's to the side, one of a hundred.

But I wonder who put Greenwald and Snowden together. If that has come out I haven't heard it yet. Was it just a chance they met, did Snowden contact Greenwald? I still think one of the Pauls wer involved in the whole thing, but I could be wrong.

Yep. What a coincidence.

Rand Paul actually involved in...

you'd think that actively working to "expose the evils of the Obama admin" would be something frowned upon at a partisan Democratic discussion board.

But no. Shitting on Obama at DU get's recs, recs and more recs.

Sid

...and then they accuse people who disagree of attempting to shut down debate, but there is a reason why DU had to have a separate forum for Barack Obama. There are so many anti-Obama threads on a *DEMOCRATIC PARTY* message board that we had to have one. It's very sad.

Our resident libertarian rejects will be very very angry with you

Question to something else and then went silent when I ask again. They have been trolling very actively lately. So easy to spot also.

The last one should be subtitled "Republicans who want to smoke weed!"

"Atlas" is all too common around here too.

I can use it if I ever see a Paulite on DU.

So far, I've never seen one. Some folks here with very creative imaginations think this place swarms with Paulites – silly them.

Just check out the threads about the number of people who will 'never vote for a Democrat again' including those who said on those threads they'd vote for Rand Paul in 2016. That's a Paulite.

You might be surprised at how many rec'd and posted saying the same thing. And those who have come here openly saying they are Libertarians. And those who posted threads agreeing with Rand Paul, despite those who he's actively been hurting for a long time, that they ignore.

If you honestly haven't seen them, look around, and see those of who have engaged with Paulites on DU for a long time. If you are pulling my leg, and I highly suspect you are just know I'm in the fuck the Pauls group.



No, I'm not silly about this guy, who is not funny.This man is not a joke, nor are his supporters, and is a danger to me and mine. Some of us are forced to pay attention. A google reveals Rand has the same positions as his Daddy:

Of Broken Clocks, Presidential Candidates, and the Confusion of Certain White Liberals

By Tim Wise, January 12, 2012

The last four paragraphs:

I mean, seriously, if “raising important issues” is all it takes to get some kind words from liberal authors, bloggers and activists, and maybe even votes from some progressives, just so as to “shake things up,” then why not support David Duke? With the exception of his views on the drug war, David shares every single view of Paul’s that can be considered progressive or left in orientation. Every single one. So where do you draw the line? Must one have actually donned a Klan hood and lit a cross before his handful of liberal stands prove to be insufficient? Must one actually, as Duke has been known to do, light candles on a birthday cake for Hitler on April 20, before it no longer proves adequate to want to limit the overzealous reach of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms? Exactly when does one become too much of an evil fuck even for you? Inquiring minds seriously want to know.

Meanwhile, at what point do you stop being so concerned about whether a presidential candidate is pushing the issues Paul raises (so many of which do need raising and attention), and realize what every actual leftist in history has realized, but which apparently some liberals and progressives don’t: namely, that the real battles are in the streets, and in the neighborhoods, and in movement activism? It isn’t a president, whether his name is Ron Paul or Barack Obama who gets good things done. It is us, demanding change and threatening to literally shut the system down (whether we mean Wall Street, the Port of Oakland, the Wisconsin state capitol, Columbia University, a Woolworth’s lunch counter, or the Montgomery, Alabama bus system) who force presidents and lawmakers to bend to the public will.

In short, if you’re still disappointed in Barack Obama, it’s only because you never understood whose job it was to produce change in the first place. But don’t take out your own failings in this regard on the rest of us, by giving ideological cover and assorted journalistic love taps to a guy who believes the poor should rely on the charitable impulses of doctors to provide for their medical needs, including, one presumes, chemotherapy; or that America was meant to be a “robustly Christian” nation, but is being currently undermined by “secularists;” or who puts the term gay rights in quotation marks when he writes it, and believes states should be free to criminalize homosexual intercourse, and who is such a homophobe that he won’t even use the bathroom in a gay man’s house; or who has all but said that he would like to take America back to the early 1800s, in terms of the scope of government: a truly glorious time to be sure, if you were white, male and owned property.

Ya know, like some of the liberal “thinkers” who have, as of late, decided to praise Ron Paul.

http://www.timwise.org/2012/01/of-broken-clocks-presidential-candidates-and-the-confusion-of-certain-white-liberals/

It's the fucking same person!!!

Every once and a while they do try to swarm in, when one of the Pauls makes big news. You get a bunch of brand new posters who get all pissy when people here dont just drip love all over Tea Party philosophy and thus their chosen libertarian savior of the day just because one of the paul's said something that happens to line up with what a sane person might think. then they all get TS'd for saying really insane things, and we move on.

...where I have arguments going with Republican/libertarians.

...Over they years, I've run into just about every variety. Two things they all have in common... it's always, all about them and they have this strange inability to logically think things through. Discussing damn near anything with a libretarian is a prime example of utter futility. Were they dropped on their heads as kids or what?

Saving to share...

:kick::kick::kick:

haha.

Snowdenwald.

Won't change my mind or shut me up.

us liberals are not going away.

Oh that's rich!

yes I am proud of being a liberal. If you want to laugh at me so be it.

If you're not a Paul supporter, then I didn't call you anything. Get over yourself.

in this exchange. Someone says "if you engage in dishonest/Freeper-ish/right wing bull shit tactics, we can't rule out that racism is not a factor" and cretins line up by the dozens to scream "stop talking about mee and calling me a racist!!1one"

Heart breaking, hilarious and UTTERLY PREDICTABLE all at the same time.

so if you want to call me a libertarian or a Rand Paul supporter or a racist, I say go ahead. It still won't stop me from criticizing centrist, corportist democrats.

because last time I looked this place was called DEMOCRATICUNDERGROUND!

Then most likely it wasn't specific enough.

The first one I read was specifically insulting to people who post. If they didn't mean it that way, then it was very badly written.

or should have been. I've seen that type of noisy squealing by people who know they've just been busted a million times.

Just like MADem said upthread, if someone CHOOSEs to out themselves by jumping into the pile when no one asked them to, that's on them.

There are no Paul followers here.

few posts

. But I do know from having served on the MIRT team that it is DU policy to ban Paulites.