Will Rand Paul plunge the world into catastrophic depression?

[JayVols]

agreed. and your point is?

Just an observation/opinion. I do think Beck would change his views if it would make him money... That's all. I guess my point is that he and other commentators like him including liberals are money whores.

 

[JayVols]

I don't think he's an idiot. I don't think he's the genius that I keep hearing about here.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

I can handle that.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Just an observation/opinion. I do think Beck would change his views if it would make him money... That's all. I guess my point is that he and other commentators like him including liberals are money whores.

Sure they are, but some are masquerading as newspeople.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[JayVols]

Sure they are, but some are masquerading as newspeople.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

AGREED 100%!!!!! that's the problem. Got a meeting. Later folks. Have a pleasant evening.

 

[gsvol]

Methinks ACLG may have Rand Paul cunfused with Barack Obama.

 

[sjt18]

Beck believes in Mt. Dew and Cheetos!!!!!! No offense, but Beck believes in what will get him the biggest bang and the biggest bucks, IMO.

OK.

No conservative leader/commentator can be sincere... is that where you are going? He may be... but he just does not seem to be as cynical as he would have to be to stir up literally millions by peddling something he doesn't believe in.

 

[sjt18]

Just because one disagrees with someone doesn't automatically make that person an idiot. Olbermann is smart. I don't agree with everything he says, but his momma didn't raise no dummy...... I can't stand LImbaugh. Cancerous partisan hack IMO, but he is 'wicked smart'.

Wait... Limbaugh is a cancerous partisan hack... but you defend Olbermann like that?

Limbaugh is partisan. To conservatives who get and like his schtick, he's funnier than Mahrer, Steward, or Colbert could ever hope to be.

Because of how I feel about their humor, I can understand why Limbaugh would get under liberals' skin. But if you are going to label someone a "cancerous political hack" then you need to distinguish them somehow.

You probably don't like him because he frustrates you by presenting points you can't answer.

 

[sjt18]

I am of the opinion that the hard left AND hard right doesn't sell. Look at yesterday's result an exit opinion polling. Almost equal negative opinions of BOTH parties. The Demos were in power and felt the wrath of a nervous public over JOBS. Same happened in the 06 & 08 elections. Only difference was the Repubs were in charge. Outside the 20-25% that makes up each base, people in the middle hate both parties fairly equally.

The parties aren't popular but DO look at the exit polling. Something around 55% want smaller gov't that taxes less and does less.

Translation: they don't like Dems because they act true to their principles. They don't like Repubs because they DON'T act true to their principles.

If the GOP has the courage to stick by their principles and can weather the MSM and left wing demagogury long enough to get things done then they will carve out a larger piece of the pie.

They don't really need to worry as much about being "popular" with the press as they tend to think. There are more than 30 red states waiting to elect GOP senators if they'll show they stand for something. There are more than enough red congressional districts as defined by their presidential votes to establish a stubborn majority. Voters in those districts get much of their news from Fox anyway so they will get a "fair shake".

 

[JayVols]

Wait... Limbaugh is a cancerous partisan hack... but you defend Olbermann like that?

Limbaugh is partisan. To conservatives who get and like his schtick, he's funnier than Mahrer, Steward, or Colbert could ever hope to be.

Because of how I feel about their humor, I can understand why Limbaugh would get under liberals' skin. But if you are going to label someone a "cancerous political hack" then you need to distinguish them somehow.

You probably don't like him because he frustrates you by presenting points you can't answer.

Fella, if you will read my posts, I am not endorsing any of these guys. I think they are all money whores that like to pick at sores and divide us for the sake of profits. I wasn't defending Olbermann. I was saying that he is no idiot just like I said Limbaugh is no idiot. Let me be clear, I have no use for any commentator liberal or conservative that are agitaters and dividers.
This is what our country has come to. If someone doesn't agree with someone's viewpoint they immediately go into attack mode. You have the right to express your opinion as does any moderate (me) or liberal. I was giving my opinion on Limbaugh, that's it. I you want to bow down and worship him, that's fine with me. BUT I am entitled to have my opinion as well. I am not posting to get into gotcha politics. I try to have civil discussions because I enjoy politics. The Limbaughs and Olbermanns of the world just want to agitate for the all mighty dollar, and our country is worse off as a result of their efforts. I will not condemn you for what you believe. This is America where no one should be attacked for expressing their views in a respectful manner. I have no use for for-profit agitaters or people that ridicule others' beliefs simply because they are different from their own beliefs. That is why there is no constructive discourse in the country today. Everyone is in attack mode. We all want America to rise up out of her problems. We may just see different ways to achieve that common goal, and there is certainly nothing wrong with that. Have a good evening, sir.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[JayVols]

The parties aren't popular but DO look at the exit polling. Something around 55% want smaller gov't that taxes less and does less.

Translation: they don't like Dems because they act true to their principles. They don't like Repubs because they DON'T act true to their principles.

If the GOP has the courage to stick by their principles and can weather the MSM and left wing demagogury long enough to get things done then they will carve out a larger piece of the pie.

They don't really need to worry as much about being "popular" with the press as they tend to think. There are more than 30 red states waiting to elect GOP senators if they'll show they stand for something. There are more than enough red congressional districts as defined by their presidential votes to establish a stubborn majority. Voters in those districts get much of their news from Fox anyway so they will get a "fair shake".

With all due respect, neither side has a monopoly on demagoguery. Today's politicians are too self serving.
I was mistaken when I mentioned exit polling. I should have said polling. Of course the exit polls will show that voters yesterday want less government. The energized base that turned out in heavier numbers were Republicans. Less or more government doesn't always equate to effective government, IMO. I want effective government, not more or less government for the sake of having my views vindicated, but for the sake of OUR nation.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[IPorange]

Sorry Jayvols, if you aren't conservative you are a dirty liberal that is corroding the constitution and chipping away at the foundation of this country.

 

[JayVols]

Sorry Jayvols, if you aren't conservative you are a dirty liberal that is corroding the constitution and chipping away at the foundation of this country.

That's the general impression that I'm getting. That's kinda my point. Everything has a breaking point when pulled to extremes, including America..... That's a dangerous road to travel IMO. Have an enjoyable evening IP.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[sjt18]

Fella, if you will read my posts, I am not endorsing any of these guys. I think they are all money whores that like to pick at sores and divide us for the sake of profits. I wasn't defending Olbermann. I was saying that he is no idiot just like I said Limbaugh is no idiot. Let me be clear, I have no use for any commentator liberal or conservative that are agitaters and dividers.

So you are saying that if someone makes money at something they cannot be sincere and serious about it, right?

I think Limbaugh is over the top at times but the guy IS sincere. He did it when he wasn't making much money doing it. He took a risk to do it when he could have easily gone bankrupt. He is doing something he loves in support of something he loves and is making a boat load of money at it. I have no problem with that at all.

Agitaters and dividers? We should just all agree with you then?

This is the very core and nature of a free and democratic system. You have constant war of ideas so that the suppression of those ideas doesn't eventually lead to blood shed.

This is what our country has come to.

Come to? It has seldom been much different.

If someone doesn't agree with someone's viewpoint they immediately go into attack mode. You have the right to express your opinion as does any moderate (me) or liberal. I was giving my opinion on Limbaugh, that's it. I you want to bow down and worship him, that's fine with me.

Were you trying to illustrate your own point?

BUT I am entitled to have my opinion as well. I am not posting to get into gotcha politics. I try to have civil discussions because I enjoy politics.

Where was I uncivil? Where did I say you did not have a right to express your pov?

This is America where no one should be attacked for expressing their views in a respectful manner.

Where were you attacked?

I have no use for for-profit agitaters or people that ridicule others' beliefs simply because they are different from their own beliefs.

And I have no use for spineless compromisers who won't firmly state then rationally defend them. The Limbaughs and Olbermanns out there are far less dangerous to the future of the country than those who have no firm foundation on which they build their political views... those who are carried back and forth by whichever side has fooled them this time around.

That is why there is no constructive discourse in the country today. Everyone is in attack mode. We all want America to rise up out of her problems. We may just see different ways to achieve that common goal, and there is certainly nothing wrong with that. Have a good evening, sir.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

We aren't debating "different ways". The "hard" left and the libertarian right are disagreeing over the fundamentals of political philosophy. You cannot simultaneously think big gov't is the answer to every problem and believe that big gov't IS the problem. There is little to no overlap between the notion that people are capable and responsible so if you protect their rights and liberties they will provide for themselves and their families and neighbors... and the notion that people can't get along without gov't making the world "fair" for them.

Individualism (individual rights/freedoms/responsibilities) and state dependency lie at opposite ends of the spectrum.

You apparently do not like the hostility. That's fine. But there are serious and meaningful reasons for it.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Sorry Jayvols, if you aren't conservative you are a dirty liberal that is corroding the constitution and chipping away at the foundation of this country.

You know that's exaggeration.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[sjt18]

Sorry Jayvols, if you aren't conservative you are a dirty liberal that is corroding the constitution and chipping away at the foundation of this country.

No. If you hold ideas that are contrary to the USC and try to impose them on others through the legislature, judiciary, and executive branches of gov't then you are corroding the constitution and chipping away at the foundation of this country...

Well, OK, you are right. That's pretty much what liberals are doing. Moderates are just "enablers".

 

[JayVols]

So you are saying that if someone makes money at something they cannot be sincere and serious about it, right?

I think Limbaugh is over the top at times but the guy IS sincere. He did it when he wasn't making much money doing it. He took a risk to do it when he could have easily gone bankrupt. He is doing something he loves in support of something he loves and is making a boat load of money at it. I have no problem with that at all.

Agitaters and dividers? We should just all agree with you then?

This is the very core and nature of a free and democratic system. You have constant war of ideas so that the suppression of those ideas doesn't eventually lead to blood shed.
Come to? It has seldom been much different. Were you trying to illustrate your own point?

Where was I uncivil? Where did I say you did not have a right to express your pov? Where were you attacked? And I have no use for spineless compromisers who won't firmly state then rationally defend them. The Limbaughs and Olbermanns out there are far less dangerous to the future of the country than those who have no firm foundation on which they build their political views... those who are carried back and forth by whichever side has fooled them this time around.



We aren't debating "different ways". The "hard" left and the libertarian right are disagreeing over the fundamentals of political philosophy. You cannot simultaneously think big gov't is the answer to every problem and believe that big gov't IS the problem. There is little to no overlap between the notion that people are capable and responsible so if you protect their rights and liberties they will provide for themselves and their families and neighbors... and the notion that people can't get along without gov't making the world "fair" for them.

Individualism (individual rights/freedoms/responsibilities) and state dependency lie at opposite ends of the spectrum.

You apparently do not like the hostility. That's fine. But there are serious and meaningful reasons for it.

You can believe whatever you want, but make no mistake, I have principles that I will fight for. I have served America to defend those principles. So your assumption that all those that don't adhere to a stoic set of beliefs are spineless is dead wrong. And you are also wrong if you think the tone of today's politics are the status quo. I respect your right to your beliefs; however I have absolutely no respect for your uncompromising self-righteous 'gotcha' attitude. I will discuss issues if you want, but I will not play your 'gotcha' game..
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[JayVols]

You know that's exaggeration.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Yeah, I know.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[sjt18]

With all due respect, neither side has a monopoly on demagoguery.

Agree to a point. Liberals just tend to exaggerate a good bit more than conservatives do. A local Republican ran an ad that said that a Dem voted with Pelosi over 90% of the time. Technically true... and way too true that he supported her too much... but that figure includes procedural votes and such too. However that is a far cry from claiming that "draconian" Republican budget cuts are going to cause grandmas to go without heat or children to go without food.

The energized base that turned out in heavier numbers were Republicans.

Those polls are not unique to this election or to those who showed up. When that question is generically asked, Americans ALWAYS answer that they want smaller, less intrusive, less costly gov't.

Less or more government doesn't always equate to effective government, IMO.

Yes. Frankly, it does. Bureaucracy will ALWAYS choke out efficiency. Large accummulations of power and money will ALWAYS, 100% of the time, UNIVERSALLY result in excessive corruption and waste.

I want effective government, not more or less government for the sake of having my views vindicated, but for the sake of OUR nation.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

But what exactly does that mean? Effective at what? Ensuring your freedom and security or trying to make sure everyone has their needs met and a "fair" outcome?

I want gov't to be very, very effective. Focused on the few things it can and must do well and effective at doing them.

 

[JayVols]

No. If you hold ideas that are contrary to the USC and try to impose them on others through the legislature, judiciary, and executive branches of gov't then you are corroding the constitution and chipping away at the foundation of this country...

Well, OK, you are right. That's pretty much what liberals are doing. Moderates are just "enablers".

Would you agree the the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision qualifies as an activist court ruling? Or does that fit your philosophy so it makes it ok?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[sjt18]

You can believe whatever you want, but make no mistake, I have principles that I will fight for. I have served America to defend those principles. So your assumption that all those that don't adhere to a stoic set of beliefs are spineless is dead wrong. And you are also wrong if you think the tone of today's politics are the status quo. I respect your right to your beliefs; however I have absolutely no respect for your uncompromising self-righteous 'gotcha' attitude. I will discuss issues if you want, but I will not play your 'gotcha' game..
Posted via VolNation Mobile

No "gotcha games" friend. I am just trying to provoke thought and debate.

What principles will you fight or die for? I don't adhere to a "stoic set of beliefs" so I am not really sure what you are referring to. I am quite passionate about my belief that both you and I are better off when the gov't assures our rights and freedoms then gets out of the way.

I am not compromising. I am open minded however. Debate me. Present unassailable logic... and you can most certainly change my mind. If I genuinely believe that the ideal you have convinced me of is "truth" then I will be just as uncompromising about that.

 

[sjt18]

Would you agree the the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision qualifies as an activist court ruling? Or does that fit your philosophy so it makes it ok?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Remind me of the particulars. I may have heard of it or maybe not.

 

[JayVols]

No "gotcha games" friend. I am just trying to provoke thought and debate.

What principles will you fight or die for? I don't adhere to a "stoic set of beliefs" so I am not really sure what you are referring to. I am quite passionate about my belief that both you and I are better off when the gov't assures our rights and freedoms then gets out of the way.

I am not compromising. I am open minded however. Debate me. Present unassailable logic... and you can most certainly change my mind. If I genuinely believe that the ideal you have convinced me of is "truth" then I will be just as uncompromising about that.

fair enough. I can respect that attitude. My apologies, I was mistaken.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[JayVols]

Remind me of the particulars. I may have heard of it or maybe not.

That was the decision that allowed virtually unlimited amounts of money to be pumped into elections with no disclosure. That's the Cliff Notes version.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[sjt18]

I appreciate your apology but it really isn't necessary. I enjoy this or wouldn't do it. Iron sharpens iron. This is a pretty safe way to try out your ideals to see if they hold water and are strong enough to stand scrutiny.

I did come on strong enough to provoke a defensive posture. Sorry about that.

I would like to answer your question though if you can give me a little detail.

 

[gsvol]

You know that's exaggeration.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Not only that, it appears to be snotty nosed whiny as well.

When I first came on this board one couldn't get a conservative word in edgewise, it was overrun with immature, inane, ignorant, brainwashed, meaningless, frivolity.