--> Jump to content

Rand Paul was always a Piece of Shit


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

It's merely a grain of sand in the giant beach that is Trump's absurdity, but I love the fact that he has routinely referred to himself as "The King of Debt" yet managed to convince legions of drooling morons to vote for him because he was going to bring down the national debt.  (Of course he did the exact opposite, but "we like the way he talks!")

We should administer IQ tests before letting people vote.  Below 105, you're out.

 

 

 

 

Edited by jimmyjazz
no type good
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's a conman like the rest of the politicians in DC. 

Paul in 2016:

Quote

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) called Donald Trump an "orange-faced windbag" on Monday, the latest insult in his feud with the GOP presidential front-runner.

"Donald Trump is a delusional narcissist and an orange-faced windbag," he said on Comedy Central's "The Nightly Show."

"Have you ever had a speck of dirt fly into your eye?" he continued, mocking Trump."[It is] annoying, irritating and might even make you cry.

"If the dirt doesn't go away, it will keep scratching your cornea until eventually it blinds you with all its filth. A speck of dirt is way more qualified to be president."

Paul in 2018:

Quote

Mshs bvn sbrhdhdhehsgsgwged

Difficult to make out the details with Trump's nuts stuffed in his mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this whole charade that he might vote against Kavanaugh is just soooooo stupid. We all know he’s going to vote to confirm. He’s not going to get any concessions. He’s probably not even asking for any. So what’s the fucking point?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Orca of Peace said:

I liked Rand Paul quite a bit during the campaign as he's a moderate R, an educated person as an opthamologist, and an intellectual speaker. Not sure why the hatred, especially since old Shag/Surly had an admiration for his dad. So why the hatred?

Because he's a slimy weasel?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

And this whole charade that he might vote against Kavanaugh is just soooooo stupid. We all know he’s going to vote to confirm. He’s not going to get any concessions. He’s probably not even asking for any. So what’s the fucking point?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's an attention whore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked Rand Paul quite a bit during the campaign as he's a moderate R, an educated person as an opthamologist, and an intellectual speaker. Not sure why the hatred, especially since old Shag/Surly had an admiration for his dad. So why the hatred?

Only a few of us liked Ron. Most of the shag/surly political folks don't really stand for anything other than team politics.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

It's merely a grain of sand in the giant beach that is Trump's absurdity, but I love the fact that he has routinely referred to himself as "The King of Debt" yet managed to convince legions of drooling morons to vote for him because he was going to bring down the national debt.  (Of course he did the exact opposite, but "we like the way he talks!")

We should administer IQ tests before letting people vote.  Below 105, you're out.

 

spot on.  I fully support stripping you of your voting rights. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Do your own homework.  He's a little bitch, and I think you overestimate his intellect by a mile.

He's all the grandstanding of Cruz, but with worse hair and an old racist dad, and truly 100% thinks he's making a difference in bringing "libertarian" positions to the front by voting lock-step with the GOP to destroy civil liberties under the guise of "national security."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

He's all the grandstanding of Cruz, but with worse hair and an old racist dad, and truly 100% thinks he's making a difference in bringing "libertarian" positions to the front by voting lock-step with the GOP to destroy civil liberties under the guise of "national security."

yeah, hair is critical to understand a politician, same with having a father. How did he destroy civil liberties?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it truly is a mystery why posters on surlyhorns aren't able to produce mountains of evidence here in the middle of a Special Counsel investigation. Quite the riddle.

Why can't you fools give me more evidence than has been publicly released by the investigation?!?!?!? You've been right about everything that has eventually come out over the past year but until I see the smoking gun that hasn't been publicly released I will believe nothing!!! I am objective!!!

  • Like 4
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Yes, it truly is a mystery why posters on surlyhorns aren't able to produce mountains of evidence here in the middle of a Special Counsel investigation. Quite the riddle.

Why can't you fools give me more evidence than has been publicly released by the investigation?!?!?!? You've been right about everything that has eventually come out over the past year but until I see the smoking gun that hasn't been publicly released I will believe nothing!!! I am objective!!!

you are on the wrong thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Yes, it truly is a mystery why posters on surlyhorns aren't able to produce mountains of evidence here in the middle of a Special Counsel investigation. Quite the riddle.

Why can't you fools give me more evidence than has been publicly released by the investigation?!?!?!? You've been right about everything that has eventually come out over the past year but until I see the smoking gun that hasn't been publicly released I will believe nothing!!! I am objective!!!

giphy.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more along the lines of "I'm not a gullible idiot."  I know spurious when I see it.  And I know false when I see it.

Spurious is that Rand taking a picture with a journalist says anything about his character.

Spurious is that her "okay" symbol means white power.  Especially given the history of this particular reporter and that the OK-KK implication was created as a subterfuge to make the alt-left look stupid (it worked, btw).

False is saying that Rand Paul votes lock-step with Trump.  He's a negative 16% on 538s Trump+/-.  That is below 30 Senate Democrats.

Edited by JBJ
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find that Rand Paul isn't in decline but never stood up against anything like his father did.  Sure he will grandstand and say that he is uncomfortable with a decision, or he needs more time to evaluate, but he always caves in the end.    "I don't agree with this law but I think it's better than the alternative of voting no."    He only seems to stick to his principles when his vote isn't needed.   In other words, he is like everyone else in DC.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SpiralOut said:

How anyone that votes R or D can say this with a straight face considering the idiots who make up our government is beyond me.

 

It's actually incredibly easy when you you're starting point isn't "all politicians are crooks and only want to help themselves" like some angst-ridden melodramatic teen

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jack Burton said:

It's actually incredibly easy when you you're starting point isn't "all politicians are crooks and only want to help themselves" like some angst-ridden melodramatic teen

Well, yeah. Believing a lie is always easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jack Burton said:

It's actually incredibly easy when you you're starting point isn't "all politicians are crooks and only want to help themselves" like some angst-ridden melodramatic teen

Wait, I thought we were talking about these politicians being clowns, not crooks.  Stop moving the goalposts. 

Do I really need to waste my time linking videos to Republicans holding snowballs on the floor of the Senate to prove climate change is all BS?  Or maybe ones extolling the virtues of "Corch Urban Meyers and Go Gata?"  Or that Guam might tip over and capsize? 

Or I suppose I could just post a picture of McConnell's face.

It just never ceases to amaze me how locked in you ideologues are to this two-sided war of the mentally retarded.  You can't entertain any outside ideas that might upset the purity of your never-ending slap fight of failure.  There's is a lot of shit to make fun of Libertarians for, but they (and by extension their ideas) are all ridiculous and not worth anyone's time?  And Rand Paul isn't a Libertarian.  R in front of his name out front shoulda told ya.  So pick someone else as your Libertarian poster-boy. 

Having at least one real Libertarian in Congress would probably improve the place.  Unless of course you consider the soon-to-be complete takeover of our government by corporate interests and the devolution of our political process to that of late-stage Rome to be a good thing.  Hell, as much as I disagree with her politics, having this gal from New York in Congress who is in her words a Democratic Socialist will probably improve the place.  I've seen this corporate controlled R v D movie my entire life.  It fucking sucks.  New ideas are a good thing.  Even if they just force people to critically think about their own positions.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SpiralOut said:

Wait, I thought we were talking about these politicians being clowns, not crooks.  Stop moving the goalposts. 

Do I really need to waste my time linking videos to Republicans holding snowballs on the floor of the Senate to prove climate change is all BS?  Or maybe ones extolling the virtues of "Corch Urban Meyers and Go Gata?"  Or that Guam might tip over and capsize? 

Or I suppose I could just post a picture of McConnell's face.

It just never ceases to amaze me how locked in you ideologues are to this two-sided war of the mentally retarded.  You can't entertain any outside ideas that might upset the purity of your never-ending slap fight of failure.  There's is a lot of shit to make fun of Libertarians for, but they (and by extension their ideas) are all ridiculous and not worth anyone's time?  And Rand Paul isn't a Libertarian.  R in front of his name out front shoulda told ya.  So pick someone else as your Libertarian poster-boy. 

Having at least one real Libertarian in Congress would probably improve the place.  Unless of course you consider the soon-to-be complete takeover of our government by corporate interests and the devolution of our political process to that of late-stage Rome to be a good thing.  Hell, as much as I disagree with her politics, having this gal from New York in Congress who is in her words a Democratic Socialist will probably improve the place.  I've seen this corporate controlled R v D movie my entire life.  It fucking sucks.  New ideas are a good thing.  Even if they just force people to critically think about their own positions.  

 

Yawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...