IGX

This is my brother's reply on FB to the question of what Holder means.

I can clarify Mr. Holder's position. There are three types of combat

Physical combat: using your body to inflict physical harm or damage on something belonging to The State

Verbal combat: Speaking seditious words and phrases which disparage The State.

Thought combat: Thinking seditious thoughts and phrases which disparage The State.

As long as you avoid all three of those, you will not be killed by drone strikes at any point. Easy

Blaidd Drwg wrote:He also rubs a lot of people the wrong way. I think he's doing a great job but I don't hold out a tremdous amount of hope.

If/when he runs for the Republican nomination, Paul's foreign policy views will be spun as anti-American, pro-terrorist, anti-Israel, etc. And people will buy the spin.

He can't ever be president. That curly thing on top of his head is a wig.

http://www.politico.com/multimedia/vide ... html?hp=s3

Rand, at least so far, seems unwilling to be baited into seeming like a lunatic (video is about 15 minutes). He's handling this incredibly well. He seems to have a pretty good understanding of Senate rules and traditions, and seems to know how to use these rules well. I probably don't agree with him on everything, but he has a great point that more rules need to be codified.

Rand's a better politician than his father. Ron Paul was great in a lot of ways. He certainly paved the way for people like Lee, Amash, Rand, Cruz etc, but his shortcomings as a politician kept him from ever breaking out with the 25 and older voters. He also had a habit of being kind of geeky and coming off as a loon, even when making a good point.

This is going to be a big net positive for Rand and his political allies, I think. Crusty old farts like Graham and McCain aren't too happy with Rand, but I'd guess they're less happy with the reaction he got.

I mean, he got Code Pink to follow along with, and support, the #standwithrand trend on Twitter. He "out community organized" the Alinsky disciple.

The issue is whether or not he can maintain the momentum heading into 2016.

Don't worry. If he starts to be a real threat, they'll smear him into an ink spot with a whole bunch of irrelevant shit. Legalize drugs? Empty prisons from all non violent drug offenders? Bring all troops home from around the world? I don't think so!

baffled wrote:Rand's a better politician than his father. Ron Paul was great in a lot of ways. He certainly paved the way for people like Lee, Amash, Rand, Cruz etc, but his shortcomings as a politician kept him from ever breaking out with the 25 and older voters. He also had a habit of being kind of geeky and coming off as a loon, even when making a good point.

.

What really helped Rand was " doing the right thing" by kissing up to the Israeli Lobby to stave off criticism and smears from that quarter. Ron's comparative lack of success was mostly due to his unwillingness to do so, in my opinion.

VO2 maxed wrote:

baffled wrote:Rand's a better politician than his father. Ron Paul was great in a lot of ways. He certainly paved the way for people like Lee, Amash, Rand, Cruz etc, but his shortcomings as a politician kept him from ever breaking out with the 25 and older voters. He also had a habit of being kind of geeky and coming off as a loon, even when making a good point.

.

What really helped Rand was " doing the right thing" by kissing up to the Israeli Lobby to stave off criticism and smears from that quarter. Ron's comparative lack of success was mostly due to his unwillingness to do so, in my opinion.

So Rand's a practical politician eh? I like him better already.