You and 75 need to focus on the message, not the messenger. The McConnell wing of the Republican Party is so tight with big business, you couldn't separate 'em with a crowbar. That's primarily why the average worker is hurting so much today while sales of Cadillacs are doing just fine, thank you.

 

More amusing tidbits from the left.

Imperfect or not, our country and our values are THE most tolerant and accepting of other cultures, races, religions and theologies, and it may be our undoing.

You've got to be kidding.

Rand Paul's voice is heard on TV. But where does his ideas have more power as the minority party or the majority? I understand the emotion behind being angry with some of Mitch's voting record. You also have to see the big picture.

 

I'm a tea party supporter since day one and define myself as a Libertarian. Mitch and I do not match up on a lot of things but their are some issues we do match. In a perfect world for KY you would have two Rand Pauls. It does seem like Rand and Mitch get along for the most part. So I would guess Rand would prefer Mitch to be leading the Senate so Rand could have his ear on some of his legislation ideas.

 

Rand Paul's voice has power because he is one of three Senators who've stood up for the conservative base since day 1.

 

Emotion has nothing to do with it, man. Your strategy lacks strategy. All you see is a potential majority for Republicans. You're even willing to reward Republicans who actively fight against conservatism. To you, there is no big picture. It's just Obama and what happens in the next 2-years. It's a marathon, not a sprint, we can't take back our government overnight and we sure as hell can't take it back with fake-Republicans.

You've got to be kidding.

 

Not for a second. I don't know what planet you are living on, but I have been to every region and almost every country on ours.

I'm happy being part of the problem if it means control of the house and senate while the opposition holds the white house. You're plan is a loser all around in those circumstances and makes things much worse.

 

I guess you'd also be happy with non-conservative Republicans such as McCain or Romney in the WH over Obama?

 

And I'm assuming you were okay with Bush/Cheney/Rove destroying the Republican brand in the 2000s?

Not for a second. I don't know what planet you are living on, but I have been to every region and almost every country on ours.

The facts say otherwise. The rather brief history of our nation has been pockmarked by bigotry and persecution, slavery and violence, discrimination and classism.

Rand Paul's voice has power because he is one of three Senators who've stood up for the conservative base since day 1.

 

Emotion has nothing to do with it, man. Your strategy lacks strategy. All you see is a potential majority for Republicans. You're even willing to reward Republicans who actively fight against conservatism. To you, there is no big picture. It's just Obama and what happens in the next 2-years. It's a marathon, not a sprint, we can't take back our government overnight and we sure as hell can't take it back with fake-Republicans.

 

I'm sorry but as Obama has shown in the short term he can implement policies that hurt us for generations. If we can't stop the bleeding now , there is no future.

 

You are talking to the wrong guy about lacking strategy. I find my plan much more feasible. Allow the republicans to take back control. Then let the conservative majority in the House and the few true conservatives in the Senate use that Republican power.

 

Rand Paul has zero power as minority junior senator from Kentucky, but if the GOP comes to power now he has the juice to pass legislation with actual meaning and substance.

 

You live in a world where there are no moderates, while I am a fiscal conservative , I'm also a moderate on some social issues. We have to understand in some area's of the country we can't run with this litmus testing style. We have to swallow bitter pills sometimes.

 

I actually agree with most the problems you have. I just completley disagree on your objective for change. The best way for Republicans to unseat people is through the primary. I notice you keep avoiding that topic everytime I state it. If republicans don't want Mitch to run beat him in the primaries. If you can't do that then I have no clue how voting for a more liberal person is going to fit you agenda.

Rand Paul's voice has power because he is one of three Senators who've stood up for the conservative base since day 1.

 

Emotion has nothing to do with it, man. Your strategy lacks strategy. All you see is a potential majority for Republicans. You're even willing to reward Republicans who actively fight against conservatism. To you, there is no big picture. It's just Obama and what happens in the next 2-years. It's a marathon, not a sprint, we can't take back our government overnight and we sure as hell can't take it back with fake-Republicans.

 

 

But if Obama is unchecked for the next 2 years how much damage can he do? In a normal situation I would agree 100% with you but this is not normal. There is a President in office who is willing to do anything to push his agenda through. Give him 2 more years with a Senate majority and he can stack every bench in the country with people that will support his agenda thanks to Reid's nuclear option. Between that and his willingness to use executive orders to bypass congress it becomes even more imperative that anything that can be done must be done to stop him. I may be 100% wrong but I don't believe anyone but McConnell can beat Grimes and she MUST be beaten.

The facts say otherwise. The rather brief history of our nation has been pockmarked by bigotry and persecution, slavery and violence, discrimination and classism.

 

What super power in the history of this planet has a better track record than the USA?

But if Obama is unchecked for the next 2 years how much damage can he do? In a normal situation I would agree 100% with you but this is not normal. There is a President in office who is willing to do anything to push his agenda through. Give him 2 more years with a Senate majority and he can stack every bench in the country with people that will support his agenda thanks to Reid's nuclear option. Between that and his willingness to use executive orders to bypass congress it becomes even more imperative that anything that can be done must be done to stop him. I may be 100% wrong but I don't believe anyone but McConnell can beat Grimes and she MUST be beaten.

 

Exactly there is so much at stack these next two years these silly internal struggles need to take a back seat.

What super power in the history of this planet has a better track record than the USA?

Read some history before you start in with the Kate Smith "God Bless America."

Read some history before you start in with the Kate Smith "God Bless America."

 

Thanks buddy. I'm pretty well read. I know the scares on our history but I also know the shining bright spots.

I'm sorry but as Obama has shown in the short term he can implement policies that hurt us for generations. If we can't stop the bleeding now , there is no future.

 

I'm going to stop you right there. You are choosing to believe that Obama created this entire mess.

 

How much did the size and scope of government grow under the Bush Administration? What does more damage to the conservative cause? Our own party drastically expanding government, or the opposition drastically expanding government?

 

Rand Paul has tremendous power because he aligns himself with like-minded outside groups.

 

I wholeheartedly agree that primaries are the BEST way to punish liberal Republicans. However, that is NOT an excuse to reward bad politicians in the General.

 

If Romney had won in 2012, the Assault Weapons Ban and Brady Checks Expansion last year would have had enough bipartisan support to pass the Senate and House.

 

It's much easier to rally conservatives against Obama's radical gun grab than Romney's moderate expansion of background checks. The same concept applies to McConnell.

But if Obama is unchecked for the next 2 years how much damage can he do? In a normal situation I would agree 100% with you but this is not normal. There is a President in office who is willing to do anything to push his agenda through. Give him 2 more years with a Senate majority and he can stack every bench in the country with people that will support his agenda thanks to Reid's nuclear option. Between that and his willingness to use executive orders to bypass congress it becomes even more imperative that anything that can be done must be done to stop him. I may be 100% wrong but I don't believe anyone but McConnell can beat Grimes and she MUST be beaten.

 

The same amount of damage Bush did in 8 years. Bush gave us Chief Justice Roberts, the same guy who said Obamacare was constitutionally valid! What are you talking about? The problem is not Democrats. The problem is liberal Republicans who refuse to fight against liberal policies and that type of behavior creates apathy among our base.

I'm going to stop you right there. You are choosing to believe that Obama created this entire mess.

 

How much did the size and scope of government grow under the Bush Administration? What does more damage to the conservative cause? Our own party drastically expanding government, or the opposition drastically expanding government?

 

Rand Paul has tremendous power because he aligns himself with like-minded outside groups.

 

I wholeheartedly agree that primaries are the BEST way to punish liberal Republicans. However, that is NOT an excuse to reward bad politicians in the General.

 

If Romney had won in 2012, the Assault Weapons Ban and Brady Checks Expansion last year would have had enough bipartisan support to pass the Senate and House.

 

It's much easier to rally conservatives against Obama's radical gun grab than Romney's moderate expansion of background checks. The same concept applies to McConnell.

 

We will agree to disagree then. I see nothing positive in keeping democrats in control of the Senate.