re: OT: This boards thoughts on Rand Paul

But FTR I agree with what you're saying about both sides being beholden to the campaign cash, and that's wrong. And democrats can be hypocritical about that issue, that's true. The problem is as different as their rhetoric might be, behind closed doors there is a very thin line between dems and repubs. I'd say we need a third party but I have a feeling that my idea of a third party is different from what a lot of others on this board want. So it could be that we really just need the two parties we have reformed. Changing campaign finance laws would go a long way.

I am afraid we are past the tipping point defined as the majority of "Americans" wanting the goberment to support then rather than independently working. And obama is doing a masteful job of ensuring that flip continues via the atrocious opening of the borders to any and all and automatically going on the govberment dole. Couple that with a "minority" dim candidate be it a black man, white women, black women, etc. spells much doom for the elephants especially if they keep walking into Obama's upper cuts and left hooks.

Add to that the entirely debatable opinion the the reps are superior to the dims and you have the current quagmire. Not an honest one in the bunch IMO, you can't be and "succeed" in that environment.

This could all be fixed in about a ten year period if Washington would again allow refineries to be built and a focus change from liquid oil fuels to natural gas fuels. The U.S. has 300 years worth of natural gas under our soil, and that's just what we know about after only 30% exploration. We are the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.

But Democrats/Liberals have blocked the building of new refineries and a national pipeline for 3+ decades now.

There's a reason North and South Dakota have nearly zero unemployment and pay high school dropouts $100K+ a year. It's the one place drilling regulations are lax and refineries have been allowed to update technologies. Private corporations making money and hiring everyone in sight. What a novel concept.

If we did this country wide, we'd have a surplus of jobs and even the lazy leeches of society couldn't pass up how much more money they'd make over what the welfare life affords.

Liberalism just baffles me. It's its own conflict of interest. They claim to be the champion of the poor, but what would happen if they actually solved poverty? What would happen if 5 million people were on welfare instead of 50 million? What would happen is they would lose there power and a democrat would never get elected again.

Why can't people who vote Democrat get that? 60 years of championing poverty and it's only gotten worse. How freaking insane is that.

Look who votes Democrat. The poor (who are bribed and enabled to stay forever poor), Minorities (who are overwhelmingly oblivious about the fact Dems and the media actually incite racial division to purposely manipulate them), Hollywood (the most detached from reality people on the planet), Bleeding-Hearts with white-guilt, Homosexuals, College professors, and the vast majority of the wealthiest 1%'ers in the country.

Its just mind boggling that people can't figure out what's going on there. It's pure agenda-driven manipulation of or by the most ignorant, lowest IQ, lazy, gullible, misguided, foolish, and flat out most corrupt and intellectually dishonest people in this country.

Establishment Republicans suck too. They're just as bad. They just use a different set of ideologies to manipulate their agenda. But Liberals are just the worst.