Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:56 AM

Democrat Cory Booker wants to work with LIBERTARIAN Rand Paul

Interesting.

Bite on that NSA apologists...

In the special-election race that wrapped up last week, Mr. Booker campaigned on working across the aisle despite the bitter partisan divide in Washington. Drug policy could be one area where he finds some success, according to those who work in the field. He singled out Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a libertarian, as someone who sees eye-to-eye with him on the issue.

"I want to work with him," said Mr. Booker, about Mr. Paul, during an interview Tuesday at his campaign office in the city he led as mayor for seven years. "I take everybody in the Senate as sincere people who want to make a difference."

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303902404579151922058208760?mod=WSJ_NY_MIDDLELEADNewsCollection

342 replies, 38620 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

342 replies	Author	Time	Post
Democrat Cory Booker wants to work with LIBERTARIAN Rand Paul (Original post)	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	OP
Of course he's going to expect the Libertarian to work with him on drug legislation reform.	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#1
Knew there was more to it than met the eye.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#3
No shit---the two paragraph selective excerpt that didn't mention drugs? Tip off that something was	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#5
Silly NSA apologist!	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#13
I thought I was Stasi? It's tough to keep up. nt	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#16
From the OP: "Drug policy could be one area where he finds some success"	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#33
Tell us why you have a problem with Booker working on drug policy? "Bite" is not a direction	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#36
I've none. Unlike those who have a problem with Democratic and Liberals	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#59
You wrote "Bite on that" to DUers in an OP where you are "happy?" Holy crap-I'd hate to read what	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#62
I'm sure you were horrified when you read those words.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#64
I had expected more erudition from someone in your profession, frankly. As an avid Rude Pundit	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#71
My job as a paid assassin requires little erudition. In fact, I rarely talk at work.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#86
Heh ...	1000words	Oct 2013	#92
That explains the WSJ subscription. nt	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#96
You have a lively imagination.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#110
Sadly, I cannot return the compliment. nt	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#122
Sadly, I cannot turn my comment into one.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#132
They said 'bite on that' to 'NSA apologists'	muriel_volestrangler	Oct 2013	#245
I say never ever work with Paul.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#268
+1...	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#7
Really. Senators are free to associate and make alliances on specific issues...	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#17
What do you have against ending the Drug War?	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#20
Nothing. An I don't have anything against Democrats working with Libertarians	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#34
when someone teamed up with paul	questionseverything	Oct 2013	#331
Senators need 'votes' to further legislation--here's a primer.....	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#23
...	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#24
And citizens need as many voices as possible to exert public pressure to change policies. nt	woo me with science	Oct 2013	#38
I am sure that you support Booker's efforts to change drug policy, right? nt	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#40
Here's my succinct summary of this stale, manipulative corporate spin:	woo me with science	Oct 2013	#43
Indeed--why the OP would post ANYTHING from Murdoch's Wall Street Journal is puzzling.	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#47
I know! They were the ones who reported today	woo me with science	Oct 2013	#49
Silly things such as:	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#51
Oh lordy....losing on this issue, you switch to President Obama? Are Booker and Obama fungible to	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#52
So the WSJ is spinning Booker's intent to work with Paul?	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#66
Isn't that a question you should have asked yourself BEFORE you used the Murdoch source? nt	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#72
If Booker didn't want it reported, he shouldn't have said it.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#89
836 words, 23 paragraphs, drug policy mentioned 3 times.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#77
Ending wars, de-militarization of the U.S. of A., surveillance	dreamnightwind	Oct 2013	#131
They are not for ending wars.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#136
You're wrong	dreamnightwind	Oct 2013	#196
Message auto-removed	Name removed	Oct 2013	#341
It's so beautiful.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#45
Activists have an impact electorally, not legislatively, generally.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#27
youre on roll, lol.	BootinUp	Oct 2013	#41
Are you done deleting posts yet?	Marr	Oct 2013	#267
+1	Tuesday Afternoon	Oct 2013	#8
Nailed it...nt	SidDithers	Oct 2013	#25
You Better Believe It! nt	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#32
Drug policy is mentioned in my excerpt.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#29
It's not bolded.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#35
Because bold words make the others unreadable. Hahahaha.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#63
I think Booker would be for privacy laws.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#65
What are you blathering on about? I never made the claim that libertarians	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#168
Erm, you said "any criticism of anti-NSA bedfellows."	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#171
I can and will make a distinction between government surveillance and corporate surveillance...	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#186
No, they are not "separate legislative fights."	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#190
No Josh, they are not the same. The outcome will be similar but the corporate	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#198
Corporate data selling is trivial to implement.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#201
We will disagree about this. HIPAA privacy was primarily driven	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#213
ELUA's are unenforcable.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#236
Great catch!	silverweb	Oct 2013	#37
there would be no point going to the Senate is one isn't willing to try to get votes to pass	JI7	Oct 2013	#2
I think every single newly elected Democrat should barricade themselves in their office, and	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#4
On changing VERY specific DRUG laws.	MADem	Oct 2013	#6
Booker is "paling around" with Rand Paul. Did you hear? Imagine! A Senator-elect making	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#14
I am shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, that he'd make good on a campaign promise by joining the	MADem	Oct 2013	#26
You should read the attempts to rehabilitate this OP in this thread---apparently, we've	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#54
Gee, is that suddenly a "positive" kind of exhortation? Who knew?	MADem	Oct 2013	#57
We need a new avatar. "Bite on That!" It's right up there with "Yes, We Can!"	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#58
It's my new sig line.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#70
Why not include the permalink to this thread? nt	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#74
Good idea!	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#90
Thanks for editing the OP back.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#93
Oh I have. DUers who have clearly stated that they are against NSA excesses	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#98
Classic MadHound.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#73
You know, Skinner, in his infinite wisdom, gave posters the option to stop digging with self-delete.	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#76
Oh, we love our words, our thoughts, they are our mind children	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#202
STOP IT!	Rex	Oct 2013	#205
That is lovely.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#215
he is a good example of how fucked up some of this is, didn't want to report a pedophile ring	JI7	Oct 2013	#220
Well, I'd say "Unbelievable!" but since I see what I see with my own lying eyes, I guess I'd just	MADem	Oct 2013	#276
I'd appreciate it if you quote me correctly. It is not "Bite me," but rather	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#293
I guess I'll give that admonition all the attention it deserves, eh? nt	MADem	Oct 2013	#294
But liberal activists are suspect when they form strange alliances on the odd occasion.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#94
No, not "the odd occasion." The "odd occasion" wouldn't raise any eyebrows.	MADem	Oct 2013	#287
You've wandered way off the farm.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#290
Well, with this thread, I'd say you've purchased the thing!	MADem	Oct 2013	#297
Not once said, "bite on that NSA apologists,"	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#308
Smart politics	Pretzel_Warrior	Oct 2013	#9
They could also work together on tax breaks for private equity firms. nt	geek tragedy	Oct 2013	#10
Ouch..	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#183
I'm copying this OP.....	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#11
I like the original edit, myself.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#18
Noted--Here's the original	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#21
Not too subtle, is he? But hey, Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal is just a nifty source, there,	MADem	Oct 2013	#31
FYI OP is a she.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#39
Ah, I stand corrected.	MADem	Oct 2013	#277
This is the OP you should have copied	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#218
What did it say, as a matter of interest?	muriel_volestrangler	Oct 2013	#246
The thread title was "Don't Ally With Libertarians" and it wasn't snark	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#248
The very same people high 5ing each other in that thread over	Rex	Oct 2013	#304
If he wants to work with him on ending the $60 Billion a year drug war, that's great.	Warren DeMontague	Oct 2013	#12
If this is supposed to be a smear against Sen-Elect Booker, it is a failure. nt	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#15
Epic fail--which is why I copied the OP into a post as a hedge against self-delete. nt	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#19
Good work.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#22
This is in my Hall of Fame of epic fails---you might find it amusing...Check the recs.	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#28
This is my Hall of Fame epic fail post by your buddy	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#97
I think it's a great post. If you can't tell the substantive difference between	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#197
Yep. Great post that has now been self-deleted and the OP also deleted his/her comments.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#217
Before I got to bed, thank you for making this thread!	Rex	Oct 2013	#221
You are welcome! Good night!	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#222
"march of idiots carrying a Obama-as-Hitler sign"	hootinholler	Oct 2013	#254
Yeah it was SO great he self-deleted!	Rex	Oct 2013	#211
But, what happened to the sentiment you shared just recently in this thread:	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#95
And I stand by that thread.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#107
You stand by your thread that you deleted. And you deleted your comments.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#219
The special few are well...special.	Rex	Oct 2013	#305
Your funny! You stood by it so much you deleted it	Dragonfli	Oct 2013	#337
I did delete it.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#338
What posse would that be junior? You don't like Democrats?	Dragonfli	Oct 2013	#340
No it isn't. Try again.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#149
What's wrong with working with Rand Paul on this issue?	Cali_Democrat	Oct 2013	#30
Excellent. Thank you for highlighting the absurdity of the divide and conquer/	woo me with science	Oct 2013	#42
Booker isn't getting together with Rand Paul to protest Obama and hold up Obama with hitler	JI7	Oct 2013	#44
Yes, that's the point.	woo me with science	Oct 2013	#50
"Bite on that" as an exhortation to DUers was not written by those you call "the corporate crew."	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#53
Restored. Oh captain of comity.	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#69
Bullshit. No one said we can't protest.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#60
Nonsense. Of course people were saying that.	woo me with science	Oct 2013	#85
California shows how to govern.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#88
Could it be that when DU is actually united it is actually united?	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#209
Yeah, absolutely.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#237
The notable attempt at division during the shutdown crisis came from michigandem58	muriel_volestrangler	Oct 2013	#249
Things move so fast here, I'd forgotten that	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#250
That's so true.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#252
23 DUers rec'd that OP blaming liberals for the shutdown Republicans caused. Many of them	Bluenorthwest	Oct 2013	#258
And?	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#264
Why are you asking me what you should do? I made my point, you pretended not to get it	Bluenorthwest	Oct 2013	#309
What point?	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#328
Thanks; that thread and the recs are pretty telling	Chathamization	Oct 2013	#316
The OP told Duers to "Bite on that" in reference to the comity that Mr. Booker espouses. So I	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#46
Yep. And not in the spirit of bipartisanship the article was trying to promote. nt	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#48
Telling DUers to "Bite on that" is so charming, isn't it? nt	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#55
Illuminating. nt	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#61
I was going to say, 'don't worry, they'll forget about this	Marr	Oct 2013	#105
It's like having discussions in Wonderland,	woo me with science	Oct 2013	#339
Remember also...his support of Romney and Bain Capital.	ErikJ	Oct 2013	#56
After reading the entire thread I'm reccing this	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#67
What hypocrisy?	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#68
You're normally smarter than this..	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#75
Where are you getting "jumping for joy"?	ucrdem	Oct 2013	#79
I wouldn't expect you to	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#87
You mean because you made it up?	ucrdem	Oct 2013	#91
Go ahead, defend Libertarians and working with them all you want	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#109
I suppose you made that up too?	ucrdem	Oct 2013	#113
I would have no problems with that duo	ZombieHorde	Oct 2013	#239
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Grayson associates himself with this particular bill to amend drug	MADem	Oct 2013	#284
We are happy that Cory Booker is working with Rand Paul on this.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#82
I think the OP expected exactly the reaction they got	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#99
There's a difference between "working with" and "aligning with."	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#108
Of course you're aligned with Libertarians	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#116
That's using a more weak version of the word, imo.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#128
Do you know anyone you are aligned with 100% on everything?	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#137
Myself.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#146
Thankfully that's a situation we'll see right after the devil dons ice skates	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#160
That's called compromising.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#163
I think "agreeing with" would be a more accurate word, don't you?	Marr	Oct 2013	#120
You are comparing a pundit with a Democratic Senator? Greenwald colludes with Libertarians to	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#84
Wasn't Greenwald a life-long Republican before he became a Libertarian?	ucrdem	Oct 2013	#103
Yes. The gullibility of the fringes should surprise no one. I mean, that anyone would think	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#114
There is much to savor lately in the comedy department.	ucrdem	Oct 2013	#121
Disparage Dems for not being liberal or progressive enough, but embrace far-right loons.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#123
Far right loons who tell you they are 'liberal' so therefore, they must be. And when you look at	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#139
And taped his clients without their permission, but now claims to be a privacy advocate.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#142
Worse--he taped a witness. But that caused him to lose the case for his client,	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#158
"Don't ally with Libertarians"	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#194
"Don't ally with Libertarians"	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#134
It's good advice. I hope Cory Booker uses the fuck out of Rand Paul. Think he's not smart	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#154
Would you say you were allied with LaRouchies?	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#157
I think reasonable people can differ on a lot of things	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#165
But we wouldn't announce the alliance.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#166
And they think that of you	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#176
Which is why their narrative is pushed so often.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#178
I wouldn't get any traction if some of it didn't resonate with a larger audience	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#188
On a single issue--they aren't getting married.	MADem	Oct 2013	#281
Perspectives often differ	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#295
I haven't insulted anyone. Trying to pretend I did, like you are doing, is BAD FORM.	MADem	Oct 2013	#298
" You couldn't possibly be more willfully obtuse in those comments of yours if you tried. "	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#299
Nice try, but no cigar. I was right on point, and your weak effort to flip is a fail.	MADem	Oct 2013	#301
As I said a little while ago, perspectives differ	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#323
I am not talking about your "perceived personal shortcomings," but if you want to make	MADem	Oct 2013	#325
You couldn't possibly be more willfully obtuse in those comments of yours if you tried.	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#326
What you're doing is called goading and baiting, and you're not a very skilled	MADem	Oct 2013	#329
I note you're still talking about my personal shortcomings	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#330
Bless your heart right back atcha--and I'll refer you to my last post. nt	MADem	Oct 2013	#336
It is well known now and bookmarked for future mocking.	Rex	Oct 2013	#182
That's all you have to say about a newly elected Dem senator?	ucrdem	Oct 2013	#78
Someone had to take over for HiPointDem--they HATED Cory Booker, but since their shit-	msanthrope	Oct 2013	#104
This thread is highlarious	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#80
+1000. Dizzying AND hilarious, both at the same time	quinnox	Oct 2013	#101
It's classic.	woo me with science	Oct 2013	#111
Yep-- that's about it.	Marr	Oct 2013	#126
I'm positively dizzy	hootinholler	Oct 2013	#257
That vertigo is not due to a medical condition.	nadinbrzezinski	Oct 2013	#286
You, you...	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#318
No, I didn't.	hootinholler	Oct 2013	#319
Yes it is truly a double standard	Harmony Blue	Oct 2013	#283
Confused? No. They're nothing, if not predictable.	WorseBeforeBetter	Oct 2013	#302
The DEA apologists are out in full force.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#81
Manipulative bullshit...	WorseBeforeBetter	Oct 2013	#306
What, Rand Paul, that most evil and vile libertarian?	quinnox	Oct 2013	#83
I didn't really notice that, lol wow yeah I see it now.	Rex	Oct 2013	#100
Yep. That said, somehow, I don't expect the future "Fuck Rand Paul!" posts to have the addition	quinnox	Oct 2013	#115
Maybe a disclaimer as a sig line?	Rex	Oct 2013	#125
lol, good one, a disclaimer sounds like a good idea henceforth...	quinnox	Oct 2013	#127
Well you know we cannot work with libertarians, unless certain	Rex	Oct 2013	#133
Kind of like Obama's political appointments that gets everyone's jimmies rustled.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#140
Yeah I know it must suck, you can still self delete that thread.	Rex	Oct 2013	#144
As I've said twice already, I stand by that thread.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#148
Keep pretending that is true.	Rex	Oct 2013	#150
I post nothing on here that I wouldn't defend a week later.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#153
Bitter? Oh I get it, you are stuck in a narrative and cannot get out!	Rex	Oct 2013	#159
Really?	Rex	Oct 2013	#214
No, you 'self deleted' that OP which is the opposite of standing by it, it is hiding it from view	Bluenorthwest	Oct 2013	#260
Remember this recent, epic post by Bluegrass?	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#102
Hmm, with the headline -- "Don’t ally with libertarians"	quinnox	Oct 2013	#106
Actually, I stand by that thread.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#117
But those same people holding the disparaging signs...	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#138
Good call! I cannot believe we were expected to forget something	Rex	Oct 2013	#145
I responded to it, so...	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#162
Thanks for the kick.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#170
I will keep it Bookmarked so I can laugh at them from now on	Rex	Oct 2013	#174
I doubt any of them voted at all.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#155
This message was self-deleted by its author	nadinbrzezinski	Oct 2013	#279
So you'd openly admit your alliance with them?	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#161
So you imagine that Cory Booker is only going to vote on a Libertarian generated	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#195
Regarding drug policy, I see that as possible.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#199
I make the distinction of championing bi-partisan when doing so advances	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#207
As do I, for the most part.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#241
Hey! Just yesterday someone suggested I watch Walking Dead...	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#243
Actually you self deleted that thread and shut down the discussion. Opposite of standing by it.	Bluenorthwest	Oct 2013	#261
You'll probably want to delete this post, too. /nt	Marr	Oct 2013	#270
Now THAT... is hilarious.	Marr	Oct 2013	#130
...	Rex	Oct 2013	#172
Yes but the kind of difference some of them want to make essentially destroys lives.	gtar100	Oct 2013	#112
I have no problem with Booker making an alliance over a specific issue...	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#119
Maybe we made some headway tonight	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#173
Thanks for pointing out that little gem of knowledge.	Rex	Oct 2013	#177
Well, well, well	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#300
Can you believe it!?	Rex	Oct 2013	#303
No, I can't believe it	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#310
It's so... Spandanesque.	WorseBeforeBetter	Oct 2013	#315
This one was a real DUzy too! By: You guessed it!	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#118
I stand by that thread and still regard anyone in attendance a foolish tool. nt	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#124
I've been advised to self-delete. Can't imagine why. (Snort)	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#129
Yeah someone wants you to help them save face now.	Rex	Oct 2013	#135
Definitely, you aren't the one who needs to self-delete in this thread. On the other hand, the spin-	quinnox	Oct 2013	#141
I bet you have	Oilwellian	Oct 2013	#147
I'm holding up a mirror and their is zero reflection	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#156
Yes this is Animal Farm and some of us are more important or our opinions	Rex	Oct 2013	#164
That thread has a smackdown with Barney Frank:	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#152
"Don't ever protest because LaRouche people might show up"	Chathamization	Oct 2013	#320
I can attest our local nut was not from the Lyndon LaRouche organization	nadinbrzezinski	Oct 2013	#334
Uh.....	ourfuneral	Oct 2013	#143
New Senators always say stuff like that	Recursion	Oct 2013	#151
Work with him?	DeSwiss	Oct 2013	#167
Horrible, terrible! The experts on DU said Libertarians and Dems should	Rex	Oct 2013	#169
The only irony here are those jumping on bipartisanship.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#175
Nice try but fail, the point was made to the obvious two faced stance	Rex	Oct 2013	#179
Read post #27.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#180
Don't be mad bro.	Rex	Oct 2013	#184
Hey, you support Democrats working with the right wing.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#187
Hey I don't really care much if your friends got caught up in a lie.	Rex	Oct 2013	#191
The narrative change was swift indeed.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#181
SO you think it is okay to work with Libertarians now?	Rex	Oct 2013	#185
...	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#189
Truth hurts sometimes.	Rex	Oct 2013	#193
From what I gather, many American laws are created and sponsored by people from both parties	LeftishBrit	Oct 2013	#192
This thread is a good example of how the "swarm" attacks can sometimes turn into epic fails	quinnox	Oct 2013	#200
The only fails I see here are supporting bipartisanship...	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#203
Guess who is self deleting like a mad man now to save face!?	Rex	Oct 2013	#204
LOL	quinnox	Oct 2013	#206
I was going to bed...will have to wait until the laughing dies down.	Rex	Oct 2013	#208
heh heh, well, I was in bed, and something was calling me back to DU...	quinnox	Oct 2013	#210
Scrubbing Bubbles does most of the work, anyway. Stay up late and live a little. nt	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#212
Nah, going to bed. I am sure you were being honest	Rex	Oct 2013	#216
+!!!!	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#224
I haven't read anything as funny as this thread in days, possibly weeks	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#223
I'll have a smile when I go to sleep...	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#225
there is a big difference between trying to get a current Senator's vote and working with Teabaggers	JI7	Oct 2013	#226
and every fucking libertarian i know of is a racist	JI7	Oct 2013	#227
So you're saying that Corey Booker is working with a racist?	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#228
yes, just like FDR did, just like Obama tries to in order to get shit done	JI7	Oct 2013	#230
So you are saying it's OK to agree with Libertarians sometimes on some issues?	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#235
depends, if they are Senator their vote matters in whether something will pass	JI7	Oct 2013	#240
...	bullwinkle428	Oct 2013	#259
You should call up Booker and let him know...	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#229
he is going to be Senator so he will have to deal with Racists to get things done	JI7	Oct 2013	#231
Just like OP dealt with homophobes to get things done.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#233
He will learn the hard way the same as Obama did. Some people can't be worked with.	appleannie1	Oct 2013	#232
that's why it's important to defeat these assholes during election time	JI7	Oct 2013	#234
I say work with whomever you have to	Blue_In_AK	Oct 2013	#238
I agree. And I also agree that it is a good thing for liberals to unite with	Luminous Animal	Oct 2013	#242
Because politicians in a democracy must not work with other politicians?	intaglio	Oct 2013	#244
I dislike the crying extremist on both sides	beachbum bob	Oct 2013	#247
^ Thread win.	ucrdem	Oct 2013	#251
Welcome to DU!	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#253
ive seen enough of these threads	beachbum bob	Oct 2013	#288
The intent was to smoke out hypocrites	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#296
Rand Paul is NOT Libertarian. nt	Demo_Chris	Oct 2013	#255
Ohhhhhhh myyyyyyy! Nice catch Luminous!	Pholus	Oct 2013	#256
I expect better of you.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#266
What an enchanting thread. Going to have to rec and bookmark	Autumn	Oct 2013	#262
Really an amazing thread, it has it all, hypocrisy, a nattering centrist self deleting and yet	Bluenorthwest	Oct 2013	#263
Unsupportable.	joshcryer	Oct 2013	#265
What, josh, you didn't read this thread? Your personal attack aside, I expect you to at least	Bluenorthwest	Oct 2013	#307
Performance art is so underappreciated these days n/t	Fumesucker	Oct 2013	#324
+1	Marr	Oct 2013	#269
Oh noes! You is making them madz and sadz!	Rex	Oct 2013	#272
They get bitey when the chagrin kicks in.	Bluenorthwest	Oct 2013	#312
I commend you on the first reply in which you stay on topic and don't play the victim.	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#311
You've been here 23 days.	WorseBeforeBetter	Oct 2013	#313
This message was self-deleted by its author	BluegrassStateBlues	Oct 2013	#314
Is this before or after Paul tries to overturn the Civil Rights Act of 1964??	Blue_Tires	Oct 2013	#271
Maybe Rand Paul will work with Booker on this	ProSense	Oct 2013	#275
K&R for pissing off all the Right people!	Rex	Oct 2013	#273
VA-Gov: Rand Paul (R. KY) Coming To Virginia To Beg Libertarians To Back Ken Cuccinelli (R)	ProSense	Oct 2013	#274
Pass the smelling salts	nadinbrzezinski	Oct 2013	#278
Let me add, this is a really ammusing thread	nadinbrzezinski	Oct 2013	#280
This was great! Best hour of my time in a long time, just reading this.	bravenak	Oct 2013	#282
Yup	nadinbrzezinski	Oct 2013	#285
I guess Senator Booker likes the Oathkeepers.	NuclearDem	Oct 2013	#289
Booker must hate blacks, yup, that's it	nadinbrzezinski	Oct 2013	#291
fuck that you can't work with an ass clown like Paul	gopiscrap	Oct 2013	#292
"sincere people" yeah right	DiverDave	Oct 2013	#317
You, sir, are naive, if you think everyone in the Senate is sincere.	alarimer	Oct 2013	#321
Amazingly foolish.	True Blue Door	Oct 2013	#322
Political arsonist! Yes! Perfect!	Rex	Oct 2013	#327
Somehow, I have a feeling this won't end well.....Paul is NOT to be trusted.....nt	AverageJoe90	Oct 2013	#332
Cory Booker isn't a real Democrat anyway. nt	duffyduff	Oct 2013	#333
Good for Booker! His political job requires him to talk to all manner of batshizz crazy asshats,	struggle4progress	Oct 2013	#335
Fuck deranged Rand Paul.	HappyMe	Oct 2013	#342

Response to Luminous Animal (Original post)

Mon Oct 28, 2013, 01:03 AM

msanthrope (37,549 posts)

1. Of course he's going to expect the Libertarian to work with him on drug legislation reform.

You know, I wondered why you'd only excerpted 2 paragraphs from this article.....and then I read it and realized that since it was on drug policy, it was best to OBSCURE the issue, and focus on Booker's association with Rand Paul......if you have a certain agenda....

While your selectiveness certainly highlights your agenda, it really, really does a disservice to two deserving groups--

1) DUers. We deserve properly presented articles that accurately present the issues.

2) People in prison/facing trials/sentencing under out current drug laws.

If Corey Booker can coax a reasonable vote out of Rand Paul on drug sentencing issues, I think that will benefit sooooooo many groups in America that have suffered from our draconian drug laws.

Tell me again, what's your objection to that????

Seriously--what is your objection to Cory Booker's quest to reform drug law and therefore, policy?

Democrat Cory Booker wants to work with LIBERTARIAN Rand Paul

1. Of course he's going to expect the Libertarian to work with him on drug legislation reform.

3. Knew there was more to it than met the eye.

5. No shit---the two paragraph selective excerpt that didn't mention drugs? Tip off that something was

13. Silly NSA apologist!

16. I thought I was Stasi? It's tough to keep up. nt

33. From the OP: "Drug policy could be one area where he finds some success"

36. Tell us why you have a problem with Booker working on drug policy? "Bite" is not a direction

59. I've none. Unlike those who have a problem with Democratic and Liberals

62. You wrote "Bite on that" to DUers in an OP where you are "happy?" Holy crap-I'd hate to read what

64. I'm sure you were horrified when you read those words.

71. I had expected more erudition from someone in your profession, frankly. As an avid Rude Pundit

86. My job as a paid assassin requires little erudition. In fact, I rarely talk at work.

92. Heh ...

96. That explains the WSJ subscription. nt

110. You have a lively imagination.

122. Sadly, I cannot return the compliment. nt

132. Sadly, I cannot turn my comment into one.

245. They said 'bite on that' to 'NSA apologists'

268. I say never ever work with Paul.

7. +1...

17. Really. Senators are free to associate and make alliances on specific issues...

20. What do you have against ending the Drug War?

34. Nothing. An I don't have anything against Democrats working with Libertarians

331. when someone teamed up with paul

23. Senators need 'votes' to further legislation--here's a primer.....

24. ...

38. And citizens need as many voices as possible to exert public pressure to change policies. nt

40. I am sure that you support Booker's efforts to change drug policy, right? nt

43. Here's my succinct summary of this stale, manipulative corporate spin:

47. Indeed--why the OP would post ANYTHING from Murdoch's Wall Street Journal is puzzling.

49. I know! They were the ones who reported today

51. Silly things such as:

52. Oh lordy....losing on this issue, you switch to President Obama? Are Booker and Obama fungible to

66. So the WSJ is spinning Booker's intent to work with Paul?

72. Isn't that a question you should have asked yourself BEFORE you used the Murdoch source? nt

89. If Booker didn't want it reported, he shouldn't have said it.

77. 836 words, 23 paragraphs, drug policy mentioned 3 times.

131. Ending wars, de-militarization of the U.S. of A., surveillance

136. They are not for ending wars.

196. You're wrong

45. It's so beautiful.

27. Activists have an impact electorally, not legislatively, generally.

41. youre on roll, lol.

267. Are you done deleting posts yet?

8. +1

25. Nailed it...nt

32. You Better Believe It! nt

29. Drug policy is mentioned in my excerpt.

35. It's not bolded.

63. Because bold words make the others unreadable. Hahahaha.

65. I think Booker would be for privacy laws.

168. What are you blathering on about? I never made the claim that libertarians

171. Erm, you said "any criticism of anti-NSA bedfellows."

186. I can and will make a distinction between government surveillance and corporate surveillance...

190. No, they are not "separate legislative fights."

198. No Josh, they are not the same. The outcome will be similar but the corporate

201. Corporate data selling is trivial to implement.

213. We will disagree about this. HIPAA privacy was primarily driven

236. ELUA's are unenforcable.

37. Great catch!

2. there would be no point going to the Senate is one isn't willing to try to get votes to pass

4. I think every single newly elected Democrat should barricade themselves in their office, and

6. On changing VERY specific DRUG laws.

14. Booker is "paling around" with Rand Paul. Did you hear? Imagine! A Senator-elect making

26. I am shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, that he'd make good on a campaign promise by joining the

54. You should read the attempts to rehabilitate this OP in this thread---apparently, we've

57. Gee, is that suddenly a "positive" kind of exhortation? Who knew?

58. We need a new avatar. "Bite on That!" It's right up there with "Yes, We Can!"

70. It's my new sig line.

74. Why not include the permalink to this thread? nt

90. Good idea!

93. Thanks for editing the OP back.

98. Oh I have. DUers who have clearly stated that they are against NSA excesses

73. Classic MadHound.

76. You know, Skinner, in his infinite wisdom, gave posters the option to stop digging with self-delete.

202. Oh, we love our words, our thoughts, they are our mind children

205. STOP IT!

215. That is lovely.

220. he is a good example of how fucked up some of this is, didn't want to report a pedophile ring

218. This is the OP you should have copied