Where do YOU split with the good doctor?
- Thread starter erect
- Start date
Not precisely.
The Courts overstep their bounds sometimes when they "define" things that were clearly defined to begin with. (Citizens United anyone?)
Worse yet though, the LEGISLATORS are doing the real damage passing all kinds of bills that anyone who isn't insane would see are clearly unconstitutional.
All of the Amendments that Paul wants taken away are in this category. So are bills like the NDAA.
It confuses me that people are still stuck in the 1950's or 1770's ... we're so far past that as a society. Suppose tomorrow the republic crumbled and the constitution extinct, what do you think will happen ... All the white people take to the streets claiming our negros? Seriously?
Slavery was ended because it was immoral and 99.999% (there's always a dresden) of us would rise as one and overthrow the government if they legislated it back into reality.
The Women's "rights" bullshit absofuckinglutely screwed us all. A woman's maternal instinct (take care of the poor, the sick, the old, babbies, ...) has wrecked any opportunity for future generations thanks to 10's of TRILLIONS in unfunded liabilities. Don't believe me? Check the dates and realize that politicians used your insecurities against us making promises backed by the blood of our grandchildren as collateral. Slimy politicians worked their ass off to make sure women voted regularly ... women love being lied to and it's hard to expect politicians to not do what they do best. It was like true <3 at first sight and they really claimed they did something wonderful for you .. while raping your future generations.
Runaway deficits were the final nail in our coffin and it's taken several decades to materialize. Abe made a successful silent coup 100 years before (civil war = power grab over taxing south, not done for liberation of blacks .. that's propaganda) ... it was the beginning of the end.
Socialist and redneck, huh? That makes a lot of sense. :eek7:
Considering the first half of my post is a pretty reasonable response to your assertion that RP is "pro-rights" and is based on what he's actually proposed as a Congressman, I'd think you'd have the dignity to offer a response.
As for the second half, even if you don't believe he's a complete shitbag, it's not like I'm making this stuff up. The newsletters exist and it was James Kirchick in the New Republic who first did detailed analysis of them back in 2008. Now it's the Washington Post picking up the trail and interviewing former staffers.
I guess it's easier to put your fingers in your ears and scream "I'm not listening" then even entertain the fact that there might be some truth in these statements. Well, that and leveling personal attacks because you've got nothing intelligent to say.
1/2 million died in that war, 2-3% of our entire population at the time. England freed their slaves 20 years before without a war giving compensation to businesses who lost production in order to recover.
England's solution total cost: £20M .. total dead due to gov't force: 0
Civil War total cost: $6B ... total dead due to gov't force: ~600k
If it was really about freeing the slaves, you have to admit there was a better way.
Wow. You just keep making yourself look more and more stupid with each post.
I can't believe I have to tell you this, but the #1 class of Welfare recipients in this nation isn't inner-city families... It's the trailer parks. And if you haven't figured it out yet by now; receiving money like medicare, social security, or especially Welfare from the government is Socialism, plain and simple.
Make sense now?
What you & I call a "reasonable response" are not at all similar.
What he has proposed is repealing harmful laws and amendments to the cause of liberty. That's it, and that's pretty much all.
The problem with your assumption that Civil rights would be sent back to chaotic times is that the people of 2012 don't think like people during those chaotic times. You've basically claimed that since the civil rights have "been repealed" (which of course isn't what Paul wants and you know it) then all the white people of 2012 in america are suddenly going to become predjudice against blacks again, as if by magic.
This is another fine example of the "Help us government, we can't think for ourselves" syndrome. You seem to believe that if the government doesn't hold society one way, then it will automatically fall the other way.
So lame... But just the way Obama wants it.
He just goofed. Accept it.
In Paul's heart and everything he is driven by, he is about LIBERTY. There is so much evidence of this it's silly to even talk about it. Go look at his 35-year voting record... He's been the planet's #1 defender of personal Liberties since 1976, hands down.
Someone who believes so strongly and works so hard for so long for everyone to have maximum liberty is simply not someone who can walk around being prejudice against people's skin color, basically taking away their liberties.
You're seriously barking up the wrong tree on that one. Give it up.
When I entertained statements such as those about Paul it was before long hours of checking out his voting record and watching the INCREDIBLE opposition he has faced in the mainstream Media. It was before learning about what it is to be a libertarian, which Paul is pretty much the face of in our world today.
You see, Paul isn't a "presidential candidate." He's like a messiah of Liberty, and if he falls, it will only ENRAGE his crusaders of liberty.
You're not seeing this movement for what it is. It really is about the cause... This cause:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7X8WJdlq1k]The Ron Paul Revolution DEFINED - YouTube[/ame]
But if you still appreciate socialism or can't understand what Liberty really is then you won't get it.
And as long as you don't, I highly advise you to keep your socialistic, redneck comments to yourself on this forum because I'm not even close to being the smartest or most outspoken libertarian here. You have been warned.
Yeah don't get the wrong idea, I don't disagree much with the above. I just cringe when I hear people say that it was all Lincoln's aggression and that he was a tyrant and so on.
But I'm going to suggest we don't go there plskthx
Oh and back on track to the thread I just learned RP's biggest sugardaddy is on the Bilderberger steering committee.
That is not cool
I heard that rumor today also. But it's kinda silly that Thiel would give away millions and millions and millions to all of these Anti-NWO, Anti-Governement-at-all causes and be a bilderberger, so I'm just not buying it without some solid photo or video evidence.
it's not too hard to establish buzzy Steering Committee | Bilderberg Meetings
And just so you and everyone else reading this is clear, 'Anti-NWO' and 'Anti-Government-at-all-causes' are pretty much diametrically opposite positions. The new world order crowd has been trying to weaken national sovereignty and destroy the strength of national governments for hundreds of years. That's what they do.
The new world order crowd is not a bunch of government officials. Look at the steering committee. It's finance, industry, and education/think tanks running the show.
anti-nwo = anti-finance oligarchy and anti-corporatism, not anti-government
David Rockefeller said:
David Rockefeller said:
It may not be a stretch to say that Ron Paul and David Rockefeller would see eye to eye on many political and economic issues.
It's ironic that many conspiracy theorists are atheists because they are incredibly similar to religious zealots in just about every way.
It's much easier to believe that the world is controlled by powerful forces beyond your control and behind the magic curtain than to accept that it might just be a series of objectively meaningless events that take their context from the subjective positions of the people observing them.
If you want to put God behind that curtain, working the dials, that's up to you.
If you want to put the illuminati behind that curtain, working the dials, that's up to you.
I don't sleep with the light on, and I don't need to believe in some overarching master plan to make my days easier.
Ron Paul 2012.
It's much easier to believe that the world is controlled by powerful forces beyond your control and behind the magic curtain than to accept that it might just be a series of objectively meaningless events that take their context from the subjective positions of the people observing them.
If you want to put God behind that curtain, working the dials, that's up to you.
If you want to put the illuminati behind that curtain, working the dials, that's up to you.
I don't sleep with the light on, and I don't need to believe in some overarching master plan to make my days easier.
Ron Paul 2012.
Bravo, I guess I should have checked there. Oops.
Now I'm going to have to rethink my position on the Bilderberg group. Thiel's ideals and the classic bilderberg ideals seems completely unaligned.
Sounds like a planned facade to me, in fact... Like a "Distraction" group has been created to lead everyone away from the real issue they're up to.
Would you mind explaining to everyone how anti-corporatism and anti-government fit on the same side of the fence???
Corporatism REQUIRES a government to control... Without a government, the corporatists would have no more power than they would in a free market.
I've resisted using the word/acronym "NWO" for years now because it doesn't sound like there needs to be such a group of collaborators to exist in order to explain the current world's situation.
However lately, whenever I read about subjects like the Petrodollar or other proven conspiracy fact that shape world events and laws, I hear it also described as NWO so I have recently loosened the definition for NWO in my vernacular/mind to mean "All of that government conspiracy stuff; whichever is really happening."
Would you mind telling us which flavor of the NWO you are ascribing to? Please tell me it doesn't have anything to do with Templars or masons, illuminati, Tom Hanks, or any hocus pocus shit like that...
Here's an interesting thought for you: Ever since the dawn of humans forming social structures, probably while we were still up in the trees, humans have needed answers about common things like where the sun comes from, where you go when you die, yadda yadda yadda... Religion has ALWAYS been a part of humanity.
Therefore Atheism IS conspiracy theory... It's just harder to prove it a 'conspiracy fact' than other real conspiracies.
Atheists, when talking to other atheists about their atheism, are by default discussing the conspiracy that exists among deists. They believe that this conspiracy exists to keep the truth away from mankind, to even control the masses to do the bidding of the few, such as the clergy.
True or not, this is the very definition of conspiracy. What else can one conclude but the fact that all atheists have tons of experience at being conspiracy theorists?
Me too. However the fact that you said all of this in response to a short conversation about the Bilderberg group would seem to mean that you don't feel that there is any conspiracy going on among them. Am I right?
They are most definitely a force to be reckoned with; but of course one would have to be a fool to say he knows how much of the world around us they have shaped in the last 60 years of their existence. I don't lose any sleep at all thinking about what they are up to but you have to admit; when someone like Ben Bernake joins up and then we immediately go into a global depression, there may be a cause to raise eyebrows a bit.
Yeah yeah, I'm not going to be the one on here defending any Bilderberg theories... But look at it this way: For 60 years a large number of the very most powerful men in the world have been meeting in private annually or more often and won't discuss the details of their meetings with the public. This is all fact.
If they had been working on some huge charity project or even a for-profit idea, there wouldn't be room to question all of the secrecy and need for all of their power.
Using Occham's razor again, wouldn't it be more likely that they're up to SOMETHING there than it is they are just hanging out and drinking some beers together at this great expense?
So whatever it is that all of these government people from multiple nations are up to, I just can't believe that it is to get rid of the US government like MSTeacher implied. If that were the case they probably wouldn't invite so many Americans, amirite?
Not sure about that - around here there seems to be plenty of Americans that hate their country.
It's juicy stuff to think about for sure .. the reality is likely you get ticket to ride after your bank account hits 9 figures. I'm sure there's plenty of collusion that happens behind closed doors but it's probably more about stature and influence than anything else
Same thing with DC ... but Occam would probably prefer to blame ignorance over sabotage & neglect. So do I, sleep better that way.