See other All is Vanity Articles
Title: Get Ready for a Major, Major Disappointment (Ron Paul's Built-In Loss)
Source:
Meself
URL Source: [None]
Published: Dec 24, 2007
Author: Me, Me, Me
Post Date: 2007-12-24 10:19:48 by a vast rightwing conspirator
Keywords: None
Views: 7869
Comments: 264
Merry Xmas everyone and may your grandest wishes come true, for as long as they don't come into conflict with my own :). I haven't done a vanity in a long, long, long time but I felt that it's important to discuss the reality of where RP is currently heading. Disclaimer: I stand for just about everything RP stands for. 'Just about' stands for his continuing membership in the stupid, evil, dangerous GOP party. Now, on the topic of Ron Paul. I just watched a clip of him on the Tim Russert show where RP re-stated in the most forceful way that he has no intention whatsoever to run for US Prez outside of the GOP reservation. The inescapable conclusion, therefore, is that RP is really running for the GOP nomination and, of course, he is NOT going to get it. He is not even going to be a close third or fourth. In the end, you will find RP trailing Huckabee, McCain, Thompson, Giuliani and just about everyone else who stands for Bush, War and the fat State way because this is what the GOP membership is standing for these days. I am fully aware of the 'hijacking' theory. Its exponents believe that, somehow, the RP activists are going to show up all 100% of them to vote in primaries and everyone else's supporters are going to stay home and we will see RP winning state after state after state. This is, of course, nonsense. Reality is coming on Jan 3, I believe, and Jan 2 will be the last time you are going to hear about the hijacking theory. Then, I heard someone here stating that 'the 2 parties' are nothing but tools for whomever is seeking the presidency to get the presidency. This, my friends, is as naive as it gets. The parties are Mafia-like organizations whose aim is to seek, get and exercise political power for the benefit of the inner circles who own them and they as much a 'free' tool for the people the parties put forward for the voters to vote on as the Mafia is a tool for the Mafia bosses. The inner circle has no use for RP, he does not support the type of 'leadership' they are paying for. Now, RP is going to lose. He took millions of dollars from supporters who refused to accept that he can NOT win the US presidency under the stinky and filthy flag of the GOP. He was asked repeatedly whether he would consider running as an independent, OPPOSING the 2 monstrous political Mafias and, every time he answered the question, the answer was a strong 'NO'. THE FUTURE: the next US Prez is going to be Hillary, O'Bama, Giuliani, Romney or, maybe, Huckabee. Ron Paul will win ZERO primaries/caucuses and, if he is true to his words, he will get back to delivering babies and representing his Texas district. I suspect that RP is going to be very much at peace with himself but, what are his supporters going to feel about it? What are they going to do? They supported a campaign for the US presidency that was built from the ground up to lose the race - and they refused to see it because they liked the excitement. Are they going to be sad? Angry? What would be the consequences of RP's campaign? The main consequence that I see is that of legitimizing the 2-party system. RP is a saint among politicians. He says and does all the right things and, yet, he insists in staying inside the GOP party and he retreats when the GOP, as predicted and as expected, deals him a humiliating defeat in his attempt to represent the political Cosa Nostra - because he is not a made made and he is not from the families. However, staying as an 'unmade' member of the organization, he adds credibility to it. It would be something close to Jesus joining the Pharisees and seeking Caiafa's job. I will be watching with interest how the RP fantasy gets itself crushed by the inevitable political reality. Just you all keep in mind that, while 'the media' and 'the corrupt politicians' can be blamed for RP's inability to win the GOP nomination, the main problem is RP's seeking the GOP nomination instead of running for the US presidency and seeking the support of the people, not the nod of the GOP party bosses.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-223) not displayed.
.
.
.
#224. To: richard9151 (#222)
Some of it I knew, so I'll admit to speed reading through those parts. The court cases will take me another go around or two when my eyes aren't crossed from exhaustion. I wasn't familiar with what you posted earlier about how the district states were created and how they overlaid the original states, but now I understand it. Sneaky fatherless sons, all of 'em.
Many many people in this forum have given much of their time and support for the ad itself to promote a good man. An accusation of immorality Did avrwc say that Ron Paul supporters are immoral? If he did. I missed it. Here's the only reference to morality that I saw him make and that was directed not towards supporters, but rather to Ron Paul's choice to run as a republican which he sees as lending legitimacy to the 2 party anti-people fraud: "Of course it is relevant. The goals do not justify the means. It's Morality 101." I didn't address that because that is avrwc's opinion. Also, it's impossible for me to read every post on 4um much less respond to them. I'm sure you understand that I can't be held responsible for what every member posts especially when I encourage free speech and my policy as far as moderating is pretty much a hands off one. Anyway, I don't wish to beat this to death or to perpetuate the dissention. I just wanted to make my position clear on that issue.
What?! What??! Beat what to death?! What dissention?!! There have only been 1,244 views in this thread and 225 posts!! I don figure but what we is only gettin started!!
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Who could forget a name like Squeaky..........yikes....what a bunch of losers.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
How right you are. I will never forget, or forgive, the non-sense I was taught in the government schools about the so-called 'founding fathers.' And, esp. about his highness, ol George hisself. And how much searching I had to do before I finally began to catch on and stopped looking for 'the problem' in 1933 -- 1929 -- 1912 -- 1861 -- I just kept going farther and farther back, and every time I though, ah ha! THIS IS IT! Nope. Had to go all the way back to the father of the country to finally get it. What a disappointment! And not just him; his friends as well, cause he sure never did it all hisself. Just goes to show; to the victors, the spoils, and to the winners, well, they get to write the history books.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
richard... Why not write your view of "actual" history as correctly perceived by you. I think it would be interesting and I might even buy one.
You sign what paper with the state--if it isn't state owned land you've purchased or are buying from them? FWIW, you don't HAVE TO record a land purchase. It is in your best interest to do so. Clouded titles can get to be an expensive proposition.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
You could say that I have started. Check out 210 in this thread, and you can read the beginning.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
richard... I do hope you do not plan on retiring on the book sale proceeds?
I know about that website. It was not me who wrote: "These have been carefully passed along and are still in force, as illustrated by the railroads not paying any property tax on such land nor on any improvements that have been built on the land." thereby giving the impression that railroads do not pay property taxes.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
(Sigh.) Rowdee, that is the point, isn't it. If you do not have to record a land purchase, something should tell you that so doing is for another purpose. If you were REQUIRED to record a land purchase, then it would not be a VOLUTARY action. And to do that VOLUNTARY recording, YOU MUST SIGN A CONTRACT to complete the recording. That is the only recording of a public document that a signing of a contract is required. Before all of this 'property tax' non-sense started, people had ABSTRACTs, and there were no clouded titles, cause every action taken with that land, back to when it was first sold, was of record in that abstract. And if there was an error in that abstract, whoever prepared it was responsible. Errors were very, very rare. Much rarer than they are today. BUT, when the money system was changed in America, and credit became the 'money' of the realm, no banks would lend on property that they could not reposse. That is when everything started to change; title insurance was the biggest part of the scam; making sure people 'thought' they were getting a good deal. You may try this site; http://landrights.com/ They have a pretty good handle on what is going on. I do not thing that they have all of the answers, but they have a LOT of good info. So what was the problem?
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
LOL!! Not hardly!! If I was going to do that, I would not deal in hard facts; I would deal in illusion as it is SO MUCH easier to sell!
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Gee.... who could it have been then? ;) any property tax on such land I admit, I should have added as follows; any property tax on such land grant land On occasion.... my typing outproduces my intent/thought/thinking!
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
richard.. Just maybe you are trying to sell personal hokum and not hard facts.
I am trying to find out what 'contract with the state' you think a property owner is signing? What is it called? Quit the condescending bullshit and talk like a real man instead of a conceited asshole who thinks he has a long on intelligence. Perhaps its in the way you word things.....but then, it seems as though this is how I've always found your character.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
Have you ever registered a piece of land? If you have, then you signed a contract to do so. What the paper is called varies from state to state, and at times, within the state. It depends on what system of land law you have in your area. In some, the presumption is that the property tax attaches automatically, recorded or not and you must file an excemption to be excluded. In others, it is the actual act of recording that attaches the tax. Now, I do not have my books on property tax here; they are packed away, and I find no reason to go dig them out to give you a short course in land tax law. To give you some simple idea of what the differences are, try here; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Register United States of America In the USA, land registration is not required. Instead, there are laws that are commonly referred to as "recording acts." Each state in the USA has a different recording act. Generally speaking, however, recording acts come in three flavors, "race statutes," "notice statutes," and "race/notice statutes." Race Statute - Whoever records first wins. Race statutes are extremely rare because most people agree that it is unfair to protect a person who had actual notice of a prior conveyance. Currently North Carolina is the only state that employs this method. Notice Statute - A subsequent purchaser for value wins if, at the time of conveyance, that subsequent purchaser had no actual or constructive notice of the prior conveyance. In short, a subsequent bona fide purchaser (BFP) wins. Race/Notice Statute - A subsequent purchaser for value wins if: (1) at the time of conveyance, that subsequent purchaser had no actual or constructive notice of the prior conveyance and (2) the subsequent purchaser records before the prior purchaser. In short, subsequent BFP's win only if they record before the prior purchaser. Even though recording acts in the USA do not require recordation, they do create a strong incentive for recordation. At a minimum, recordation creates constructive notice to any subsequent purchasers that a prior conveyance occurred and therefore protects the prior purchaser in the event of a subsequent conveyance.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
And thank God for that. Keep up the good work!
Maybe... but I always... ALWAYS -- pre-release anything that I have written and ask for correction. The last paper, the one listed in 210; There is no Constitution; it is a carefully crafted illusion, was out being read for about 6 months before I updated and declared it ready for distribution. No one could substaniate a factual error in the paper. And I do not just send to the public at large; it was posted to a couple of really, really sharp legal research groups. But who knows, maybe it is hokem. I mean, after all, we can easily see that America is doing just fine and nothing is wrong, right?
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
I have recorded land ownership in several ways. In more than one state. I'm trying to understand what it is you are trying to tell folks. I've not signed anything bringing the state into the picture. All my land record dealings have been through county agencies, and at that, the county is not involved as a participant in the matter, other than the registrar or some clerk making notations that the document was recorded on page such and such of document such and such in such and such a book. I've witnessed friends dealing with a clouded title issue that wound up involving numerous families, so I'm rather interested in learning how if they had just not signed some 'paper' with the state that all would be well and hunky dory, with hugs and kisses be tossed hither and yon. Alas, I guess that is for another day, too..... Regards
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
Case closed .... shut down the thread. Thanks for clarity, wakeup.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
There are many liars so I read that a lot. However, no one that states that is willing to put their money where there mouth is. That is, give 25 to 1 odds and if it is certain then the odds don't matter. Put up $100,000 or your house as collateral in Nevada where gambling is legal and I will put up $4,000 and a third party can hold the money and/or the deed to your house. I will not hold my breath.
This website can probably answer your questions.
"WE" are not pleased with your opinion. Which "we" was Franklin referring to? We, the founders, or "WE" the representatives of the Royal Crown of England? He did go to London to negotiate with the Royal Crown and bartered away the new country's sovereignty in exchange for a little financial assistance for the new government, ya know. They didn't just give that assistance without receiving something in return. Have you never wondered what that something was? And to which "you" was he referring? The "you" as unembarrased landholders of the allegedly breakaway republic, or "you" as in petitioners to the new federal government under the authority of London's financiers? Language can be tricky.
That would be me. Thanks. Then, I heard someone here stating that 'the 2 parties' are nothing but tools for whomever is seeking the presidency to get the presidency. That would be me too. Thanks again! Taking the R nomination is also a great way to eliminate a bunch of other candidates prior to the gen election. I think it amusing that you claim to know more about 3rd party politics than someone who actually ran as the Libertarian pres candidate 20 years ago. I don't claim to know with any certainty what will happen with RP during the primaries, which is what separates you and me. But if Ron does place first or second in NH, it will be interesting to see if you will admit being wrong or if you'll apply some spin on the results like Mr. No-Spin-Zone man himself. I believe that you did support these theories on other threads but you must be aware that there are others who promote such tactics and express their hope that they may succeed. I remember reading a number of articles at the Lew Rockwell site from people suggesting that RP 'could' hijack the GOP nomination. I wrote to them, expressing some doubts, and their replies indicated that they were basing their predictions mostly on wishful thinking. It is true that I never ran for any officially public office, ever. I grew up in a Communist paradise and my most intense interaction with 'politics' was when I could not have my 'Masters' because I refused to formally join the Communist party - I decided then to do what was right and live with the consequences and sleep well at night. My subsequent instigation of non-violent and 'leaderless' student protests puzzled and frightened the Communist authorities to such degree, they had myself and a number of friends quickly stripped of our citizenship and practically pushed us through the door of the US Embassy with the implied threat that we were going to have no future if we didn't take the opportunity to get out of there - (the fall from paradise?). That experience made me very skeptical of politics, politicians and all forms of collectivism. But... yes... I shared this because, while I was growing up inside that Communist paradise, there were plenty of published novels and movies, promoting 'the good Commie theory' - that theory was stating that the one good communist, playing by the communist rules alone, could change the communist system because communism was inherently good and it was only bad communists that made it the evil reality that it was. Of course, that was all BS, communism could not be changed from the inside and the communists at the top were evil people because communism was a vehicle or a conduct for evil to be introduced in other people's lives. However, the system 'allowing' for the expression of such theory, mainly via literature and movies, strengthened the system because it gave people some home and it encouraged them to keep 'playing by the rules' and supported the fantasy that communism was a good and sound system that produced evil outcomes by the accident of bad and corrupt people a the top only. The theory that 'a good man' such as Ron Paul could infiltrate a genuinely and structurally evil system (the GOP party and the 2-party abomination) and reform them from the inside is naive and all it does is strengthen and legitimize the system by advancing the illusion that the system is legitimate and reformable. And, yes, I did not do politics but I do pay some attention to what is going on around me. I don't know who can be more objective: a player inside the system or an observer. Could RP win NH? I don't think so. I sincerely hope that he gets the GOP nomination if this is the path he wishes to take but the odds of that happening are so infinitesimal, we can say with high confidence that it will not happen. Will I admit of being wrong, if RP wins NH? Sure I will. Again, I don't agree that the goals justify the means. I will be wrong if RP wins NH because I am stating that it would be unlikely for him to do so. I also recall "the system's" response to Buchanan's going after the GOP nomination. Buchanan, arguably much more a GOP than RP can ever be was, indeed, able to surprise the establishment and win ONE primary. Some of us recall the eventual outcome of that quest. So, let me state or restate this: I do not believe that RP can win even ONE primary or caucus. If he did, of course, I would be proven wrong. And, if he did, I am willing to bet all my not-mortgaged possessions that RP will NOT receive the GOP nomination. If he did, I would be proven wrong but the odds are that I would be doubling my wealth if anyone took the bet. If RP won the GOP nomination, I would be happy for him even though, and this is my personal belief, I can't see how this state and the current globalist world order can survive, with or without RP as the US prez. I wish it was possible to destroy the 2 parties and regenerate our society peacefully and painlessly but, I am afraid, the society as a whole is on a fast, nearly impossible to stop, stampede downhill and the cliff is not too far. Meanwhile, I am encouraging my boys to date Amish girls - they are neighbors - because I am giving them the best chance to survive the upcoming historical discontinuity.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
That's it, in a nutshell. And your advice to your sons is, I believe, very wise.
I wasn't aware of your background in actively working against the communist party. That's helpful in understanding where you're coming from. Thank you. There's a big, big difference between the GOP in the USA and the communist party in whichever country you came from, and that is that the GOP is not synonymous with the government. The GOP cannot do the things the communists could do because they have no direct power. The GOP cannot pass laws, cannot pass budgets, cannot enforce laws, exile people or throw people in jail. That is something the government can do, but not the GOP. All the GOP does in the USA, as does any political party including 3rd parties is create a political platform which is nothing more than a wish list of what they'd like to see the government do. Party candidates are not obligated to adhere to the party platform at all and field candidates that hopefully adhere to the platform. But the choice of who wins a nomination is not controlled by party heads as you doubtless experienced with the commies. That instead is up to mass voting by the people at large and it happens regularly when a non-traditional candidate causes controversy by running a campaign that is contrary to the platform. The R platform itself, if it broadcast, would likely not even be recognized by most R's. I heard the Texas R platform discussed and the candidate most matching it is none other than Ron Paul himself. Given that the only thing the R party really has the authority to do is field a candidate for office, there is no harm in a principled man like Ron Paul to seek it's nomination. The communist party where you came from WAS the government. That's not the case here. It's an important difference.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
We do have '2 parties of government' in this country which, of course, amount with one powerful political elite, hiding behind the 2-party illusion. I did not claim that the Communists and the US 2-party machines are the same. Communism was basically the exercise of power through violence and fear or, in the later, decadent phase, through the memory of past violence and fear. I can't remember ONE person living under Communism unaware of the fear-based foundation of Communism. The 2-party system in the US rules through illusion and subtle manipulation of minds. One illusion is the the illusion of 'choice' by offering the consumer the ability to select one of usually 2 strikingly similar 'candidates', both fully committed to essentially the same agenda.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
The Official MSM Guide To Attacking Ron Paul
No argument here that the 2 party system locks out all others unfairly. But that's exactly why Ron Paul should stay in the R party. The system IS unfair and Ron Paul's ability to be a true constitutionalist while being a serious contender in the R primaries is invaluable. He's using the system against itself.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
How many times have we seen that in play? Too many I wager.
Mikhail Gorbachev was able to come to power in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Excellent. One other is to 'repeat the big lie over enough till it is considered truth'.
Good piece.
Mr. O'Leary, an elderly Irish gentleman, was in an accident and sustained extensive damage to his foot. After examination in the emergency room, the doctor informed Mr. O'Leary that the only chance to save his foot was to try a new, experimental procedure that involved encasing his foot in brass. Whereupon Mr. O'Leary cried out in a loud voice, "no, no---don't braze me toe!".
Sadly, reality will bite in 2 days and, then, it will bite again next Tuesday. And it will keep biting and biting and biting. A the act of a freedom-loving man seeking the nomination of the party of Bush-enablers is, if not an abomination in a religious sense, then certainly a foolish and naive waste of resources. I would call it an irresponsible and nearly-irreversible waste of resources. I hope that the the vast majority of the hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of RP supporters are going to be intelligent enough to abandon all hope that freedom, decency and individualism via one of these 2 political machines of control and domination can ever be accomplished. While RP's message is wholesome and good, the means he and his campaign are using are wicked and, in the end, very little good will come out of it. The GOP and the Demo propagandists are going to exploit RP's campaign failure for decades to come to 'illustrate' how 'the people' had the opportunity to vote for someone supporting freedom and individualism and how 'the people' soundly rejected such extreme ideas. The 2 parties claim to legitimacy will be stronger, following the crushing RP's defeat at the hands of the corrupt GOP machine.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
I haven't read the whole thread, so please accept my apologies if you've already explained this, but what do you mean by 'wicked'? The GOP and the Demo propagandists are going to exploit RP's campaign failure for decades to come to 'illustrate' how 'the people' had the opportunity to vote for someone supporting freedom and individualism and how 'the people' soundly rejected such extreme ideas. On the other hand, some of RP's genuine supporters may be disabused of some illusions. That's got to be a good thing, right?
Mr. O'Leary, an elderly Irish gentleman, was in an accident and sustained extensive damage to his foot. After examination in the emergency room, the doctor informed Mr. O'Leary that the only chance to save his foot was to try a new, experimental procedure that involved encasing his foot in brass. Whereupon Mr. O'Leary cried out in a loud voice, "no, no---don't braze me toe!".
It's possible that 'wicked' is too strong a word. It is possible that RP was genuinely surprised and, possibly, overwhelmed by the amount of support he is receiving. I doubt that he expected to win the US presidency. He probably viewed himself as the Kuchinich (sp?) of the GOP, using the nomination campaign and the debates as a means of educating the consumers on the facts of life. If that was the goal then, clearly, staying with the GOP so that he can be in the debates, was the right thing to do. If all RP wants is to spread some message, then this would be a good strategy. The problem I see is that he DOES have a realistic chance, albeit a small one, to be elected as the US prez but as an independent, not as a GOP. I believe that it is his moral duty not to let his supporters down. He is not getting millions of dollars so that he can do a couple of 2-minute sound bites on the cable channels. People give him money because they want him to win. He should outline a winning strategy or tell everyone that he does not have one. Getting 8% or 10% in New Hampshire is not a victory. He can't win the presidency by occasionally beating Fred Thompson or McCain for the 4th place. Absent a stated winning strategy from RP's campaign, some of his supporters produced the fantasy of RP's being able to hijack to GOP nomination process. I don't know why they do this, because all rational people with some connection with reality should know that this will not happen. RP is going to lose Iowa tomorrow, New Hampshire next Tuesday, North Carolina, Florida and all the 'super Tuesday states'. Reality is here and many people are going to have to adjust to it within the next few weeks.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
I believe that it is his moral duty not to let his supporters down. At some point -- preferably before this(!) -- I prefer to assume people are grown-ups and responsible for themselves. People give him money because they want him to win. Not necessarily. It's like efficient market theory. Somebody sells their stock. Does it follow they expect the stock to fall? Could be the information incorporated in the sale is that the seller needs to raise bail money for his no-goodnik brudda. Otherwise, I agree.
Mr. O'Leary, an elderly Irish gentleman, was in an accident and sustained extensive damage to his foot. After examination in the emergency room, the doctor informed Mr. O'Leary that the only chance to save his foot was to try a new, experimental procedure that involved encasing his foot in brass. Whereupon Mr. O'Leary cried out in a loud voice, "no, no---don't braze me toe!".
Duuuuuuude. This is a righteous tagline.
I see this more like his supporters being the shareholders who invested in RP's success. I doubt that most of them expect to get 'education' or a failed presidential run as the fair return on their investment. I bet that most of those who gave money to RP's campaign wanted him to win the presidency and, I bet, most of them, could not care less about the GOP party.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
P.S. - look at the top of this thread, which started some time before the Iowa caucuses. Lots of contributors were criticizing me for failing to believe that RP can win the presidency as a GOP. Now... surprise, surprise, some of the contributors are talking about the educational value of RP's campaign. This is not very honest. In fact, it's funny.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
There are some nice people in the world who aren't very honest with themselves. And hope dies hard.
Mr. O'Leary, an elderly Irish gentleman, was in an accident and sustained extensive damage to his foot. After examination in the emergency room, the doctor informed Mr. O'Leary that the only chance to save his foot was to try a new, experimental procedure that involved encasing his foot in brass. Whereupon Mr. O'Leary cried out in a loud voice, "no, no---don't braze me toe!".
That was fast! Thank you. Usually takes people a couple of months to absorb it.... if they do.
#225. To: Peppa, a vast rightwing conspirator (#170)
(Edited)
I didn't attribute the immoral sentiment to you, but you rather did not acknowledge it's flat appraisal by Vast to those that support RP. Rather it was allowed to stand as a form of truth, and many posters seemed to support that.
#226. To: christine (#225)
I don't wish to beat this to death or to perpetuate the dissention.
#227. To: kiki (#185)
#228. To: RidinShotgun (#224)
Sneaky fatherless sons, all of 'em.
#229. To: richard9151 (#228)
they get to write the history books.
#230. To: richard9151 (#197)
If you go down to record the title to a piece of property that you just bought, again, of public record, you must first sign a paper.
#231. To: Cynicom (#229)
Why not write your view of "actual" history as correctly perceived by you.
#232. To: richard9151 (#231)
#233. To: richard9151 (#200)
#234. To: rowdee (#230)
you don't HAVE TO record a land purchase.
#235. To: Cynicom (#232)
I do hope you do not plan on retiring on the book sale proceeds?
#236. To: rowdee (#233)
(Edited)
"These have been carefully passed along and are still in force, as illustrated by the railroads not paying any property tax on such land nor on any improvements that have been built on the land." thereby giving the impression that railroads do not pay property taxes.
#237. To: richard9151 (#235)
#238. To: richard9151 (#234)
#239. To: rowdee (#238)
I am trying to find out what 'contract with the state' you think a property owner is signing?
#240. To: christine (#225)
I encourage free speech and my policy as far as moderating is pretty much a hands off one.
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#241. To: Cynicom (#237)
Just maybe you are trying to sell personal hokum and not hard facts.
#242. To: richard9151 (#239)
#243. To: wakeup (#174)
It was ole' Ben Franklin that remarked, "We have given you a Republic... if you can keep it." We did not and here we be.
#244. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
RP is going to lose.
#245. To: rowdee (#242)
I have recorded land ownership in several ways. In more than one state. I'm trying to understand what it is you are trying to tell folks. I've not signed anything bringing the state into the picture.
#246. To: iconoclast (#243)
It was ole' Ben Franklin that remarked, "We have given you a Republic... if you can keep it." We did not and here we be. Case closed .... shut down the thread.
#247. To: Pinguinite (#218)
I am fully aware of the 'hijacking' theory. Its exponents believe that, somehow, the RP activists are going to show up all 100% of them to vote in primaries and everyone else's supporters are going to stay home and we will see RP winning state after state after state.
#248. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#247)
The theory that 'a good man' such as Ron Paul could infiltrate a genuinely and structurally evil system (the GOP party and the 2-party abomination) and reform them from the inside is naive and all it does is strengthen and legitimize the system by advancing the illusion that the system is legitimate and reformable.
#249. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#247)
#250. To: Pinguinite (#249)
#251. To: farmfriend (#240)
#252. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#250)
#253. To: TwentyTwelve (#251)
The Official MSM Guide To Attacking Ron Paul
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#254. To: Pinguinite (#249)
#255. To: TwentyTwelve (#251)
The Official MSM Guide To Attacking Ron Paul
#256. To: a vast rightwing conspirator, IndieTX (#0)
#257. To: Tauzero (#256)
#258. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#257)
While RP's message is wholesome and good, the means he and his campaign are using are wicked and, in the end, very little good will come out of it.
#259. To: Tauzero (#258)
(Edited)
#260. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#259)
#261. To: Tauzero (#260)
Whereupon Mr. O'Leary cried out in a loud voice, "no, no---don't braze me toe!".
#262. To: Tauzero (#260)
#263. To: Tauzero (#260)
#264. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#263)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest