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: 7675
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
#1. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
Very well done. A+
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition "Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." © IndieTx We live in irrational times. Me and my kids are currently spending most of our free time playing Oblivion - kept me up until 3:30 last night. I find the quests for Daedric armor, our work for at Mages Guild and the impossible reality of the Shivering Isles a lot more meaningful and even more relevant than the current political charades.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Sitting on the sidelines is a great American pastime. That is the major reason this country is in dire straights. Sitting on the sidelines and carping is an arrogant affront that is unneeded and unwanted. If a person in this day and age still believes there is a two party system, then such a view by sideliners is understandable. During the Revolutionary War, 70% of the Colonists sat on the sidelines, most of us know the rest.
That says it all.
Please deal with the REALITY that RP is seeking THE GOP NOMINATION for the US presidency. The GOP has as much to do with THE PEOPLE as the Mafia has to do with the business of construction and garbage collection. And, yes, ANYTHING that helps legitimize the 2-party system or any of the 2 2-parties is, in the end, more support for the anti-people 2-party system. It should be avoided.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Somehow it appears to me that you seem to have a lock on "reality". Does it occur to you that just perhaps there are people here that did not fall off the political turnip truck yesterday??? The object is to give Paul a run for the presidency, what path he takes is not relevant. Others have tried the third party way and failed. If Paul filed as a Communist, it would not matter. Somehow that seems to escape you and adds to your illusion that there are two parties. There is only ONE party and Paul is using it, is that so difficult to understand???
First of all, he left some wiggle room about running as an independent. But the point is, the GOP was hijacked by crooks and we're trying to take it back. For that matter, the entire country was hijacked and is being run by foreign interests. Ron Paul's Boston Tea Party resulted in: The average donation was $102; we had 58,407 individual contributors, of whom an astounding 24,915 were first-time donors. The campaign is growing rapidly, with supporters getting involved in blimps and ads outside the official campaign. Ron Paul has by far more meetup groups than any other candidate. And Ron Paul has generated more interest than any other: In November, Compete says voters spent 252,000 hours looking at Ron Paul's pages, up 50% month-over-month and almost twice as much attention as his next rival, up-and-comer Mike Huckabee. Paul commanded 53% of the total "FaceTime" spent on Republican candidates, and 87% of the attention to all candidates from both parties on Meetup.com. The closest "FaceTime" Democrat, meanwhile, was Barack Obama: voters spent about 91,000 hours looking him up online in November. The majority of Americans want us out of Iraq, and Ron Paul is the only candidate who represents those Americans (besides Kucinich who doesn't have much support). Therefore, Ron Paul is the best candidate to win in Nov '08 against the any liberal candidate. Almost all liberals want us out of Iraq.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today! Of course it is relevant. The goals do not justify the means. It's Morality 101. As far as the path the RP is taking, justified or not, it is NOT going to bring him even close to the US presidency.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
It's true. The majority of American do want us out Iraq 'NOW'. Not a majority or GOPs though.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
There are liberals voting for Ron Paul because of this, even though they have Kucinich, because as they put it "Paul has the momentum". I've met a few.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today! As far as the path the RP is taking, justified or not, it is NOT going to bring him even close to the US presidency. Morality 101??? By that standard you are in fact justifying yourself for doing NOTHING. In fact with your own epistle you are proud of doing nothing, claiming to have some superior enlightenment as to what is real and what is not. Your own words condemn you for doing nothing but ever further by posting here trying to undermine the will of those that are willing to speak up and be heard, not stand on the sidelines willing to accept the fate that awaits you. Smother yourself in your own world but spare us here the presence of one more American that is a talker and not a doer.
Vast is living in his own make believe world where the two party system exists.
In two weeks; we are going to have a much better understanding of just how much support Ron Paul has...barring massive voter fraud, of course. :-)
Get Ready for a Major, Major Disappointment While you are welcome to your opinion..................... Here is a different opinion and some reality for you............... Some of us, possibly millions of us, believe in the message presented by Dr. Paul, and are willing to put our money and our votes where our mouths are. It is understandable that there are many who lack the intelligence and the common sense to consider any approach that does not follow the "divide and conquer" two-party system that has given us 20 years, (an entire generation) of the worst-case scenario-lesser of two evils "leadership" in Washington, it is also unacceptable to continue to live on our knees and to blame "the other party" and "the enemy." Your position, in the opinion of millions of Americans who want control of government returned to "We the people" is full of shit. Here is some reality - there is a growing number of Americans who have been taken for granted by the gop for the past 7 years who will refuse to vote for any candidate EXCEPT Dr. Ron Paul. Perhaps your camp should try to grasp the concept of smaller government and sensible foreign policy that would return government to the capable hands of the American people. Best wishes! Merry Christmas!
Stop foreign welfare NOW!
You give that point too much of the wrong weight. Ron Paul cannot even once say that he will bolt and run as a Third Party because in the instant he does that he is totally out of contention for the Republican Nomination and becomes deligitimized with his principles and platform marginalized. If he is seen as having had the nomination stolen from him then instantly a Third Party Candidacy becomes viable, and I am sure he is well aware of this as he is not a stupid man. At no point have I ever assumed or asserted in my support that Ron Paul was a lock or that he would be allowed to secure the nomination regardless of support. If the elites can't steal the election outright they will kill him. He knows this and has said it - even if you weren't listening and the MSM will not repeat it. The reality is that we are in a desperate fight to avoid all out Civil War, Massive Bloodshed, and enslavement. Have no doubt that the goal of the elites, the Bankers and their Psychiatrists, is achieve total domination and then carry out their eugenics program of murdering 80% of humanity to cull out the "rebellious" and "useless eaters" (as Kissinger termed us). This is not some political horse race. We are in a fight for our lives not just our liberty. Preaching defeatism is pointless. While we must acknowledge the realities there is no where to run - either we win or we die or become slaves. Those are options, and I can't paint it much starker than that.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Even many liberals are beginning to understand it is a hoax. Not ONE Democrat candidate for President is for getting US out of Iraq now, yet the overwhelming majority of their constituents want exactly that.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today! I suspect vast is a Hillary supporter. Now that is morality for you.
I have a friend whom I would term an ultra-liberal socialist leaning individual. Even she is aware of Ron Paul and while she will not commit - I suspect she may end up supporting Ron Paul as well - he is now the Standard Bearer of the Lamp of Liberty whether he wished it or not.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
I've heard a few laughing about registering as Republicans for the first (and probably only) time in their lives, in order to vote for Dr. Paul. You might remind your friend there are deadlines to do this (it varies by state).
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today! Thank you for the reminder. I need to change my registration from Libertarian to Republicrat as well.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
You may want to check and see if your state has 'open' or 'closed' primaries - luckily, TX is of the open persuasion, so anyone can vote for whom they choose without any more paperwork hassle.
You have no idea how paranoid you sound.
You're the paranoid one. You're afraid that people might be misleading you with "facts."
What facts are you talking about?
here's a list of states and whether their primaries are open or closed: http://www.votewomenshealth.org/primaries.htm
As I said, you're truly the paranoid one. Better stop reading 4UM. These dangerous ideas might corrupt your mind.
That one looks out dated, here are current dates.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today! You make some very good points and I know that your opinions on this are based on history and the fact that for decades we've not had legitimate elections. Having said that, I think that what is happening now with Ron Paul's candidacy has never happened before. We can make some comparisons to the Perot bid and the Buchanan bid, but back then, there was not the awakening of near the number of Americans to the fraud and the corrupt government that there is now. Nor has there has been the amount of grassroots activism like now. Who knows what we the people can accomplish? But, certainly, you can't argue that what we need is a critical mass. Our strength can only be in numbers so what does it hurt to try? Most, if not all of us realize that this is it. This is our last chance--our last hope. I doubt that few will experience a "major major disappointment" as I believe we're all pretty much grounded in reality. Still, none of us can say with certainty what is going to happen.
People should be working from the bottom up, not top down. Start with running for dog-catcher and taking over the administration of a small village. Decentralization is what his followers want, anyway.
Fortune favors the prepared mind. A zombie, however, prefers it raw.
thanks Robin! I discovered there that a Dr. Hugh Cort is on the republican ballot, in alabama anyway. he lives near me, but I've never heard of him. here's his platform:
lol! I'm so sorry you live anywhere near someone who supports this. Come to think of it, we all probably do ;p
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today! Anyone who isn't paranoid isn't paying attention. Either that or they have a vested interest in perpetuating the scams and holding on to the status quo.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. bingo
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today! Political reality? I think not. The political reality is Ron Paul is not only going to win, he is going to crush the competition. He is the only candidate to have over 1200 meetup groups around the nation. And the only candidate who is getting the majority of his campaign money from small private donations, and the only Republican one that will raise 19 million+ in the 4th quarter. Ron Paul has won all but one debate poll. He has won the majority of state straw polls. That my friend is the political reality. The ONLY way Ron Paul can be beat now by anyone, Republican or Democrat, is to fix the election.
God is always good!
Just amazing how that works, isn't it?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Merry Christmas to all. Thanks for the joke page. It is so nice to see everyone of you hiliary clinton supporters out to entertain us Paul supporters. Being Christmas eve with all the stress, it is so refreshing and relaxing to read this thread and see the humor in it. Iwrote down all your names and made a floppy of this thread so that if I get to feeling down and stressed out, I may be able to download the floppy for a pickerupper should that happen. In the mean time, I'll be pondering why you all claim Ron Paul is doing and saying the right things, and yet you all seem to be pleased to make the call that hiliary will clean Dr. Paul's clock. If I can think of a good joke later on I will post it to this joke thread. Oh, and a Happy New Year too!! Lac
your opinion?
What this thread is exposing is the reality of Botism, RP-style. Like in a football show, some fans want their side to win so much, they are suspending all judgment and, generally, they agree that 'everything goes' if it's going to give them a win. Many of W's voters in 2000 came from people who were so much disgusted of Clinton's 'leadership' they helped put W ahead of others because, they claimed 'he could win' and, while they did so, they refused to see W's obvious flaws such as incompetence, lack of experience, mental retardation and his membership in a oligarchy family vastly more powerful that Clinton's. In the case of RP, he does stand, heads an shoulders, above everyone else in the run at this time. I was fascinated by RP's career long before he decided to run for US prez. in 2007. He is a good man. He is not a good orator but the force of the ideas he is discussing with average oratoric skills is great enough to make him noticed. What puzzles me to no end is his insistence in staying a GOP and his promise not to 'betray' the GOPs and 'go independent'. I have no doubt that he is smart enough to know that he is not going to get the GOP nomination. He won't because, as we all know, even though the RP-bots refuse to let reality disturb them, the GOP, as big a tent as it may be, is standing now fair and square for big war, big state, big borrowing and Big Brother. RP-bots will not be able to hijack the nomination from under the noses of the GOP establishment so his current run as a GOP, as I explained already, is only going to strengthen the 2-party system. RP will help the establishment carry on the illusion that the 2-party system offers the voters 'choice'. Now, regarding Perot's and Buchanan's runs for the US presidency. Perot, as an indie, could have won but something was done to make him sabotage his own campaign. At the height of his popularity he withdrew citing some lame and kookish reason (the Bush campaign was going to mess up his daughter wedding). When he returned, he was damaged goods already and all he did was help carry on the illusion of 'choice' and reinforce the concept of the 2-party system inevitability. Buchanan one, where he ran as a GOP insurgent, attempting to hijack the nomination from the establishment, he won a primary then the GOP's crushed him. His run reinforced the notion that the 2-parties do offer 'choice' and that anyone that the establishment doesn't like should be called 'an anti-semite' or 'an extremist'. RP is doing much worse amongst the GOP today than Buchanan did during his first run as a GOP. Buchanan two, where he was an indie, there were very high expectations and he stood a chance to run well against the 2-party opponents. Instead of discussing his vision and exposing the 2-party system for what it was, Buchanan and his campaign spend their energy trying to get Ross Perot's money - the Reform Party's bank account- and hijack control of his party. It was a stupid thing and it offered the media an excuse to ridicule Buchanan, the idea of 'a third party' and to help reinforce the notion of the 2-party 'mainstream' monopoly. RP two - and I have now idea what he did as a libertarian running for prez back in the 80's - stands maybe a 10% chance to win the presidency if he quits the GOP now and presents himself as the right choice with Hillary and Giuliani as his pathetic and so very similar opponents. That chances diminishes to next to nothing if he participates in the GOP nomination process and loses, which is as close to certain as the likelihood of another sunrise tomorrow. Now, on the botish reactions on this thread. I see that a couple of them, out of the blue, accuse me of being a 'Hillary supporter', which is super-funny at some level. A couple are also blaming me for 'staying on the sidelines'. These reactions are very typical of the level of irrationality the frustration with the 2-parties and the overwhelming desire to follow some leader. The 'Hillary' accusation, I will not dignify it with an answer. As for 'staying on the sidelines' - if they actually read my post - they would have noticed that I was curious about the RP supporters reaction to the reality of RP winning zero GOP state contests. I am still curious and it will be something interesting to watch and study. Right now, they are talking about registering GOP. What are they going to do when the GOP primary and caucus voters show them that the GOP is not 'their' party and it shouldn't be RP's party either? I am also curious of what will RP do. My prediction: not much. But... let's see.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
vast... Dont be cowardly, name names... Until you realize there is ONE party in this political system, you have nothing to offer anyone here on 4um. You found it somehow to be necessary to write an epistle with your own opinions. That was your mistake. Posting comments of opinions is welcomed but posting an epistle that would have us believe that somehow we are all operating in the dark and only vast is aware of the political system in this country was arrogance first class. You have exposed yourself as one that is in fact a sideliner by your own words, not mine, just read what you have written. There are "talkers" and there are "doers" when any action is needed in any circumstance.
Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster, was on C-SPAN this morning. I was only half-listening, but I think he said that Ron Paul is now polling in the double digits, at 10%, nationwide. He also said people should be taking Ron Paul's candidacy a lot more seriously.
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.
Paul would be the choice of the people if elected, and that cannot be allowed. Kristol in calling Paul a crackpot has started the offensive that MSM will use to marginalize if not destroy Paul. Americans must not elect a person of their choice. If I recall correctly, Kristol even said Paul hated America or something to that effect. That from a man that evaded the draft while Paul served.
Vast says he "stands maybe a 10% chance to win the presidency if he quits the GOP". Whatever shall we do if he loses in all 3 parties. I'm beside myself with curiosity. I'm curious. What will I do. I do not have a plan for my curiosity. I will have to think about this more. Focus on a plan. I wonder if other people have plans. I'm curious. I think I will write a lot about my curiosity. I was curious before other elections, I think. But I didn't take the time to write it down. I should've though, so I could remember to note what happened after I found out the result. I'm sure I heard it on TV. Not the radio. I'm really stretching my memory at this point, but I am certain I was no longer curious. I treated it like, well, news. I generally don't have a plan for other news I hear. I'm not curious about it enough I guess. I wonder if other people are curious about it. I mean, I like to know what the news is, and if it's bad, I hope someone else will fix it. I only have time to listen to part of it anyway.
Pep... Good morning. Vast even added a touch of immorality to Pauls bid for the presidency. If one wants to look at morality they would learn that the entire system is corrupt, immoral if you will. However it is the only system there is, we either work within the corruption or we stay on the sidelines and whine.
Good morning. Vast even added a touch of immorality to Pauls bid for the presidency. If one wants to look at morality they would learn that the entire system is corrupt, immoral if you will. However it is the only system their is, we either work within the corruption or we stay on the sidelines and whine. Good Morning Cyni. Yes, I caught that yesterday as well. I hang on every word. Without such brilliance, I really don't know how we can continue anything. Someone has a screw loose. I have never seen such a ridiculous obession play out like this. Maybe, it's best for Obi Wan Kenobe there to stay on the curb.
I have yet to see a comparable political situation. Ron Paul has support from every quarter of society and the unique position of having a 20 year track record of excellence. He also has the internet communications network supplying more energy, contributing more dollars and converts than the competition. Kennedy had the Catholic Church network with its publications, sermons, organizations, Bingo and millions of energetic supporters when he made his run, and I saw that as a child. There were posters everywhere, people in the streets talking about it, people attending conferences and meetings etc., similar to what appears to be happening with Ron Paul. Ron Paul is hated by his own party. He will have more problem getting nominated than he would have getting elected. I think the secret to his success lies in the nomination process. Get him nominated and he will be elected. That's my 2 cents worth !
"We are much beholden to Machiavelli and others, that write what men do, and not what they ought to do." --- Francis Bacon
I have been preaching that for a long time but to no avail. Glad you share the view.
What can we do to help get him nominated?
Personally I think the people have to get in the streets everywhere across the country so much so that their numbers are obvious and cannot be disputed. The people of other countries have benefited greatly from getting in the street, my view is that's the only message able to prevail against the embedded oligarchy. The young people, college students and others will make or break this fight for freedom. It looks like they see the importance of it and many have joined the fight. The oppressive and invasive nature of current government policy hasn't gone unnoticed by them.
"We are much beholden to Machiavelli and others, that write what men do, and not what they ought to do." --- Francis Bacon
Glad you asked. Money is always the prime need but it alone will not accomplish the job. It takes thinking and doing, big and small, by many people, such as the money bombs and the blimp and the 4um ad. Waiting for someone else to do it has gotten this country into this mess.
Let me add that I have not seen a better opportunity to tear down or at least significantly impede the progress of the ruling war mongers in my lifetime.
"We are much beholden to Machiavelli and others, that write what men do, and not what they ought to do." --- Francis Bacon
I've been thinking that there's a half-life to tyranny. Without drastic measures to enforce it, the mechanisms used lose their effect. This generation of American youth coming up has experienced brainwashing like none other before it. Perhaps they are waking up to the reasons behind that.
The MSM will not get the message out, and advertisements can only do so much. Some people will google Ron Paul and learn what he stands for, but many more will have to be reached one-on-one. Discuss him with family, friends, co-workers, associates. Show how he has credible arguments for eliminating the income tax, People will start to look and think for themselves.
The U.S. Constitution is no impediment to our form of government.--PJ O'Rourke
In that vein, I asked a friend if he could support Ron Paul. His answer... "I am a democrat".
Not every approach will be successful. But discussions -- particularly issue-driven -- can plant seeds. Perhaps you could ask your friend if they believe Hillary or Obama will end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home.
The U.S. Constitution is no impediment to our form of government.--PJ O'Rourke
One cannot over-emphasize the importance of this election. The vulchers from both parties are hovering above the corpse of our country, and can't wait to claim a mandate to imprison us and our descendants in a feudal system ... forever !
"We are much beholden to Machiavelli and others, that write what men do, and not what they ought to do." --- Francis Bacon
Democrats are going to have to face the facts: do they want to war to end, or do they want Fed-funded welfare. They can have welfare a little longer under Ron Paul, but he'll lead us away from both war and socialism. I wish I could teach them what I know: a big federal welfare state requires an empire to pay for its excesses. They can't be unlinked.
He thinks the war is fine and that Bush is doing a good job there, but, everything else Bush does is bad so we need a democrat President. Sounds like a dummy?? Not at all. He has full faith in the two party system. On the other hand I have friends that are pubs and scoff at Paul and are supporting McLame and Il Rude.
The overwhelming advantage to genuine Constitutional Government is that it isn't biased in favor of anyone or any group. I think Ron Paul already enjoys a good deal of "democrat" support. This country hasn't had an open, honest leader in a hundred years or more. It's time we did.
"We are much beholden to Machiavelli and others, that write what men do, and not what they ought to do." --- Francis Bacon
Join a Ron Paul Meetup Group.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today! I am so olde that I remember when the Federal Government was a bunch of squirrels that lived in a swamp somewhere down South in MD and VA. And then FDR and the fellow travelers found out the way to eternal power was via the US Treasury. Having lived that part of history, it is indeed difficult to get the younger people to understand that his monster of a government has not always been so. We lived just fine without it.
Your musings about squirrels reminded me of Pogo's famous quote. "We have met the enemy, and he is us."
You would have loved Rutherford B. Hayes. No, I was not olde enough to vote for him. Hayes promised two things, he would serve one term and go away and there would be no corruption. He delivered on both. His wife promised no booze in the Whitehouse and she delivered on that.
How can we broadcast that meme? I think it's correct, it's honest, and it's why we need Ron Paul the most. On our own and in our respective "groups" (whatever those are from moment to moment) we would do so much better on our own. When "groups" get control, we all lose. The individual has rights given by the Creator. The rest are dealing with the devil when they put their collective controls on our government.
I am a Green and support Dr. Paul. Sounds like your neighbor doesn't understand that under the sheep skin of most Democratic leaders is a 'Republicrat' wolf. There is no real two party system anymore in Bush's America where the Constitution is treated like a "God damn piece of paper."
I understand you labeling yourself a green. I have been so sick of labels that I am just an American, nothing else. I use to be a conservative but that has fallen into disgrace so I am just an olde bald headed American. Everything else no longer matters to me.
This country hasn't had an open, honest leader in a hundred years or more. It's time we did. Justin Raimondo agrees. The sheer breadth of the anti-Paul Popular Front is an astonishing sight to behold, extending all the way from avowed Nazis to radical Zionists, from Noam Chomsky to Glenn Beck. Both Fox News and the International Socialist Organization are out for Paul's scalp – and you can tell an awful lot about people by their enemies. What this tells me about Ron Paul is that he's just what many people on both sides of the political spectrum have been waiting and hoping for. Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today! The thing I personally think is imperative as a country consisting of free peoples is to comprehend and obtain an understanding that the collective cannot vote themselves a superior position to that of the individual with respect to fundamental rights.
"We are much beholden to Machiavelli and others, that write what men do, and not what they ought to do." --- Francis Bacon
No shit, when you see those that should be for him instead villifying him at every opportunity ... the hypocrisy becomes nauseating. (Glenn Beck immediately comes to mind notwithstanding his pretty fair interview).
"We are much beholden to Machiavelli and others, that write what men do, and not what they ought to do." --- Francis Bacon
hehehe..teasin' ya...i do believe that's the first time i've ever seen you misspell a word!
Communist coward Kristol called Paul a crackpot and said he hated everything American.
Heh, I am registered as a Pacific Green. But I consider myself an American first. I was a Democrat for a long time. I even was a Precinct Committee person where I vote and always worked deeply in the local party structure to get Democrats elected. Clinton cured me of that, I learned through him the lie the two party system is. My actual registration denotes the fact I am very committed to the environment and opposed to how society on a fundamental level destroys and damages it foolishly and to their detriment. I wouldn't read my registration as being the same thing as that affiliation of your neighbor to his precious Democratic Party. It like the Republican party has become facades for corporate fascism.
oops ... vultures ... That's funny ... must've been excited !
"We are much beholden to Machiavelli and others, that write what men do, and not what they ought to do." --- Francis Bacon
Sorry, friend, but I don't take these things personally and I make no effort to remember who said what about me because online identities matter little. If you said something and you were wrong, I don't really care. Some day you will be aware of your wrongness or... not. It doesn't mean a thing to me. Now, on this particular situation, reality is going to hit you in the face in about 2 weeks so, enjoy your fantasy while it lasts. By the way, it's funny that you state the 'one-party' situation in this country, something about which I agree but, illogically, you advocate that RP stays confined within the one-party system and play by the rules that are written so that they take him nowhere. Oh, well. Good luck and enjoy the Xmas.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
According to President Rutherford Hayes, who issued no formally designated “executive orders”: The executive power is large because not defined in the Constitution. The real test has never come, because the Presidents have down to the present been conservative, or what might be called conscientious men, and have kept within limited range. And there is an unwritten law of usage that has come to regulate an average administration. But if a Napoleon ever became President, he could make the executive almost what he wished to make it. The war power of President Lincoln went to lengths which could scarcely be surpassed in despotic principle. The U.S. Constitution is no impediment to our form of government.--PJ O'Rourke
From Washington on, men did not desire to be president for life. Had Lincoln lived there might have been a different turn of events. Hayes has been my hero for a long time. A man that serves one term and then walks away has my greatest respect. Few men ever display a spurning of power, indeed we have seen the opposite embodied in FDR.
The original post analysis is correct. But I would encourage a look at the RP phenomenon from a different perspective. The only reason we have the Bill of Rights at all is because of those RP type supporters from 1787 who took one look at the new constitution and said "that's well and good for all you rich bastards, but what about the freedoms from an oppressive government we fought for?" That small contingent of loud mouthed activists is the ONLY reason we have a Bill of Rights. Throughout our history, the movements on the fringe do affect the main body of politics. Traditionally, this happens as third party issues typically promoted by a figure running for president under said banner. Even though the third parties fail in getting a president, they impact the body politic and influence the direction of the country. Therefore I ask that people see what is really taking place with the RP phenomenon. Millions of Americans are moved by the things RP is saying. They are rallying around his banner that our constitution matters, that it's not just a piece of paper, it's how we define who we are as a people. This core group of people are proving that they will be heard, that they are savvy at getting media exposure, and that they can and will spend vast sums of money to get the message out there. The people who have been inspired by RP are a force inside the political landscape, and I will not be surprised to see many of them appearing again as issue advocates down the road. Let's put it this way: Without the Ron Paul candidacy, there would be no discussion in this presidential election about the limitations of government under the constitution. And as long as he has money and support, he's in the primaries all the way to the convention, unlike all but a couple of other Republican candidates. As guys like Tancredo and Hunter fall away, the Ron Paul message will become more important. Winning is not the point. Being heard is the point.
The people who have been inspired by RP are a force inside the political landscape, and I will not be surprised to see many of them appearing again as issue advocates down the road Well said. Regarding Paul winning or losing, 'duty is mine, consequences are God's'. We can do what our conscience dictates as to promoting a decent man and his righteous message of freedom. Let the chips fall where they may. Even if the masses embraced Ron Paul's message, which in murika 2007 is debatable, I'm still concerned about the voting machines. Also, i think paul makes a good point- we need more of the Ron Paul folks to make a run for congress in their own districts! take the country back one district at a time. It will be interesting to see where this momentum leads after the elections. It is also great to see the mainstream press being forced to discuss issues such as the fed reserve, pre-emptive undeclared wars and defense of individual liberties. nearly unheard of in recent years. Whatever the outcome, Paul's campaign has been a great boost to libertarianism., and brought these issues into the public's minds eye. I salute Ron Paul for making the run.
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" They are. So why the push to change to 3rd party.
Are you related to Palo Verde?
God is always good!
They might not do that. But we can encourage them to do that and if that fails, we can do something for them in exchange for their vote for Ron Paul. I know it sucks to have to buy votes, but we need Ron Paul as President now really bad and the other candidates have no problem whatsoever buying votes. It may already be too late to save this nation, but if it isn't, then Ron Paul must be elected now or it will be too late for sure.
God is always good!
Are you?
Do you know Palo Verde?
God is always good!
Do you?
Yeah I know her in cyberspace, not personally. Your post I replied to kind of reminded me of some of her posts.
God is always good!
Okay.
I am in general agreement with your entire post. What I would like to explore is the current political reality, with RP running to a certain defeat in his quest for the GOP nomination and a couple of other possible scenarios. Let's just outlines the pro/cons, advantages/disadvantages to individual freedom. - RP running for GOP nomination: it legitimizes the 2-party system, it legitimizes the GOP as a viable political vehicle for carrying the banner of freedom, it legitimizes a Giuliani or some other enemy of freedom as a 'winner fair and square', it enforces the impression that 'the consumers' do have 'a choice.' On the positive side, SOME good ideas do get SOME exposure but, what I am seeing recently, a lot of the talk, and, sadly, even talk coming from RP himself and his campaign is talk about the insanely huge (LOL) amounts of moneys the campaign is able to raise. Once RP is defeated, nothing happens. The media is likely to stop talking about him shortly after the first 2-3 nomination contests. - RP not running at all (a world without RP): an election cycle of 'malaise'. As 'the 2 parties' designate their uninspiring, repulsive, Tweedledee/Dumb nominees, their is increased awareness of the reality behind the 2-party democracy facade. The lack of choice is exposed and, to some extent, even discussed in the 'mainstream media'. There is increased talk of the need of 'a third party'. Currently, the parties activists/propagandists keep telling the masses that this is 'the most important election since... (enter some date in the past)' and they are unchallenged. Unless the phoniness of these statements is exposed, the consumers will have no choice but believe it and feel themselves proud for being free, democratic and 'kept safe' by their leaders. - RP running as an independent: could he win if he ran against Hillary/Rudy and he ran the perfect campaign? Maybe he could if he could get 34% of the votes and they were properly distributed. Like I said, I give him about 10% odds to winning which, by the way, is way better than the 0% he has now. I also tend to agree that, if he won, his days in office might not be too many. It's important that he takes a freedom leaning VP running mate rather than do that stupid 'ticket balancing' thing and bring along a Cheney-like ogre. If he does not win, at least we have an election with a choice and the choice will be clearly not for 'one of the three' but it will be a "freedom vs. the establishment provided Faustian offering of 'safety'". If RP went indie, expect Bloomberg to jump in so that he can pose as 'the center' and give the impression that Hillary would be the 'legitimate left', Rudy playing 'the mainstream right' and RP could be painted as 'the extremist'. Regardless of whether he wins or not, RP's message will be heard through November 2008 and, hopefully, beyond 2008, rather than stop being heard by the end of January, 2008.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Of course it is relevant. The goals do not justify the means. It's Morality 101. Running as a Republican is immoral? The party may be run by thugs now, but I see no immorality in trying to change for the better. Besides, he's been elected as a Republican several times. It's only logical that he run as a Republican.
someone(s) erred, big time, with that.
Same here in AL. The only signs I've seen anywhere are Ron Paul signs. I could definitely happen here, especially if people realize he has the best shot at beating Hillary.
very well said...my hope is that his candidacy is a building towards the awareness of the critical mass needed for revolution.
I suspect vast does not realize that Pauls perceived "immorality" would also include all of the other republican candidates that have held office under the republican banner. It is very difficult for me to accept that in this day of readily available information that there are intelligent people that seem to believe there are two "moral" parties in this political system. To attach some degree of "immorality" to one candidate out of more than a dozen for attempting to become president via the only system available seems to be rather disingenuous.
The only non-Paul sticker I've seen was on an old Malibu creeping along piloted by a q-tip head supporting Edwards. To me, the power behind Dr.Paul's campaign is that he is giving us something to vote for, instead of something to be against.
The executive power is large because not defined in the Constitution. someone(s) erred, big time, with that. It was not an err, christine. To understand, study the establishment of the First Bank of the United States, and Washington's.... as in President Washington's, role in the charade. Or, as I have posted before, study the order made by President Washington that established what has come to be known as the Federal Zone, which overlays the states of the union. Or, read the book, The CONstitution That Never Was, but, well, perhaps you get the picture.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
George Washington's choice for secretary of the treasury was our first clue.
i can see the logic in that. i'm still hoping RP will make the decision to go independent if/when he doesn't get the GOP nomination.
They barely even try to hide it any more.
i do, richard. in fact, i started to write in my post to Deacon that it was purposeful. Lysander Spooner: The Constitution of No Authority The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living eighty years ago. And it can be supposed to have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years. And the Constitution, so far as it was their contract, died with them. They had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they could bind their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. That is to say, the instrument does not purport to be an agreement between any body but "the people" then existing; nor does it, either expressly or impliedly, assert any right, power, or disposition, on their part, to bind anybody but themselves. Let us see. Its language is: We, the people of the United States (that is, the people then existing in the United States), in order to form a more perfect union, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. It is plain, in the first place, that this language, as an agreement, purports to be only what it at most really was, viz., a contract between the people then existing; and, of necessity, binding, as a contract, only upon those then existing. In the second place, the language neither expresses nor implies that they had any intention or desire, nor that they imagined they had any right or power, to bind their "posterity" to live under it. It does not say that their "posterity" will, shall, or must live under it. It only says, in effect, that their hopes and motives in adopting it were that it might prove useful to their posterity, as well as to themselves, by promoting their union, safety, tranquility, liberty, etc. Suppose an agreement were entered into, in this form: We, the people of Boston, agree to maintain a fort on Governor's Island, to protect ourselves and our posterity against invasion. This agreement, as an agreement, would clearly bind nobody but the people then existing. Secondly, it would assert no right, power, or disposition, on their part, to compel their "posterity" to maintain such a fort. It would only indicate that the supposed welfare of their posterity was one of the motives that induced the original parties to enter into the agreement. When a man says he is building a house for himself and his posterity, he does not mean to be understood as saying that he has any thought of binding them, nor is it to be inferred that he is so foolish as to imagine that he has any right or power to bind them, to live in it. So far as they are concerned, he only means to be understood as saying that his hopes and motives, in building it, are that they, or at least some of them, may find it for their happiness to live in it. So when a man says he is planting a tree for himself and his posterity, he does not mean to be understood as saying that he has any thought of compelling them, nor is it to be inferred that he is such a simpleton as to imagine that he has any right or power to compel them, to eat the fruit. So far as they are concerned, he only means to say that his hopes and motives, in planting the tree, are that its fruit may be agreeable to them. So it was with those who originally adopted the Constitution. Whatever may have been their personal intentions, the legal meaning of their language, so far as their "posterity" was concerned, simply was, that their hopes and motives, in entering into the agreement, were that it might prove useful and acceptable to their posterity; that it might promote their union, safety, tranquility, and welfare; and that it might tend "to secure to them the blessings of liberty." The language does not assert nor at all imply, any right, power, or disposition, on the part of the original parties to the agreement, to compel their "posterity" to live under it. If they had intended to bind their posterity to live under it, they should have said that their object was, not "to secure to them the blessings of liberty," but to make slaves of them; for if their "posterity" are bound to live under it, they are nothing less than the slaves of their foolish, tyrannical, and dead grandfathers. It cannot be said that the Constitution formed "the people of the United States," for all time, into a corporation. It does not speak of "the people" as a corporation, but as individuals. A corporation does not describe itself as "we," nor as "people," nor as "ourselves." Nor does a corporation, in legal language, have any "posterity." It supposes itself to have, and speaks of itself as having, perpetual existence, as a single individuality. Moreover, no body of men, existing at any one time, have the power to create a perpetual corporation. A corporation can become practically perpetual only by the voluntary accession of new members, as the old ones die off. But for this voluntary accession of new members, the corporation necessarily dies with the death of those who originally composed it. Legally speaking, therefore, there is, in the Constitution, nothing that professes or attempts to bind the "posterity" of those who established it. If, then, those who established the Constitution, had no power to bind, and did not attempt to bind, their posterity, the question arises, whether their posterity have bound themselves. If they have done so, they can have done so in only one or both of these two ways, viz., by voting, and paying taxes. ---snip---
The Constitution spells out the limits on federal responsibilities well enough for me. Our problems lie not in the words of the Constitution but in the fact that it has become irrelevant. The "my bad" goes on the American sheeple, not the founders.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
At first, I was very skeptical about his chances. I "bought some hope" (contributed) anyway and hoped for the best. Over the past few weeks, in the face of volley after volley from the MSM, I have seen Paul not discredited, but strengthened. They are inadverdently providing him with the exposure he was denied through normal channels. Sure the "scientific" polls show him to be trailing significantly, but these polls only "scientifically" measure what they are designed to measure. They aren't designed to show grassroots support. There is real excitement about this campaign and it is showing some real legs. I'm volunteering to hang door tags and I've never spent one second of my time for a political candidate. This can really happen.
LOL! Why would an agent of the Rochschilds make anyone think something smelly was going on?! I am still amazed at the countless numbers of people who believe that getting back to the Constitution will solve everything, when what we have in America is the fruit OF the Constitution! No one seems to be able/willing to deal with that.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Excellent, christine. Spooner is one of the few attorneys that ever lived who deserves real respect. The real point of what he said, however, is contracts. You enter into such by the actions mentioned above, and today, in many, many other ways as well. It is amazing to me, and well illustrates where we have gone, when opening a bank account is a contract to pay taxes! Oh well, we live and learn... well, some of us do anyway.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
I doubt if many Americans share that opinion.
I can remember back to the days when I still thought getting back to the constitution would do the trick, so its kind of hard to fault people who haven't gotten over it yet. Of course that doesn't stop me from wanting to shake them until all the feel-good myths fall right out of their heads and they can finally see the tapeworm they've been harboring between their ears.
Really? How many Americans no longer vote? Perhaps the namber is much larger than you suspect, my friend. In the groups that I have corresponded with over the last 10 years, there are, litterally, tens of thousands who know where the problems come/came from, and the vast majority of them do not/have not voted in some time. At least, since the connections by and between the Clintons and Bushs became so obvious. And those are just the ones that I was involved with. Stands to reason I was aware of only a very small percentage of the total.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Very well said. I understand. Esp. the part about wanting to shake them so hard that.....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Whew! Glad I got that out of my system today!
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Same here. The MSM fails to realize that Paulites are real people, acting independently and with their local groups, un-paid by the campaign, with only the desire to return some Hope for America with Freedom, Peace, and Prosperity for all.
That's what Teddy Roosevelt did in 1912. And he came close to winning the election that year. The two major parties are in a lot more discredit now than they were then. So a third-party run is much more promising today.
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.
You are right about the millions of people who have given up voting, but it irritates the daylights out of me that so many of them don't understand the whole thing was a set-up right from the beginning and that they continue to blame all the "failures" of constitutional law on themselves. It is absolutely stunning to me that anyone could actually still believe that regular everyday Americans ever had any control over this country's insane policies.
A fatalistic approach to any situation will bring you just that. Extending your logic, as a result of our Constitution, we have two choices, a dictatorship or a revolution. Myself I prefer another revolution, others may make their own decisions.
Reading your comment, Cynicom, caused the following thought to cross my mind: How long has it been that there has only been one (l) third party (a socialist) elected to Congress (first to the House and now over to the Senate) or some other 'party'===we've had more queers elected than third party candidates.I am, of course, referring to Bernie Sanders, the Socialist, versus Barney Fwank, and Jim Kolbe, to name two. I will put a caveat here, "in our lifetime" when discussing this.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
The two major parties are in a lot more discredit now than they were then. So a third-party run is much more promising today. Let me see if I understand this correctly, please, and bear with me, cause I am slow to learn......... OK? Wilson, a little known teacher... OK, so he was president of a university.... told you I was slow... Is not electable. Most everyone agrees with that in 1911-12. Not a smowball's chance in hell of beating the incumbant. Who is popular. BUT...... along comes Roosevelt.. er, excuse me, Rosenvelt, whose cousin will one day be elected as a crat-part-of-the-Republicrats. Elected as president, I should add (see-- SLOW!) Starts a one-year-flash-in-the-pan party known as the Bull Moose. Incidently, using only BIG MONEY DONERS to finance his new 'party.' Umm, sounds just like a party.. of some kind or other. Splits the Republican party vote..... and presto chango!! The new president is..... (wiat for the drum roll!) ....... WILSON! Who was not electable. Course, Wilson had said something about supporting what the sitting president would not support... something about a Federal Reserve Act, or somthin...... Let me se.... how was it that Clinton got elected pres? And history repeatsrepeatsrepeatsrepeatsrepeatsrepeatsrepeatsrepeats endlessly and no one learns anything.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Don't do that. See number 111.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Your post is timely and important. The evidence is obvious in the response. Responses have come from several directions. And this will be my answer to them. First, the objection to RP running on the Plutocrat/Industrial Complex ticket. Dr. Paul may be politically unsophisticated, but he ain't stupid! How else would his message travel beyond the political junkies in cyberspace like ourselves? As to the "immorality" of it, that's just ridiculously purist to me. I'd liken it more to the "center fumble" or "hook-and-ladder" plays in football (we called it the "flea-flicker" in my day). Any "trick play" that takes advantage of a not-too-sharp opponent, short of rules violations is is fair and square. Second, the third party thing. There is plenty of time before that decision has to be made, the later the better as far as I'm concerned. Third party or no party my vote in Nov '08 is going to be for Dr. Paul. The sign in my front yard says "Hope for America". Actually, I like it better than the "Revolution" slogans which I believe are a little too sweeping in implication for a single election. The significance of RP's run is that a long delayed message is reaching the masses. The Boston Tea Party wasn't a huge sweeping turn back of British domination, but it certainly was a providential spark. If we can achieve just that then I will more elated than in any of my previous decades of political observation and participation. Finally, the defeatist undercurrent. Anyone who ever participated in competitive sport has experienced the role of underdog. Did any of you quit? Any not show up? I hope not, because if you did I must feel that you found the shame of surrender worse than the pain of defeat. Perhaps we just light the flame in the tower, then at least we will have opened the door to the possibility of our own jubilant Yorktown. So, fight the good fight, right up to and including election day '08 and beyond.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
Your sayin that the 2-party order needs to be strictly enforced or the Nation suffers because of look what happened when there was a 'third party' run (Wilson, Clinton)? This is very interesting but it's not very clear what Wilson's 2-party rival would have done or what a GHWB2 presidency would have been like. Is there a knowledge that shows how better America would have been absent the Bull Moose or Perot? I am askin because, I remember that GHWB threatened the Yugos with war over Kosovo, then Clinton Made war over Kosovo. Then, Clinton bombed Iraq and the W bombed Iraq and more. Now, both Clinton and Giuliani are promise to do the responsible thing in Iraq and send more Americans to the death as they slaughter the locals. None of them has anything to say about reducing the Welfare state. Also: Bush one, Clinton one, Bush two, Clinton two, Giuliani one - all Globalists and 'free traders'. So, being as slow as I am, what is the harm that a 'third party' challenge does?
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
In the nineteenth century, America was the freest country in the world, with an extremely limited federal government. That was under the same Constitution we have today (minus a few amendments), at a time when there had been less time to subject it to misintrepretation that grows upon itself over time.
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.
As, I believe, I noted in the post that started this thread, it was prompted by Ron Paul going on the Russert show doing the equivalent of swearing on his mother's grave that he will NOT do an Indie run.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Ron Paul in that interview deliberately left himself wiggle room to eventually mount a third-party run. I believe Teddy Roosevelt did precisely the same thing while running in the Republican primaries in 1912.
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.
I do believe there will be cautious (at least it should be cautious) attacks on Ron. But the attackers should keep in mind that there are many of the Silicon Valley types that are supporting the man. They can't have us peons thinking that these IT folks, who 'run' the service sector of our economy that affects everyones lives, are dumb and stupid and willing to blindly follow some loose cannonball. These Silicon Valley types add further credibility to Ron helping to deflect all the stupid 'kook' crap that would otherwise be swirling all around. The old $500 donation from some white supremist seems to be about the worst that I've seen...........and that's been deflected by the man as its going to be used for good purposes. Kristol is a pitiful POS.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
The shame of participating in a game knowing the fix was in before you suited up would be a lot worse than walking off the field with an attitude. Look around the field, for crying out loud, there's barely anything left to surrender. And one man isn't going to recover your losses, even if the owners allowed him to coach the team for a few years. Which, of course, they won't.
since i read Votescam: The Stealing of America in 2k, i have advocated (and i still believe it would work)that everyone stay home on election day--refuse to participate. if we all did that, they couldn't fake the numbers and continue to perpetuate the FRAUD of legitimate elections in this country. of course, i know that would never happen as there are too many who benefit economically from the system that is. so, to repeat, my hope is that RP's candidacy is a step in the process to a huge awakening to this fact.
I did not say that it does harm. But if not for the Bull Moose party, we would not have had the Federal Reserve Act in 1912. Later perhaps, but not then, and that would have prevented WWI as well. There has been a lot written about WWI never happening without the Federal Reserve Act being in place to finance it, as all of Europe was broke then. Mostly, it is about ignorance. As in the ignorance that has permitted a two pàrty system to be established in the first place. Not to mention the silliness about having Senators subject to a popular election, contrary to the Constitution, and then having the same people who cry about the Constitution being unaware of this bit of non-sense........... Talk about ignorance! And I say, welcome to America.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
I must agree with you Deacon. I know that it is physically impossible for Dr. Paul to visit with people one on one. That's a given............however, when I ran for office, given the size of the district I wanted to represent, and the fact that many people didn't want their space invaded by political wannabees or politicians, and trash bins were littered with mailing materials, I decided to try to call everyone on the phone. I worked out a short message which included an apology for taking up their time, a very brief who I was and l or two things I represented, asked if they had questions, and if not a question for just then, I said they could call me collect with any questions they had. The feedback from being contacted by a person was fantastic. And, I only lost the vote in the incumbent's home town by something like 40 votes! I'm not advocating that Ron do this, but his foot soldiers could. Everybody knows somebody. OR, go down to the county building and get a roster of voter registration in your area; look up the phone numbers, work out a 'message', and start calling. Tell the caller who you are, that you live on 14th Street, or whatever---that makes you 'one of them'. Asking if it is a convenient time for a very short comment, or apologizing for taking up their time is a very good idea as well because people don't like infringements on their time. This was a big deal when I worked phone banks for a statewide office election. We were to inquire if we could speak to them for a couple of minutes, or was it bad timing--whatever.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
That depended entirely on who you were at the time, as well as what you said and did that went against the conventional wisdom, not to mention the color of one's skin. Its not good to get too wrapped up in myths, however comforting they may sound.
Let's back this up a little. If you do not believe in legitimizing fraudulent election, by not participating in casting a vote, fine. Then why would you want to run an ad in a newspaper asking others to support RP (who apparently for some legitimizes the evil machine) and therefore going against your personal position on the value of voting in the first place? Is there time to cancel the ad? We certainly would not want to participate in promoting a complete fraud and sham. Edited to add: Doing such would violate MORALITY 101 set forth by vast.
The Federal Reserve Act of 1912 was a law voted in by the US Congress and signed by the Prez, not an Executive Order.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
You may need to do some more reading, my friend. The Federal Reserve Act was passed AFTER Congress went home for the Xmas holydays in 1912. There is some evidence that, as I recall, as few as 12 Senators passed it in the Senate, BUT, because the vote was not done as a roll call vote, it was simply noted as 'passed.' There was absolutely no way that it could have been voted in over a presidential veto, which is exactly what 'the other candidate' had sworn to do. You would do well to also note that this was done BEFORE the popular election of Senators was force-fed to America.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
That depended entirely on who you were at the time, as well as what you said and did that went against the conventional wisdom, not to mention the color of one's skin. Its not good to get too wrapped up in myths, however comforting they may sound. Very correct. It is also important to note here that, by the end of the noneteenth century, the Federal Zone that overlaid the states had been in effect for a hundred years, and America was just beginning to see the effect of that (outside of banking, that is.) The consolitadion of power was well underway, as shown by the robber barons of the late 1800s, and it would come to fruitation with the Federal Reserve Act of 1912, the popular election of Senators, and WWI. But the real exercise of this power was the Civil War and its aftermath. Would you care to discuss Reconstruction? Or, note perhaps, that Reconstruction has never been terminated? Not to mention that the Civil War has never been terminated, officially?
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
2)...their is increased awareness of the reality behind the 2-party democracy facade. The lack of choice is exposed and, to some extent, even discussed in the 'mainstream media'. There is increased talk of the need of 'a third party'. 3)...Maybe he could if he could get 34% of the votes and they were properly distributed....If he does not win, at least we have an election with a choice and the choice will be clearly not for 'one of the three' but it will be a "freedom vs. the establishment provided Faustian offering of 'safety'". ...Regardless of whether he wins or not, RP's message will be heard through November 2008 and, hopefully, beyond 2008, rather than stop being heard by the end of January, 2008. Regarding #1...imagine how it would be were he an independent: He would be getting virtually NO coverage at all. Debates? Do independents debate and does the MSM cover them? Does C-SPAN cover them? Besides.........MSM doesn't continue talking about 'losers'......where's all the Gilchrist comments? In a month I can ask about Tancredo comments the media covers. For that matter, how often does the MSM hang on every word uttered by Gary Hart? Michael Dukakis? Bob Dole? Regarding #2......they can talk about a third parpty til they're blue in the face........ask Perot, Harry Browne, Howard Phillips, Lyndon LaRouche, or any of the congresscowards on the Hill. Ain't gonna happen==would be an absolute fluke. BECAUSE it was demos and repukos that wrote the federal laws regarding campaigning and elections. You really do need to see some of the tapes of the committee hearings where the 'good ol boys' slap each other on the back and congratulate one another on the fine job they've done--as they are walking out of a meeting room where the table/cast of 3rd party advocates sit waiting for their turn to advise what needs to be changed. And finally, regarding #3.....Care to tell us how he could reach 34% of the voters? Since when do the 'presidential debates' which are Demo/Republo events, include the likes of him? If they're paying for the platform, they certainly wouldn't want to free ride anyone who could be a threat to the one-party system. Even the media would have excuses not to cover anything about him other than in passing. And if he doesn't win..........doncha just love feeling good, while the nation goes to hell in a handbasket? Again, how does his message get heard, if the medias don't cover him? Ron isn't dumb...........he's been in those sacred halls of Congress as they've voted in these damnable laws regarding elections. And if it isn't the feds laws, its the states laws---and they are generally guided/dictated by the two-headed one party system we have now. Crappy system, but you have to play with the cards that were dealt...to be considered viable. We can all sit and talk about eliminating the federal reserve, cleaning up and out the FBI and the CIA because we're up with it. Let the rank and file citizen hear that from someone running on an unknown 'ticket', with talking heads and media suggesting he's a kook, and see how much coffee you can buy from donations. Work to get the man elected. A vetoing president would be wonderful. Congress would either start cleaning up their act, or the national dais will show them to the collaborating crooks that they are.....maybe that is what it will take to get the rest of the sheeple to awaken from their rip vanwinkle slumber party.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
Pep, I still believe they're going to steal it from RP. I believe the PTB have already chosen their selection and I think that's Hillary. However, as I posted above to vast and as duckhunter, Paul Revere, and others posted, I think there's never been the grassroots support and awareness of the message of Liberty. For this reason, I have some hope that as the numbers grow (we need a critical mass ala V for Vendetta) if we-the-people are to have a chance of defeating the elites and taking our country back. This is our last hope and I don't want to sit on the sidelines and do nothing. I want to take part in the fight.
Well said. "The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
I've saved your little graphic. Too good not to.
Not to mention that the federal government owns all of the land the states occupy and always has. Outright. Take, for instance, the Louisiana Purchase, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and all the other usurpations. In none of the paperwork, including the CONstitution, is it ever said that the american people own or control one square inch of anything.
Vast is not one to let history get in his way of advancing an agenda.
Excellent point, which I overlooked. Where have you been by the way?! While I was getting 'nailed to the wall' in 4um for posting on the non-sense of the CONstitution?!!!!!????!!!!
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
LOL! Yeah, I HAVE noticed that!
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
I was probably getting nailed for the same thing somewhere else. But you do a damn fine job of getting un-nailed with your great responses, with or without backup. Keep telling it like it is ... even when it seems like no one is listening.
The Senate, IIRC, does NOT routinely use roll call voting. Much of what they do is 'passed by voice vote', which is not recorded. Its obvious there was hanky panky in play for this to happen........just as there was when clinton's coal grab in Utah was given coverage by the senate late at night. The Constitution gives each chamber of the Congress the ability to make their own rules for conducting their affairs. The Senate, as I recall, is rather loathe to make any changes to their 'grand OLD rules', but we all know that rules were meant to be broken.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
That doesn't match with your opinion of not voting. It doesn't match the words on this thread about RP continuing to legitimize an evil party. Either THOSE WORDS are wrong this time because RON is the candidate, and therefore should be taken back. Or, they are right, and I won't participate in something hipocritical and considered immoral. Ron Paul is trying the method best for change, and thats to do it from the inside. Anyone that can't see that, has an agenda contrary to the majority supporting RP. Being called immoral for supporting a good man in unacceptable and all are owed an apology. If millions upon millions show up for Paul, and the fraud goes down as expected, it will wake more people up and can't be spun. That's only my opinion, and so what if we think different here. But, the forum's name is on that ad, if the forum feels that Ron is an Immoral candidate and his supporters as well, then, perhaps the money should go directly to the campaign, and not advertise the Forum as something that supports what it does not. If RP changes parties, I'll vote for him no matter. I will not quibble about why, I will be voting for hope. To DO NOTHING ensures HIS LOSS, and ours. And to my mind, THAT is what is immoral. But people are entitled sit home, if only they would shut up then. I know all members of the forum did not participate in the ad and should not be held to any other members beliefs. If that ad runs, and people are directed here to the Forum because of the support for Ron Paul or not, the Forum is representing itself as a supporter. Posters here that want to demonize him, are not serving a helpful purpose to get him elected. Further, saying people should sit home, makes this whole idea nuts. So, where do we stand. Are his supporters immoral or not?
Where do land patents fit in this picture.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
In some bank's vault. Pull a few financial panics, talk people into signing up for mortgages and tell them they might own something someday. Putting your patent into a shredder would have the same result. And it was all done voluntarily, dontchaknow.
Included in that is entering into a trust by registering your land with the state, which is why you have to sign a contract to do so. With the state as trustee, well, you certainly have no rights in the land, or, you would not need a trustee. And then we do have the best example of an existing, 'old' land patent what is still enforced; the land patent issued to the original railroads when they were building across America. 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.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
This is not some political horse race. We are in a fight for our lives not just our liberty." Yep.
............ We now have six Ron Paul clips DVD's and Freedom to Fascism has a few Ron Paul clips. Also available is a newly "Edited" version of Zeitgeist. Part I is still removed but, now it starts with the JFK speech about Conspiracy, his assassination, the Federal Reserve then the 911 myth and it ends the same way as before. It is my most favorite of all time videos.
True enough.
............ We now have six Ron Paul clips DVD's and Freedom to Fascism has a few Ron Paul clips. Also available is a newly "Edited" version of Zeitgeist. Part I is still removed but, now it starts with the JFK speech about Conspiracy, his assassination, the Federal Reserve then the 911 myth and it ends the same way as before. It is my most favorite of all time videos.
Yes, absolutely true. But then the american people could never be described as careful. Offer them any old pig in a poke and as long as it comes with a lot of colorful pictures and too good to be true promises, they'll be knocking each other down to get theirs first.
And/or, "fix" Ron Paul. If he is removed, I'm gonna need more ammo. By the way, word is ammo is going up in price on the 1st. Buy a bunch this week. It is as good an investment as gold and silver, really. The day may come when we are bartering with all four basic metals: gold, silver, lead and brass. No kidding, buy some guns and ammo this week. Consider a re-loader. Make ammo yourself on the cheap. It's fun.
............ We now have six Ron Paul clips DVD's and Freedom to Fascism has a few Ron Paul clips. Also available is a newly "Edited" version of Zeitgeist. Part I is still removed but, now it starts with the JFK speech about Conspiracy, his assassination, the Federal Reserve then the 911 myth and it ends the same way as before. It is my most favorite of all time videos.
I'm not going to disagree with that, but remembering back to the run-up to the Iraq invasion, the Iraqis were stocking up on guns and ammo like mad. They're still getting those somehow, while their main shortages are things like clean water, utilities and food. There's a lesson in there somewhere.
Silence. I guess that answers that.
I already did that when Klinton made his banning threats. I agree we'll be bartering bullets for food.. they'll be that valuable some day. Many have guns; few have more than a box of ammo for it! Bullets, water, food, tobacco, booze...all very important barter items when the SHTF. BUt the most important is guns and ammo, for without those, you can not protect the others, and will soon find you and your family a recipient of the rioting hordes "Three R's": Rape, rap and robbery.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition "Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." © IndieTx I just learned that the Ammo Depot 903 527 6120 is having a sale at $3.50/round + shipping. They have no website and are located outside Caddo Mills, TX on IH 30 N.E. of Dallas. Mickey has superb deals on all sorts of goodies at his store.
Bullets, water, food, tobacco, booze...all very important barter items when the SHTF. BUt the most important is guns and ammo, for without those, you can not protect the others, and will soon find you and your family a recipient of the rioting hordes "Three R's": Rape, rap and robbery. I think I'll sit back and let others take care of me.
What are you talking about? What is your rationale? Do you agree of disagree? This criptic BS is getting tiresome.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition "Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." © IndieTx No, it's immoral to participate in the system. I'm going along with the best thinkers on the thread. What's cryptic about just saying it's up to someone else to take care of me. Others write epitsles to say as much.
Dude Ron Paul would have received no publicity and would probably be down around Ralph Nader-land in the polls if he weren't running for the GOP nomination. He wouldn't have received all the free exposure from the GOP debates, and the media would completely ignore him. Face it: the system is rigged against independent campaigns, especially at the national level. In theory, your independent run ideas sound good, but Ron Paul would be in a worse, not better, position had he not entered the GOP race. Now if he loses the nomination, I'm all for an independent run. The campaign will have benefited from all the free publicity from the GOP campaigning and primary season.
"The system" ["Das System"] was the phrase Hitler and the other Nazis used for the Weimar Republic that they wanted to get rid of.
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.
What few on this thread know is that I was using your own words against me on another thread against you on this one. ONly you would know the satire in it.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition "Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." © IndieTx Vast has accomplished what he set out to do.
True enough. Hi wakeup. I hope you and yours had a great Christmas.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Silence. sorry, i didn't answer you post haste. i had an appointment to go to. i obviously didn't make it clear to you that this had been my position in the past and that Ron Paul's candidacy has caused me to have a change of heart and to give it one last chance. as for calling RP supporters immoral, i never said anything of the sort as i believe quite the opposite is true. i don't know how you attributed that sentiment to me from anything i've posted on this thread.
He left room to wiggle. I watched the Meet The Press clip again. He is thinking it but, knows better than to talk about it. He IS running for President but, right now he needs to look like he is running for the nomination. Congressman Paul is most wise in the ways of the politician though he is THE statesman of our day.
............ We now have six Ron Paul clips DVD's and Freedom to Fascism has a few Ron Paul clips. Also available is a newly "Edited" version of Zeitgeist. Part I is still removed but, now it starts with the JFK speech about Conspiracy, his assassination, the Federal Reserve then the 911 myth and it ends the same way as before. It is my most favorite of all time videos.
LOL! You must be a carpenter--you hit the nail squarely on the head.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. I am not paranoid but I am worried about the guy behind me that gaining on me.
I have noticed him catching up too! But he is mad at me because the voices talk to me, not him. LOL!
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. That leaves us where, Aristeides?
Don't let it happen again. Ever. I mean it. :)
I know, and there is a great issue at stake as we speak. Do we have the moral right to fight or not. The question is not really for you Indy.
One thing I've learned from posting on forums, if it can be twisted, someone will do it. Positions will be attributed to you that leave you in shock, wondering how anyone could arrive at that conclusion.
one more thing, though history proves my past and current attitude of cynicism to be realistic, who am i to say that there won't/can't be a miracle. i've stated this before too, imo, a Ron Paul victory is going to require divine intervention.
L. Spooner If it was interpreted and administered with the original intent of the parties in the contract, I would gladly sign up for its protections and encourage others to do same. But, what we have today resembles little original intent therefore, all bets are off until the chains of the Constitution are properly re-attached. I acknowledge the wisdom of the original authors of the contract but, I will not allow present day usurpers to obscure the original intent of the lawmakers/founders.
............ We now have six Ron Paul clips DVD's and Freedom to Fascism has a few Ron Paul clips. Also available is a newly "Edited" version of Zeitgeist. Part I is still removed but, now it starts with the JFK speech about Conspiracy, his assassination, the Federal Reserve then the 911 myth and it ends the same way as before. It is my most favorite of all time videos.
Vast set out to sow discord and in that vein he has succeeded. On the plus side, we now see an exposed Vast and we have experienced negativism propaganda cloaked in totally innocent self musings. Joseph Goebbels was very good at that.
i obviously didn't make it clear to you that this had been my position in the past and that Ron Paul's candidacy has caused me to have a change of heart and to give it one last chance. Thanks for your response Christine. I hope others will have a change of heart as well. I agree this is our one last chance. as for calling RP supporters immoral, i never said anything of the sort as i believe quite the opposite is true. i don't know how you attributed that sentiment to me from anything i've posted on this thread. 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. 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 of doing so, is more than an insult to at least 10 people I could name right now, and it's not right and should be addressed. If we or they are unwelcome and do not meet the morality bar set by a sideliner, then our efforts, HERE at least are at best an utter waste. Standing silent against a troll with an agenda to demoralize a community here that believes there is still hope, is unacceptable. Why, because the ad has this Forums name on it. And that means you. Where the confusion came was allowing the immorality statement to stand, and that you supported no voting. Those two things together translated as hipocrisy for the forum that is dedicated to freedom. There is no other peaceful way to achieve a victory at the polls, and we all are very much aware of the reality of vote fraud. Speaking for myself, it's up to us to use the methods we have to affect change. It's up to the people to decide what is and isn't legitimate, and pour to the polls to change it, from the ground up. The disease in on the inside, and that's where I think, we have the best chance to effect peaceful change.
Once in a great while I manage to avoid smashing a finger, so thumb tacks are usually my preference. *grins*
No arguement here. And we have seen many little miracles. Let us not let some coward steal them.
Explanation, please........
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
WE deal daily, sir. Some doth shuffle too much. You gotta' know when hold 'em and when to fold 'em. The only game better than the Constitutional Republic, we were given, is a benevolent dictatorship. Yet, those never seem to work out. Even George Washington realized he might screw that idea up and chose not to take the deal. He folded but, he did not leave the table. The founders continued to shuffle and the hands that were finally dealt, were all good. Past generations just did not know how to play them. 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. The deck is still on the table but, some cards are missing, some are up sleeves and others are tattered and unrecognizable. Let us put all the cards back on the table and decide whether we need a new deck or, a new dealer. Save the Republic and God Bless America. Your deal.
............ We now have six Ron Paul clips DVD's and Freedom to Fascism has a few Ron Paul clips. Also available is a newly "Edited" version of Zeitgeist. Part I is still removed but, now it starts with the JFK speech about Conspiracy, his assassination, the Federal Reserve then the 911 myth and it ends the same way as before. It is my most favorite of all time videos.
Can you explain this from the Cincinnati Law Library Assn: Friday, December 21, 2007 Taxation of Railroad Property The Supreme Court, back on December 4th., decided that railroads could challenge state methods for determining the value of railroad property along with the manner in which those methods are applied, resolving a split in federal circuit court holdings as to whether a state’s property tax valuation methodologies could be challenged under the federal Railroad Revitalization & Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (4-R Act) An article in CCH’s State Tax Review on Dec. 13th. says “the 4-R Act, which bars states from discriminating against railroads when levying property taxes, provides an exception to the general rule of the Federal Tax Injunction Act that federal courts won’t interfere with matters of state taxation. “In order to evaluate an assessment ratio under the 4-R Act, however, federal courts have to calculate the true market value of in-state railroad property, and that requires the court to ‘look behind’ a state’s choice of valuation methods, and preventing courts from scrutinizing methodologies would force them to accept the market value estimates of the state, a party to the litigation. States would then be free to use methodology that routinely overestimates market values of railroad property, perpetuating the discriminatory taxation of railroads Congress sought to eliminate.” Sure makes it sound like there are property taxes being paid to the states, doens't it? Found at: http://cincinnatilaw.blogspot.com/2007/12/taxation-of-railroad- property.html
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
Just as you are doing now.
Is that why so much nutty fruit cake shows up around this time of year? No one really knows what to give.
............ We now have six Ron Paul clips DVD's and Freedom to Fascism has a few Ron Paul clips. Also available is a newly "Edited" version of Zeitgeist. Part I is still removed but, now it starts with the JFK speech about Conspiracy, his assassination, the Federal Reserve then the 911 myth and it ends the same way as before. It is my most favorite of all time videos.
A further though in the matter......suppose TPTB decide to 'let' him have a shot at it, knowing full well that Hil would get the final vote count? It would/could/should shut up those 'kooks' hollering that 'elections are rigged', 'its not a fair playing field', or any other number of things that could be 'legitimately' used to stiffle future dissention on the part of the peons who surely would/could/should learn by the most recent lesson. Hell, they could knock out two birds with one stone, so to speak......all those who march to a different drummer within the party, as well as a wake-up call to the independents or 3rd party types.....a real toofer, so to speak. Or, even if he won, they could pull a Hinckley, thereby getting to the VP via the example- setting trend of Kennedy, Reagan, and Paul. I'll always remember how they got to Perot via words---and he had enough money to finance anything he wanted to-- except perhaps saving his family from annihilation.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
Wiggle room. Isn't that the main reason so many cynics distrust all politicians? And isn't it kind of like old read-my-lips promising us no new taxes, but failing to mention that he'd raise the ones that already existed?
Agnew went to jail. Ford was elevated. Nixon was sent running, Ford was elevated and Rockefeller (surprise) was appointed. Two failures in one month on Fords life or we would have had an appointed President.
No, I made no comment on you or your exchange with Christine. It was a simple statement. Don't prove me right by making it more than it was.
Thats a little like comparing apples to oranges. Why should RP be forced to slam any and every door, if there is a way to still save the Republic? Why aren't the other candidates being forced to address all their lies and flip- flops. Or is there a standard you wish broadbrush for the sake of discrediting someones record that stands alone in word and deed? I suspect those that are whining for a 3rd party change now, want to kill his campaign, and I suspect that if RP changed parties to suit them, would only say they could no longer support one who was part of the evil-machine to begin with, and again side step accountability on their part. I'll say it. They WANT the status quo to continue, and some rather effect change by violence. Of course they will let someone else put their neck out. They are unworthy cowards. We've not had a candidate in decades delivered that has been speaking for, us. Still, some, proclaiming a need for such a person to rise, can't find it within themselves to stand up. These people are cowards. They are afraid of their own shadow. Can not and will not as the yoke of tyranny, seems more comfortable. It's one thing to give up your own soul, it's another to condemn others to the same.
Just as you are doing now. No, I made no comment on you or your exchange with Christine. It was a simple statement. Don't prove me right by making it more than it was. Sure it was farm. You are probably the most transparent person on this forum.
Yessir.........I believe the bullet carrier's name was Sarah Moore......related to Mansons' bunch, IIRC.
God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!
and Squeaky Fromme the other time, as I remember.
They are unworthy cowards. It really doesn't matter what banner Ron Paul runs under, if there was any chance that he could win and accomplish even half of the tbings his supporters believe possible, it would be HIS neck on the line, not theirs, and there are plenty of people backing that idea. Please understand, I have no animosity toward Dr. Paul nor any of his supporters, I just think they're fiddling while rome burns. The systemic disease infecting this country and its people is so old and so deep rooted that one man could never heal it, short of declaring a dictatorship and ridding the government of its traitors the hard way. I feel pretty confident that no one wants that.
I see. NO one wants a dictatorship, but we should just sit silent and wait for the inevitable. I don't see us as the fiddlers. But if that's what we are, perhaps it's time to lay the fiddle down, and let the big talkers take over. Take a count of those you think will be there. What an utter dissapointment. Time to cancel the ad.
Anyone want to buy a fiddle?
Taking offers on a fiddle.
Let me give you an analogy. We're all sitting in the only theater in town and the acting is terrible, the scenery sucks, the plot isn't thickening and everyone is pretty disgusted. What should we do?
Just walk out and close all the theatres. Give up. There a good movie down the street, but why go. Right? Demons exist to quash hope. You have a lot of company. Remember it is you that will have to answer alone.
Cheer up lady. One silly thread does not a forum make, or break.
Whatever.
I am curious as to what you think America has been under? Because it certainly was not a Republic, and was not 'under' the Constitution. The following paper I wrote this last year, and it is titled; There is no Constitution; it is a carefully crafted illusion. Enjoy. http://www.brainwashington.info/othersites/Misc%20Authors/Richard%20Gould/There% 20is%20no%20Constitution%20Part%201.pdf When you finish this, look on the web for the book; The CONstitution that never was. It covers the lies that ended up being called a Constitutional convention, and does it very well. Neither the book nor my own paper will tell you things that are taught in the government controlled educational establishment. So, once again, enjoy.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
The only game better than the Constitutional Republic, we were given, is a benevolent dictatorship. Yet, those never seem to work out. Even George Washington realized he might screw that idea up and chose not to take the deal. He folded but, he did not leave the table. The founders continued to shuffle and the hands that were finally dealt, were all good. Past generations just did not know how to play them. 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. The deck is still on the table but, some cards are missing, some are up sleeves and others are tattered and unrecognizable. Let us put all the cards back on the table and decide whether we need a new deck or, a new dealer. Save the Republic and God Bless America. Well said - thanks. The more I learn, the better seem the Articles of Confederation.
Give up. There a good movie down the street, but why go. Right? You didn't read the rules of the analogy so you lost your train of thought ... there IS no other theater, just as there is no other government. But you did get part of it right. You'd walk out. IOW, you'd secede from your seat and the theater would go broke. Now transfer that response to the larger part of the analogy. And if you think secession is the coward's way out, you don't know any southerners.
You can go down and record a paper in the court house as public record. You pay a fee, but you sign nothing. 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. Signing a paper is a contract, particularly when the paper is from the government (any arm thereof). Understanding what the purpose of the contract is explains the trust you entered into.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Thanks critter, but it has revealed much of it's soul.
I couldn't open your link.
There are, for a number of reasons. 1. Some land grants were cancelled because the railroad in question failed to live up to the contract. 2. Occasionally, railroads have requested special benefits from a state, and in return, have agreed to a limited amount of taxation on improvements built on land grant land. 3. Not all railroads have land grants. And, 4. Of those railroads that have land grants (just 4), not everything they own (because of mergers and the like) is on land grant land. If you wish to study this subject, try this site; http://www.landgrant.org/forfeiture.html Very interesting, and I support their efforts. I now wish to prevent a perpetual monopoly of over 50,000,000 acres of lands by an immense railroad company... I hope that the American Senate... will not by their action here to-day cause their posterity to curse their memories for thus building up such an immense monopoly to the detriment of the country, to the oppression and injury of all who may settle in that region. -- U.S. Senator Howell, arguing against additional subsidies to the Northern Pacific Railroad, in 1870. The lesson of the railroad land grants after more than one hundred years is that the government has been incapable of dealing affirmatively and at arms length with powerful economic interests. -- Attorney Sheldon Greene, 1976.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
I'm sorry, if you did not see the other theater. But you did get part of it right. You'd walk out. IOW, you'd secede from your seat and the theater would go broke. Now transfer that response to the larger part of the analogy. And if you think secession is the coward's way out, you don't know any southerners If you speak of secession, then I'm all in. I didn't know that was part of the unspoken question. However there is other government, but not one of mans alone. The Lakota Indians are trying that, and I hope they succeed. I may move there if it happens. Until then, we deal with the 'republic' we have, malignant as it is.
Ummmm. I will repaste here: http://www.brainwashington.info/othersites/Misc%20Authors/Richard%20Gould/There% 20is%20no%20Constitution%20Part%201.pdf Looks the same, but, what I have found is that often, when you transfer them, you get a space where they are 'bent'; you may want to check that, cause I copied this one directly from the site.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Nah. There are like two naysayers. They just talk a lot. :)
However there is other government, but not one of mans alone. The Lakota Indians are trying that, and I hope they succeed. I may move there if it happens. Until then, we deal with the 'republic' we have, malignant as it is. Well okay then. Sorry I wasn't clearer. Maybe I'll see you there.
I've tried it and checked it really carefully and it still won't open. Is there another way to get there?
:) If only.
I'll be wearing a lavendar sprig and dragging a ice chest. :)
I'll probably have all the ice I need hanging from my eyebrows, at least until around May or so.
Wondering if the .info domain is the culprit here.
Go here; http://www.brainwashington.info/ Click on files, and open up 01 There is no Constitution...
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Got it, thanks. :) Haven't read one word yet, just wanted to let you know it worked.
See 210 & 211, please.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
LOL!
Well, aren't you two a pair. I'm astounded to discover that the Decider is not the only ignoramus that thinks the Constitution is just a damned piece of paper.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
Teddy Roosevelt was immensely popular, a proven quantity, and had greater name recognition than his opponents. Perhaps he would have succeeded had he not been running for a third term. His example is not immediately applicable to Ron Paul. Of course it took another Roosevelt to succeed in winning a third term.
The U.S. Constitution is no impediment to our form of government.--PJ O'Rourke
The Articles of Confederation went into full effect in 1781, when Maryland ratified them. It took five or six years before most Americans decided they were not working. The Constitution of 1787 went into full effect in 1789, when the new government started work. It took more than 200 years before large numbers of Americans decided that it was not working. (And that was after it had undergone signficant formal amendment and been significantly reinterpreted by court decision many times.)
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.
We didn't get here in one administration and we won't get back in one. no one knows that better than Ron Paul. But you just sit it out or vote for the lesser of two evils and then you and your buddy can come back and crap on some more threads.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
That would be me. Thanks. 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.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
Well, yes, I do believe that we are. Thank you for noticing! I'm astounded to discover that the Decider is not the only ignoramus that thinks the Constitution is just a damned piece of paper. Perhaps it is because he actually read the document, and, some of the case law written on it? Could be....... Speaking for myself, as a student of the subject for the last, oh, 25 years or so, I have yet to met anyone who would honestly look at the subject, i.e., the CONstitution and the case law/history thereof, and fail to do one of two things; 1. Agree with me on the subject, or; 2. Refuse to talk any further on the subject. And where would you'll fit into this here subject? Ummmm? And by the way, before you bother to get ansty on the subject, I supplied two sources chock-a-block full of info on 'the subject.' Help yurself.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
LOL! But then he stuck Dubya right smack dab in the middle. Poor Dubya, he finally tells the truth and no one believes him. Actually though, it isn't just a GD piece of paper, its a piece of work. I'd go so far as to say it almost qualifies as an art form. I just finished reading part I, good job!!!
First off, most Americans WERE NOT of the mindset that the Articles of Confederation were not working. Which is why, by the way, that the Constitutional Convention was held in secret. And there have always been LARGE numbers of Americans who have been convinced that the Constitution was not working. Thousands and thousands of them gave their lives in the Civil War over just that subject. Or, are you of the mindset that the Civil War was about slavery?! And finally, just a little bit about those so-called Amendments; This is the first line of the 17th Amendment; The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. This is the final line of Artile V of the Constitution; ; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. Shall I, or need I, point out that the 17th Amendment was NOT ratified 100%? Now, want to run some more 'stuff' about the Constitution by me?
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
That was fast! Thank you. Usually takes people a couple of months to absorb it.... if they do. As for Dubya, you are correct. Of course, he so seldom does tell the truth, how is someone to know?! And yes, it is an artform; an attorney's word-smith art form, designed to confuse and hide what is actually there. A friend of mine did an education level assessment of it, and he figured that to understand the Constitution with a single reading, you would need 26 years of formal education. I have never found any reason to doubt his findings.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
I wonder if you have any idea how many times that exact phrase has been repeated during elections of the past hundred years and counting. I've used it myself a few times. But sooner or later you realize, you keep doing the same things and you'll keep getting more of what you've got. I can't help you out there anymore.
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!".
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.
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#2. To: IndieTX (#1)
#3. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
I will be watching with interest how the RP fantasy gets itself crushed by the inevitable political reality.
#4. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
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.
#5. To: Cynicom (#3)
(Edited)
#6. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#5)
Please deal with the REALITY that RP is seeking THE GOP NOMINATION for the US presidency. The GOP has as much to do with THE PEOPLE as the Mafia has to do with the business of construction and garbage collection.
#7. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
The Revolution will not be televised!
#8. To: Cynicom (#6)
The object is to give Paul a run for the presidency, what path he takes is not relevant.
#9. To: robin (#7)
The majority of Americans want us out of Iraq, and Ron Paul is the only candidate who represents those Americans
#10. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#9)
The Revolution will not be televised!
#11. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#8)
Of course it is relevant. The goals do not justify the means. It's Morality 101.
#12. To: robin (#10)
#13. To: Cynicom (#12)
Remember...G-d saved more animals than people on the ark. www.siameserescue.org
#14. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
#15. To: a vast rightwing conspirator, christine, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, FOH, Indie Tx, Pinguinite, Zipporah, robin, scrapper2, all (#0)
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'.
#16. To: Cynicom (#12)
The Revolution will not be televised!
#17. To: robin (#16)
#18. To: robin, a vast rightwing conspirator (#10)
(Edited)
There are liberals voting for Ron Paul because of this, even though they have Kucinich, because as they put it "Paul has the momentum". I've met a few.
#19. To: Original_Intent (#18)
The Revolution will not be televised!
#20. To: robin (#19)
I've heard a few laughing about registering as Republicans for the first (and probably only) time in their lives, in order to vote for Dr. Paul. You might remind your friend there are deadlines to do this (it varies by state).
#21. To: Original_Intent, robin, RP friends (#20)
I need to change my registration from Libertarian to Republicrat as well.
#22. To: Original_Intent (#15)
Preaching defeatism is pointless. While we must acknowledge the realities there is no where to run - either we win or we die or become slaves. Those are options, and I can't paint it much starker than that.
#23. To: Mister Clean (#22)
#24. To: buckeye (#23)
You're the paranoid one. You're afraid that people might be misleading you with "facts."
#25. To: lodwick (#21)
(Edited)
You may want to check and see if your state has 'open' or 'closed' primaries
#26. To: Mister Clean (#24)
What facts are you talking about?
#27. To: kiki, Original_Intent, lodwick (#25)
www.ronpaul2008.com/primary-and-caucus-information/
The Revolution will not be televised!
#28. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
#29. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
#30. To: robin (#27)
According to his campaign literature Dr. Cort is running for President of the United States "because the Lord has given me a very important message to give to America. This message is that America has gotten so far away from God and His protection, with abortion, homosexual marriage, and many other sins, that destruction is coming on America a million times worse than 9/11." Cort's campaign literature goes on to say. "Another reason I am running is to push for 'The McInerney Plan.' My friend General Tom McInerney, Fox News military analyst, says we will never win the War in Iraq until we deal with Iran..."
According to the campaign literature, The McInerney Plan says "we need to take out Iran's 24 nuclear sites and Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs' headquarters, and that we can do so in a 24 hour bombing campaign. Then the moderates in Iran can take their country back, things will finally settle down in Iraq, we will have stopped Iran from getting nuclear weapons and starting World War III... Don't you wish we had listened to Winston Churchill when he begged us to stop Hitler before he got big?"
#31. To: kiki (#30)
According to the campaign literature, The McInerney Plan says "we need to take out Iran's 24 nuclear sites and Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs' headquarters, and that we can do so in a 24 hour bombing campaign.
The Revolution will not be televised!
#32. To: Mister Clean (#22)
You have no idea how paranoid you sound.
Lord Acton
#33. To: James Deffenbach (#32)
Either that or they have a vested interest in perpetuating the scams and holding on to the status quo.
The Revolution will not be televised!
#34. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
(Edited)
I will be watching with interest how the RP fantasy gets itself crushed by the inevitable political reality.
#35. To: robin (#33)
bingo
Lord Acton
#36. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
Get Ready for a Major, Major Disappointment (Ron Paul's
#37. To: noone222 (#0)
#38. To: christine (#28)
#39. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#38)
Now, on the botish reactions on this thread. I see that a couple of them, out of the blue, accuse me of being a 'Hillary supporter', which is super-funny at some level. A couple are also blaming me for 'staying on the sidelines'.
#40. To: Cynicom (#39)
(Edited)
#41. To: aristeides (#40)
He also said people should be taking Ron Paul's candidacy a lot more seriously.
#42. To: aristeides (#40)
stands maybe a 10% chance to win the presidency if he quits the GOP
#43. To: Peppa (#42)
(Edited)
I only have time to listen to part of it anyway.
#44. To: Cynicom (#43)
Pep...
#45. To: christine (#37)
your opinion?
#46. To: noone222 (#45)
He will have more problem getting nominated than he would have getting elected.
#47. To: Cynicom, noone222 (#46)
#48. To: buckeye (#47)
(Edited)
#49. To: buckeye (#47)
What can we do to help get him nominated?
#50. To: buckeye (#47)
#51. To: noone222, Cynicom (#48)
The oppressive and invasive nature of current government policy hasn't gone unnoticed by them.
#52. To: Cynicom, buckeye (#49)
bringing the troops home -- discuss how many countries we have troops posted in --
discuss that there is a credible economic answer to the inflation of $3-4/gas and $4-5/milk and $4 hamburger.
#53. To: DeaconBenjamin (#52)
#54. To: Cynicom (#53)
#55. To: DeaconBenjamin (#52)
Discuss him with family, friends, co-workers, associates.
#56. To: Cynicom, DeaconBenjamin (#53)
#57. To: DeaconBenjamin (#54)
#58. To: buckeye (#56)
#59. To: buckeye (#47)
The Revolution will not be televised!
#60. To: buckeye (#56)
(Edited)
a big federal welfare state requires an empire to pay for its excesses. They can't be unlinked.
#61. To: Cynicom (#60)
(Edited)
#62. To: noone222 (#58)
This country hasn't had an open, honest leader in a hundred years or more. It's time we did.
#63. To: noone222, Cynicom, robin (#58)
The overwhelming advantage to genuine Constitutional Government is that it isn't biased in favor of anyone or any group.
#64. To: Cynicom (#57)
#65. To: Ferret Mike (#64)
#66. To: noone222 (#58)
I think Ron Paul already enjoys a good deal of "democrat" support.
The Revolution will not be televised!
#67. To: buckeye (#63)
#68. To: robin (#66)
#69. To: noone222 (#55)
vulchers ?
#70. To: noone222 (#68)
villifying him at every opportunity
#71. To: Cynicom (#65)
#72. To: christine (#69)
(Edited)
#73. To: Cynicom (#39)
Dont be cowardly, name names...
#74. To: Cynicom (#62)
#75. To: DeaconBenjamin (#74)
what might be called conscientious men,
#76. To: a vast rightwing conspirator, all (#0)
(Edited)
#77. To: Paul Revere, a vast rightwing conspirator (#76)
Therefore I ask that people see what is really taking place with the RP phenomenon. Millions of Americans are moved by the things RP is saying. They are rallying around his banner that our constitution matters, that it's not just a piece of paper, it's how we define who we are as a people. This core group of people are proving that they will be heard, that they are savvy at getting media exposure, and that they can and will spend vast sums of money to get the message out there.
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#78. To: Paul Revere (#76)
Therefore I ask that people see what is really taking place with the RP phenomenon.
#79. To: Peppa (#42)
#80. To: DeaconBenjamin (#52)
People will start to look and think for themselves.
#81. To: RickyJ (#79)
Are you related to Palo Verde?
#82. To: Peppa (#81)
#83. To: RickyJ (#82)
Do you know Palo Verde?
#84. To: Peppa (#83)
#85. To: RickyJ (#84)
Yeah I know her in cyberspace, not personally. Your post I replied to kind of reminded me of some of her posts.
#86. To: Paul Revere (#76)
Throughout our history, the movements on the fringe do affect the main body of politics. Traditionally, this happens as third party issues typically promoted by a figure running for president under said banner. Even though the third parties fail in getting a president, they impact the body politic and influence the direction of the country.
#87. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#8)
The object is to give Paul a run for the presidency, what path he takes is not relevant.
#88. To: DeaconBenjamin (#74)
The executive power is large because not defined in the Constitution.
#89. To: lodwick (#21)
You may want to check and see if your state has 'open' or 'closed' primaries - luckily, TX is of the open persuasion, so anyone can vote for whom they choose without any more paperwork hassle.
#90. To: Paul Revere (#76)
Let's put it this way: Without the Ron Paul candidacy, there would be no discussion in this presidential election about the limitations of government under the constitution.
#91. To: duckhunter (#87)
#92. To: duckhunter. RP friends (#89)
The only signs I've seen anywhere are Ron Paul signs. It could definitely happen here, especially if people realize he has the best shot at beating Hillary.
#93. To: christine, DeaconBenjamin (#88)
#94. To: richard9151 (#93)
#95. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#86)
RP running as an independent: could he win if he ran against Hillary/Rudy and he ran the perfect campaign? Maybe he could if he could get 34% of the votes and they were properly distributed. Like I said, I give him about 10% odds to winning which, by the way, is way better than the 0% he has now. I also tend to agree that, if he won, his days in office might not be too many. It's important that he takes a freedom leaning VP running mate rather than do that stupid 'ticket balancing' thing and bring along a Cheney-like ogre. If he does not win, at least we have an election with a choice and the choice will be clearly not for 'one of the three' but it will be a "freedom vs. the establishment provided Faustian offering of 'safety'". If RP went indie, expect Bloomberg to jump in so that he can pose as 'the center' and give the impression that Hillary would be the 'legitimate left', Rudy playing 'the mainstream right' and RP could be painted as 'the extremist'. Regardless of whether he wins or not, RP's message will be heard through November 2008 and, hopefully, beyond 2008, rather than stop being heard by the end of January, 2008.
#96. To: Cynicom (#91)
It is very difficult for me to accept that in this day of readily available information that there are intelligent people that seem to believe there are two "moral" parties in this political system.
#97. To: richard9151 (#93)
Or, read the book, The CONstitution That Never Was, but, well, perhaps you get the picture.
#98. To: christine, DeaconBenjamin (#88)
The executive power is large because not defined in the Constitution.
#99. To: lodwick (#92)
To me, the power behind Dr.Paul's campaign is that he is giving us something to vote for, instead of something to be against.
#100. To: RidinShotgun (#94)
George Washington's choice for secretary of the treasury was our first clue.
#101. To: christine (#97)
only one or both of these two ways, viz., by voting, and paying taxes.
#102. To: richard9151 (#100)
I am still amazed at the countless numbers of people who believe that getting back to the Constitution will solve everything, when what we have in America is the fruit OF the Constitution! No one seems to be able/willing to deal with that.
#103. To: richard9151 (#100)
#104. To: Cynicom (#102)
I doubt if many Americans share that opinion.
#105. To: RidinShotgun (#103)
I can remember back to the days when I still thought getting back to the constitution would do the trick, so its kind of hard to fault people who haven't gotten over it yet. Of course that doesn't stop me from wanting to shake them until all the feel-good myths fall right out of their heads and they can finally see the tapeworm they've been harboring between their ears.
#106. To: duckhunter (#99)
There is real excitement about this campaign and it is showing some real legs. I'm volunteering to hang door tags and I've never spent one second of my time for a political candidate. This can really happen.
#107. To: christine (#95)
i can see the logic in that. i'm still hoping RP will make the decision to go independent if/when he doesn't get the GOP nomination.
#108. To: richard9151 (#105)
#109. To: richard9151 (#104)
Really? How many Americans no longer vote? Perhaps the namber is much larger than you suspect, my friend.
#110. To: Cynicom, robin, a vast right wing conspirator (#12)
Vast is living in his own make believe world where the two party system exists
#111. To: aristeides, christine (#107)
That's what Teddy Roosevelt did in 1912. And he came close to winning the election that year.
#112. To: rowdee, Cynicom, robin, a vast right wing conspirator (#110)
I will put a caveat here, "in our lifetime" when discussing this.
#113. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
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.
#114. To: richard9151 (#111)
(Edited)
#115. To: RidinShotgun (#108)
#116. To: iconoclast (#113)
Second, the third party thing. There is plenty of time before that decision has to be made, the later the better as far as I'm concerned.
#117. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#116)
#118. To: Cynicom (#41)
#119. To: iconoclast (#113)
Finally, the defeatist undercurrent. Anyone who ever participated in competitive sport has experienced the role of underdog. Did any of you quit? Any not show up? I hope not, because if you did I must feel that you found the shame of surrender worse than the pain of defeat.
#120. To: richard9151, Cynicom, a vast rightwing conspiracy, lodwick, Jethro Tull, iconoclast, RidinShotgun, duckhunter, ALL (#104)
#121. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#114)
So, being as slow as I am, what is the harm that a 'third party' challenge does?
#122. To: DeaconBenjamin (#52)
but many more will have to be reached one-on-one. Discuss him with family, friends, co-workers, associates
#123. To: aristeides (#115)
In the nineteenth century, America was the freest country in the world, with an extremely limited federal government. That was under the same Constitution we have today (minus a few amendments), at a time when there had been less time to subject it to misintrepretation that grows upon itself over time.
#124. To: christine (#120)
(Edited)
i have advocated (and i still believe it would work)that everyone stay home on election day--refuse to participate. if we all did that, they couldn't fake the numbers and continue to perpetuate the FRAUD of legitimate elections in this country.
#125. To: richard9151 (#121)
But if not for the Bull Moose party, we would not have had the Federal Reserve Act in 1912.
#126. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#125)
The Federal Reserve Act of 1912 was a law voted in by the US Congress
#127. To: RidinShotgun, aristeides (#123)
In the nineteenth century, America was the freest country in the world, with an extremely limited federal government. That was under the same Constitution we have today (minus a few amendments), at a time when there had been less time to subject it to misintrepretation that grows upon itself over time.
#128. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#86)
1)... Once RP is defeated, nothing happens. The media is likely to stop talking about him shortly after the first 2-3 nomination contests.
#129. To: Peppa (#124)
#130. To: christine, peppa (#129)
#131. To: Original_Intent (#130)
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#132. To: richard9151 (#127)
#133. To: richard9151 (#126)
You may need to do some more reading, my friend.
#134. To: RidinShotgun (#132)
Not to mention that the federal government owns all of the land the states occupy and always has. Outright. Take, for instance, the Louisiana Purchase, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and all the other usurpations. In none of the paperwork, including the CONstitution, is it ever said that the american people own or control one square inch of anything.
#135. To: Cynicom (#133)
Vast is not one to let history get in his way of advancing an agenda.
#136. To: richard9151 (#134)
Where have you been by the way?! While I was getting 'nailed to the wall' in 4um for posting on the non-sense of the CONstitution?!!!!!????!!!!
#137. To: richard9151 (#126)
#138. To: christine (#129)
(Edited)
Pep, I still believe they're going to steal it from RP. I believe the PTB have already chosen their selection and I think that's Hillary. However, as I posted above to vast and as duckhunter, Paul Revere, and others posted, I think there's never been the grassroots support and awareness of the message of Liberty. For this reason, I have some hope that as the numbers grow (we need a critical mass ala V for Vendetta) if we-the-people are to have a chance of defeating the elites and taking our country back. This is our last hope and I don't want to sit on the sidelines and do nothing. I want to take part in the fight.
#139. To: RidinShotgun (#132)
#140. To: rowdee (#139)
Where do land patents fit in this picture.
#141. To: RidinShotgun, rowdee (#140)
In some bank's vault. Pull a few financial panics, talk people into signing up for mortgages and tell them they might own something someday. Putting your patent into a shredder would have the same result. And it was all done voluntarily, dontchaknow.
#142. To: Original_Intent (#15)
" Have no doubt that the goal of the elites, the Bankers and their Psychiatrists, is achieve total domination and then carry out their eugenics program of murdering 80% of humanity to cull out the "rebellious" and "useless eaters" (as Kissinger termed us).
#143. To: James Deffenbach (#32)
"Anyone who isn't paranoid isn't paying attention."
#144. To: richard9151 (#141)
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.
#145. To: RickyJ (#34)
"The ONLY way Ron Paul can be beat now by anyone, Republican or Democrat, is to fix the election."
#146. To: wakeup (#145)
By the way, word is ammo is going up in price on the 1st. Buy a bunch this week. It is as good an investment as gold and silver, really. The day may come when we are bartering with all four basic metals: gold, silver, lead and brass. No kidding, buy some guns and ammo this week. Consider a re-loader. Make ammo yourself on the cheap. It's fun.
#147. To: Christine (#138)
So, where do we stand. Are his supporters immoral or not?
#148. To: wakeup, tauzero, lodwick, peppa (#145)
By the way, word is ammo is going up in price on the 1st. Buy a bunch this week. It is as good an investment as gold and silver, really. The day may come when we are bartering with all four basic metals: gold, silver, lead and brass. No kidding, buy some guns and ammo this week
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#149. To: IndieTX, .50cal owners (#148)
#150. To: IndieTX (#148)
already did that when Klinton made his banning threats. I agree we'll be bartering bullets for food.. they'll be that valuable some day. Many have guns; few have more than a box of ammo for it!
#151. To: Peppa (#150)
I think I'll sit back and let others take care of me.
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#152. To: IndieTX (#151)
I think I'll sit back and let others take care of me. What are you talking about? What is your rationale? Do you agree of disagree? This criptic BS is getting tiresome.
#153. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
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.
#154. To: Peppa (#152)
#155. To: Peppa (#152)
(Edited)
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#156. To: IndieTX (#151)
#157. To: wakeup (#143)
"Anyone who isn't paranoid isn't paying attention."
Lord Acton
#158. To: Peppa (#138)
That doesn't match with your opinion of not voting.
#159. To: christine (#95)
"i can see the logic in that. i'm still hoping RP will make the decision to go independent if/when he doesn't get the GOP nomination."
#160. To: RidinShotgun (#144)
But then the american people could never be described as careful. Offer them any old pig in a poke and as long as it comes with a lot of colorful pictures and too good to be true promises, they'll be knocking each other down to get theirs first.
Lord Acton
#161. To: James Deffenbach (#157)
"Anyone who isn't paranoid isn't paying attention.
#162. To: Cynicom (#161)
Lord Acton
#163. To: aristeides (#154)
"The system" ["Das System"] was the phrase Hitler and the other Nazis used for the Weimar Republic that they wanted to get rid of.
#164. To: christine (#158)
sorry, i didn't answer you post haste. i had an appointment to go to.
#165. To: IndieTX (#155)
What few on this thread know is that I was using your own words against me on another thread against you on this one. ONly you would know the satire in it.
#166. To: christine (#158)
i don't know how you attributed that sentiment to me from anything i've posted on this thread.
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#167. To: Peppa (#138)
#168. To: christine (#97)
"If, then, those who established the Constitution, had no power to bind, and did not attempt to bind, their posterity, the question arises, whether their posterity have bound themselves. If they have done so, they can have done so in only one or both of these two ways, viz., by voting, and paying taxes."
#169. To: christine, All (#167)
#170. To: christine (#158)
(Edited)
sorry, i didn't answer you post haste. i had an appointment to go to.
#171. To: James Deffenbach (#160)
LOL! You must be a carpenter--you hit the nail squarely on the head.
#172. To: christine (#167)
one more thing, though history proves my past and current attitude of cynicism to be realistic, who am i to say that there won't/can't be a miracle. i've stated this before too, imo, a Ron Paul victory is going to require divine intervention.
#173. To: richard9151 (#141)
Included in that is entering into a trust by registering your land with the state, which is why you have to sign a contract to do so.
#174. To: richard9151 (#100)
"I am still amazed at the countless numbers of people who believe that getting back to the Constitution will solve everything, when what we have in America is the fruit OF the Constitution! No one seems to be able/willing to deal with that."
#175. To: richard9151 (#141)
#176. To: farmfriend (#166)
One thing I've learned from posting on forums, if it can be twisted, someone will do it. Positions will be attributed to you that leave you in shock, wondering how anyone could arrive at that conclusion.
#177. To: rowdee (#175)
"God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts!"
#178. To: christine (#167)
#179. To: aristeides (#117)
Ron Paul in that interview deliberately left himself wiggle room to eventually mount a third-party run.
#180. To: rowdee (#178)
#181. To: Peppa (#176)
Just as you are doing now.
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#182. To: RidinShotgun (#179)
Wiggle room. Isn't that the main reason so many cynics distrust all politicians? And isn't it kind of like old read-my-lips promising us no new taxes, but failing to mention that he'd raise the ones that already existed?
#183. To: farmfriend (#181)
To: Peppa
#184. To: Cynicom (#180)
#185. To: rowdee (#184)
I believe the bullet carrier's name was Sarah Moore......
#186. To: Peppa (#182)
Of course they will let someone else put their neck out.
#187. To: RidinShotgun (#186)
I just think they're fiddling while rome burns.
#188. To: Cynicom, RidinShotgun (#186)
#189. To: All, *Ron Paul for President 2008* (#188)
#190. To: Peppa (#187)
#191. To: RidinShotgun (#190)
Let me give you an analogy. We're all sitting in the only theater in town and the acting is terrible, the scenery sucks, the plot isn't thickening and everyone is pretty disgusted. What should we do?
#192. To: Peppa (#187)
#193. To: Peppa (#183)
You are probably the most transparent person on this forum.
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#194. To: wakeup (#174)
The only game better than the Constitutional Republic, we were given, is a benevolent dictatorship.
#195. To: wakeup. the thread (#174)
WE deal daily, sir. Some doth shuffle too much. You gotta' know when hold 'em and when to fold 'em.
#196. To: Peppa (#191)
(Edited)
Just walk out and close all the theatres.
#197. To: rowdee (#173)
Explanation, please........
#198. To: Critter (#192)
Cheer up lady. One silly thread does not a forum make, or break.
#199. To: richard9151 (#194)
http://www.brainwashington.info/othersites/Misc%20Authors/Richard%20Gould/There% 20is%20no%20Constitution%20Part%201.pdf
#200. To: rowdee (#175)
Sure makes it sound like there are property taxes being paid to the states, doens't it?
#201. To: RidinShotgun (#196)
You didn't read the rules of the analogy so you lost your train of thought ... there IS no other theater, just as there is no other government.
#202. To: RidinShotgun (#199)
http://www.brainwashington.info/othersites/Misc%20Authors/Richard%20Gould/There% 20is%20no%20Constitution%20Part%201.pdf
#203. To: Peppa (#198)
#204. To: Peppa (#201)
If you speak of secession, then I'm all in. I didn't know that was part of the unspoken question.
#205. To: richard9151 (#202)
#206. To: Critter (#203)
Nah. There are like two naysayers. They just talk a lot. :)
#207. To: RidinShotgun (#204)
Well okay then. Sorry I wasn't clearer. Maybe I'll see you there.
#208. To: Peppa (#207)
#209. To: RidinShotgun, richard9151, Penguinite, coders here (#205)
I've tried it and checked it really carefully and it still won't open.
#210. To: RidinShotgun (#205)
Is there another way to get there?
#211. To: richard9151 (#210)
#212. To: lodwick (#209)
#213. To: RidinShotgun (#208)
I'll probably have all the ice I need hanging from my eyebrows, at least until around May or so.
#214. To: richard9151, RidinShotgun (#134)
Where have you been by the way?! While I was getting 'nailed to the wall' in 4um for posting on the non-sense of the CONstitution?!!!!!????!!!!
#215. To: aristeides (#107)
That's what Teddy Roosevelt did in 1912. And he came close to winning the election that year.
#216. To: lodwick (#195)
(Edited)
#217. To: RidinShotgun (#186)
The systemic disease infecting this country and its people is so old and so deep rooted that one man could never heal it, short of declaring a dictatorship and ridding the government of its traitors the hard way. I feel pretty confident that no one wants that.
#218. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
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.
Then, I heard someone here stating that 'the 2 parties' are nothing but tools for whomever is seeking the presidency to get the presidency.
#219. To: iconoclast, RidinShotgun (#214)
Well, aren't you two a pair.
#220. To: richard9151 (#219)
Well, yes, I do believe that we are. Thank you for noticing!
#221. To: aristeides, lodwick (#216)
(Edited)
It took five or six years before most Americans decided they were not working.
#222. To: RidinShotgun (#220)
I just finished reading part I, good job!!!
#223. To: iconoclast (#217)
We didn't get here in one administration and we won't get back in one.
#224. To: richard9151 (#222)
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