|
|
Posted: 4/13/2012 11:08:52 PM
[Last Edit: 4/13/2012 11:45:17 PM by jdubya87]
doubletap.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 1:01:43 AM
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 5:17:47 AM
All delegates for Colorado Congressional District 1 to the State convention are Ron Paul supporters.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 5:26:18 AM
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
All delegates for Colorado Congressional District 1 to the State convention are Ron Paul supporters. Do you believe in the constitution? Do you believe that votes by the majority of THE PEOPLE should determine the candidates? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 5:43:23 AM
[Last Edit: 4/14/2012 5:58:00 AM by Molon-Labe]
Originally Posted By hughjafj: Originally Posted By Molon-Labe: All delegates for Colorado Congressional District 1 to the State convention are Ron Paul supporters. Do you believe in the constitution? Do you believe that votes by the majority of THE PEOPLE should determine the candidates? Just a word of advice for the haters who insist on posting in this thread, even though they have been advised against it: If you are going to invoke the Constitution, maybe you should read it and understand it, so you avoid looking like an idiot. Reading comprehension doesn't seem to be a strong suit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 6:05:22 AM
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 6:42:28 AM
We are a Constitutional Representative Republic not a Democracy. Even though you will only hear the term Democracy on mainstream media.
Our elected representatives are legally bound to function within the constraints of the Constitution, therefore, it shouldn't matter very much who we have representing us because their hands are tied (supposedly) by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The problem we have is that our Representatives take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution and then proceed to ignore it. Thankfully we have people who support freedom, liberty, the Constitution and Bill of Rights who are interested enough in the process to participate this time out. Hopefully they will prevail and we will start to dig ourselves out of the giant mess that those who ignore the Constitution have gotten us into. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 8:44:31 AM
Does anyone know why Ron Paul did not speak at the NRA convention? It is a damn shame that the most pro 2A candidate was not there and they had to listen to the bullshit From Mitt, Newt and sweaterboy.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 9:02:55 AM
Word is that he was invited, but didn't respond. Not sure why. Could have been an oversight or a scheduling conflict.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 9:44:03 AM
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 9:54:50 AM
Originally Posted By 900kilo:
Does anyone know why Ron Paul did not speak at the NRA convention? It is a damn shame that the most pro 2A candidate was not there and they had to listen to the bullshit From Mitt, Newt and sweaterboy. Going up against those three I don't see why he would. With gun rights he can stand on his record, so he doesn't need to spout a bunch of promises about NFA and CCW that will only scare the bejeesus out of mainstream voters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 10:38:00 AM
![]() |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 10:39:45 AM
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 5:08:40 PM
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 5:12:34 PM
Can Anyone Guess Who is Under Investigation for a Felony? (Hint: It Could Disqualify Him From the Presidency)http://youthrevolutionarycouncil.org/?p=1264&fb_comment_id=fbc_10150649058351401_21121778_10150667725916401#f1db95a948 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 5:24:00 PM
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 5:45:31 PM
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/380574_278267618924545_169567139794594_637478_2048886590_n.jpg We lose credibility, every time we use banal terms like "banksters". I hate that shit. I've come to the point, where I'm comfortable with the idea of saying that if most vocal Ron Paul supporters actually understood what he was proposing, they would (sadly) reject his platform in a New York minute. I'm including anyone who cottons to the idea of calling another human being a "bankster". It's really unbecoming. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 6:13:20 PM
Originally Posted By Subnet:
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/380574_278267618924545_169567139794594_637478_2048886590_n.jpg We lose credibility, every time we use banal terms like "banksters". I hate that shit. I've come to the point, where I'm comfortable with the idea of saying that if most vocal Ron Paul supporters actually understood what he was proposing, they would (sadly) reject his platform in a New York minute. I'm including anyone who cottons to the idea of calling another human being a "bankster". It's really unbecoming. Vocal Ron Paul supporters would reject his entire platform, planks in his platform? The idea that the Fed should be done away with? That the Fed should be audited? What exactly would vocal Ron Paul supporters reject? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 6:29:08 PM
"Can you believe that after three years of strong public reaction to bailout economics, where you had the creation of the tea party from nothing, where Scott Brown won Teddy Kennedy's old seat, where the California special election in May 2009 totally repudiated that sick political class's ideas of reform. Every single signal in the market for three years has been in one direction, and that has been for limiting, restraining government, reacting negatively to Obamacare." "After all of this, the Republican party is on the verge of nominating the person who created the individual mandate, who every single day on the campaign trail attacks Obama for cutting Medicare." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 6:32:02 PM
Originally Posted By Subnet: Originally Posted By Molon-Labe: https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/380574_278267618924545_169567139794594_637478_2048886590_n.jpg We lose credibility, every time we use banal terms like "banksters". I hate that shit. I've come to the point, where I'm comfortable with the idea of saying that if most vocal Ron Paul supporters actually understood what he was proposing, they would (sadly) reject his platform in a New York minute. I'm including anyone who cottons to the idea of calling another human being a "bankster". It's really unbecoming. I didn't coin the term, or create the graphic, but I don't disagree with his position on the Fed, either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 6:50:23 PM
The Federal Reserve's Explicit Goal: Devalue The Dollar 33%
The Federal Reserve Open Market Committee (FOMC) has made it official: After its latest two day meeting, it announced its goal to devalue the dollar by 33% over the next 20 years. The debauch of the dollar will be even greater if the Fed exceeds its goal of a 2 percent per year increase in the price level. An increase in the price level of 2% in any one year is barely noticeable. Under a gold standard, such an increase was uncommon, but not unknown. The difference is that when the dollar was as good as gold, the years of modest inflation would be followed, in time, by declining prices. As a consequence, over longer periods of time, the price level was unchanged. A dollar 20 years hence was still worth a dollar. But, an increase of 2% a year over a period of 20 years will lead to a 50% increase in the price level. It will take 150 (2032) dollars to purchase the same basket of goods 100 (2012) dollars can buy today. What will be called the “dollar” in 2032 will be worth one-third less (100/150) than what we call a dollar today. Read the rest of the article here: What the Fed is up to. These are the people who are running our economy and it's the best they can do. They are an illegal entity and a private bank. They caused the Great Depression (this Bernanke admitted) but said they would not let it happen again. END THE FED! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 7:09:08 PM
Preliminary reports have Paul winning over half the delegates in Colorado.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 7:30:26 PM
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 7:55:31 PM
Three losers, indeed.
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/522616_3755281127598_1443551900_33484111_2026891069_n.jpg |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 8:29:19 PM
Economic Cycles Before the Fed | Thomas E Woods, Jr.
Thanks to Molon Labe for introducing me to Thomas E. Woods. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 8:31:18 PM
Thomas E. Woods is awesome.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 8:34:59 PM
Douglas County, Washington (central Washington) delegate convention results:
10 delegates (3 for Paul, 5 for Romney and 2 for Newt). 10 alternates (7 for Paul, 3 for Romney). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 9:18:04 PM
Colorado Republicans split delegate votes between Romney, unified Paul and Santorum supportershttp://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20398638/politics |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 9:50:37 PM
[Last Edit: 4/14/2012 9:52:01 PM by Teltech]
Meltdown | Thomas E Woods, Jr.
Why government intervention will only make things worse. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2012 10:00:25 PM
Prepare for the Worst | Ron Paul
"The Failure of the Keynesian State" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 12:14:06 AM
Ron Paul gets a boost at Yakima County GOP Conventionhttp://www.yakima-herald.com/stories/2012/04/14/ron-paul-leads-in-delegates-from-yakima-county-gop |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 12:25:55 AM
A Rick Santorum supporter visits a Ron Paul Rallyhttp://blog.briangallimore.com/2012/04/adrian-santorum-and-ron-paul/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 12:28:53 AM
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 3:13:31 AM
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
A Rick Santorum supporter visits a Ron Paul Rallyhttp://blog.briangallimore.com/2012/04/adrian-santorum-and-ron-paul/ I respect his opinions, but something that's very bizarre to me... he claims to be an ardent political follower, book writer, etc. Yet he talks about Ron Paul like he had really no idea who he was until Santorum dropped out of the race. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 3:44:04 AM
I can't tell you the number of people who can't articulate Paul's positions but have formed opinions on him. Even current supporters have admitted the same: they just accepted what they had been fed without doing any of their own research until someone made them take a deeper look.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 4:03:37 AM
[Last Edit: 4/15/2012 4:03:56 AM by Kstanton]
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
I can't tell you the number of people who can't articulate Paul's positions but have formed opinions on him. Even current supporters have admitted the same: they just accepted what they had been fed without doing any of their own research until someone made them take a deeper look. I guess that's what a life-time of brainwashing does. I'm not sure how I missed out on it |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 4:35:33 AM
Originally Posted By Kstanton: I guess that's what a life-time of brainwashing does. I'm not sure how I missed out on it Different life experiences cause everyone to have different outlooks. The best example I can give is Ted Kennedy. I think he was totally wrong in his opinion on gun control, and I vehemently disagreed with it, but I completely understand why he would hold his views after having two brothers assassinated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 5:16:41 AM
Originally Posted By Kstanton:
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
I can't tell you the number of people who can't articulate Paul's positions but have formed opinions on him. Even current supporters have admitted the same: they just accepted what they had been fed without doing any of their own research until someone made them take a deeper look. I guess that's what a life-time of brainwashing does. I'm not sure how I missed out on it Known who and what he represents since the 1980's. You? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 5:21:07 AM
Red letters doesn't seem to be enough. Maybe red letters and a big font might help. Of course there's still that pesky reading comprehension problem...
Originally Posted By DK-Prof: This thread is for Ron Paul Supporters only. If you are not posting in this thread to support him, then you should NOT be posting in this thread at all. It's that simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 6:11:37 AM
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
Red letters doesn't seem to be enough. Maybe red letters and a big font might help. Of course there's still that pesky reading comprehension problem... Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
This thread is for Ron Paul Supporters only. If you are not posting in this thread to support him, then you should NOT be posting in this thread at all. It's that simple. Please do not call Ron Paul or his supporters names in this thread.
I've done neither. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 6:54:19 AM
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
I can't tell you the number of people who can't articulate Paul's positions but have formed opinions on him. Even current supporters have admitted the same: they just accepted what they had been fed without doing any of their own research until someone made them take a deeper look. Yeah I've ran in to a few who now support him because of his domestic positions but they concede that he's a bit crazy on foreign policy. I then ask them what's so crazy about Paul's foreign policy and they say he's an isolationist. I've had to explain to a few people(who should know better) that there's a middle ground between spending money to spoon-feed every 3rd world nation and holing up in a bunker somewhere. Both Fox News and the traditonally liberal networks are guilty of this. If you watch television you'd think that an idea like non-interventionism doesn't even exist, and that America must either white-knight all over the globe at massive expense or totally disarm itself and sing kumbaya. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 8:17:07 AM
[Last Edit: 4/15/2012 8:18:43 AM by arowneragain]
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
I can't tell you the number of people who can't articulate Paul's positions but have formed opinions on him. Even current supporters have admitted the same: they just accepted what they had been fed without doing any of their own research until someone made them take a deeper look. *raises hand* I meet people almost every day who don't have a clue what he stands for. Tried to talk to a democrat yesterday. Said he'd never vote for him - even though his foreign policy is EXACTLY what said democrat has been harping about for, oh, the last thirty years or more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 8:37:13 AM
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
Thomas E. Woods is awesome. That he is. I like him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 8:44:40 AM
Originally Posted By Subnet: Originally Posted By Molon-Labe: https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/380574_278267618924545_169567139794594_637478_2048886590_n.jpg We lose credibility, every time we use banal terms like "banksters". I hate that shit. I've come to the point, where I'm comfortable with the idea of saying that if most vocal Ron Paul supporters actually understood what he was proposing, they would (sadly) reject his platform in a New York minute. I'm including anyone who cottons to the idea of calling another human being a "bankster". It's really unbecoming. I concur. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 9:36:42 AM
Originally Posted By Subnet:
Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/380574_278267618924545_169567139794594_637478_2048886590_n.jpg We lose credibility, every time we use banal terms like "banksters". I hate that shit. I've come to the point, where I'm comfortable with the idea of saying that if most vocal Ron Paul supporters actually understood what he was proposing, they would (sadly) reject his platform in a New York minute. I'm including anyone who cottons to the idea of calling another human being a "bankster". It's really unbecoming. I guess I don't see the problem. "Bankster" is merely a combination of two words: "banker" and "gangster". "Gangster" is defined as follows: "a member of a gang of criminals, especially a racketeer. " Sounds pretty accurate to me. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 9:46:19 AM
Originally Posted By Texas_Sig: Originally Posted By Subnet: Originally Posted By Molon-Labe: https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/380574_278267618924545_169567139794594_637478_2048886590_n.jpg We lose credibility, every time we use banal terms like "banksters". I hate that shit. I've come to the point, where I'm comfortable with the idea of saying that if most vocal Ron Paul supporters actually understood what he was proposing, they would (sadly) reject his platform in a New York minute. I'm including anyone who cottons to the idea of calling another human being a "bankster". It's really unbecoming. I guess I don't see the problem. "Bankster" is merely a combination of two words: "banker" and "gangster". "Gangster" is defined as follows: "a member of a gang of criminals, especially a racketeer. " Sounds pretty accurate to me. 'cept they aren't running a racket or operating as criminals. Most bankers are operating and doing bad things based not on willingness to scam the system or to enslave us, but because they are threatened with force and coercion from the government. I simply refuse to castigate individuals and businesses who perform a needed service. Folks who were loaned money took it willingly and voluntarily. No one held a gun to their head and said "take this money and buy that house, or else!". However, banks were told "lend this money to those people,or else!".
People during the housing boom behaved stupidly, and this is for the whole entire chain, from land speculators, the forest products industry, lenders, buyers, and local governments.
In 2006 I was driving down a new neighborhood looking at the McMansions that sprung up that were unheard of in this area. I looked over at my wife (who as my girlfriend at the time) and wondered out loud what would happen when people simply decided that they could not possibly own a bigger house and fill it with enough stuff. I guess we know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 9:59:54 AM
While Thomas Woods is great, I have been going more towards Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Jörg Guido Hülsmann, Douglas French, David Gordon, and Salerno. If you are used to not hearing a speaker that has English as non-native language, I would say that you are only missing out. Hans-Hermann Hoppe and Jörg Guido Hülsmann, and David Gordon have had a profound affect upon me, the way I think.
Hans-Hermann Hoppe: Hans-Hermann Hoppe Hans-Hermann Hoppe Interview Jorg Guido Hulsmann: Jorg Guido Hulsmann on Deflation David Gordon: David Gordon on Logic as Economics, not 2+2=4 David Gordon's book is profound, a modern Hazlitt but even more than that- An Introduction to Economic Reasoning. Douglas French: Money and Banking First in Line It is always interesting, because there is always some argument for central planning and the argument presented that central planning is needed and justified. The Constitution may make mention or affirm that yes, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but what do we all have and see happening now? We all see the excuses of the State to infringe, and we have the State itself that creates conflicts to infringe upon this. In the governments 'vision,' the Constitution has never mattered, and the statists are just as guilty for all anyone will hear or read from them is nothing but 'justifications' to restrict and infringe upon what was not to be restricted or infringed upon. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 10:33:10 AM
Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
In 2006 I was driving down a new neighborhood looking at the McMansions that sprung up that were unheard of in this area. I looked over at my wife (who as my girlfriend at the time) and wondered out loud what would happen when people simply decided that they could not possibly own a bigger house and fill it with enough stuff. I guess we know. In 2006 I was working in one of those neighborhoods one day and I ntoiced that people I knew lived there. They didn't make any more than me - probably made less than me - but they had a McMansion. Seemed like bad decision-making to me. Fast forward 6 years, half of those houses are foreclosed on. Huh. Go figure. ![]() |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 12:26:30 PM
[Last Edit: 4/15/2012 12:28:46 PM by Kstanton]
Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
[/quote]
'cept they aren't running a racket or operating as criminals. Most bankers are operating and doing bad things based not on willingness to scam the system or to enslave us, but because they are threatened with force and coercion from the government. I simply refuse to castigate individuals and businesses who perform a needed service. Folks who were loaned money took it willingly and voluntarily. No one held a gun to their head and said "take this money and buy that house, or else!". However, banks were told "lend this money to those people,or else!". People during the housing boom behaved stupidly, and this is for the whole entire chain, from land speculators, the forest products industry, lenders, buyers, and local governments. I'm sorry, but this is inaccurate. You can choose to believe me or not, but I used to be a "bankster." I am a division director at arguably one of the biggest banks in the country. The banks aren't forced to do anything. They LOVE legislation telling them to give loans to everyone, it gives them an excuse to do so, package the loan, sell it and skate away. Then if things go awry, they simply get money from the government. It's a 100% win for the bank, and 100% lose for the tax paying citizen. It used to be, prior to 2009, we had a picture in one of our risk analysis rooms that showed a profit line graph going into the negative and an "Uncle Sam" at the bottom of the line with "Plan B" written on him. Don't fall for the propaganda the banks release claiming to be the victim. They wanted this, and they got it. The question I'll pose to you is this: If this legislation was so bad for the large banks, why were are the decision makers at said banks making off like bandits? It's because they wanted it, and they planned for it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2012 2:34:35 PM
[Last Edit: 4/15/2012 3:22:00 PM by Teltech]
They are stealing our money by devaluing the currency. They have said that they want to devalue the dollar by 33% in 20 years.
That's is money you put in savings, your retirement account. One third of it will be gone in 20 years. THIS IS A GOAL! These people are crooks. Bankster is too good a name for them. They should be hung for destroying our economy. By the way, while I'm ranting. What you never hear in this whole housing crisis is the fact that our trade policies and treaties have cost us millions upon millions of jobs. Don't you think that had just a little bit to do with the fact that all these people are now unable to pay their mortgages? I mean, you just never hear anyone utter anything about that anywhere. It's always people who should not have gotten a mortgage were buying houses they couldn't afford. Can anyone justify this for me? If so, please do. |
|