Definitely … Not a socialist … just a small business owner who has been squeezed and became very cognizant of those stepping out on issues having the means to do something but deciding to stay on the side lines…. Root and the bunch would serve the cause better if they focused on reality and that being the eligibility issue and criminal activitity that has been documented…(e.g.. SSI # Passport College Transcripts ) …Let us not forget that Trump got a response when he pressed the issue and then he let it go..

Davey boy …got an unread Mises link you want to put in for supporting your statements?

I’ll take his Mises-links over your blathering any day!

I look to Mises for honest, well-researched, and well-thought-out commentary, FlashShill. We can expect none of those from you.

We hear from WTS/JAY, “I’ll take his Mises-links over your blathering any day!” Be careful, JAY. You don’t want to get too close to Dave. The “new Jay” is much more effective than the “old Jay” and shouldn’t backslide into the swamp of ignorance that DaveH inhabits just to curry favor. And the use of “blathering” is getting rather old—-trite, adolescent (as Dave would say), and unimaginative—-that’s why you won’t find folks like me, flashy, robert, and GALT using it except when we are quoting the functionally illiterate..

DaveH says, “I look to Mises for honest, well-researched, and well-thought-out commentary, FlashShill. We can expect none of those from you”.

I have been researching Rothbard, Rockwell, and the Von Mises Institute (and Foundation) for some time now. Readers may recall how I caught DaveH in several instances of out right lying and misrepresentation in his use of mises links. Or perhaps you missed them since DaveH quickly ran for cover with his tail between his legs when exposed and refused to answer my charges. Most folks don’t seem to hold von mises in as high esteem as DaveH does—-quite to the contrary. I have saved a bunch of material for an appropriate time—DaveH having the nerve to talk about von mises horsepucky as “honest, well-researched, and well-thought-out” commentary rather than the propaganda that it is requires that I share some of my findings with you today. I hope you find this quote as informative as I did.

“The Ludwig von Mises Institute, founded in 1982 by Llewellyn Rockwell Jr. and still headed by him, is a major center promoting libertarian political theory and the Austrian School of free market economics, pioneered by the late economist Ludwig von Mises. It publishes seven journals, has printed more than 100 books, and offers scholarships, prizes, conferences and a major library at its Auburn, Ala., offices”.

“It also promotes a type of Darwinian view of society in which elites are seen as natural and any intervention by the government on behalf of social justice is destructive. The institute seems nostalgic for the days when, “because of selective mating, marriage, and the laws of civil and genetic inheritance, positions of natural authority [were] likely to be passed on within a few noble families.”

“But the rule of these natural elites and intellectuals, writes institute scholar Hans-Hermann Hoppe, is being ruined by statist meddling such as “affirmative action and forced integration,” which he said is “responsible for the almost complete destruction of private property rights, and the erosion of freedom of contract, association, and disassociation.”

“A key player in the institute for years was the late Murray Rothbard, who worked with Rockwell closely and co-edited a journal with him. The institute’s Web site includes a cybershrine to Rothbard, a man who complained that the “Officially Oppressed” of American society (read, blacks, women and so on) were a “parasitic burden,” forcing their “hapless Oppressors” to provide “an endless flow of benefits.”

“The call of ‘equality,’” he wrote, “is a siren song that can only mean the destruction of all that we cherish as being human.” Rothbard blamed much of what he disliked on meddling women. In the mid-1800s, a “legion of Yankee women” who were “not fettered by the responsibilities” of household work “imposed” voting rights for women on the nation. Later, Jewish women, after raising funds from “top Jewish financiers,” agitated for child labor laws, Rothbard adds with evident disgust. The “dominant tradition” of all these activist women, he suggests, is lesbianism”.

“Institute scholars also have promoted anti-immigrant views, positively reviewing Peter Brimelow’s Alien Nation”.

That’s a quote from SPLCenter.org: Into the Mainstream Quite telling, I think, and calls into question anything that issues from von mises, as well as the credibility of someone like DaveH who seems to think that anything and everything von mises says or prints is another testament of the Bible.

Dear Right Brain Thinker,

Your comment went to moderation because of the reference to the Southern Preposterous Lie Center. I normally don’t allow any information sourced to it to appear. We have exposed the SPLC’s lies here, including one they fabricated from whole cloth about me.

http://personalliberty.com/2012/06/18/more-preposterous-lies-from-the-center-of-all-preposterousness/
http://personalliberty.com/2012/03/09/patriots-are-radical-racist-hate-filled-terror-suspects/
http://personalliberty.com/2011/08/11/they-dont-want-us-doing-this-were-doing-it-anyway/
http://personalliberty.com/2010/05/10/fear-and-loathing-of-the-tea-party/

It was let through moderation to expose you for who you are. Only a fool and left-wing shill would use the Preposterous Lie Center as a source of information.

Best wishes,
Bob

Bob Livingston says, “Dear Right Brain Thinker, Your comment went to moderation because of the reference to the Southern Preposterous Lie Center. I normally don’t allow any information sourced to it to appear. We have exposed the SPLC’s lies here, including one they fabricated from whole cloth about me”. Bob then provides several links for perusal.

I’d like to thank Bob for showing some honesty and admitting that he defines what “Personal Liberty” means for us. It apparently means that it’s HIS personal liberty he’s talking about—-the “liberties” he and whoever else he employs to “moderate” employ when they ban particular ideas from the site and put some of us on permanent moderation if we step on certain toes. I don’t know how he squares that with the 1st. Amendment but it’s his site and if he wants me to go away, all he has to do is tell me so—if he truly believes in personal liberty and the 1st. Amendment, he should allow GALT and I and others the same “freedom” that he does to those on the extreme right. Unlike other “visitors” to the site, my self-image (and for some apparently, the need for a paycheck) does not make me come here. And I would think the the handful of us that are in any way out of step with the “masses” of PLD posters pose no real threat. Perhaps I’m mistaken there, but an occasional snowball of truth thrown into the gates of hell isn’t going to “cool things off” for more than a split second..

Bob also says, “It was let through moderation to expose you for who you are. Only a fool and left-wing shill would use the Preposterous Lie Center as a source of information”. I thank Bob for that also, and for the links to the various articles that actually “expose PLD and Bob for what HE is”—-I will say no more than to say that the SPLC is as legitimate “source of information” as PLD is, and it seems rather “weak” for you to go off in such a big-time way that you would ban all mention of them—if they are such a “nothing” group, why such a reaction?—-why wouldn’t you allow them to be mentioned and perhaps take that opportunity to remind everyone of how “bad” they are? I’m sure that many of the regular visitors to PLD would take the “hint” and attack any mention of SPLC.

And the link to the Iowa Republican Party Platform?—-I recommend that to all that may have forgotten it or never seen it—-it illustrates nicely why the Republicans lost the 2012 election and why they will likely continue to fade into obscurity if they don’t fight the extremists in their midst..

That reminds me of an interview I read about with a cuban citizen who was railing about the class disparity in America. The reporter asked “but don’t your highest income earners have less income than America’s lowest income earners?”. The Cuban’s reply was “Yes, but they are more equal”.
Ahh, you gotta love envy.

The problem isn’t capitalism, nor socialism, communism, oligarchies nor autocracies. The problem is when those, who get a better handle within whatever system is in place, lose connection with their higher sense of purpose and continue to line in “the jungle”. The Warburgs, the Rockefellers, and Carnegie had fallen victim to it, although, apparently, Carnegie had a change of heart later on. Philanthropy should not be confused with answering a call to a higher sense of purpose.

Perhaps at some point in the future, when leaders whom we trusted will no longer hoard wealth and resources for themselves or believe that they alone possess the genes necessary to pass on to future generations, maybe them socialism would just be just a name for a system of government. Capitalism is not by itself evil. Even a dictatorship can be good if the bottom line is the benefit of the people being ruled over.

The problem is that so many people, especially the leaders, are losing faith, period. And if they don’t have faith in God or feel that they must be responsible to any other authority beside themselves, their egos take over and they can then justify doing anything.

Gross national income per capita using Atlas Methodology:

Cuba — $5550
United States — $47,140

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GNIPC.pdf

And the health care in Cuba is rated very close to America.

Too bad not all Americans are covered, but all Cubans are.

Rob

Robert…and don’t forget…aside from the US and Canada, Cuba is the most advanced of the Latin and South American countries. All with an embargo against it by the richest country on earth. Wonder what the S Amer/Latin countries would have if the US embargo’d their economies….hmmmm…

Until recently, Cubans were justifiably proud of their health-care system. Life-expectancy matches that of Americans, who are eight times richer. Infant mortality ties with Canada’s as the lowest in the Americas. Measles jabs have been near-universal for more than 20 years, putting Cuba ahead of many rich countries.

But Cuba’s crumbling economy has put this system under stress. Though the state still trains armies of doctors, a third of these are deployed overseas in “soft-power” missions. Pharmacies are generally ill-stocked. In many hospitals patients must provide their own sheets, food and dressings. Neglect of infrastructure means that almost 10% of the population lacks access to clean drinking water. The American embargo against the island does not help: equipment for radiology, mammograms and cancer therapy is hard to replace, says Julia Sweig of the Council on Foreign Relations, an American think-tank.

Raúl Castro, the president, who this month visited China and Vietnam, is trying to revive the economy by cautiously transferring chunks of it into private hands. The next step, reported this week, will be to let transport and other service workers form co-operatives, currently restricted to farming. If the health service is to thrive again, this sort of economic surgery will need to speed up.

http://www.economist.com/node/21558613

Robert and Flashy, why hasn’t Obama the big-banana lifted the Embargo on Cuba as of yet? Either one of you two care two answer?

About Who’s Healthcare ratings:
http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp101.pdf

And so what if it was, Robert? Would you give up 7/8ths of your income to gain that healthcare?

“Robert and Flashy, why hasn’t Obama the big-banana lifted the Embargo on Cuba as of yet? Either one of you two care two answer?”

Easy answer..the Cuban American vote in Florida. What’s ironic is if the embargo was indeed lifted … I’d say the existing Cuban government wouldn’t last more than a year or two after that. And i also think the Cuban Americans wouldn’t be welcomed back with open arms…

You lie, Flashy. The only thing Obama has done is loosen the “travel-restrictions” for Americans traveling to Cuba. He has done “nada” with economic/trade embargo! How do you live with yourself?

Plain and simple Abolish the trade embargo! Should have ended about 40 years ago and should no longer be a political football.

Easy answer, Jay.
He’s a Sociopaths. Sociopaths don’t have consciences.

eddie47d says “Plain and simple Abolish the trade embargo! Should have ended about 40 years ago and should no longer be a political football”.

“Robert and Flashy, why hasn’t Obama the big-banana lifted the Embargo on Cuba as of yet? Either one of you two care two answer?”

Flashy says, “Easy answer..the Cuban American vote in Florida”.

WTS/JAY says something that makes me think he didn’t even read what Flashy said, and again demonstrates that the new and “less rational” JAY seems to be taking over.
“You lie, Flashy. The only thing Obama has done is loosen the “travel-restrictions” for Americans traveling to Cuba. He has done “nada” with economic/trade embargo! How do you live with yourself?”

And of course, DaveH, in spite of the seeming lack of coherence in what JAY says, misses no chance to spout an inanity and says,
“Easy answer, Jay. He’s a Sociopaths. Sociopaths don’t have consciences”.

My two cents—-eddie and Flash have made some points about the Cuban embargo and its political implications that perhaps invites further discussion, and JAY and DaveH once again demonstrate their lack of seriousness by doing some of that “blathering” they like to accuse others of engaging in. Hypocrisy? Lack of self-awareness?

Lyndia says, “I would think that it would be the middle class who would become non-existent and only the upper income and lower income would be left. This would mean that you would see only the very wealthy and the poor remaining. The governing body of the country would be among the wealthy, while the poor would have no hope to move up to a non existent middle class”

Yes, Lyndia—-you didn’t quite get what I was saying but you DO understand where the idea of “corporate feudalism” leads. It will be a more benign thing than in the middle ages—-all will be guaranteed a simple job, a roof over their heads, food, basic medical care, a minimal education, and even some vacations. Some will be allowed to become somewhat “middle class” because the bosses will need managers. But there will be no “moving up” as a matter of free will and hard work. The Plutocracy and Corporate Oligarchs will run things for the benefit of the corporate bottom line and the rich and they will determine what each of is allowed to do. They will be the “governing body” and the politicians and government we have today will cease to exist (or become some kind of figurehead). Not a pretty picture but we are well on our way there.

Bill, I have seen some pictures of some mighty pretty places in Detroit! I can’t help but believe that the recent events that kept people on their jobs there will make it even better!
Have you ever known of a big city, REGADLESS of the TYPE of government that controlled it, that didn’t have at least one surpressed )low income) area????I’m talking about cities throughout the history of mankind!! Who had the most ready supply of cash to fix it up and didn’t??? The local rich!! Enter the government ” to deliver a more perfect union’!! Demoocrats didn’t invent slums! They have been with us forever! If you don’t like them see if you can get the government to fix them!

The tax on football, baseball and basketball stadiums on it’s citizens that don’t use it is definitely a socialist act.

Steve E. It is fascism not socialism. Very similar except fascism has some private property, that is controlled by the elite few who are cronies of those in power in government. Read about how F.D.R. praised Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler for awhile before they were exposed as the monsters they were. He, like Obama, wanted to be the Dictator and actually was for awhile.

Eddie: Dang it Ollie we can’t have tax supported airports either which the business community greatly benefits from?

Same argument could be applied to wars, Eddie!

Oh yes those much needed Military Industrial Complex wars! Barf!

JAY starts out with the “warmup” at 8:13—-a not too contentious or complicated statement to get everyone’s attention. He then launches into a much longer and more subtly biased clip from a wing-nut site at 8:21. Good propaganda technique, Jay. I do think that you should have quoted this from the site as well. Once one filters out the obligatory right wing horsepucky about unions, Hollywood, and O’Bama-hate, it provides a perhaps more “fair and balanced” view.

“A key characteristic of the reality of fascist thinking is rampant cronyism and corruption. Certain capitalists, wishing to ingratiate themselves with the state, are willing to fund the election of those in power in exchange for favorable government contracts and avoidance of regulatory wrath. Recently, much of Wall Street, Hollywood, the unions, major companies such as General Electric, and the super-wealthy such as Warren Buffett are willing to sleep with those in power and be used as props in any propaganda campaign initiated by the Obama regime”.

“The Obama administration has, through the Justice Department and other agencies, behaved exactly as many quasi-fascist regimes in the past — almost all of whom have been governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect themselves and their friends from accountability”.

And in closing, a few more Benito Mussolini quotes:

Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.

Democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice it is a fallacy.

Socialism is a fraud, a comedy, a phantom, a blackmail.

The history of saints is mainly the history of insane people.

If Mussolini were alive today, he would have to modify that first one just a bit by considering the concept of corporate feudalism. I think that his vision of fascism and the view of most of those back in the 1920′s did not reach that far towards the subjugation that we see coming today.

It really amazes me to hear all of the liberals quote the media mantra of taxing the rich. They think that some smart accountant in the government will magically take the added revenue and apply it to our debt.

The reality is that money will just be pissed away on other things and the debt will grow. The real way to raise revenue is to lower taxes which will increase investment in the economy and increase revenue. History has shown us that is what works.

If you hear differently, it is just a BS story to sell you their ideas

“The real way to raise revenue is to lower taxes which will increase investment in the economy and increase revenue. History has shown us that is what works.” <— Bill on drugs

Bill…there is a balancing point where the cost of operations of government in fulfilling the social contract and the benefits of that contract co-exists and balance the burden versus the benefits. Historically, 30-32% of GDP give or take.

That number goes up when expenditures for war etc are required. We had two unfunded wars, a drop in revenues to close to 35% GDP, and a massive push of the policies begun under Reagan which raped the Middle Class and was, quite literally, redistribution of wealth from the Middle Class to the wealthy on a scale unprecedented in the history on Man. Add in the policies which caused the Crash of '07-'08 and you have what we face today.

Can anyone argue that as we are deeper in debt, the benefits received by the Middle Class has shrunk 1981-present? Can anyone argue that the Middle Class has taken it on the chin since 1981? What segment of our society flourished during that period of time? (the upper income wealthy).

Yes, spending has to be reduced, and revenue needs to rise. Both temporarily before we can pull ourselves out of the mess the Reagan and Bush II policies are negated.

Now…if you listen to the GOP in Congress…their plan? Nail the Middle Class yet some more. Don't touch the wealthy. Continue the Welfare for the Rich policies, reduce any program designed to assist the Middle and lower income segments.

Federal sending has flat lined during this administration. Check it out…spending has gone up less under President Obama less than any president the past 100 years. What hasn't been in the balance is revenues. Now we have the extremists stating that any further tax cuts need to be balanced by a cut in spending. Yes…and spending targeted at the masses…while the tax cuts need to be for the wealthy. More of the same formula which has crippled the REAL JOB CREATORS..the backbone of our economy…the Middle Class.

bill … it's called reality … you should try it.

RBT, me thinks you are too paranoid! In fact, you sound like right-winger…relax, take a deep breath, and stop assuming that your right-brain is always right.

WTS/JAY says, “RBT, me thinks you are too paranoid!” Since you share many of the same thoughts as I do about what’s ‘wrong”, does that make you paranoid too? And if we ARE both “paranoid” on this topic, it doesn’t mean they are not really “out to get us”, as the old saying goes.

Jay also says, “In fact, you sound like right-winger” Jay forgets that I have had this discussion before with many of the folks on the site. Maybe he will listen a bit more than many of them did when I say I am a true conservative in that I want to preserve the nation and AM a “right-winger” in that regard. That I believe in freedom, personal liberty, and capitalism more than the so-called Libertarians on this site.

So many have gone running into the swamps of La-La Land on the extreme right because they have bought the horsepucky of the plutocracy and corporate oligarchs, leaving me standing right where I was all along (except that now I’ve gone from being “conservative” to being a communist-marxist-socialist-fascist—-you know, one of those “ists” that believes in one of those “isms” that the ignorant call me and talk so much about on PLD (and they DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE “ISM” and “IST” WORDS MEAN!)

Jay also tells me to “….stop assuming that your right-brain is always right”. Not an assumption, JAY—-my “right brain” IS always right until someone proves that it is not—-when they do, I admit error, which is something that hardly anyone on PLD has ever done, certainly not some of the biggest “fools” on the site that are always responding to my arguments with smug name-calling.and meaningless references.

Reagan did his part in giving the Banksters free reign which caused major problem. He also made those same Banksters accountable after the Keating Scandal. After Reagan the laws and regulations were loosened up again which once again caused our economy to falter. Terrible banking practices are often behind capitalism being washed down the toilet.

Reagan borrowed and spent his way out of the recession….actually, three under his regime if you count the post-Vietnam, oil shortage one we were coming outm of when he took office. .

Eddie: Reagan did his part in giving the Banksters free reign which caused major problem.

They all did their part and Obama is no different, except, he cranked it up a few notches!!!

WTS/JAY says, “Umm, that’s why i supplied the link, RBT, that way people could go to the site and read the article in its entirety, rather than use up space on the thread”.

Ummmmmmmmm, SURE you did, JAY. Nice try, but you won’t get me to believe that you weren’t just doing a little of the “cherry-picking” we see so much of on this site. That’s why I pulled a little “antidote” to the “poison” from the very same article—-fair is fair.

We ALL know that most folks don’t go and read these “sources”, especially since so many of them are dead ends like the von mises stuff that DaveH wants us to believe actually mean something. Tends to make folks say to themselves “why bother”? Of course, the fact that they have read the horsepucky in the first place and a little will stick to the wall once “thrown” is a plus fro the propagandist—-repeat a lie enough times and some will think it’s true. You know—-O’Bama is a Muslim—-O’Bama has issued 900+ executive orders—-O’Bama is a socialist—-it wasn’t Bush’s fault.

Hmm, you make a lot of assumptions about, and hurl many accusation at this mysterious “right” you claim exists. Where is this, so-called “right” you and a few others on this site keep ranting about? Now granted, there are “labels” people wear, or have been assigned, that may or may not encapsulate their world-view; but we should not haphazardly slap a derogatory-label on anyone simply because they disagree with us, don’t you agree? For doing so simply brings to the surface, your insecurities and your lack of proper judgment Of course, “labels” do play an important-role; they are blips on a radar-screen, however, they are limited, as they are not, and do not tell the full-story; and some, has been discovered, are in the habit of wearing them “under falls pretence”!

Now, i understand your love affair with respect to Obama, and regard your back-lash and flailing-about in blind-rage at anyone who criticizes him, understandable; but this is not, proper behaviour displayed by someone who claims to have held a position of leadership in the education-industry. Surely, RBT, adding a different opinion to your limited repartee, i should think, would enhance your perspective, and not, as you fear, undermine it! Chillax dude, don/t be so insecure!

WTS/JAY has thrown so much horsepucky against the wall here that they will have to sandblast him clean—-that’s because none of it stuck and he has got to be covered in it.

JAY asks,”Where is this, so-called “right” you and a few others on this site keep ranting about?”
And says “….but we should not haphazardly slap a derogatory-label on anyone simply because they disagree with us, don’t you agree?”
And says, “For doing so simply brings to the surface, your insecurities and your lack of proper judgment”

Lord love a duck, JAY!—-you can really sling it!

Jay “understands (my) love affair with respect to Obama, and regard your back-lash and flailing-about in blind-rage at anyone who criticizes him”
That rates more than a LLAD, JAY—it rates a LIAR and a DIRTY POOL because you are stating an untruth in an attempt to smear me—-page ? in the Troll Manual?—-I have perhaps said more anti-O’Bama things today than on any other day I’ve visited PLD. Stop lying—-it’s a cheap way to score points.

And JAY thnks he is somehow qualified to make this judgment, “but this is not, proper behaviour displayed by someone who claims to have held a position of leadership in the education-industry”. Another attempted smear (or is it just mandibular diarrhea?)

And JAY closes with smugness and condescension, the refuge of those who really have nothing to say and are just trying to get someone’s goat.. “Surely, RBT, adding a different opinion to your limited repartee, i should think, would enhance your perspective, and not, as you fear, undermine it! Chillax dude, don/t be so insecure!” Here’s a little “goat talk” for you—-GFYS, JAY. The “new” JAY is becoming less attractive every day. Do you really need the paycheck that bad?

Well…Doc, ya think we have a pattern ? let’s see…President Obama has so far this thread been termed a socialist, a Marxist, a communist, a fascist, a dictator, a Muslim, foreign born … so far though, i haven’t read of the FEMA camps, the UN plots, his child born of wedlock with an alien from another solar system, his plan to take the guns, etc….

Am i missing some of the other “claims’ ?

Then by all means, humour us, Flashy. Who/what, do you think is an “Obama”?

Also, the illegitimate son of Frank Marshall. Recently, I read on the Before Its News rag (Globe of the internet) that he was actually born in Kansas and there are some murders involved. The writing was so incoherent I couldn’t even figure out what the woman was saying.

Great comeback Sarvis, that education didn’t go to waste, did it?

You forgot a pathological liar, everything about OhBozo is a sham, fraud, fake, and deceptive.

a socialist, a Marxist, a communist, a fascist, a dictator, a Muslim, foreign born, a pathological liar … so far though, i haven’t read of the FEMA camps, the UN plots, his child born of wedlock with an alien from another solar system, his plan to take the guns, etc….

Motov…everything read OK now? Did i get the list? Do you concur with the FEMA/UN/Alien space baby references so I can include those in today’s list of rants?

Another words, Flash, you have absolutely no idea, who or what Obama is, do you?

And you want some “terror” from your president? Just wait until Hilary gets elected in 2106! (With Elizabeth Warren as her veep and Tammy Duckworth as the SecDef).

At least Hilary’s post-menopausal, so we don’t have to worry about her having a PMS attack and doing something Un-American like rounding up all the wing-nuts and sending them to the FEMA camps. .

OOOPS—-that’s 2016—–Hil and Bill will likely be around for a long time but not that long.

Yup every president since 1913, when two things happened,
1) The creation of the Federal Reserve
2) Income taxes was passed (After altering the Constitution, so it would stand)
We have been getting screwed since

You are correct, Doc!

Here’s one…That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,…

Steve….just where exactly, is that “Right” in the Constitution?

Flashy, what in the world is a “Constitution”?

WTS…excuse me. So you are aware..the Constitution of the United States.

Clear now?

Flashy, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution go hand in hand.

“Flashy, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution go hand in hand.”<–Steve E

by the gawds above ,eyes rolling. … would you also include the Articles of Confederation? Or…how about old Archie comic books ?

Flashy: WTS…excuse me. So you are aware..the Constitution of the United States.

Clear now?

Oh, you mean that document forged by our fore-fathers that the “fascist-progs” consider to be nothing more than toilet-paper and fight over who, amongst them, should be the first to wipe his/her azz with? Oh, now i get ya…thanks for the clarification!

The Bill of Rights:
http://www.cato.org/blog/today-bill-rights-day

Flashshill says — “Steve….just where exactly, is that “Right” in the Constitution?”

It isn’t. That comes from the Declaration of Independence:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/constitution/declarationcopy_en.html

Flashman says — “by the gawds above ,eyes rolling”.

Interesting that Flashshill brought up that common visual Liberal Progressive technique that is used to manipulate those with weak minds. But we must forgive them, because Facts and Logic is not their strong suit, so they have little choice but to use adolescent manipulative techniques.

I honestly respect all opinions. However in this case i find that the satement regarding the democratic party is universal with no solid bases. Might be the same point of view postulating Obama like a realcomunist….

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/01/the_right_wing_dreams_of_demented_utopias/?source=newsletter

I thought Root claimed to be a die-hard repub. only recently.

What the hell is a die-hard-repub? Is that the same as a die-hard-democrat?

A die-hard-repub is someone who is a RINO but doesn’t know he/she is. They vote Republican but don’t realize that the person they are voting for is a sociopath. They also despise Libertarians who are the true liberty lovers.

Well Steve, at least he has run as one in the past.
What is a real Libertarian? Read this:
http://library.mises.org/books/Murray%20N%20Rothbard/For%20a%20New%20Liberty%20The%20Libertarian%20Manifesto.pdf

Flashshill posts his link to a credible article (that’s a joke).

Sub-Title of Article:
“It used to be liberals who wanted to remake society according to a theory. Now that’s the looney dream of the right”.
Oh yeah, that’s Fair and Balanced.

For the first 100 years of our Country’s existence, Government spent less than 3% of our GDP each year. The value of our money actually grew to double over those 100 years. The people could purchase twice the amount of goods and services that they could 100 years earlier with the same dollar.
Then by 1910 Government Spending grew to 8% of GDP.
Now Government spends 41% of our GDP.
And what did we get for that? A Great Depression, a currency that buys 1/23rd of what it could buy in 1913, and now this current economic calamity.

And they call those who know there’s a better way “looney”?

What else? Name-calling and obfuscation is all they have.

Wayne is NOW a Republican – he gave up on the USLP this past fall.
Premature departure methinks since Libertarians made great advances this past year. It will take a while but !VENCEREMOS!

“Then by 1910 Government Spending grew to 8% of GDP.” <– Davey boy doing a good job he has no idea what he's talking about.

So we should itemize each area of the budget to reflect spending in 1910? A military budget of less than 15 of GDP? Transportation budget of less than that? Health?

Davey…you use numbers to perpetuate a myth. i don't think you do it knowingly lying…i just don't think you have a clue or know what you're talking about.

OOps…15 should be 1%

“i just don’t think you have a clue or know what you’re talking about.”

You certainly do not think Flushy you just repeat what your superiors (who pay you to write reports about what is said on PLD) tell you to.

Flashshill,
Feel free to point out anything that I said which is untrue.

Or you could tell us another Sniper Story.

DaveH, would you mind providing the link to Flashy’s “Sniper-story”? I should like to read it once more.

Excuse me, but the dailyfinance.com reference I posted is based on Merriam-Webster’s definition of Socialism. Are you telling me that is not a valid source for definitions?

Paul Wells says that DOC has “redefined” socialism? Lord love a duck, Paul!.

YOU are the one that has swallowed the “redefinition of socialism” kool-aid, not Doc. Someone else mentioned some of the many things that move O’Bama pretty far over into the center (and even to the right of that a bit)—–did you pay any attention to that? Or does your status as an “only one flavor kool-aid drinker allowed” make that impossible?

Speaking of blind folks, you should also have included the one that goes “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king” (or something like that). Doc has at least one eye and can perhaps explain to you how Richard Nixon (definitely) and Ronald Reagan (in more than a few ways) would be “Liberals” under today’s insane definition of the term.

You’re beyond “sad”, Paul. You are deluded if you can’t recognize the fallacies in the “O’Bama is a socialist-communist-Marxist-fascist-Nazi” horsepucky and the FACTS that he has demonstrated in many ways that he is just a kinder, gentler version of the front men for the plutocracy and corporate oligarchy that have been working to enslave us for the last 30+years.

Doc….these are folks who have stated that the SCOTUS is not the Constitutional final arbiter of what the Constitution says and means. They “know’….no one else is correct or has any validity. Socialism is what they say it is…not what the vast majority know it to be.

For example, ask Davey boy…he’d come up with some farcical nonsense, claim you’re denigrating him, and send a Mises link on another subject stating without doubt it was informative (though he doesn’t read them)

I would seriously think that if Socialist Magazine does not think Obama is a socialist, then he isn’t.

Flashy says, “…these are folks who have stated that the SCOTUS is not the Constitutional final arbiter of what the Constitution says and means.”

You speak in half-truths by not understanding the Constitution or what your opponent is actually arguing.

SCOTUS as final arbiter is constitutional only as it pertains to a specific case and that ruling then only pertains to that case… which can even be appealed. In that sense, they are the final arbiter, but the practice of judicial review without a specific case – meaning, it must meet the guidelines for a case to be heard, as opposed to having them rule on something just to give the ok or see what they say – is not constitutional in itself, and even when practiced, such ruling does not stand as law. A tribunal of unelected officials for life does not have the constitutional power to declare themselves the final arbiter of all constitutional questions as if to pass legislation either by ruling or mere review of all acts of the Legislative branch.

This is especially true regarding secession in which the principle of contract, the obligation is mutual; that the failure of one of the contracting parties to perform a material part of the agreement, entirely releases the obligation of the other, and where no arbiter is provided (because federal government – SCOTUS – being its own arbiter is like a plaintiff being judge and jury, or like the wolf guarding the hen house) each party remitted to his own judgment to determine the fact of failure, with all its consequences.

The power of the sovereign state also has the power of nullification against any law its own Supreme court deems unconstitutional.

Karolyn: I would seriously think that if Socialist Magazine does not think Obama is a socialist, then he isn’t.

That’s because he’s not, a Socialist. Obama, is Fascist!

“SCOTUS as final arbiter is constitutional only as it pertains to a specific case and that ruling then only pertains to that case… which can even be appealed.” <— TML

Errrr…TML, what is the higher level of appeal as to whether something is within the Constitutional powers or is unconstitutional? As for the remainder of your rant…you would be well served to red marbury v madison… a principle case which has been adhered to since it's writing…back in 1803. now…if that case was in error…given so many of the drafters were still breathing (including Jefferson, Adams, Washington, etc…) would you not think they'd be united as one voice saying 'not so!" ?

And now, after 210 years of recognizing that case as the basic case for the role and powers of the SCOTUS, you state today that it was all in error? because….you say so?

RBT: You are deluded if you can’t recognize the fallacies in the “O’Bama is a socialist-communist-Marxist-fascist-Nazi” horsepucky and the FACTS that he has demonstrated in many ways that he is just a kinder, gentler version of the front men for the plutocracy and corporate oligarchy that have been working to enslave us for the last 30+years.

Actually, that’s a very nice way of putting it, RBT, and remarkably accurate. That’s like saying; Jeffrey Dahmer, is a kinder and gentler version of all “homicidal-maniacs” that have been preying on society since time immemorial!

Flashy says, “what is the higher level of appeal as to whether something is within the Constitutional powers or is unconstitutional?”

It can be appealed, not necessarily to a higher court, but because it is understood as mere interpretation by a fallible group of individuals.

Flashy says, “As for the remainder of your rant…you would be well served to red marbury v madison… a principle case which has been adhered to since it’s writing…back in 1803. now…if that case was in error…given so many of the drafters were still breathing (including Jefferson, Adams, Washington, etc…) would you not think they’d be united as one voice saying ‘not so!” ?”

I have read it, and was the exact case I referred to when I stated that a tribunal of unelected officials for life does not have the constitutional power to act as an oligarchy, to declare themselves the final arbiter of all constitutional questions, even above the Legislative branch or the States which are a party to the constitution. As to your question, both Madison and Jefferson (among many others) DID unite in saying no to the doctrine of judicial review, which is nowhere expressly delegated to the Supreme Court in the Constitution.

Flashy says, “And now, after 210 years of recognizing that case as the basic case for the role and powers of the SCOTUS, you state today that it was all in error? because….you say so?”

The tradition of referencing that case does not mean that it is constitutional. And you don’t have to take my word for it; you can easily reference Madison’s and Jefferson’s writings on judicial review and nullification.

I think you are the kool aid drinker Paul Wells. There are many on the left who don’t think Obama is a socialist and certainly not a communist so enough of your pet names. Some think he is a die hard crony capitalist and almost as bad as Bush as a warmonger. You need to put on your thinking cap more often because you are too often wrong..

Flashy says, “what is the higher level of appeal as to whether something is within the Constitutional powers or is unconstitutional?”

TML says, “It can be appealed, not necessarily to a higher court, but because it is understood as mere interpretation by a fallible group of individuals.”

To help you better, it is the specific Supreme Court Rule #44

TML….As of 2010, the United States Supreme Court had held unconstitutional some 163 Acts of the U.S. Congress. That’s from Wikipedia. Instead of going through the process of the Doctrine of judicial review…and aside from Jefferson stating the SCOTUS may not have review, he never argued state courts lacked the power. And..ironic isn’t it that Jefferson followed the SCOTUS decisions?

Here is a fairly good explanation of Marbury and judicial review. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review_in_the_United_States

If I may ask…who decides what the Constitution allows if two or more parties disagree?

if i state guns are for militia and not private ownership…and you state guns are a right of the individual….who decides which interpretation is correct?

Flashy says, “Instead of going through the process of the Doctrine of judicial review…and aside from Jefferson stating the SCOTUS may not have review, he never argued state courts lacked the power. And..ironic isn’t it that Jefferson followed the SCOTUS decisions?”

You will have to be more specific. Exactly what SCOTUS decisions are you claiming Jefferson “followed”?

Flashy says, “Here is a fairly good explanation of Marbury and judicial review. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review_in_the_United_States”

From your own source – “The United States Constitution does not explicitly establish the power of judicial review.”. I will then refer you to the 10th Amendment, and its first ratification.

“The powers NOT DELEGATED to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

“The United States shall guaranty to each state its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is NOT by this Constitution EXPRESSLY DELEGATED to the United States.”

Aside from the writing of Jefferson, here is a better explanation… http://constitutionality.us/SupremeCourt.html

Judicial review upsets the balance of power between the other two co-equal and co-sovereign branches of government by assuming that one has the power to prescribe rules to the other two.

Flashy says, “If I may ask…who decides what the Constitution allows if two or more parties disagree?
if i state guns are for militia and not private ownership…and you state guns are a right of the individual….who decides which interpretation is correct?”

As I understand it, it entirely depends on who the parties are and if there is actually a case to be heard. In your example, it is between you and I, in which, yes, the Supreme Court would have final say on that particular case IF it was an actual case in which you or I were physically, financially, or otherwise injured (or deprived of right) by our disagreement. You can’t go to the Supreme Court just to settle a general disagreement, or just check an idea or even an act of congress for constitutionality without a legitimate case to rule upon – to do so is the essence of judicial review. Yet, even then, their ruling is only for our specific case, and not necessarily a blanket ruling. I can use their past ruling to support my claims, as you are doing now, and as I would do if you argued the Constitution does not protect the right of the individual to bear arms, but these rulings are still NOT law. Future tribunals are not required to uphold past rulings as if they were.

The Supreme Court is final arbiter in cases between individuals, between individuals and a state, and between interstate disputes.

The only time in which the SCOTUS is not the final arbiter, is in a case in which the two parties are the federal government, and a state under the principles of nullification or secession, and the third principle of contract that I mentioned above.

“Judicial review upsets the balance of power between the other two co-equal and co-sovereign branches of government by assuming that one has the power to prescribe rules to the other two. ” <— TML

Thanks for your comments TML. Interesting and food for thought. i don't agree…but you gave an very interesting line and perspective.

Flashy: Thanks for your comments TML. Interesting and food for thought. i don’t agree…but you gave an very interesting line and perspective.

Another words, you forfeit the debate. Naturally, since you are no match for TML!

WTS…what gives that impression? I thanked TML for a thoughtful interesting commentary. I disagree, but it doesn’t take away he gave a well thought and well written comment.

If President Obama wanted to be a world dictator he would not have pulled combat troops out of Iraq (ahead of schedule), nor would he be pulling troops out of Afghanistan. He would also NOT go along with the Pentagon’s lower budget reccomendations.

Doc, who got us involved in Libya and Syria? Who is authorizing drone strikes in Pakistan and Iran? He allegedly pulled out the military from Iraq but did he pull out American civilians and corporations? Doubt it….

rendarsmith,
Pulling American civilians and corporations out of Iraq would be a dictatorial and anti-capitalist thing to do. President Obama would never do such anti-American behavior.

Funny you say that Doc, since the whole point of these wars was to put them there in the first place….but that’s all Bush’s doing right?

Ignoring the low intellect and lack of respect for the nation shown by a cretin who calls the president Obumbo, Doc and rendarsmith say things that warrant a reply.

Doc says, “If President Obama wanted to be a world dictator he would not have pulled combat troops out of Iraq (ahead of schedule), nor would he be pulling troops out of Afghanistan. He would also NOT go along with the Pentagon’s lower budget recommendations”.

Correct, Doc. And you could cite many other pieces of evidence, but why waste the time? Truth is truth and just piling it up doesn’t make it any more true (although the folks who like to post lies on the site seem to think that “piled higher and deeper” DOES turn lies into truth)

rendarsmith says “Doc, who got us involved in Libya and Syria? Who is authorizing drone strikes in Pakistan and Iran? He allegedly pulled out the military from Iraq but did he pull out American civilians and corporations? Doubt it….”

Good points, r-man. Perhaps the behavior of the Libyans and Syrians and our position as a world leader got us involved in the rather limited way that we did? A lot better than chasing non-existent WMD’s as an excuse for a real war (by real, I mean many people dying). And have you been paying attention, R-man? Drone strikes are the “new” way of fighting right now, and the defense contractors get a lot richer making drones than they did making .223 rounds. Just like they got a lot richer by providing so many “contractors” and paid mercenaries to the two wars—-so many that they actually outnumbered the troops in uniform at one point. You are correct to doubt that O’Bama is “pulling out” as many as he might if he weren’t part of the “game”.

PS When did we ever have a drone STRIKE in Iran? Don’t you believe “them” when they tell us that the one the Iranians shot down “malfunctioned”? And that it was only cruising along the border and doing a little harmless “sightseeing” when those vicious Iranians attacked it?.

rendarsmith gets it! He understands that “the whole point of these wars was to put them there in the first place”.

And then he shows that he REALLY gets it when he adds, ” ….but that’s all Bush’s doing right?” Not ALL Bush’s fault, R-man—-he was just the “front man” for Cheney and his corporate cronies (and he even had some help from the many Democrats who have sold us out as well).

RBT: Not ALL Bush’s fault, R-man—-he was just the “front man” for Cheney and his corporate cronies (and he even had some help from the many Democrats who have sold us out as well).

Wow, i couldn’t agree more! And neither is it all Obama’s fault; Obama is just the “Closer”! The “idiotic” notion/claim that it is the fault of one President, or that the fault should be laid at feet of one particulat-party or the other, is a claim made by idiots, who haven’t the presence of mind to realize that the demise of our nation was/is a well orchestrated plot where “all”, political-parties were complicit, and that, from the top-down and bottom-up!!!

Doc: Pulling American civilians and corporations out of Iraq would be a dictatorial and anti-capitalist thing to do. President Obama would never do such anti-American behavior.

I was under the impression that “progs” consider “Capitalism” to be evil, dictatorial and anti-american? Oh, i get it, only on American-soil is “Capitalism” viewed as; evil, dictatorial and anti-American, i get ya, Doc!

Doc says — “he would not have pulled combat troops out of Iraq (ahead of schedule)”.

Then RBT says — “Correct, Doc. And you could cite many other pieces of evidence, but why waste the time? Truth is truth”.

Ahead of schedule?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WYTKj8pU5M

The actual withdrawal in December of 2011 was done because the Iraqi Government asked the US military to leave. See link in next comment:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/21/iraq-rejects-us-plea-bases

Obama and, more accurately, his handlers, are following a carefully orchestrated plan to bring this country down and create a dictatorship and you dorks are argueing over how to LABEL it!!??

I imagine those in high office must laugh their heads off at the stupid way people argue about which POTUS did what.

The truth is, they make none of the decisions. They take instructions from the uber-elite foreign banking corporations, and it doesn’t matter one bit which side of the fence they fall on.

We waste so much time arguing about Obama this, Bush that. Good grief. We’re like a bunch of school kids fighting about whose daddy is best.

Until the snake is cut off at the head, it doesn’t matter who takes elections. There are no real elections, anyway.

Actually, from what I’ve been hearing under the radar, the cabals are being taken down…even have been taken down… And we are about to see some real changes taking place.

What we need to do is to start thinking and acting like free people. They’ll keep up the charade as long as they can. It’s really up to us.

For what it’s worth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=paz5lEoxXrc#!

DaveH says: “The actual withdrawal in December of 2011 was done because the Iraqi Government asked the US military to leave”.

Really? “Asked” us? Are you sure that we wouldn’t still be there IF the Iraqis hadn’t made unreasonable demands on us? Ones that made it untenable for us to remain there?

It’s because OhBozo is really a puppet for those who want a one world government.
It’s why he needs his teleprompter every time he lies to the american sheeple.

Well, after all, spokesperson for all black people Jamie Foxx said Obama …”was their lord and savior”. I mean…that’s enough to sway the case, right? Idiots, each and every one!

Mr 1971 is neither a rational human being or even a Conservative so why do you troll this site. (nasty man) Motov can’t be much better with his old news Republican talking point about teleprompters and one world government. Hey that was H Bush’s baby! Then Paul Wells can’t comprehend that Foxx is a comedian who was mocking the Conservatives who claim that Obama is a Savior. I bagged the 3 stooges in one clean sweep and they will continue in their ignorance!

And once again fast eddy is really fast,………asleep!

I received plenty of sleep last night Motov but thanks for your concern. LOL!

Ah, finally, somebody get’s it!!! You are absolutely correct, Capitalist!

It really doesn’t matter what they call themselves. If they Force their way on the people, they are tyrants.

Nice of you to quote a true Socialist, Jesus.

Doc Sarvis, Where is your evidence that Jesus was a socialist. I have studied the bible and the history of religion. No where did Jesus ever espouse socialism Yes you can take parts of parables and take them out of context to try to paint that picture. but no where is there any evidence.

Hey Capitalist, wasn’t it Jesus who tipped the tables of the money changers?

Wasn’t it Jesus who healed people without charging them?

Rob

Oh, Jesus was a socialist? Well, he did do miracles for those least able, so if that is honestly what you *think* a socialist is, yes, I guess you could warp your mind around Jesus being a socialist.

But, concerning what the good book says about moochers, which socialists also condone the behavior of:

For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “If a man will not work, he shall not eat.” 2 Thessalonians 3:10

Lazy hands make a man poor, but diligent hands bring wealth. Proverbs 10:4

How long will you lie there, you sluggard? When will you get up from your sleep? A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest — and poverty will come on you like a bandit and scarcity like an armed man. Proverbs 6:9-11

Not that any of you libtards would ever actually pick up a Bible to see what God thinks.

Robert says — “Wasn’t it Jesus who healed people without charging them?”.

That one was pretty ignorant even for you, Robert. In Free Markets (Capitalism) you can charge your customer whatever you please if they will accept the charge as a fair exchange.

How does your brutal god deal with the 1%?

Rob

its amazing and Ironic that the 1 % majority of them support Obama . so what does that tell ya about true fiscal and Tax code reform ever coming to be with the grand Bargain B.S and all that Jive ?

It’s that 1% who owns both parties, Didn’t matter who won the election because it would have been the same crap but in a different package, There was no major change when OhBozo took over from the Shrub, OhBozo just picked up where the Shrub left off.
This has been going on for decades. They were a tad scared at first but they told the press and the GOP to ignore Ron Paul. He was their only threat.
Everything else didn’t matter as it was designed to keep the sheeple from listening to someone who believed in the constitution. Everything was just a show.
What will happen is by raising taxes,….Congress with OhBozo will increase spending
because they will believe there will be an increase of revenue. The debt is not even in their microscopic brains.

Tony: The Bible has alot to say about abuse from the 1% (wealthy).James 2:5 Has not God chosen the poor in the world to be rich in Faith and to be heirs of the kingdom that He has promised to those who love Him? 6: But you (wealthy) have dishonored the poor. Is it not the rich who oppress you?

Paul Wells: You mean us terrible (commie)”Libtards”? Your words! Mark 12:41-44 “Many rich people put in large sums . A poor widow came and put in two small copper coins which are worth a penny. Then Jesus says to his Disciples Truly I tell you this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. They gave out of abundance but she out of poverty has put in everything she had”. Not much different than today where the wealthy stoke themselves to make a name for themselves while the poor are looked down upon. How about the well known Mark 10:25 “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of the needle than for someone who is rich to enter the Kingdom of God”

Eddie: The Bible has alot to say about abuse from the 1% (wealthy).James 2:5 Has not God chosen the poor in the world to be rich in Faith and to be heirs of the kingdom that He has promised to those who love Him? 6: But you (wealthy) have dishonored the poor. Is it not the rich who oppress you?

Eddie, Jesus was speaking of the “rich” who had political power with which to oppress the “poor”. Not, the “rich” in general. Another words, it wasn’t a generalized-statement, but a judgmental-statement, aimed at a very specific group. You need to start reading “in-Context”.

Doc Sarvis, Robert Smith: Neither of you know $hit about Jesus, if you think he was a socialist. He advocated individuals CHOOSING to help the poor and less fortunate. Never did he advocate the forced redistribution of wealth by the government. It is the CHOICE that makes the act Christian, and the force that makes the act socialist.

I don’t know if Robert was talking to me or not, but I am pretty sure he has no clue as to who the One Percenters really are:
http://mises.org/daily/5776/The-State-is-the-1-Percent

WTS: He was talking about the rich in general who went to the Temple to impress the priests and to gain favor. The poor woman was gaining nothing (except her soul).

Excerpt from the article, DaveH. Couldn’t resist.

“In fact, that 1 percent includes some of the smartest, most innovative people in the country — the people who invent, market, and distribute material blessings to the whole population. But there is another 1 percent out there…”

The “occupy” protest movement is thriving off the claim that the 99 percent are being exploited by the 1 percent, and there is truth in what they say. But they have the identities of the groups wrong. They imagine that it is the 1 percent of highest wealth holders who are the problem. In fact, that 1 percent includes some of the smartest, most innovative people in the country — the people who invent, market, and distribute material blessings to the whole population. They also own the capital that sustains productivity and growth.

But there is another 1 percent out there, those who do live parasitically off the population and exploit the 99 percent. Moreover, there is a long intellectual tradition, dating back to the late Middle Ages, that draws attention to the strange reality that a tiny minority lives off the productive labor of the overwhelming majority.

I’m speaking of the state, which even today is made up of a tiny sliver of the population but is the direct cause of all the impoverishing wars, inflation, taxes, regimentation, and social conflict. This 1 percent is the direct cause of the violence, the censorship, the unemployment, and vast amounts of poverty, too.

Look at the numbers, rounding from latest data. The US population is 307 million. There are about 20 million government employees at all levels, which makes 6.5 percent. But 6.2 million of these people are public-school teachers, whom I think we can say are not really the ruling elite. That takes us down to 4.4 percent.

We can knock of another half million who work for the post office, and probably the same who work for various service department bureaus. Probably another million do not work in any enforcement arm of the state, and there’s also the amazing labor-pool fluff that comes with any government work. Local governments do not cause nationwide problems (usually), and the same might be said of the 50 states. The real problem is at the federal level (8.5 million), from which we can subtract fluff, drones, and service workers.

In the end, we end up with about 3 million people who constitute what is commonly called the state. For short, we can just call these people the 1 percent.

The 1 percent do not generate any wealth of their own. Everything they have they get by taking from others under the cover of law. They live at our expense. Without us, the state as an institution would die.

There you have it folks, there is your 1% that feeds off the life-blood from the American tax-payers!

It would seem that the “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate” DavidH has given us
another mindless link to “von mises”……..

“They imagine that it is the 1 percent of highest wealth holders who are the problem. In fact, that 1 percent includes some of the smartest, most innovative people in the country — the people who invent, market, and distribute material blessings to the whole population. They also own the capital that sustains productivity and growth.”

Unfortunately the author ( L. Rockwell ) neglected to “identify” any of these people.

Maybe DavidH, who seems to rely on this “source” for most of what he claims
is “his understanding” of “things” ( and the solution ) could provide us with
this list…….either on his own ( which would not be a good idea ) or directly
from the “source”……( since it is possible that maybe it exists in other offerings
by Mr. Rockwell? )

It might also be interesting to see a list of David’s “crony capitalists” in contrast
to these yet “unidentified” list of what we might possibly assume are “non crony capitalist’s”, since we are actually being referred to this link, for a reason?

Which is the continual problem with the “functionally illiterate” part of DavidH,
in that he never actually understands anything he reads…….which is
why he never makes “any sense”………but we shall see…….

David?

YO VICKI……this is the “original POST” which asks THE question of “DavidH.”

Do you see a response to the question?

Are you a “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate” like DavidH……is?

I think buckeye8 has been eating Buckeyes.

Charlie: I think you have that backwards somewhat. Its the poor who don’t register to vote. Its the poor/lower middle class who can’t afford to take time off from work to vote. Sure there are poor at home who could vote but don’t have a way to get to the polls. Yes if the system was fair there would be an awakening and they would find a way to vote.

Right eddie!?!!
Seems like many people do a ‘feel-good’ think and find personal relief in speaking for “the poor”.
Not counting Food Stamps, ADC, SNAP, School Lunches, Welfare, Subsidized Housing and Grants in Aid, plus Free Bus Tokens; what poor are you referring to? It must be the worker that has to pay for all these ‘benefits!

Good point Charlie but you initially were talking about the voting blocks so that is how I responded.

A country that adopts socialist policies is not a socialist country….ok that makes perfect sense. Brilliant logic there Doc! What is a socialist country then?

Doc…in any other era, President Obama would be deemed a conservative Moderate. With the hold the extremists have on the GOP, Reagan would not have made it out of the first set of primaries…being viewed as too liberal.

it’s the swan song of the extremists. We can only hold our breath hoping they don’t do too much further damage as they are pushed into the corner to be ignored and marginalized. They know it’s a downhill slide for their influence and time. They won’t admit it…they’ll scream in self inflated importance, and try to derail any rebuilding of this nation from the damages they wrought these past few years…but in the end, they will have made the GOP into a minority party and then we can continue the rebuilding from their destructive policies unhindered by their rants.

Ok lets try “Fascist” , “Crook”, “Compulsive Liar”, “Egoist”, “Maniac”, “Moron”. “Anti Constitutionalist”…….

Socialist do not know that they are socialist. That’s the magic that stupidity brings with it.

More fascist than socialist. If you had read “The Obamanation” you would know that already.

The more education people attend to the dumber they seems to become. If in fact you are a doc. I once heard that people that finish at the bottom of the class are also call doctors.

And if your name is Doc Sarvis, you are a socialist

I do know Doc!
When your actions are separated from reality by more than 3 degrees – you ARE DREAMING, big boy.

Flashshill says — “Doc…in any other era, President Obama would be deemed a conservative Moderate. With the hold the extremists have on the GOP, Reagan would not have made it out of the first set of primaries…being viewed as too liberal”.
The extremist Flashman calls anybody, who knows as our Founders did that Big Government serves Big Government, an “extremist” because it’s what manipulative shill operatives do to sway ignorant minds.
The funny thing is that those ignorant people are already in his camp so he gains nothing but looking like a fool.

Davey boy … since there were literally hundreds of “Founders”, which ones are you talking about? And were they federalists or democrats?

In comments relating to judicial review, many of the Contnential Congress and Fist Congress indicated that the power of judges to declare laws unconstitutional was part of the system of separation of powers. They stated that the courts’ power to declare laws unconstitutional would provide a check on the legislature, protecting against excessive exercise of legislative power. Madison was one, Randolph another, Hamilton a third. Were not each of those to be considered ‘Founders” ?

One of the first beneficiaries of the doctrine was Jefferson…who ignored the Constitution constantly as he expanded the nation as well as the powers of the Presidency. So…you have Jefferson’s political comments written for political purposes. … we have Jefferson’s actual actions.

Founders, as in the people who “Founded” the United States Federal Government. Those who tried unsuccessfully to protect the people from the inevitable attacks on Freedom that are common with Leaders. Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely. You know “corrupt”, like you Flashman.
For those who would like to get intimate with the minutes of the Constitutional Convention and see that Flashman is blowing smoke up your tailpipe:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/debcont.asp

You are welcome, Flashman, to provide references to back up your claims. But we all know you can’t.
That’s why you have no credibility on this board, Flashshill.

Did you read any of those Davey boy? LOL….no0 need to shame yourself, we know you’re modus operandi. You paste a link you haven’t read, containing something inane, yet state it to support you. When you have no clue what the linked material actually states.

So Davey…did you personally read the minutes to the Constitutional Convention? And the sidebars, letters, and extraneous commentaries? Or is this the “I aced philosophy’ without reading any of the Great Masters?

No, I haven’t read them all, Flashshill. But the link is there. I did your leg-work for you. All you need do now is find one to support your lie.

Sad reality, but the only way for Obama and his merry crowd to get out of debt is war. That is what history shows. Just keep your ears open and listen for the reasons why they have to go to war

“Just keep your ears open and listen for the reasons why they have to go to war”

As opposed to someone like Bush who simply lied to get us into war.

Rob

As opposed to Obama who just broke the law to involve us in a war.

Which war, which law? Please be specific.

Rob

Bill almost hit the nail on the head (and I agree with his premise) but he forgot to mention Nixon,Reagan and Bush in warmongering so that kills his point. They all do it big boy now put on your big boy pants and admit it. That way we can take a united stand instead of this being a Democrat/Republican thing!

Nixon got us OUT of a war that LBJ started.

But Eddie, you can’t talk about the Nixon, Reagan and Bush warmongering without talking about the Clinton and Obama warmongering.

For that matter, why don’t we REALLY ask what forces have been pulling all of their strings since the ’70s? Then maybe we could connect the dots as to a larger agenda BESIDE the Rep/Dem, good-guy/bad-guy false paradigm tossed on our TVs by the corporate owned media.

One of my favorite political images was a picture of a sheep standing in front of a TV showing George Bush, but the same is true of anyone who still doesn’t see what is really going on. It’s a Red Pill and Blue Pill thing; some people want to dive into the truth, as much as it might upset them. The others just want either the Republican or Democrat Fairy Tale and to be allowed to go back to sleep.

Hi bill, I think you should ask your buddy BUSH that question not obama .I cant see why you all blaming Obama and not seeing the facts

“Robert Smith says:
January 3, 2013 at 10:02 am

“Just keep your ears open and listen for the reasons why they have to go to war”

As opposed to someone like Bush who simply lied to get us into war.

Rob”

Damn, sorry to be picking on you today RS. BUT, EVERYBODY (except for the Prezz) voted for war with Iraq based on common beliefs that they were the next Nazis. EVERYBODY, dude. And even though I have no love for Pres. Patriot Act, his info was based on faulty info to begin with. There is a strong possibility that Saddam H was lied to by his own DARPA who needed to cover their own asses. And also a strong possibility Bush Jr. had a vendetta with Saddam H ‘cos of the hit job SH placed against Bush Sr.

Gee Walter & Renee Agard, last time I checked Obama, not Bush, was running the country and has been starting new fights as well as escalating the old ones.

When historians sit down decades from now to address the events of the early 21st century, they will have no trouble explaining why Americans elected Barack Obama president. They elected him out of a firm conviction that the United States was not involved in enough wars.

Problem solved. Today, American forces are fighting in four countries for sure.

How about Yemen, where we learn the administration is carrying out an intense covert campaign against anti-government militants, using fighter aircraft and drone missiles. It is being handled by the Pentagon in conjunction with the CIA, and according to The New York Times, “teams of American military and intelligence operatives have a command post in Sana, the Yemeni capital.”

Or Libya. Since March, the administration has been immersed in a grand humanitarian mission requiring us to deliver bombs on a regular basis. Obama’s stated goal was to prevent a mass slaughter he accused Moammar Gadhafi of plotting. But that pretext has given way to the real purpose: killing the dictator, pounding his regime into submission, or both.

Continuing the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and starting new wars…do ya feel safer? Probably not unless you are a socialist.

Most of what presidents do with the U.S. military is not aimed at enhancing the security or welfare of the American people. It serves mainly to advance our domination of the world, even — or maybe especially — in places irrelevant to any tangible interests.

“As opposed to Obama who just broke the law to involve us in a war.” <— Davey boy

What law was that Davey? As an aside…did he lie to us to get us involved in Libya as a NATO ally and non-ground assistance ? Or are you claiming he lied as Bush II did to get us into Iraq and Afgghanistan?

Robert: “Just keep your ears open and listen for the reasons why they have to go to war”
As opposed to someone like Bush who simply lied to get us into war.

Oh boy, and you wonder why no one here takes you seriously…remarkable display of “Cognitive-dissonance”, btw!

Robert says — “Which war, which law? Please be specific”.

The Libyan war.
The War Powers Resolution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

Even one of Obama’s fellow Democrats thought he should be impeached for that:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/21/dennis-kucinich-obama-impeachment_n_838502.html

For those who wonder — Why Libya?
http://2012patriot.wordpress.com/2011/04/28/new-libyan-gold-dinar/

In fact, all of our middle east actions have roots in money matters and oil.

One would think that Flashman, being a Liberal Progressive, would express horror at such things.
But then that would require ignorance of FlashShill’s real purpose here.

“Robert says — “Which war, which law? Please be specific”.

The Libyan war.
The War Powers Resolution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution” <— Davey boy

LOL I guess that's why Congress invoked the WPA and asked the courts for enforcement eh? oh wait…Congress didn't.

You do realize no president, from the time the WPA was enacted…no President has taken the position it was a constitutional power of Congress and every one took the position they were not obligated to it. Every president Davey…every single one. And…just as important, Congress has never pressed the issue in a court to force a President to abide with the terms.

So is it against the law if no court rules it is? Especially if no suit filed asking for "enforcement" ?

What a dufus…

MOTOV claims: “Nixon got us OUT of a war that LBJ started.”

Actually the war was started long before LBJ. It was going when the French left, and it continued as President Eisenhower (a republican) sent troops in to “advise.” Then it grew from there, fertilized by the hawks from the right who didn’t want the “domino” thing going on.

Nixon did get us out after years of mismanagement of the war.

BTW, Nixon also opened China for trade. We all know how that has turned out.

Rob

Why does Motov once again say that Nixon got us out of Vietnam. For awhile he actually escalated it and cause half the casualties. Besides he was impeached and Ford ended the war on April 28 1975.

I’m a dufus?
It’s you, Flashshill, who is claiming the law hasn’t been broken because more than one politician is doing it.
So I guess Murderers are no longer Murderers because many before them have done it and gotten away with it.
Your logic, Flashman, is sorely in need of improvement.

It must really be humiliating for a “dufus” to continually put your face in the dirt.
You remind me of the punch-drunk boxer, Flashshill, who keeps standing up just to get knocked down again.
You’re pitiful, Flashman.

There you have it, Folks. Flashshill is bragging about how the Politicians ignore the Constitution and even their own laws as they see fit.
Is this the kind of country you want to live in? One where creepy, lawless, and lying characters like Flashman are running your lives?
Sheesh.

Ken wrote: “If taking care of our own people is Socialistic, than I am proud to be a Socialist.”

I think ANY system that is truly working properly would be able to take care of those who were less fortunately, but then that would mean that those who WERE more fortunate would be volunteering their time and energy to help others, and those at the bottom would be motivated to contribute and do so with integrity.

When those at the top AND bottom are both violating other people’s boundaries to safe their own asses, the problem is not the form of government; it’s higher than that. That is when everyone has lost their common connection to a higher ideal.

That is why (without bringing religion into this) the problem is approaching one of spiritual proportions and “coincidentally” just happens to involve all the human foibles that the ancient sages had known about. It is why we have these “revisionist” judges who somehow believe we have managed to outgrow our humanity and that it is time to revise or toss out the Constitution. It isn’t that the Constitution is archaic, the problem is that greed and avarice has convinced everyone that it is obsolete, …… before we ever had a chance to actually live into its wisdom.

Actually the ‘constitution’ is archaic, and non existent, and an illusion, in that the ‘words’ that have been left in place for you to read ( these are the one’s which inspire those of you to yell “unconstitutional” with every act of government ) have no meaning, because the “jurisdiction” that would give them “meaning” and “force” no longer exists.

The problem with the “original design” which ran through 4 phases, the Continental Association, the United States Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution, is that the “intent” and “motivation” for it, is NOT actually understood……..and it can not be “understood”, by attempting to use the “words” of the “document”….to do so…….for the “documents” are the “effects” of the “conditions” which caused them to be written…….and most have no clue what the words mean anyway, or meant. ( which makes all the “opinion” offered here regarding this “meaning” rather pointless………but it just keeps going on and on and on. )

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“The Continental Association, often known simply as the “Association”, was a system created by the First Continental Congress in 1774 for implementing a trade boycott with Great Britain. Congress hoped that by imposing economic sanctions, Great Britain would be pressured to redress the grievances of the colonies, and in particular repeal the Intolerable Acts passed by the British Parliament. The Association aimed to alter Britain’s policies towards the colonies without severing allegiance.

The boycott became operative on December 1, 1774. The Association was fairly successful while it lasted. Trade with Great Britain fell sharply, and the British responded with the New England Restraining Act of 1775. The outbreak of the American Revolutionary War effectively superseded the attempt to boycott British goods.”

http://www.constitution.org/bcp/art_assoc.htm

That is the link to the text of the original document and the subject material is quite clear……….

In fact the entire history of the North American continent can be viewed as a trade war between the British East India Company and the French COMPAGNIE DES INDES OCCIDENTALES, at least for most of the eastern seaboard of the U.S. and Canada, which reached it’s conflict peak with the Seven Year’s War in Europe. ( French and Indian War for the North American Theatre )

The winner’s write history ( at least temporarily ) and this document is omitted entirely from both the history we learn and all of the discussion regarding the “meaning” of the documents that followed…….yet if one examines those that signed and participated in the process of “producing” these documents………they would be recognized for the “educated and financial” elite, who were excluded from “benefits” of the “winner” of this Trade War……..

The Articles of Confederation is the first attempt to “construct” a model of self governance…… ( by the educated and financial elite in the midst of the war of independence ) but the idea’s here are rooted in The Magna Carta which was forced on King John in 1215, conveying the principles of “common law” which was already in place in the colonies.

This document is however, distinctly ANTI-FEDERALIST in it’s construction, and since “The winner’s write history ( at least temporarily )” it is given short shrift, in the understanding of history and most “discussion” of it……..even though, most of the Articles are transferred to the constitution directly…….so that what we are left with, for the most part……is citations of the FEDERALIST PAPERS, regarding intent…. and Madison’s notes, the only consistently non-inebriated attendee of the “illegal gathering held in secret” in 1787……….everything else is missing and “ignored”.

It was also written when the “economy” of the U.S. was “agrarian”, which was about to change……….

The ultimate “irony” of the present discussion ( or that which pretends to be a discussion ) is ECONOMICS………( the cause again )……..and a government which is not working and an economy which is not working and the fact that there is no where else to go………..

Do we share ‘common ground”? Yes…….but we do not share “common understanding” as to the “cause” of what we are experiencing…….because most of the “opinion” is clearly ‘ignorant’ of both “history”, and what caused it to happen……..because the “winners’ wrote it……and those who benefit from this continued distortion, are still distorting it…….

“To conquer, first DIVIDE!!!!” ( and then HANG, separately. )

We now return you to the continuation of your regularly scheduled idiocy.

Socialist Hell! More like an out and out communist.

Paul the fascist troll is strutting his stuff with cowboy Bill in tow. Since I’m not a communist Paul then you deserve to be called far worst! Your a “smart Conservative? Not a chance!

So your opinions are the only valid ones, the wishes of the majority as expressed through a petition are not valid. That sir makes you a traitor to democracy, and reveals your the one who wants to be a dictator. Keep talking…your true colors will out!

Ken Kurtz, learn already that this nation is not a Democracy, nor do we want one.
By the way, if the petitions were enacted because of emotions they deserve to end up in the garbage can.

There’s eddie the communist troll right on cue! WTG, comrade eddie! Signed all your petitions yet today?

Hi Bill,

Thank you for yet another fine example of a right wing ad hominem attack.

Can’t make points on logic, fact, or any reasonable arguments, so you attack the poster.

Thank you again for such a fine example of right wing tactics over substance.

Rob

Please, holier than thou Robert. Don’t make me dig out some of your past nasty unprovoked ad hominem attacks.

Dig ‘em out DaveH. At least there is some truth to them.

Oh! I have an idea… Why don’t you dig out how many times samurai used “moron.” Haven’t seen it lately though. Did someone tell him to stop?

Rob

I’m not talking about Samurai, or Bush, or anybody else but you, Robert. You’re a hypocrite writ large:
http://personalliberty.com/2011/09/01/teaching-the-birds-and-the-bees-along-with-abcs-41427/#comment-407923

There are many others.

Excellent! Post ‘em.

BTW, my kid has learned to cope with those from the extreme reich. He can recognize them and drive them into door slamming exits from trying to pontificate in a room just like his pappy does. I’m proud of him. In some ways he’s even better than I am at it because they don’t expect it from someone of his age.

Rob

Here’s another:
http://personalliberty.com/2011/10/17/house-gop-reignites-abortion-issue-talks-800617823/#comment-429939

So you’re training your kid to be a Thief and Forcer, Robert? You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

Does your kid know how often I make you look like the ignoramus that you are?

I hope folks actually look at what I posted.

You still have no proof.

ROFL…

Rob

Robert: BTW, my kid has learned to cope with those from the extreme reich.

I should think so, Robert, growing up with you must have been quite the learning experience for the little tyke. Hopefully you haven’t caused too much damage.

Scanning the thread and noticed that I was mentioned by one of the mindless. Bill says, “And if your name is Eddie, Flashy, Right Brain Thinker or Robert Smith, then you are a socialist”. Brilliant contribution, and one that Robert has dealt with more than adequately. However, since the leader of the mindless, DaveH, has chipped in, I guess I might as well do the same.

I particularly like what Robert Smith says here, “BTW, my kid has learned to cope with those from the extreme reich. He can recognize them and drive them into door slamming exits from trying to pontificate in a room just like his pappy does. I’m proud of him. In some ways he’s even better than I am at it because they don’t expect it from someone of his age”.

Give your kid a pat on the back for me, Robert. If there are enough like him coming up, there may be hope for the country yet. One of the great pleasures of being an educator was seeing smart kids become even smarter.

This also reminds me of the line I used to use to provoke “door slamming exits from trying to pontificate in a room”. When “they” started in on all of O’Bama’s failings, I used to say things like “Cut the crap—why can’t you just admit that you’re a sore loser and a racist and can’t stand the fact that we have a black president and the old white man lost”.

Worked every time—-after either a moment of dumb-struck, mouth dropped silence OR extreme professions of “some of my best friends are black, etc”. Although the slow learners ARE finally starting to try to talk their way out of that accusation lately—-using that “logic” they are so well known for—-so the “door slamming exits” don’t happen as quickly.

And DaveH becomes the leader in the race for “Best Laugh of the Day” by saying,
“Does your kid know how often I make you look like the ignoramus that you are?”
BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA, Dave!! LMAO Need I explain why that’s so funny?

This is what I was thinking, I DON’T KNOW WHERE IS GUY HAS BEEN, HE SHOULD BE SAYING, I WISH THAT A SOCIALIST IS ALL THIS MONGREL WAS!!! A SOCIALIST IS MILD COMPARED TO WHAT EVIL, VILE, LITTLE MAN(AND I USE THAT TERM LOOSELY) REALLY IS.

My thoughts precisely. Thank you for saying it so clearly.

Will Immigration reform include Gun regulation and for those who do not conform to this be subject to reeducation internment ?

http://www.infowars.com/leaked-u-s-army-document-outlines-plan-for-re-education-camps-in-america/

ht tp://www.infowars.com/yes-the-re-education-camp-manual-does-apply-domestically-to-u-s-citizens/

Obama probably thinks it’s great that those people in Cuba are driving around in those classic 50′s model automobiles. They fit his GREEN program.

“I mean educated… in public schools by socialist teachers’ union members.”

Careful Wayne. These are the same folks the NRA wants to give guns to.

BTW, I’d trusted my kids with public school. The option of sending them in for religious indoctrination filling their heads with lies and supersticion just didn’t sit right with me.

Rob

Robert Smith, you chose your life so why do you come on this site complaining about your life. We don’t want to hear that you are not happy. Bud, you chose your own unhappiness and don’t inflict it on us.

Robert says — “Careful Wayne. These are the same folks the NRA wants to give guns to”.
That’s true, Robert, but unlike Liberal Progressives we believe this is a Nation of Laws, Not a Nation of Men:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/nation_of_men_not_of_laws.html

Robert says — “BTW, I’d trusted my kids with public school. The option of sending them in for religious indoctrination filling their heads with lies and supersticion just didn’t sit right with me”.
Understandable, but then why did you send them to schools that filled “their heads with lies and supersticion”, Robert?
Here’s just one of many examples:
Honest Abe? Hardly:
http://library.mises.org/books/John%20V%20Denson/A%20Century%20of%20War%20Lincoln,%20Wilson%20and%20Roosevelt.pdf

Robert, they are being indoctrinated with religion. It is called Secular Humanism.

“Secular Humanism”

And what’s bad about that?

Oh! I’ll answer…

It isn’t YOUR brutal god that destroyed the entire population except Noah and his kin.

Knocked up a virgin to have his kid tortured… Or was that himself? I can’t keep that trinity thing straight.

Rob

Believes ?? Beliefs.

Nadzieja: Then why do you continue with your negative and unhappy feelings about everything?

Mr Smith – why are you assuming that if you don’t send your kids to public school, then tou’re sending them to a religious school. There are quite a few private schools that are not religious and not the indoctrination of the left.

eddie, why do you post daily comments here that show just how ignorant and stupid you are without being embarrased?

Oh, that’s right…you are a socialist!(ignorant progressive)

More “mythology” from DavidH…….so let us redirect the poor delusional childe.

We are a nation of laws MADE by men, corrupted by other men, to secure the advantage
of those who broke the laws in the first place. ( to continue their quest for further and pointless acquisition to the detriment of everyone else. )

It is truly fascinating to see the mentally deficient victims championing the source of
their oppression, simply because they have managed to ( or have been allowed to )
retain a few baubles and have not been reduced to the state of the other victims,
for whom they have no compassion, because they believe their condition has
been self inflicted, while their own (temporary) escape, is due to their own efforts,
virtue and skill…….and of course the “victims” of this “corruption” can not be “victims”,
since this would imply that “serendipity” and not “intelligence” ( and they are NOT
intelligent ) is the cause of their temporary reprieve, so they must, by necessity be
PARASITES and deserving of their fate………

If you find this level of this stupidity incredible, imagine the poor white trash down south
who could revel in their condition by simply consoling themselves with the observation
that they weren’t BLACK.

a brief excerpt from the book Econned.

“In 1776, Adam Smith published The Wealth fof Nations. In it he argued that the uncoordinated actions of large numbers of individuals, each acting out of self interest, sometimes produced , as if by “an invisible hand,”results that were beneficial to broader society. Smith also pointed out that self interested actions frequently led to injustice or even ruin. He fiercely criticized both how employers colluded with each other to keep wages low, as well as the ” savage injustice ” that European mercantilist interests had “commited with impunity” in colonies in Asia and the Americas.

Smith’s ideas were cherry picked and turned into a simplistic ideology that now dominates university economics departments. This theory proclaims that the “invisible hand” ensures that economic interest will always lead to the best outcomes imaginable. It follows that any restrictions on the profit seeking activities of individuals and corporations interfer with this invisible hand, and therefor are “inefficient” and nonsensical.

According to this line of thinking, individuals have perfect knowledge both of what they want and everything happening in the world at large,and so they pass there lives making intelligent decisions. Prices may change in ways that appear random, but this randomness follows predictable and unchanging rules and is never violently chaotic. It is therefore possible for corporations to use clever techniques to reduce and even eliminate the risks associated with their business. The result is a stable productive economy that represents the apex of civilization.

This heartwarming picture airbrushes out nearly all of the real business world.”

For DavidH, the solution IS “unregulated, free market capitalism with voluntary transactions” which is what caused the crash of 1929 and 2007, but for DavidH
this is NOT SO………this is “crony capitalism”……..

So capitalism = crony capitalism = crash

After 1929, the crony capitalists, having wrought the conditions and the results,
needed to distract the “victims” from associating the results with the cause, and
the means of this ‘distraction” was………..wait for it……..the THREAT of
socialism/communism.

DavidH not to be outdone, had combined THIS with the “progressive movement” which
was the threat to the “crony capitalists” prior to 1917, and has added the word “liberal”,
which used to mean “von mises”, but has also been altered……..

and then, he hides behind the words………since there is no way to “reconcile” any
of this into anything “intelligent” in terms of logical reasoning……..if he is required to
define the words………and then argue their logical implications……

You have to admire the resilience of the “poor white trash”……….until the KNOCK
( figuratively ) comes………..

“To conquer, first DIVIDE!!!!” ( and then HANG separately.)

Robert: It isn’t YOUR brutal god that destroyed the entire population except Noah and his kin. Knocked up a virgin to have his kid tortured… Or was that himself? I can’t keep that trinity thing straight.

You can’t keep anything straight, Robert. Why would you saddle yourself with the enormous task of trying to explain the “Trinity”?

I have no handlers Warrior. I am an individual who thinks and believes as he wishes.

Childe? Is English your second language, Galt?

Galt says — “For DavidH, the solution IS “unregulated, free market capitalism with voluntary transactions” which is what caused the crash of 1929 and 2007″.

How ignorant can one Socialist get?
The “crash” was caused by Malinvestment which was in turn caused by a large increase in the money supply during the 20s by the newly created Federal Reserve system. Kind of like giving your “childe” money for nothing, which they soon waste on toys that break within a week.
And then the “crash” was turned into the Great Depression by the meddlesome Herbert Hoover who instituted many of the same interventionist regulations and other market interventions that are employed by Socialists today. Those who want to learn some reality instead of listening to the disjointed garble that comes from Liberal Progressive Socialists like Galt’s mouths can read this book:
http://library.mises.org/books/Murray%20N%20Rothbard/Americas%20Great%20Depression.pdf

Start at Part II if you want to avoid some intense economic jargon.

No, Jeremy, you are a shill, and probably the same shill who calls himself Flashman.
I have evidenced that here:
http://personalliberty.com/2012/12/28/should-we-arm-our-teachers/#comment-797175

Explain to the readers, Galt, why your Socialism always fails when fully implemented?
And please, try to speak good English, rather than your usual Pigeon English.

Also, explain to the readers why the countries at the top of this ranking (those with the most Capitalism) have much better economies than those at the bottom (those with the most Socialism):
http://heritage.org/index/ranking

Coming clean that is a good word for congress. Do you think depriving money for the damage from sandy that congress refuse to give and now they are thinking other wise .are they a socialist or a—holes

I’ve posted this video for you Leftists several times, and you obviously didn’t watch it. It is what happens under socialism…where it always leads. This is the history of Stalin, Lenin, Hitler and the Russian Revolution. Yes, it’s subtitles, because it’s told by those who’ve lived through it, or whose families did, and the memories are forever fresh for them (at least until the later generations take control).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=WcAPJ-kn8Vs

Go ahead. Dare to view this to the end. And then come back and say you support socialism. You will be looking into our (all to immediate) future.

It is the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing.

From Kate8 who I’ve commented on this before to: “And then come back and say you support socialism. ”

Most Americans don’t support “socialism” as you seem to both portray socialism and those of us Americans who don’t agree with you.

For example UTILITIES: Utilities used to be among the most regulated of capitalistic businesses. It was always a safe investment and it served both investors and customers as expected. Under DEREGULATION we are paying much more for utilities and the service isn’t as good. Investors, thanks to things like Enron, have been ripped off big time. Yet to suggest regulating utilities again the term “socialist” is screamed.

Medical care in America is ranked below all the other industrialized countries that have graduated to single payer “socialist” medicine. There care is better and it costs way less by any measure. One can still buy one’s way to the head of any lines, and doctors are free to open their own businesses. The lies (can’t choose your own doctor for example… ROFL Today they have to be “in plan” or one is out of luck) continue about the current status of medical care in America while people die.

Our airports, train stations, and interstate highways are taken care of by the people, NOT buy the top 1% who are looting the rest of America. I imagine you call that socialism.

Public education is what keeps an excellent pool of workers ready to serve who don’t have to be trained from zero. I know some squawk that they don’t like they way they can’t prey on the school kids with their religion, but tough cookies, American public schools are for all kids.

So, America needs some forms of cooperative economics (what extremists call “socialism”) to compete in the world economy.

Rob

It seems only socialist don’t know they are socialist, they are Gods joke on the earth. A bunch of feel good brain lacking idiots.

Sorry childe, what is the colour of your leverage…….

As has already been explained to you, DavidH. the source of this leverage was provided by Wall St……….this was called “margin trading”……in 1929

For 2007, Wall St. did this again…..these were called “derivatives”…….

No regulations existed for either………non existent in 1929, and removed for 2007.

See “Lords of Finance” again or post “von mises” link that refutes the “pulitzer prize”
winning history……….

Whan that Aprill, with his shoures soote
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote
And bathed every veyne in swich licour,
Of which vertu engendred is the flour;
5 Whan Zephirus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the Ram his halfe cours yronne,
And smale foweles maken melodye,
10 That slepen al the nyght with open eye-
(So priketh hem Nature in hir corages);
Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages
And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes
To ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes;
15 And specially from every shires ende
Of Engelond, to Caunterbury they wende,
The hooly blisful martir for to seke
That hem hath holpen, whan that they were seeke.
Bifil that in that seson, on a day,
20 In Southwerk at the Tabard as I lay
Redy to wenden on my pilgrymage
To Caunterbury with ful devout corage,
At nyght was come into that hostelrye
Wel nyne and twenty in a compaignye

How many times DavidH will you continue to “repeat” the LIE????????

Once again DavidH…….

Economics is Invalid!!!!!!!!!!

This means NOTHING WORKS!!!!!!!!

See Economics Unmasked, Debt;The First 5000 Years, Econned, Extreme Money,
Power, Inc. The Great Divergence…….

When you are no longer a “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate”, get back to me.

Robert says — “For example UTILITIES: Utilities used to be among the most regulated of capitalistic businesses. It was always a safe investment and it served both investors and customers as expected. Under DEREGULATION we are paying much more for utilities and the service isn’t as good. Investors, thanks to things like Enron, have been ripped off big time. Yet to suggest regulating utilities again the term “socialist” is screamed”.

Please give us a reference, Robert, that supports your “deregulated” utilities conjecture.
Do you know the difference between “deregulated” and “different regulations”? Apparently not.
I love how you Liberal Progressives support scads of regulations and then, when the economy suffers as a result, you blame it on Capitalism. It must be nice to not have any conscience about your economic dishonesty.

Enron occurred in spite of regulations, not because of your conjectural “deregulation”, Robert.
http://mises.org/daily/872

Galt, perhaps instead of babbling like an old fool, you could reveal to the readers where and how I lied?
You make no sense, which is why I rarely bother to respond to your nonsense. Even the ignorant people who might buy into your failed Socialism wouldn’t be able to understand your Pigeon English enough to be influenced by it.

Can’t help but wonder if there is a relationship: ”
Pilot in Mystery Flight Case Gets Prison Term

August 30, 1992 | Associated Press

A lawyer-pilot who survived a mysterious solo flight and crash into the Atlantic Ocean was sentenced on fraud and conspiracy charges in a radio-licensing scam. Thomas Root, 39, was sentenced Friday to 15 years in prison and fined $5,000 for his part in helping bilk thousands of investors who bought FM radio partnerships sold by Sonrise Management of Columbus, Ga. ”

Rob

I’d be happy to DavidH….anything for the “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate”…..

GALT says:
January 3, 2013 at 4:09 pm
Sorry childe, what is the colour of your leverage…….

As has already been explained to you, DavidH. the source of this leverage was provided by Wall St……….this was called “margin trading”……in 1929

For 2007, Wall St. did this again…..these were called “derivatives”…….

No regulations existed for either………non existent in 1929, and removed for 2007.

See “Lords of Finance” again or post “von mises” link that refutes the “pulitzer prize”
winning history……….

You will note the use of the word “again”….as in so many times now, you are either the
“stupidest person” on this site…..or you have the most severe case of “alzheimers”
in recorded history……..actually since I just repeated myself…….in a post which occured
three posts before your question……..of course maybe you didn’t say this?

“The “crash” was caused by Malinvestment which was in turn caused by a large increase in the money supply during the 20s by the newly created Federal Reserve system. ”

One could buy stock on margin for 10% down……..90% would seem to be
quite a deal of “money” created ( as credit )……and the Fed had nothing to do with it.”

The entire “sub prime” mortgage market was valued at 1.5 trillion dollars,
the derivatives that were created from this market, 10′s of trillions, and the Fed
had nothing to do with that either……..

and all this has been repeated many times…….so I suggest that you seek immediate
medical attention………just to be on the safe side…….( unfortunately, terminal stupidity
is not treatable……sorry. )

THE U.S. IS REAL BIG TROUBLE… but the real Word is hopelessness… this crazy black UNAMERICAN COMMUNIST PRESIDENT´S agenda is to break the american way of life any capitalist system.. HE´S A COMMUNIST and wants to avenge against all who have put down his kind in the world.. THE MAN IS SICK AND HAS TO BE IMPEACHED INMEDIATELY… GOD HELP US IF NOT

Socialist puke smith said: “Our airports, train stations, and interstate highways are taken care of by the people, NOT buy the top 1% who are looting the rest of America. I imagine you call that socialism.”

Obviously you were educated in our “public” school system Roberto. It seems you missed out on the 3-R’s. Smoking dope instead of paying attention while in “School” lends itself to future foolishness, as in your demonstrated case.

I wouldn’t want to be you buddy when you punch out of here. Your arrogance will be tested, as well as, the words that you “Spew” out of your socialist fate filled mouth.

LOL with Bob Bo. I waste a while reading this “crap.” then stop and pray for our country!

Because so many commenter’s are extreme right wingers and occasionally racists.They are easy to point out and do much damage to Conservative credibility.. I’m never quite sure why the true Conservatives allow them to stoke the fires and then claim they are being fair and balanced in reporting.

Or an a$$hole!

I am sorry if your stand is only think and say according to my views, other wise you are what i say it is imposible to analize any thing with raesonable dynamicas of objectivity and logic. I resoect your opinion as a person you are but cant agre with the absurd in logic…..Sorry!

Eddie: Because so many commenter’s are extreme left-wingers and occasionally racists.They are easy to point out and do much damage to Liberal credibility.. I’m never quite sure why the true Liberals allow them to stoke the fires and then claim they are being fair and balanced in reporting.

It is wrong to call people you disagree with names or to generalize about a certain ideology. Which is why it is so strange that Mr. Root does both.

What’s the matter, Jeremy? You are just mad because the Right is dealing back to you what Leftists have been doing all along.

You Leftists see conservatives as “extreme right” because you are so far to the Left that you might fall off. It’s really a glaring example of common sense vs serious mental impairment.

What’s so “far left” understanding that it is my taxes that also go into roads and it wasn’t the top 1% who built them?

What’s so “far left” about recognizing that the current health care system is bankrupting Americans faster than anything else?

Check out: “Medical Expenses (42%)
Recent studies have shown that 42% of all personal bankruptcies are a result of medical expenses. The study also reveals that 78% of those who filed had insurance.” That’s from: http://www.clearbankruptcy.com/financial-literacy/10-leading-causes-of-bankruptcy.aspx

What’s so “extreme” about recognizing that most other industrialized countries have cheaper health care per citizen than America? It’s a simple fact, not extremist.

Rob

Actually Kate I do not see conservatives as “far right”. I have never called people names just because I disagree with them. Being on the left or right has nothing to do with ones personality. If a person is a jerk they are a jerk. It does not matter what political ideology they are. I assume you are conservative or are from “the right” Kate. But I know little of your personal beliefs so I will not judge you. I tend to be on “the left”. But please do not judge me on a label. I have some conservative views and some libertarian ones. Being of a particular ideology or having a particular label does not define you. And therefore it should not be a determining factor in how you define other people.

Okay, Jeremy. Fair enough.

Actually, I see no reason for rudeness, either. I suppose it’s borne out of frustration from trying to talk apples and oranges, for it seems that right and left have such completely differing ways of looking at things that ne’er the ‘twain shall meet.

Too bad. It was intended by the elite to create such a situation so that people would be so divided that coming together with enough strength to break free from them is near impossible. We’ve fallen for it hook, line and sinker…

Should the day come when we are hit with an EMP or some other catastrophe, perhaps some of these ideological differences won’t seem so important, and we will be forced to either assist and support one another or perish.

We’ll see.

Understandable Kate. I hope we can do it before the event you described. Maybe this a way to start. We can have debates like this and see what our beliefs are and compare. I am sure we have ideas and beliefs in common.

America has already become a third world country. Just go to Detroit.

Try to get a building permit to build your little dream house in the country and you will see a good example of third world goverment workers in action

Throughout history there have been great civilizations and cities. The USA is a huge country and Detroit doesn’t represent the whole nation. We are not a 3rd world country so come out to Denver and see for yourself that a city can function and do well. (yes we have problems too). Our Congressional District is Democrat and so is our Mayor so this crap that Democrats want all these terrible things in life is absurd.

HI bill, I dont have to tell you why America looks like a third world country and who causes that to happen, also no one can fix these problems we are having in 4 years it may fix to a certain % but not 100% and you know it.Even if Romney could’nt fix it. no one con cause a mericle for that. Again we should help to chip in and get us back to some degree.A house against ti self cannot stand. LINCOLN quote from the bible.

eddie47d,

“so come out to Denver and see for yourself that a city can function and do well. (yes we have problems too). ”

Thank you for explaining why you think or don’t think ( as the case seems to be)…mile high city…lack of oxygen to the brain…now I understand how you aquired your special brand of stupid…. Thanks for clearing that up for us!

AJ

speak truth said: January 3, 2013 at 8:55 am

You gotta be a low level, low education person to believe this rat trap. This was written by a feuding fascist, who wants all america carrying guns, the social safety net destroyed and america to become a 3rd world country, so the 2% can get richer and richer. Wayne label yourself a total fascist..look up that word.

Your argument is nonsensical, Veritas. And you should share your musings with MoveOn or HuffyPo, ‘cos I sure as hell am NOT interested in what leftists believe and I’d rather NOT read trolling baiters here.

Lefturds have ruined this country a LOT more than rightists, who at least have enough sense to know when to stop (sometimes). Leftists want to control one’s mind and wallet, whereas rightwingers at least toggle in this respect.

I am nor calling you any names and i would prefer if you do not thar either to me…I do know what caliver of education tou are talking about. I think that i am a human being and an american citizen and the nation gives me the right to express my opinion making sense to me in an open view instea of expecting you to agree with my view or somthine else. I love the freedom of expresion and belives honor so highgly in america!

Ron White said it best…You can’t fix stupid(progressives/socialists)!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL6wbsGx9qw

@ Average Joe:
eddie47 is not a native of Colorado. His thinking was affected by the smog of L.A. He moved out here when California began to implode. He still thinks like a Californian though, as most of them feel if they’ve been here for more than two weeks, they are natives

r.p. LOL. No one wants to admit they’re from California.

BTW, I’ve lived in CA all my life, and I love my state dearly. However, I loathe the politics, and find it heartbreaking what the liberals have done to us. Believe it or not, there was a time when we were very conservative, until liberals flooded in and opened the doors to unrestricted immigration (both legal and illegal). Now you’d never guess you were even in America in most cities. At least, not the America we loved.

I love my home and have no desire to relocate. Besides, unless patriots are able to right this ship, what happens here will overtake the entire country soon. It already is.

Wrong again Kate: “Believe it or not, there was a time when we were very conservative, until liberals flooded in and opened the doors to unrestricted immigration (both legal and illegal).”

Immigration is controlled on a Federal level. Remember, that’s what all the lawsuits you are so proud of are about.

BTW, nice gratuitous slam against immigrants. Shows just how “christian” you are with newcomers. Care to review the story of Sodom…

Rob

speak truth? That is a commie joke right? People with guns made this nation great and many died to make it great so that idiots who sit on their brains and do nothing can get a hand out from a government that is making them slaves. Welcome to your own plantation anything but, the truth. Grow up, get up, get a real job you free loading panty waste.

Bob – You don’t know what you are talking about.

At the federal level, it began under LBJ. A democrat. And some states pander to immigrants and some don’t.

California was beautiful and prosperous under conservatism. Liberals have turned us upside down, with many once beautiful neighborhoods evacuated by Americans as they’ve been overcome by third-world immigration and turned into dangerous ghettos. And not to mention the complete eradication of any kind of morality, and the utter economic ruin brought on by ridiculous spending and too-high taxes which have attracted mobs of welfare recipients while driving away business and jobs.

You can lose the Christian slams, too. I, for one, have had it with your nasty and derogatory remarks. You are clueless there, too.

No matter what reason posters have used in response to your rants an tirades, you ignore them, continuing with your canned leftist mantras.

You, my dear, are a pathetic joke. You are a caricature of a progressive idiot. You have the meanest and nastiest attitude toward those with whom you disagree of nearly anyone here.

I hope you are proud of yourself. At least you have a job, I suppose. Even if it is selling out your country.

Actually, I hope you wake up one day. But I’m not making any bets on it.

Really Dave. So I am ignorant to believe that Obama all by himself is not going to create our debt or our economic problems. We have had a few other Presidents you know.

Apparently so, Jeremy (aka Flashman).
If you read my comment carefully you will discover that I wasn’t referring to you rather to the people who would believe Obama did it alone.

But upon re-reading your original comment, I see that you didn’t really say what you meant. Try making your sentences shorter and more coherent.

Indeed I did misread you Dave. I am sorry. I will correct myself. What I want to point out is this. Dave my comments were meant to show that I am not that unreasonable in my beliefs. Yet because I differ from Mr. Root apparently I am a socialist. Mr. Root directed his comments against Obama. Those terrible economic outcomes he described he directed against Obama. So it appears that Mr. Root gives all the blame to Obama. So if your comment “Ignorant maybe, but not necessarily Socialist” was directed towards those who blame Obama alone I think you just called Mr. Root- ignorant maybe.

You are a Socialist, Jeremy (aka Flashman) because you support Socialistic agendas, not because you disagree with WAR.
To Socialize, make Social, as in making people pay for things they don’t want, or making people pay for other peoples’ mistakes.

So its socialism if someone has to pay for something they do not like. Problem is that’s not what socialism is. You cannot denounce something as socialism just because you do not like it. You can oppose it and seek to have it stopped. But calling it something it is not is wrong.

Is the 23 y/o innocent Loecher shedding his skin or is the Flashmann starting to show thru?

No Dave. Mr. Root was having fun throwing around the term socialist. I was just using his form of delivery to challenge his ideas about socialism. I was trying to point that Mr. Root seemed to generalizing about those he disagrees with.

You have how many 2 year degrees, Jeremy, yet you still can’t read?

No I can read Dave. You posted a video about internet shills. I was pointing out that I came on here to make a statement. I was trying to point out I am not an internet shill. Perhaps I am assuming what you were trying to say to me. I just could think of no other reason why you would post such a video.

Poor, innocent, dishonest Jeremy (aka Flashman).
For those who don’t know, go here:
http://personalliberty.com/2011/05/16/what-now/#comment-341969

And then here:
http://personalliberty.com/2012/12/28/should-we-arm-our-teachers/#comment-797175

You’re pitiful Jeremy (aka Flashman).

That link is a real doozy, DaveH. Great find.

Everyone needs to read this. It explains eddie, flush, Robert Smith and most of the others, including Karolyn, who attempts to befriend rather than smear most of the time. But that is just another of their tactics.

As the article states, these shills don’t really know much about any of the things they post about. They are just following a formula. It’s easy to push ideas you don’t even care about anyway, so being absurd is not a problem for them. And they seem to enjoy being [expletive deleted]

I say we just call them all out. They’ve become really tiresome, and they aren’t even legitimate posters. There are some days when I see some of those names and I just don’t bother being here at all.

Dave once again you return to an accusation and declare it to be proof. I am not a shill. I do not come on here with others. I come on here to state my genuine opinions. I am not crying poor innocent me. I am simple pointing out I am innocent of what Mr. Livingston is accusing me of.

DaveH provides us with a wonderful link, one that goes nicely with the “Manual for Trolls” that JeffH posted on another thread some weeks ago (and I have tried to repost that comment two or three times since but it keeps getting “moderated” into oblivion). Dare I try again? Perhaps I will post it separately if this comment is not “disappeared”.

I recommend Dave’s link to all—-http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread826545/pg1&addstar=1&on=13829871#pid1382987—-quite illuminating.

Kate8 agrees wholeheartedly with me, because she says, “That link is a real doozy, DaveH. Great find. Everyone needs to read this. It explains eddie, flush, Robert Smith and most of the others, including Karolyn, who attempts to befriend rather than smear most of the time. But that is just another of their tactics”.

“As the article states, these shills don’t really know much about any of the things they post about. They are just following a formula. It’s easy to push ideas you don’t even care about anyway, so being absurd is not a problem for them. And they seem to enjoy being [expletive deleted]”

“I say we just call them all out. They’ve become really tiresome, and they aren’t even legitimate posters. There are some days when I see some of those names and I just don’t bother being here at all”

My old school administrator’s “crap detectors” started to vibrate as I began to read the second paragraph of Kate’s little essay, and were buzzing madly by the time I finished it. Her third paragraph lit them up even more.

One of the characteristics of a “right brain thinker” in the sense that I use the term is the ability to gather in large quantities of data and perceive connections and patterns within. The same kind of mental processing that made me good at doing master schedules for high schools—-taking the class requests of several thousand students and the preferences of a couple hundred teachers, and fitting them into a seven period day in a given number of rooms in the school. We had some help from computer programs in trying things out in what we called “simulated schedule runs”, but anyone who couldn’t visualize the “puzzle” in their head was on a long hard journey and likely to need outside assistance before they built a good schedule.

Why do I bore you with all that, you ask? Because I am starting to firm up something that has been at the back of my consciousness for some time—-a pattern—a vision of Matryoshka or Babushka dolls—-those Russian nesting dolls. Combined with the fun house hall of mirrors where reflections bounce back on reflections.

Whatever is he talking about?, you may ask. Go back and read Kate’s essay and ask yourself—-”Where better place for a bunch of shills/trolls to hide but in plain sight? What better way to throw off suspicion than to “spill the beans” about how they operate and tell everyone?”. And the REALLY clever thing is to do this while pretending that you’re talking ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE, as Kate has done.

Well, Kate let ME call YOU out on this—-EVERYTHING you have said is far more descriptive of you, DaveH, JeffH, and the “new” WTS/JAY than it is of eddie, flash, robert, Karolyn, or “most of the others” (unspecified). Nice try, but you’ve convinced me that you, Dave, Jeff, and the “new” Jay are “coworkers” and draw paychecks signed by the same person, whoever that may be.

DaveH also says, “Poor, innocent, dishonest Jeremy”, which makes my crap detectors tingle also. Jeremy appears to me to be dishonest only to himself, in that he puts up with all the crap he does in an attempt to “reason” with the “unreasonable”. He is certainly giving the impression of being “innocent”, and painfully so. Jeremy reinforces that impression by saying, “Dave once again you return to an accusation and declare it to be proof. I am not a shill. I do not come on here with others. I come on here to state my genuine opinions. I am not crying poor innocent me. I am simple pointing out I am innocent of what Mr. Livingston is accusing me of”.

When I peer into the reflecting reflections of the dolls within dolls, I can even see Jeremy as part of the crew—-what better way to keep things stirred up than to have your own “lib-prog” whipping boy on board? I hope I haven’t hurt your feelings because it appears that I am accusing you, Jeremy, but you need to take the advice of an old man and think about your “place” on PLD and how it can be perceived.

So, Kate, I agree wholeheartedly with you when you say, “I say we just call them all out. They’ve become really tiresome, and they aren’t even legitimate posters. There are some days when I see some of those names and I just don’t bother being here at all” That’s EXACTLY how I feel about your cronies, and you ARE becoming “really tiresome” to those of us who do NOT play games with the truth on this site as you do. (Although I will grant that this little trick you attempted WAS more clever than most of your attempts)

I’m off to ingest some fetal-cell laced Pepsi and put a bag over my head so that I can get more of JAY’s good-for-you CO2— Later!

Right Brain thinker I appreciate your analysis. I assure you I am not part of any crew. I can’t really recall exactly how I first discovered Personal Liberty Digest. What I know is I saw an article that I felt the need to speak out on and I have come back ever since. Perhaps I do derive some pleasure out of standing out from the crowd. But I have no desire to disrupt or derail any discussion. If anything I want to contribute to a real discussion. Often the articles on this page seem to have a very absolutist tinge to them. Yet when I talk with people on this site including Mr. Livingston I am able to have serious discussions, not always but sometimes. That’s why I keep coming back.

As for my feelings. This is not about my personal feelings. I have never liked gossip, slander or libel. I do not like the idea of people thinking the worst of me when its not true. There have been people on this site who I had productive discussions with. For instance Dave and I used to debate albeit rather aggressively. But then Dave came to believe that I was being deceptive and he forever after refused to acknowledge me for who I am. And several others have followed suit. Perhaps I do care about what others think too much. But I still feel that whats most important is an honest debate. I am certain that that is what people on this site want. We can’t have that if accusations start flying left and right without evidence to back them up. I understand this is a blog and a name and email address is not much to go on or trust. All I can do is offer my word. That’s because realistically there is no real way to prove who I am without giving away information that someone could use to steal my identity. Many here may think me an idiot but I am no bodies fool. This is my request. I believe that accusing me of not being honest about my intentions or who I am disrupts the discussions and debates far more than anything I have ever said. I ask that if someone wishes to accuse me of being part of some group or of coming on this site under multiple names that they provide some evidence apart from Mr. Livingstons accusation. And to Mr. Livingston I would like to ask that if he truly believes that I am not who I say I am that he provide evidence of it. Because I say what I have always said. I have never shared my computer nor have I ever come on this site under any name but my own. I know that to be true and I believe in it as much as I believe that the earth revolves around the sun and that what goes up must come down.

momo:

I never thought of that one! Love it! LOL!

“I love Christmas lights,”

Hung by those who cut down healthy trees to celebrate the commercialization of the birth of their savior, who they promptly eat (if one believes that transubstantiation thing).

Cannibals, ritualistic or real, really do seem to be a bummer.

Rob

Those trees are grown for that purpose, Robert.
Are you a vegetarian?

That’s great momo. I wish I wold have had that one on Christmas when the house was full of relatives. LOL!

Robert:

We get our tree at a Christmas Tree FARM.

What do farms grow? CROPS.

What do you do with crops? HARVEST them.

They also grow corn and soy beans – which they HARVEST.

I will have to remember that one.

Rob, just think of those trees as baby trees. I’m sure you are one of those folks that think it’s OK to kill babies, but never cut down a tree.

You also seem to have a problem with people believing in a creator. I suppose it is more believable that once there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then the nothing exploded for no reason and created everything and then a bunch of everything rearranged itself for no reason into self replicating bits which then turned into monkeys which then turned into you. Yeah, that makes more sense.

@ Robert Smith said at January 3, 2013 at 9:48 am

“I love Christmas lights,”

Hung by those who cut down healthy trees to celebrate the commercialization of the birth of their savior, who they promptly eat (if one believes that transubstantiation thing).

Cannibals, ritualistic or real, really do seem to be a bummer.

Rob

Sounds like you’re a ‘recovering Catholic’ to me, RS (or a fundamentalist bigot who calls Catholics ‘mackerel snappers). Shoulda followed MY lead and become a Lamaist Buddhist while in Catholic school.

And speaking of transubstantiation, you forgot to mention wine – or have you been hittin’ the bottle with your parish priest?

Robert: Hung by those who cut down healthy trees to celebrate the commercialization of the birth of their savior, who they promptly eat (if one believes that transubstantiation thing).

Nonsense! Christmas, is “Pagan” holiday.

Good catch, Steve.
I completely overlooked that blatant hypocrisy by the unborn-baby-killing Robert.

Yeah, good catch, Steve! Besides, what’s the big deal about a “tree”? It is nothing but so-much “pulp”.

JAY – Bingo!

Steve bleats: “You also seem to have a problem with people believing in a creator.”

Nope. I even believe that you believe in a brutal god who had his own kid born to a virgin he knocked up to be tortured to death in his name.

My vision is of kinder gods and goddesses. BTW, they are real because your god in his big ten commandments says none of the others should be above him. What an ego that brutal god seems to have!

Rob

Robert says — “My vision is of kinder gods and goddesses”.
Vision maybe, but your application is one of stealing other peoples’ money and Forcing other people to do things your way using Big Government as your Bully Boys.
The fact that you would put Trees above Human Beings underscores the sickness that inhabits that Liberal Progressive body of yours.

Robert – It doesn’t seem to me like you know much about kindness yourself.

In fact, you are one of the most unkind posters who darken this site.

Robert: Robert says — “My vision is of kinder gods and goddesses”.

Robert, based on your speech and actions, it seems clear that you were created in the image of your “brutal goddess”!

So by suggesting that we rein in and reform government, clean it up to clear out the incompetent and corrupt I might as well be singing Tiptoe Through the Tulips. Yet believing that the gutting of government offices and shrinking the government will automatically make everything better is perfectly pragmatic and reasonable. So if I got this straight- thinking better equals better makes me an idealistic fool but thinking smaller equals better makes me a pragmatic realist. Maybe there is something wrong with me cause it does not make sense to me.

I’ve been hearing that same lame “reform” nonsense from Liberal Progressives for 40 years now. And Government just keeps growing.
No matter how much of other peoples’ money you throw at the problem, Jeremy (aka Flashman), it will still be throwing good money after bad, because Big Government is the Problem, Not the Solution.

Bad government is the problem. Liberal Progressives have been trying to reform government for years just as Libertarians have been trying to shrink government for years. We need to keep trying.

I didn’t “choose” the Bush wars.

I didn’t choose to deny research for life saving stuff like stem cell research.

I didn’t choose to fund TSA.

Rob

Robert says — “I didn’t “choose” the Bush wars”.
Neither did I, Robert. I also didn’t choose the Obama wars.

Robert says — “I didn’t choose to deny research for life saving stuff like stem cell research”.
But you did choose to fund those efforts with other peoples’ money if you voted for Big Government, Robert.

Robert says — “I didn’t choose to fund TSA”.
Then you know how it feels to be groped at your own expense whether you like it or not.

If you think it’s better to sell your Current TV to a terrorist supporting organization instead of an American conservative organization, then you may be a Socialist ex-VP of the US.

Robert: I didn’t “choose” the Bush wars.

Bush didn’t either.

Robert: I didn’t choose to deny research for life saving stuff like stem cell research.

But you do support taking a life to prevent the death of another.

Robert: I didn’t choose to fund TSA.

“Serfs” don’t get to choose.

Robert – I guess we are to assume that you are also okay with ingesting fetal tissue in food and beverages, and being injected with fetal tissue in vaccines and such.

You are a sick puppy, RS. But then, you are a masterful product of an indoctrinated, fallen society.

I also assume that you are cool with being regarded as a “human resource”. That means, whatever your masters want from you, you are happy to go along with.

Have you given any more thought to that population reduction thing?

What’s this new garbage you are tossing out Kate?

Are you suggesting that “babies” are in consumables now?

Rob

I can only conclude, Robert, that you live under a rock. You are incredibly uninformed about nearly everything.

But then, ignorance is a great excuse for deniability.

Robert: What’s this new garbage you are tossing out Kate? Are you suggesting that “babies” are consumable now?

Yes Robert, that is exactly, what Kate8 is saying!

Check out the link below.

http://birthofanewearth.blogspot.ca/2012/03/avoid-using-products-containing-aborted.html

Robert Smith says:

“What’s this new garbage you are tossing out Kate?
Are you suggesting that “babies” are in consumables now?”

That was In response to what Kate8 said, “Robert – I guess we are to assume that you are also okay with ingesting fetal tissue in food and beverages, and being injected with fetal tissue in vaccines and such”.

WTS/JAY says, “Yes Robert, that is exactly, what Kate8 is saying!” (and gives us a link to “truth”)

Kate8 also says, “You are incredibly uninformed about nearly everything, (Robert). But then, ignorance is a great excuse for deniability.”

Guess what, Robert? You need not worry about finding “babies” in your consumables or being “injected with fetal tissue” in vaccines AND SUCH (That’s a rather imprecise term in the science world, Kate. What are you talking about? Are you using it as in “Look out for the SUCH!—-It’s trying to steal Christmas”!?)

Why not to worry, Robert? Because Kate8 and JAY are displaying THEIR abysmal ignorance here, and stating some real whoppers that they hope folks will swallow. Some scientific FACTS to help those who may have been disturbed by Kate8′s horsespucky.

1) The HEK-293 strain mentioned in JAY’s link began FORTY+ YEARS ago and was harvested from an aborted fetus in Europe at that time. For the last FORTY+ YEARS it has been grown in a laboratory as a tissue culture. It is being utilized by a company developing a test to be for detecting certain chemicals that may be incorporated into soft drinks, and is NOT in any way ever going to show up in your Pepsi.

2) There is NO fetal tissue in vaccines as Kate would have you believe.
From the National Network for Immunization Information (NNii): Immunization Issues: Human Fetal Links with Some Vaccines Update from the Canadian Coalition for Immunization Awareness and Promotion (CCIAP). In answer to the question, “Do vaccines contain cells from aborted fetuses?”

“No. Vaccines do not contain human cells or tissue. During purification of the vaccine all cells are removed. Human cell lines are used in the early stages of production of some vaccines because viruses need a living cell to grow. The virus for the vaccine is grown in a human cell line, then killed or damaged so it cannot cause disease. This cell line comes from legal abortions in the early 1960s and continues today from the original source. The abortions were not conducted for the purpose of vaccine discovery or vaccine production. No new fetal tissue is required in the ongoing production of vaccines because cell lines can reproduce themselves in culture and can be used for a very long time”.

In other words, the vaccines are totally free of any fetal tissue when they are injected. So, Kate, are you going to deny that your ignorance has led you to tell a whopper?

Even the Catholic Church doesn’t go near the foolishness that Kate and JAY have, focusing instead on the question of the MORALITY of whether something that utilized fetal tissue 40 or 50 years ago should be used or not, and comes down on the side of YES. The Vatican says that “In the absence of effective alternatives, individuals may use the morally tainted vaccines”, and asserts that it is necessary to “provide for the good of one’s children”, including the prevention of disease where possible. Being perhaps a little more science literate (and honest) than Kate8 and JAY, the Vatican does NOT try to fear-monger and suggest that anyone is “eating babies”.

Dave H needs to take care of that head injury because I much rather drive on a safe bridge and a well paved road and am willing to pay for that safety. I bet Dave H does too but he won’t admit it. Dave H stretches his message out to the point of insanity for I know private businesses also want those good roads for their companies and are willing to pay for them. Oh yes those “ignorant” bussiness owners!

Leave it to the Troll to go off on a tangent with a non sequitur.

Leave it to the extreme right to go after the man rather than the issue.

Rob

The problem Dave is when he made his “You didn’t build that” comment he was not talking about business owners not building their business. That was the context that it was taken in. The Republicans made an entire night of their convention the “We built it” night and talked constantly about Obama being marxist and anti small business because he thought that business owners were not responsible for their own success. That if they have a business they did not build it. And yet that was no where near what Obama was talking about. He was talking about roads and bridges and how business did not build those. If the government had not taxed people and pushed for those roads and bridges to be built they would not have been built.

And as for your idea of it being a commie speech. Since when did the idea that success can come from a jointed effort become communistic. Since when do you become a commie by mentioning the community or by talking about the country or by suggesting that we do good because we do things together. Mentioning and supporting jointed effort and praising the good that comes from working together is not an abandonment of the individual. It does not equal communism.

I realize you Liberal Progressives don’t like it when somebody brings a gun to your gunfights, Robert. But you’re just going to have to suck it up. If you (or Eddie in this case) insults me then I will treat you (or Eddie) just as disrespectfully.

And Robert, you keep referring to me as being extreme right. Could you please inform the readers what it is I say that you think puts me in that class?

Is it because I so often expose your comments for being the factually bereft and illogical nonsense that they are? Of course it is.

Ah! Jeremy and eddie! Have you no mercy? You have DaveH going into his “defensive mode” where he talks to himself and quick fires a string of inanities as a smoke screen while his feeble brain tries to engineer a significant answer. Leave him alone for a while.

Knowing Dave, I am sure you will have many other opportunities to to point out his inadequacies to him.

OOOOPS Left out Robert when I made my plea for mercy on Dave’s behalf. We (You) shouldn’t gang up on him—-he has enough difficulty dealing with one of us.

DaveH, one week ago I got an e-mail from my son, which stated:

Mom, I just received my tax return for 2011 back from the IRS.
And I’m puzzled now!!!
They are questioning IF I CLAIMED ALL dependents.
So now I’m asking myself, WHO did I miss?

To the question on my Tax Return form “List all dependents?” I listed:

47 million people on food stamps;
12 million illegal immigrants;
3 million crack heads;
2 million people in over 243 prisons;
Half of Mexico;
535 useless in the U.S. House and Senate;
And 1 double illegal “president” aka CHARLATAN.

I KEEP ASKING MYSELF, WHO DID I MISS?
Mom, can you help me to answer the question?

And I replied:
Yes my son, I can. You missed the DEMONcrats/Libtards/Progressives/Communistic HOAX a.k.a. “paid shills” with very low IQ.

I provide you with their names and you can add them to the list of “dependents” in your 1040 Tax form for 2012.

Here you have their name:

Jeremy aka Flashy; NC aka Nut Case; eddie47d(onkey) (who does not like to be a donkey in the face of his ridiculous stubbornness); Rich and others.

DaveH, You are free to add to the list.

Thanks and Happy New Year!

Just look up “Shill” in the Employment want ads.

Most conservatives do this for free, while liberal progressives expect pay for any menial thing they do, or don’t do.

I wish I could be paid. Caliber. But no I honestly believe what I say. I want Americans to get jobs too.

Nobody is paying you to assume multiple personalities and spout illogical, unsupported, and conjectural comments, Jeremy (aka Flashman)?
That must be some mighty powerful stuff you’re smoking.

I am not doing any of those things Dave. And I don’t smoke. Its bad for your health. Don’t drink either.

DaveH
And if you can’t see that the government is creating another bubble real estate market through their FHA financing and bank bailouts, then you are not only ignorant, you are stupid

Exactly Bill.

Bill …and a socialist!

So Dave the wall street bankers had nothing to do with bundling sub prime mortgages and passing them around while betting that those worthless mortgages would fail. And I am sure they had nothing to do with pushing people to buy those mortgages. And I am sure they were completely innocent in telling major news networks that their business were doing fine so people would keep their stocks in. I apologize if I same insulting but its because it gets me angry. Because these wall street men were not honest private sector white collar workers. They were not engaging in free enterprise. And in the end their risky decisions did not hurt them. It hurt their workers and it hurt the country. I have no desire to hurt small business. But there is a need to have strong regulation on those handling the economy. At the very least the CEOS who caused this recession should have been thrown in jail instead of occasionally being brought before congress for some perfunctory scolding.

Jeremy: But there is a need to have strong regulation on those handling the economy. At the very least the CEOS who caused this recession should have been thrown in jail instead of occasionally being brought before congress for some perfunctory scolding.

Perfunctory scolding? Jeremy, they were rewarded with a generous “bailout” at taxpayers expense! Now you are insisting the same Government be their over-seer and regulatory-body? Come on, Jeremy, you can’t be serious?

With respect WTS/JAY it seems contradictory to denounce giving these guys tax payer funded bailouts and at the same time oppose the idea of regulating them so as to prevent them from getting into these situations in the first place. Its funny to me that when these large companies are in trouble suddenly they turn to uncle sam and demand support. But at the same time they demand there be no strings attached cause that could endanger their financial stability. The same financial stability they themselves ruined. What I am saying is its not okay for these corporations to expect to keep as much of their earnings as possible paying as little to the government as possible and then expect to have as much given to them as possible when they are struggling. If we have rules and regulations to control these business and since apparently corporations are people and we have rules to govern how people can act it stands to reason that these corporations will be more likely to act appropriately. If the heads of these companies get sent to jail instead of being given a golden parachute they might be less likely to steal millions or some times billions of dollars.

I have yet to see where anyone has pointed out that Acorn’s political power forced large banking institutions to start down the path of making all the bad loans that contributed to the collapse of the housing market. Maybe someday it will all come out.

Because Acorn had nothing to do with it. Unless of course Acorn held power during the bush administration when the mortgage crisis happened.

You’re either ignorant, Jeremy (aka Flashman), or you’re lying. Of course it’s most likely to be the latter given that you are assuming multiple personalities and lying about it:
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/02/acorn-housing-boom

Perhaps I am Dave. All I knew about Acorn was from that video the fake pimp showed. And I later learned that the video was heavily edited to make Acorn appear worse than it actually was. Still I believe that wall street had more to do with the mortgage crisis. Judging by your post I would say Acorn has more to do with corruption in government and crony capitalism which also needs to be curbed.

Dave H (and many others) will never admit he gives those crony capitalists free reign. They are the capitalist system as we know it and if you don’t like it but do nothing about it then you are just as guilty of allowing it to happen. Talk from both the left and right is dirt cheap and Dave H is no different.

If you are an ignorant progressive, make ignorant comments, lie, slander and talk out your arse and your name is eddie…you must be a socialist.

Eddie,
Are you a proxy for everything ignorant about propagandized Liberal Progressives?
Big Government supports Crony Capitalists with myriad protective devices including regulations, quotas, subsidies, price controls, tariffs, and many other mechanisms.
Without that Big Government protection, they would have no choice other than to please the consumers in voluntary Market Transactions.
I realize, Eddie, that ignoramuses like yourself might have trouble researching products before they buy them. But the average American has tools, never before available (on the Internet), to easily research products by reading the numerous reviews for almost anything we might want to buy. You have nobody but yourself to blame, Eddie, if you can’t take the time to avail yourself of them.

Dave are you against all regulations. I understand the issue of crony capitalism. But we need to counter act it. We cannot do that without regulations. Just as we have laws to fight bank robberies so we need laws to fight mortgage fraud.

Have you read the book — “The Big Ripoff: How Big Business and Big Government Steal your Money”, Jeremy (aka Flashman)?
Of course you haven’t, because you’re not here to learn anything. You’re here to disrupt other people who do want to learn. For those people:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Ripoff-Business-Government/dp/0471789070/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1357258911&sr=8-1&keywords=the+big+ripoff

Jeremy says — “We cannot do that without regulations”.
Sure we can, Jeremy (aka Flashman), unless by “we” you mean yourself and your masters who are taking advantage of peoples’ collective economic ignorance.
For those who want to learn what regulations are costing our economy:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/93023823/Wayne-Crews-10-000-Commandments-2012

Dave I am not trying to disrupt anything. I am trying to speak up against things I believe are incorrect. I am on this site in the hopes of learning something. As for regulations I never said we should keep all regulations or that all regulations are good. I just believe that we need regulations in the same way that we need laws. There needs to be consequences for white collar crime in the same way that there are consequences for blue collar crime. There needs to be consequences for abuses and neglect. And when I say consequences I mean judicial ones. Not CEO steals millions of dollars and has to resign with a multi million dollar golden parachute. He needs to be thrown in jail. Its kind of hard to throw someone in jail for doing something that is not against the law. We need regulations in the same way we need laws is my point. Not all laws or regulations are needed. But we still need them.

Actually it is not Dave. Just because I am a liberal progressive does not mean I hate the armed forces. I believe the United States armed forces is the best in the world and we owe it too our troops to care for and support them. I have been told that is a conservative. Well as I have said I have some conservative views. I guess this is one of them. Nothing ironic. I am just a complex person with a variety of views on a variety of issues. My label does not determine all my views.

Dave doesn’t like labeling (so he says) or name calling (so he says) but he does it all the time! Saying you are anti military Jeremy when he has said that about himself (anti-interventionist) numerous times is alittle much even from him. He slyly sends mixed messages on too many topics thinking no one will notice that he is throwing out wild punches. .

Did I say anything about you hating the armed forces, Jeremy (aka Flashman)?
No Jeremy, you aren’t conservative in any way. You are supporter of all things Big Government. And that stands to reason, you being a shill and all.

I suppose you didn’t Dave. Though your statement “If you think it isn’t just a little ironic that a Liberal Progressive would be promoting our armed forces, you might be deluded.” is open to that interpretation. I am conservative in that I am for a strong reduction in spending. I ado not support everything government does. For Example The National Defense Authorization Act, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Fast and Furious, The Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, The Iraqi War, The Bush Tax Cuts, The Defense of Marriage Act, Water Boarding, Drone Strikes, Wire Taping and Guantanamo Bay. Those are just a few examples of Big Government that I oppose as strongly as I have ever opposed anything on this site. Also an interesting note. When I was in high school and I opposed the Iraqi War I was called a Bleeding Heart Liberal who was soft on terror and wanted the terrorists to win. Now I am called a Big Government Liberal. Even though my views have not changed all that much except perhaps move more slightly to the center I am still called Liberal. It seems like the definition of liberals has changed in those who decide for themselves what liberals are.

Obama couldn’t lean more “that way” if he were Karl Marx himself.

Are you makin’ book on that, Jeremy?

No Old Henry. I am simply pointing out the lack of logic in suggesting that one person is the same as another just because they use the same word.

Old Henry there is a vast difference between wanting a more accountable and ethical government to provide services for the people and to stand as a safe guard against forces that would take advantage of the less powerful and wanting to give the government total and absolute control. There is a difference between wanting a police force and wanting the gestapo.

2/2/13, It’s over, folks. At least until Bam vacates. This h/c fiasco will collapse under it’s own weight; consider his: as veteran practitioners leave & retire, there will be fewer replacements, a disaster in itself. Doctor/patient confidentiality will be compromised in favor of the bean counters &, yes, “death panels” who will decide whether or not your care is cost-effective. The healthcare industry is like none other; you cut corners & you dehumanize people, those too old, too sick, or those you just don’t want. Once they get away with controlling 1/6th of our GNP, they will move to the next sector–like energy. I’m waiting for Bam to bang his shoe on his next lectern a-la Nikita Khrushchev @ the UN in 1960.