Republicans are bad, but Democrats are significantly worse.

[Madison320]

As much as I can't stand republicans, democrats are a lot worse. If you disagree, name a few of the top freedom favoring republicans and then name a few of the top freedom favoring democrats.

Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Thomas Massie.

Your turn....

[dannno]

Tulsi Gabbard and....... well, even Kucinich quit like 4 years ago...

I'm voting for a Democrat in my mayoral race coming up, over a 'centrist' and a 'conservative', even though he is actually a bit of a centrist. He describes himself as fiscally conservative and socially progressive and he created significant growth for a very large corporation as the CEO.

Everybody else running, including another Democrat are all entrenched in the political establishment, he is the outsider.

The other Democrat is a total nightmare. Her supporters are saying the reason we shouldn't vote for the guy I'm supporting is because he is like Donald Trump (even though he is latino, it's just because he was a successful CEO, and he hates Donald Trump).

At worst, I would like to help split the vote between the two Democrats, at best I'd like to see this guy elected.

[euphemia]

As much as I can't stand republicans, democrats are a lot worse. If you disagree, name a few of the top freedom favoring republicans and then name a few of the top freedom favoring democrats.

Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Thomas Massie.

Your turn....

There is a new guy coming up who is running for Bob Corker's seat. His name is Andy Ogles. Native Middle Tennessean, likes Rand Paul. Activism seems to be part of his DNA. He has been active as part of Americans for Prosperity and would really like to get with it on debt, budget, and limited government. I heard him on talk radio today and I will be watching him. Corker was not my choice when he ran, so it sounds like Ogles might be a gigantic improvement.

[dannno]

There is a new guy coming up who is running for Bob Corker's seat. His name is Andy Ogles. Native Middle Tennessean, likes Rand Paul. Activism seems to be part of his DNA. He has been active as part of Americans for Prosperity and would really like to get with it on debt, budget, and limited government. I heard him on talk radio today and I will be watching him. Corker was not my choice when he ran, so it sounds like Ogles might be a gigantic improvement.

^Republican (FYI)

[euphemia]

^Republican (FYI)

Of course, but of the Rand Paul stripe. He's interesting. In the part of the interview I heard, he used the word "conservative" as in conservative application of government, meaning limited government. He has had a lot of opportunity to hone his message, and he sounds like someone who can win. We haven't had a Dem senator since Gore, Jr.

Oddly, a few years ago a Democrat ran for the TN House in the Clarksville district. He was more conservative and liberty minded than any Republican on the ticket. He won the primary, but the Dems took him off the ballot and replaced him with the incumbent. Go figure.

[Madison320]

Tulsi Gabbard and....... well, even Kucinich quit like 4 years ago...


I don't know anything about Tulsi Gabbard, but wasn't Kucinich a hard core, almost Bernie Sanders like socialist? I know he had a couple of good traits, anti war, anti bank bailouts, but that's not much good if you're a socialist.

[RJB]

I have enjoyed conversations with Bernie and Kucinich supporters rather than typical FOX news viewers. I may disagree with solutions, but there is usually an agreement on what the problems are and some of the root causes. For instance, I have met plenty who acknowledged that Obama was as bad as Bush with the war on terror.

[dannno]

I don't know anything about Tulsi Gabbard, but wasn't Kucinich a hard core, almost Bernie Sanders like socialist? I know he had a couple of good traits, anti war, anti bank bailouts, but that's not much good if you're a socialist.

Don't forget civil liberties, he was fantastic on civil liberties. Remember, you said freedom 'favoring' and on most of the issues he favored freedom, at least more so than other Democrats out there at the time.

Tulsi is pretty similar, but her big claim to fame in our crowd is that she recognizes that our country is secretly supplying weaponry to ISIS and Al Qaeda in Syria and the Middle East, and she is vehemently anti-war.

[Madison320]

Don't forget civil liberties, he was fantastic on civil liberties. Remember, you said freedom 'favoring' and on most of the issues he favored freedom, at least more so than other Democrats out there at the time.


Personally I feel that high, progressive taxation is the biggest loss of freedom and my guess is Kucinich wasn't too hot on that issue. What good is smoking weed if you're a slave? Maybe I'm wrong about him, I'll look it up tomorrow.

Ok, I looked it up. It's not good.

Believes health care is a right and supports universal health care.
Wants to ban all handguns.
Supports "free" education all the way thru college.
Opposes free trade.
Basically wants to take over farming.
Favors a steeply progressive tax, the second plank of the communist manifesto.

But he lets you smoke weed!

And this is the "best" of the democrats? Holy Venezuela Batman! Actually he's not even a current politician.

[Swordsmyth]

Personally I feel that high, progressive taxation is the biggest loss of freedom and my guess is Kucinich wasn't too hot on that issue. What good is smoking weed if you're a slave? Maybe I'm wrong about him, I'll look it up tomorrow.

Don't forget gun control, without arms there is no freedom.

[Madison320]

Don't forget gun control, without arms there is no freedom.

Yup. Go back and look at my previous post. I looked up Kucinich's positions.

Actually I'm going to go out on a limb and say the worst current republican is still better on issues of freedom than the best democrat!

As long as you exclude John McCain. :rolleyes:

[HVACTech]

in my experience..
few "Republicans" know what a Republic is... and the Democrats are certain that Democracy is the final answer to all of our human problems...
(even if they cannot offer a correct definition of this word.)
the Oz understood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSfNvTVEALw

[Danke]

Personally I feel that high, progressive taxation is the biggest loss of freedom and my guess is Kucinich wasn't too hot on that issue. What good is smoking weed if you're a slave? Maybe I'm wrong about him, I'll look it up tomorrow.

Ok, I looked it up. It's not good.

Believes health care is a right and supports universal health care.
Wants to ban all handguns.
Supports "free" education all the way thru college.
Opposes free trade.
Basically wants to take over farming.
Favors a steeply progressive tax, the second plank of the communist manifesto.

But he lets you smoke weed!

And this is the "best" of the democrats? Holy Venezuela Batman! Actually he's not even a current politician.


He has got a hot wife, especially for a short man.

[Champ]

Across the board, the triumvirate of Paul, Massie, and Amash have no comparison within the Democratic Party as far as adhering to the constitution. The Democrats have a couple decent people now and in the recent years, but they generally only cared about the constitution when it came to singular issues like wars or civil liberties and largely ignored it when it was inconvenient, economics being a big one they could care less about.

Gabbard is big with the disaffected Bernie/Stein voters that want Hillary put behind bars and the deep state exposed/ended and Kucinich is in on doing what he can to make that happen as well.

So yeah, nobody comparable, but only having 3 folks there following law and the constitution is not promising either as rights and culture continue to disintegrate. Love seeing those vote counts of 97-3 and 525-6. You can usually guess who those minority votes are.

[nikcers]

Ron Paul republicans are the only good ones, we need more.

[angelatc]

As much as I can't stand republicans, democrats are a lot worse. If you disagree, name a few of the top freedom favoring republicans and then name a few of the top freedom favoring democrats.

Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Thomas Massie.

Your turn....

Democrats are worse because they actually accomplish things.

[Ender]

Yup. Go back and look at my previous post. I looked up Kucinich's positions.

Actually I'm going to go out on a limb and say the worst current republican is still better on issues of freedom than the best democrat!

As long as you exclude John McCain. :rolleyes:

Dems & Repubs- meh. For me it's 2nd verse, same as the first.

As far as Kucinich goes, here's some links with him & Ron Paul on the same page:


Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich Ask President Obama to Free Chelsea Manning

http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/


It just seemed just like yesterday Kucinich was not far from Paul’s mind, when Paul mirthfully stated during a ReLOVEution presidential campaign interview that if elected he’d consider putting the liberal Ohio congressman in his administration, creating a “Department of Peace,” where the peace-loving Kucinich could really shine.

“You’ve got to give credit to people who think,” Paul said of Kucinich at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, as reported by the Hill on Sept. 21, 2011.

Like the photographic inversion of monochromatic mirror images, Kucinich and Paul reflected each other in their general antiwar stance, foreign policy views and civil-liberty reservations about what they and their supporters perceive as our modern-day surveillance state. While political outliers in their respective parties, they both asked tough questions that challenged us morally and encouraged reflection.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/therootdc/post/ron-paul-dennis-kucinich-wont-soon-be-forgotten/2012/05/15/gIQAgJbzRU_blog.html?utm_term=.01b785aa69a8


Paul & Kucinich on the FED (Interview by the Judge)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXIvBa1BaP8


Kucinich praises Ron Paul’s ‘diligence’ in pushing Federal Reserve audit

http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/27/kucinich-praises-ron-pauls-diligence-in-pushing-federal-reserve-audit-video/

[William Tell]

I have enjoyed conversations with Bernie and Kucinich supporters rather than typical FOX news viewers. I may disagree with solutions, but there is usually an agreement on what the problems are and some of the root causes. For instance, I have met plenty who acknowledged that Obama was as bad as Bush with the war on terror.Yeah but they have zero influence in the party. I'm not sure there are truly principled socialists anyway, since the philosophy assumes stealing is OK it all goes down hill fast.

[HVACTech]

both socialism and anarchy,
will be possible when we all have force fields and replicators.
and I can see that happening..

[H. E. Panqui]

As much as I can't stand republicans, democrats are a lot worse.

:cool:

...you're too lenient with the stinking republican party inc....none of these republicrats are truly 'freedom-loving'...true 'freedom-loving' people would be railing LOUDLY AND FREQUENTLY against 'fractional reserve deposit creation' which makes us all slaves to 'the banksters' and their favorite$....but not a focused, knowledgeable peep from any republican or democrat about thi$ abomination...the hideous fiscal policies of ?your stinking republicans--spending as much or more than the stinking democrats while lowering taxes--requires more bond issuance from the treasury...bonds which the banksters get for free...the banksters looooooove your stinking republicans...

[Madison320]

:cool:

...you're too lenient with the stinking republican party inc....none of these republicrats are truly 'freedom-loving'...true 'freedom-loving' people would be railing LOUDLY AND FREQUENTLY against 'fractional reserve deposit creation' which makes us all slaves to 'the banksters' and their favorite$....but not a focused, knowledgeable peep from any republican or democrat about thi$ abomination...the hideous fiscal policies of ?your stinking republicans--spending as much or more than the stinking democrats while lowering taxes--requires more bond issuance from the treasury...bonds which the banksters get for free...the banksters looooooove your stinking republicans...

I never said they were freedom loving. And they're not "my" republicans. I haven't voted for a republican in this century. That being said I've never voted for a democrat.
The point of my post is to compare the two parties.

[timosman]

Don't forget civil liberties, he was fantastic on civil liberties. Remember, you said freedom 'favoring' and on most of the issues he favored freedom, at least more so than other Democrats out there at the time.

Tulsi is pretty similar, but her big claim to fame in our crowd is that she recognizes that our country is secretly supplying weaponry to ISIS and Al Qaeda in Syria and the Middle East, and she is vehemently anti-war.

You can take that to the bank!

[timosman]

Democrats are simply better at hiding their true agenda.

[Madison320]

Dems & Repubs- meh. For me it's 2nd verse, same as the first.

As far as Kucinich goes, here's some links with him & Ron Paul on the same page:


Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich Ask President Obama to Free Chelsea Manning

http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/



https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/therootdc/post/ron-paul-dennis-kucinich-wont-soon-be-forgotten/2012/05/15/gIQAgJbzRU_blog.html?utm_term=.01b785aa69a8


Paul & Kucinich on the FED (Interview by the Judge)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXIvBa1BaP8


Kucinich praises Ron Paul’s ‘diligence’ in pushing Federal Reserve audit

http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/27/kucinich-praises-ron-pauls-diligence-in-pushing-federal-reserve-audit-video/

I don't think agreeing with Ron Paul on one thing forgives the fact that he's a communist:

Believes health care is a right and supports universal health care.
Wants to ban all handguns.
Supports "free" education all the way thru college.
Opposes free trade.
Basically wants to take over farming.
Favors a steeply progressive tax, the second plank of the communist manifesto.

Again, I'm not saying I like the republican party. I don't. I don't vote for them. All I'm saying is that as bad as the republicans are, the democrats are MUCH worse.

[Madison320]

Yeah but they have zero influence in the party. I'm not sure there are truly principled socialists anyway, since the philosophy assumes stealing is OK it all goes down hill fast.

Exactly. I've said that many times. Socialist's core principle is theft. That's not a good foundation.

[Madison320]

Across the board, the triumvirate of Paul, Massie, and Amash have no comparison within the Democratic Party as far as adhering to the constitution. The Democrats have a couple decent people now and in the recent years, but they generally only cared about the constitution when it came to singular issues like wars or civil liberties and largely ignored it when it was inconvenient, economics being a big one they could care less about.

Gabbard is big with the disaffected Bernie/Stein voters that want Hillary put behind bars and the deep state exposed/ended and Kucinich is in on doing what he can to make that happen as well.

So yeah, nobody comparable, but only having 3 folks there following law and the constitution is not promising either as rights and culture continue to disintegrate. Love seeing those vote counts of 97-3 and 525-6. You can usually guess who those minority votes are.

At least that's progress. I remember when it used to be 500-1. And you can guess who the "1" was.

[timosman]

Democrats are simply better at hiding their true agenda.

On a second thought maybe their true agenda is easier to hide?:rolleyes:

[acptulsa]

At least that's progress. I remember when it used to be 500-1. And you can guess who the "1" was.

That's why the premise of this thread is meaningless. I remember when the majority of the people in Congress who actually tried to represent their constituents were, in fact, Democrats, and actually did fight against wiretapping and FISA secret tribunals. That was back during the era when Nixon was still casting his shadow. Even then, of course, they were already a minority.

If the Democratic Party got worse, they were just catching up to the Nixonians. And if the GOP is better, that's because we spent the last ten years making it better. But I still wouldn't give a plug nickel for either party, as a general rule.

Meanwhile, pretending like there's enough difference to worry about is something new to this movement--something the MSM and the 'Deep State' injected into it as part of their divide and conquer strategy--and if we play along and pretend either party is not fundamentally rotten, we lose our momentum. Which, in fact, we have done.

Rand Paul and Tulsi Gabbard both got elected in spite of their parties, not because of them. Party makes no difference at all. Either a politician is a public servant or a stooge. And dividing ourselves along party lines is not going to help us make the public servants less of a minority.

[shakey1]

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/2Jhj570faJw/hqdefault.jpg

[timosman]

And dividing ourselves along party lines is not going to help us make the public servants less of a minority.

I don't think this is the point of the thread. We are simply trying to analyze the situation from an average voter perspective. The Dems have a lot of appeal as they hang out with cool technology companies and do not mention religion that often. This obviously can change on a dime. :cool:

[CaptUSA]

Lol - I see people falling for this tripe from time to time...

Somehow, I always hear: "Herpes is bad, but syphilis is worse!"

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

As much as I can't stand republicans, democrats are a lot worse. If you disagree, name a few of the top freedom favoring republicans and then name a few of the top freedom favoring democrats.




Generally agree, but both often give up the principle and are just negotiating price.

Still however,
--Democrats consistently score lower on measures of freedom.
--Liberty minded people and libertarians are consistently in the Republican party
--Traditional minded women are Republicans. A tough sell, considering women often turn to Democrats.


This index and model are hardly perfect, but you can virtually guess the party based on percentage. You can either coffee klatch, whine and wait for perfection, or you can try to get something done.


"The Freedom Index: A Congressional Scorecard Based on the U.S. Constitution"
The percentages below are cumulative scores based on key votes from 1999 to the first part of 2017. [Higher means more freedom.]



A few sample states:

Kentucky
Sen. Mitch McConnell - 60%
Sen. Rand Paul - 93%
Dist.1: James Comer - 50%
Dist.2: Brett Guthrie - 63%
Dist.3: John Yarmuth - 21%
Dist.4: Thomas Massie - 98%
Dist.5: Harold Rogers - 52%
Dist.6: Garland Barr - 55%


Utah
Sen. Mike Lee - 92%
Sen. Orrin Hatch - 56%
Dist.1: Rob Bishop - 66%
Dist.2: Chris Stewart - 61%
Dist.4: Mia Love - 68%

Vermont
Sen. Patrick Leahy - 15%
Sen. Bernard Sanders - 27%
Dist.: Peter Welch - 26%

https://www.thenewamerican.com/freedom-index

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Here is another measure, per the research Freedom in the 50 States


I view the top 5 freedom states as more Republican/conservative. I view the bottom 5 states as more Democrat/liberal.



The overall freedom ranking is a combination of personal and economic freedoms.


Top freedom states:

1. New Hampshire
2. Oklahoma
3. Indiana
4. South Dakota
5. Alaska



Worst states for freedom (bottom 5):

46. Maryland
47. New Jersey
48. Hawaii
49. California
50. New York


Good map here: https://www.freedominthe50states.org/

[acptulsa]

Whatever. Regardless of how crappy the politicians are, when we turn our noses up at Democratic voters and sneer at them when we should be recruiting them, we're making a mistake. The age old 'our shit don't stink' mistake. Republican shit stinks, and that's the bottom line.


Lol - I see people falling for this tripe from time to time...

Somehow, I always hear: "Herpes is bad, but syphilis is worse!"

This. If we withhold our penicillin from either one of them, we lose. Doesn't matter which disease the voters have. We can still cure it.

Individuals >>> demographics

[Ender]

I don't think agreeing with Ron Paul on one thing forgives the fact that he's a communist:

Believes health care is a right and supports universal health care.
Wants to ban all handguns.
Supports "free" education all the way thru college.
Opposes free trade.
Basically wants to take over farming.
Favors a steeply progressive tax, the second plank of the communist manifesto.

Again, I'm not saying I like the republican party. I don't. I don't vote for them. All I'm saying is that as bad as the republicans are, the democrats are MUCH worse.


Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) says he would consider putting the liberal congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) in his Cabinet if he were to win the presidency in 2012.

Paul said his libertarian political philosophy helps him connect with some on the far left — including Kucinich, who shares Paul’s general anti-war stance.

Paul joked that if he brought the Ohio congressman aboard in his administration, he might have to create a "Department of Peace."

"You've got to give credit to people who think," he said.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/182939-ron-paul-says-hed-consider-putting-dennis-kucinich-in-his-cabinet

[Swordsmyth]

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/182939-ron-paul-says-hed-consider-putting-dennis-kucinich-in-his-cabinet

Putting him in his cabinet=controlling him by limiting his power to a subject where he is not evil.

[acptulsa]

Moving him from the House of Representatives to the Cabinet =/= limiting his power.

[Ender]

Dennis Kucinich would choose Ron Paul as his running mate:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py8cXlLyX18

Ron Paul on Dennis Kucinich


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJcnoDfFWhM&t=63s

[Madison320]

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/182939-ron-paul-says-hed-consider-putting-dennis-kucinich-in-his-cabinet

I think one reason you think Kucinich is not that bad is because you seem to put a much higher emphasis on civil liberty vs economic liberty, especially the economic liberty of the most productive.

Personally I think while they are both important, if I had to choose I'd take economic liberty first. At least if my property rights are protected I can afford to take a trip to Amsterdam and smoke weed every once in awhile. If Kucinich had his way none of us would even be able to afford weed. We'd all be worried about food, shelter and clothing.

For the third time

Kucinich:

Believes health care is a right and supports universal health care.
Wants to ban all handguns.
Supports "free" education all the way thru college.
Opposes free trade.
Basically wants to take over farming.
Favors a steeply progressive tax, the second plank of the communist manifesto.


And that's just the tip of the iceburg. I found that in a couple minutes. Actually I'm surprised that anyone who reads that list would still have the balls to defend him. If I was the one defending him and saw his positions I'd be embarrassed and apologizing.

[Madison320]

Lol - I see people falling for this tripe from time to time...

Somehow, I always hear: "Herpes is bad, but syphilis is worse!"

That's true to a point but it's more like herpes vs losing your arms and legs. My point not that republicans are good but how remarkably bad democrats are.

[Swordsmyth]

I think one reason you think Kucinich is not that bad is because you seem to put a much higher emphasis on civil liberty vs economic liberty, especially the economic liberty of the most productive.

Personally I think while they are both important, if I had to choose I'd take economic liberty first. At least if my property rights are protected I can afford to take a trip to Amsterdam and smoke weed every once in awhile. If Kucinich had his way none of us would even be able to afford weed. We'd all be worried about food, shelter and clothing.

And we wouldn't have any guns to revolt with if civil liberties were infringed far enough to justify it.

[heavenlyboy34]

As much as I can't stand republicans, democrats are a lot worse. If you disagree, name a few of the top freedom favoring republicans and then name a few of the top freedom favoring democrats.

Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Thomas Massie.

Your turn....

I hope you understand this is like trying to "win" a race to the bottom. :(

[acptulsa]

I hope you understand this is like trying to "win" a race to the bottom. :(

That's the name of their game. That's what the two party system has systematically been re-engineered to cause us to do.

And we're doing it.

[CaptUSA]

That's true to a point but it's more like herpes vs losing your arms and legs. My point not that republicans are good but how remarkably bad democrats are.

Lol - you must be buying into the rhetoric instead of the actions. Seems to me that government grows and liberty recedes regardless of which party is in power. In fact, the two parties seem to work in incredibly efficient unison to acquire and use as much power as possible. So, which leg do you hate worse? The left one or the right one? (Hint: if you choose one leg over the other, you missed the point.)

[acptulsa]

Lol - you must be buying into the rhetoric instead of the actions. Seems to me that government grows and liberty recedes regardless of which party is in power. In fact, the two parties seem to work in incredibly efficient unison to acquire and use as much power as possible. So, which leg do you hate worse? The left one or the right one? (Hint: if you choose one leg over the other, you missed the point.)

It's the age-old story. We can actually improve things later--right now we have to slow the decline down a little. That's how the 'lesser of two evils' scam works.

Young people are particularly susceptible to it because they don't yet have a perspective of history which allows them to see four years is something other than a long time. And old people fall victim to it because decades of failure to get us out of the lesser evil false paradigm has convinced them that slowing down the decline is the best we can realistically hope for.

[Madison320]

Lol - you must be buying into the rhetoric instead of the actions. Seems to me that government grows and liberty recedes regardless of which party is in power. In fact, the two parties seem to work in incredibly efficient unison to acquire and use as much power as possible. So, which leg do you hate worse? The left one or the right one? (Hint: if you choose one leg over the other, you missed the point.)

I have to admit that the results as a group of each party seem to be pretty close, despite that fact that on an individual basis, the worst republican is probably better than the best democrat.

And my Gary Johnson vote is looking better all the time.

[Ender]

I think one reason you think Kucinich is not that bad is because you seem to put a much higher emphasis on civil liberty vs economic liberty, especially the economic liberty of the most productive.

Personally I think while they are both important, if I had to choose I'd take economic liberty first. At least if my property rights are protected I can afford to take a trip to Amsterdam and smoke weed every once in awhile. If Kucinich had his way none of us would even be able to afford weed. We'd all be worried about food, shelter and clothing.

For the third time

Kucinich:

Believes health care is a right and supports universal health care.
Wants to ban all handguns.
Supports "free" education all the way thru college.
Opposes free trade.
Basically wants to take over farming.
Favors a steeply progressive tax, the second plank of the communist manifesto.


And that's just the tip of the iceburg. I found that in a couple minutes. Actually I'm surprised that anyone who reads that list would still have the balls to defend him. If I was the one defending him and saw his positions I'd be embarrassed and apologizing.

Really? You ARE talking about Ron Paul, who liked Kuinich, BTW.

They were on the same page with foreign policy & the FED. If you listened to Kuinich on the vid I posted, he said that RP and he did not agree on all things but he felt that was healthy. They could discuss and look at another's POV and think about it.

My reasons for posting this stuff is to show that some left/right people can get along and come to understandings.

As far as Reps & Dems, overall, they are NO DIFFERENT. Just say different buzzwords to make their voters happy.

[Madison320]

Really? You ARE talking about Ron Paul, who liked Kuinich, BTW.

They were on the same page with foreign policy & the FED. If you listened to Kuinich on the vid I posted, he said that RP and he did not agree on all things but he felt that was healthy. They could discuss and look at another's POV and think about it.

My reasons for posting this stuff is to show that some left/right people can get along and come to understandings.

As far as Reps & Dems, overall, they are NO DIFFERENT. Just say different buzzwords to make their voters happy.

I'm confused. Which part of communism are you ok with?

[Ender]

I'm confused. Which part of communism are you ok with?

Ahhh..... now to the insults and innuendos. Always happens when you lose an argument. :rolleyes:

[Madison320]

Ahhh..... now to the insults and innuendos. Always happens when you lose an argument. :rolleyes:

No sir, that was a factual question.

Read Kucinich's position one more time, very slowly. He's a communist. OK, I'll be nice. He's a very extreme socialist.

Believes health care is a right and supports universal health care.
Wants to ban all handguns.
Supports "free" education all the way thru college.
Opposes free trade.
Basically wants to take over farming.
Favors a steeply progressive tax, the second plank of the communist manifesto.


This was on Wikipedia about his position of farming, it might as well come from Karl Marx.

"Something is wrong when profits of agribusiness corporations skyrocket, but farmers must find off-farm jobs or sell their farms to survive," says Kucinich on his website. Kucinich has been an opponent of market led agrarian reform and has advocated canceling NAFTA and the WTO and replacing them with bilateral agreements that benefit farmers, empowering farmers by providing incentives to join collective bargaining units, breaking apart agribusiness monopolies through enforcing anti-trust laws, shifting towards local food systems such as a farm-to-school program, reducing environmental impacts through safeguarding family farms from factory farm pollution, and restoring family farms in the United States.[57] Kucinich has also said he gives "strong and unwavering support to our organic family farmers.

Update: Maybe I'm wrong about Kucinich. I just read the 10 planks of the communist manifesto and Kucinich only agrees with about half of them. Maybe he's only a partial communist.

[dannno]

Personally I feel that high, progressive taxation is the biggest loss of freedom and my guess is Kucinich wasn't too hot on that issue. What good is smoking weed if you're a slave? Maybe I'm wrong about him, I'll look it up tomorrow.

Ok, I looked it up. It's not good.

Believes health care is a right and supports universal health care.
Wants to ban all handguns.
Supports "free" education all the way thru college.
Opposes free trade.
Basically wants to take over farming.
Favors a steeply progressive tax, the second plank of the communist manifesto.

But he lets you smoke weed!

And this is the "best" of the democrats? Holy Venezuela Batman! Actually he's not even a current politician.

Wait a minute, you just equivocated anti-Patriot Act, anti-spying and smoking weed with just smoking weed.. And you forgot about being anti-war and Auditing the Fed.

I admit the socialism stuff is a HUGE ding, but Ron Paul seems to like Kucinich better than McCain and I think I would prefer him too. McCain is a big government socialist, anti-civil liberties, pro-war, pro-Fed, pro-establishment, everything about him is bad.

Sanders is a different beast, he is just too ignorant on all the issues that he might be ok on if it weren't for his ignorance, I can't find any good reason to support him at all.

[Madison320]

I hope you understand this is like trying to "win" a race to the bottom. :(

That's why I don't vote for republicans or democrats, I vote libertarian.

[Madison320]

Wait a minute, you just equivocated anti-Patriot Act, anti-spying and smoking weed with just smoking weed.. And you forgot about being anti-war and Auditing the Fed.

I admit the socialism stuff is a HUGE ding, but Ron Paul seems to like Kucinich better than McCain and I think I would prefer him too. McCain is a big government socialist, anti-civil liberties, pro-war, pro-Fed, pro-establishment, everything about him is bad.

Sanders is a different beast, he is just too ignorant on all the issues that he might be ok on if it weren't for his ignorance, I can't find any good reason to support him at all.

I know I was just being a little sarcastic.

But seriously, Kucinich seems to be a pretty hard core socialist/borderline communist. He's so horribly bad on so many issues that there's no way the positives can outweigh the negatives. That's like a serial killer who helps old ladies cross the street.

Then there's McCain. Hmm. That's a tough one. I think I'd still take McCain over Kucinich. I'll bet if you looked at the voting record Kucinich is WAY more socialistic than McCain. And I doubt that McCain supports a total ban on handguns (yikes!). So the question would be does McCain's war mongering outweigh Kucinich's communism? That's why I joked "Excluding McCain" earlier.

[Ender]

No sir, that was a factual question.

Read Kucinich's position one more time, very slowly. He's a communist. OK, I'll be nice. He's a very extreme socialist.

Believes health care is a right and supports universal health care.
Wants to ban all handguns.
Supports "free" education all the way thru college.
Opposes free trade.
Basically wants to take over farming.
Favors a steeply progressive tax, the second plank of the communist manifesto.


This was on Wikipedia about his position of farming, it might as well come from Karl Marx.

"Something is wrong when profits of agribusiness corporations skyrocket, but farmers must find off-farm jobs or sell their farms to survive," says Kucinich on his website. Kucinich has been an opponent of market led agrarian reform and has advocated canceling NAFTA and the WTO and replacing them with bilateral agreements that benefit farmers, empowering farmers by providing incentives to join collective bargaining units, breaking apart agribusiness monopolies through enforcing anti-trust laws, shifting towards local food systems such as a farm-to-school program, reducing environmental impacts through safeguarding family farms from factory farm pollution, and restoring family farms in the United States.[57] Kucinich has also said he gives "strong and unwavering support to our organic family farmers.

Update: Maybe I'm wrong about Kucinich. I just read the 10 planks of the communist manifesto and Kucinich only agrees with about half of them. Maybe he's only a partial communist.

Leeseee.... RON PAUL is also against NAFTA & the WTO.


Ron Paul is a proponent of free trade and rejects protectionism, advocating “conducting open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations.” He opposes many free trade agreements (FTAs), like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), stating that “free-trade agreements are really managed trade” and serve special interests and big business, not citizens.

http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/free-trade/


Sowing More Big Government with the Farm Bill

by Ron Paul

Those who believe federal farm programs benefit independent farmers, should take note that after 70 years of this type of government intervention, small farms continue to struggle while large corporate farms control an ever-increasing share of the agricultural market. Subsidies for agribusiness should be stopped and the free market should be allowed to work. With commodity and food prices on the rise, Congress had an opportunity to scale down government controls and taxpayer funding of agriculture. Instead, despite the warning sent by an 18% approval rating, Congress stubbornly opted for more of the same.

https://www.ronpaul.com/2008-06-02/sowing-more-big-government-with-the-farm-bill/

And HERE are the Big Agribusinesses:


Huge companies like Cargill, Nestle, Monsanto, ConAgra, and Archer Daniels Midland dominate the world's food system. They control very large shares of the international markets for grains, fertilizers, pesticides and seeds, and they are involved in the food system from the farm to the supermarket.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic.../agribusiness-companies.html

Monsanto is NOT my idea of health & freedom.

[Swordsmyth]

Leeseee.... RON PAUL is also against NAFTA & the WTO.


http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/free-trade/



https://www.ronpaul.com/2008-06-02/sowing-more-big-government-with-the-farm-bill/

And HERE are the Big Agribusinesses:


https://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic.../agribusiness-companies.html

Monsanto is NOT my idea of health & freedom.

So the enemy of my enemy is my friend?

And you say we don't learn from history:rolleyes:

[Madison320]

So the enemy of my enemy is my friend?

And you say we don't learn from history:rolleyes:

I think Kucinich and Paul both like the color blue, maybe Kucinich is ok after all. That little communist thing is no big deal.

[Ender]

Kucinich on Wars:


Americans have been misled about the Iraqi war:
Promote international treaties but reject global corporatism:
Foreign aid for peace incentives, not conflict:
International Cooperation: US out of Iraq, UN in:
Let the UN rebuild Iraq and develop its governance:
Impeach VP Cheney for taking US into Iraq War based on lies:
One cannot be against Iraq war yet still fund it:
Member of the Out-of-Iraq Congressional Caucus:
YES on removing US armed forces from Afghanistan:
YES on banning armed forces in Libya without Congressional approval:
NO on authorizing military force in Iraq:
NO on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date:
YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days:
YES on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Dennis_Kucinich.htm

And my whole point is that there is NO DIFFERENCE between most of dems/repubs- but once in a while someone does have integrity. I don't agree w/all of Kucinich but at least he is honest and is trusted by Ron Paul.

[Ender]

So the enemy of my enemy is my friend?

And you say we don't learn from history:rolleyes:

I will use small words so you are not confused:

Ron. Paul. and. Dennis. Kucinich. are. friends.

[Swordsmyth]

I will use small words so you are not confused:

Ron. Paul. and. Dennis. Kucinich. are. friends.

I also have friends I wouldn't want anywhere near a voting booth let alone a position in government if I could talk them out of it.

Kucinich is a nightmare and if Ron is soft on him because he was a fellow voice on a few issues that doesn't change anything.

[acptulsa]

I also have friends I wouldn't want anywhere near a voting booth let alone a position in government if I could talk them out of it.

Kucinich is a nightmare and if Ron is soft on him because he was a fellow voice on a few issues that doesn't change anything.

A few issues? A few issues?

There are liberal districts. They will not vote conservative. This is a fact of life you cannot change. So, does that mean a Kucinich or two is useless to the betterment of the world?

The Federal Reserve is one issue. And yet, the Federal Reserve is the monstrous domino which has the weight to topple a thousand other ugly dominoes. A thousand. Ugly dominoes. Monstrous.

A few issues?

We seem to be unclear on our priorities...

You want prosperity? So you say. But peace brings prosperity, despite eight decades of MIC propaganda to the contrary. So, what say you? Would you, too, prefer McCain the Warmonger to Kucinich?

Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.

Bullet, meet foot.

God, help us get our heads out of our partisan asses. Amen.

[Swordsmyth]

A few issues? A few issues?

The Federal Reserve is one issue. And yet, the Federal Reserve is the monstrous domino which has the weight to topple a thousand other ugly dominoes. A thousand. Ugly dominoes. Monstrous.

A few issues?

Do you really think Kucinich wants a sound money, free market, liberty solution to the Fed?
Whatever communist "solution" he wants would be as bad or worse.
The enemy of your enemy may be your enemy as well.

[Madison320]

I also have friends I wouldn't want anywhere near a voting booth let alone a position in government if I could talk them out of it.

Kucinich is a nightmare and if Ron is soft on him because he was a fellow voice on a few issues that doesn't change anything.

Nightmare is an accurate term. I've always thought Ender had a left wing streak in him and this confirms it. I'm guessing things like progressive taxation don't bother him a bit.

This thread is reminding me of the Seinfeld episode where they meet a guy who's a communist, and everybody is saying ,"Wow, cool you're a communist? I never met one of those before!"

[nikcers]

Kucinich on Wars:



http://www.ontheissues.org/Dennis_Kucinich.htm

And my whole point is that there is NO DIFFERENCE between most of dems/repubs- but once in a while someone does have integrity. I don't agree w/all of Kucinich but at least he is honest and is trusted by Ron Paul.

right, there are issues especially regarding judicial activism that Rand Paul and Thomas Massie disagree but no two people agree on everything so that doesn't mean that they shouldn't work with people like Ron Wyden on things like the patriot act.

[acptulsa]

Nightmare is an accurate term. I've always thought Ender had a left wing streak in him and this confirms it. I'm guessing things like progressive taxation don't bother him a bit.

This thread is reminding me of the Seinfeld episode where they meet a guy who's a communist, and everybody is saying ,"Wow, cool you're a communist? I never met one of those before!"

This is ass hole behavior. Pure insult, no reason for it. Report me if you must. All I'm doing is calling a spade a spade.

Ender chooses not to turn his nose up at potential allies on key issues that can make all the difference. And you undercut him by going all...


https://youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

Gee, I'm sorry I'm not putting a finer point on this, but that' fucking stupid. And the fact that this attitude has taken over this forum and spread this witch hunt mentality all across it is why this forum isn't half the tool for activism it used to be.

Sorry if you can't see it. It's still the hard, gospel truth.

I'll say it again, and see if it sinks in some of the thicker skulls. Foot, meet bullet. Don't it feel good?

Fuck this stupidity.

[Swordsmyth]

This is ass hole behavior. Pure insult, no reason for it. Report me if you must. All I'm doing is calling a spade a spade.

Ender chooses not to turn his nose up at potential allies on key issues that can make all the difference. And you undercut him by going all...


https://youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

Gee, I'm sorry I'm not putting a finer point on this, but that' $#@!ing stupid. And the fact that this attitude has taken over this forum and spread this witch hunt mentality all across it is why this forum isn't half the tool for activism it used to be.

Sorry if you can't see it. It's still the hard, gospel truth.

No one has said not to work with anyone on any issues where they are willing to vote the right way.

[acptulsa]

No one has said not to work with anyone on any issues where they are willing to vote the right way.

Ender indicated a willingness to work with people and you called the man a goddamned communist. This is your idea of working with people?

Got news for you. I can work with a commie, as long as he or she wants local or state level communism, recognizes that federal level communism is evil, and is from another state. And I can do it without insulting him or her, or even calling the person a commie if that person doesn't like it. And I can sure as fuck do it without calling a friend of mine a commie for even suggesting I work with that person.

Jesus save us.

You do realize this dried up husk of a forum, which used to attract bipartisan activism, is a public forum, right? Right?

Bend us all over.

[Swordsmyth]

Ender indicated a willingness to work with people and you called the man a goddamned communist. This is your idea of working with people?

Got news for you. I can work with a commie, as long as he or she wants local or state level communism, recognizes that federal level communism is evil, and is from another state. And I can do it without insulting him or her, or even calling the person a commie if that person doesn't like it. And I can sure as $#@! do it without calling a friend of mine a commie for even suggesting I work with that person.

Jesus save us.

You do realize this dried up husk of a forum, which used to attract bipartisan activism, is a public forum, right? Right?

Bend us all over.

I never called Ender anything.

[PierzStyx]

On the Dems side you have people like Polis, Booker, and Wyden.

Put really the partisan divide is an illusion. When it comes to centralized state power and its ability to compel you to obey it against your will the old adage holds true: Its six of one, half dozen of the other.

[Madison320]

This is ass hole behavior. Pure insult, no reason for it. Report me if you must. All I'm doing is calling a spade a spade.



Whatever.

Also I've been researching Kucinich's position on the Fed. It looks like he wants to replace the Fed not with a free market banking system but with CONGRESS!!!!! So basically it appears Kucinich wants a government takeover of the entire banking system.


http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guests-contrarian-take-dennis-kucinichs-recent-attempt-end-fed

I remember some idiots in congress talking about how terrible the Fed is and how it sucks that we have to pay interest on the money we borrow. They said "if we could only print the money ourselves we wouldn't have to pay interest." I'm wondering if Kucinich was one of those guys.

[acptulsa]

Nightmare is an accurate term. I've always thought Ender had a left wing streak in him and this confirms it. I'm guessing things like progressive taxation don't bother him a bit.

This thread is reminding me of the Seinfeld episode where they meet a guy who's a communist, and everybody is saying ,"Wow, cool you're a communist? I never met one of those before!"


I never called Ender anything.

Fine. You had your 'He might be a commie!' moment and had your Beavis and Buthead 'heh heh. Heh. Heh heh heh' laugh. And then you admitted you just might work with a commie yourself, in deference to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, which give any state the right to be commie if that's what their constituents want, if they would help you end this federal tyranny (and were from a different state). Making you exactly like Ender, but slower to realize you're exactly like Ender.

Except you're not exactly like Ender. Someone might work with Ender. No one will work with you, because they heard you do the Beavis and Butthead laugh in public.

Proud?



Whatever.

Also I've been researching Kucinich's position on the Fed. It looks like he wants to replace the Fed not with a free market banking system but with CONGRESS!!!!! So basically it appears Kucinich wants a government takeover of the entire banking system.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guests-contrarian-take-dennis-kucinichs-recent-attempt-end-fed

I remember some idiots in congress talking about how terrible the Fed is and how it sucks that we have to pay interest on the money we borrow. They said "if we could only print the money ourselves we wouldn't have to pay interest." I'm wondering if Kucinich was one of those guys.

Probably. So, you would pass on a chance to end the Fed now, and have a debate with these idealistic fools on whether this brave new currency could stand competing currencies later?

If not, you'd be a piss poor ally in this fight.

[Swordsmyth]

On the Dems side you have people like Polis, Booker, and Wyden.

Put really the partisan divide is an illusion. When it comes to centralized state power and its ability to compel you to obey it against your will the old adage holds true: Its six of one, half dozen of the other.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/freedom-index

New Jersey

Sen. Cory Booker (https://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38&Itemid=828&nameid=B001288) - 12%

Colorado

Dist.2: Jared Polis (https://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38&Itemid=828&nameid=P000598) - 24%

Oregon

Sen. Ron Wyden (https://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38&Itemid=828&nameid=W000779) - 16%



Yup, Real liberty warriors! :rolleyes:

[Swordsmyth]

Fine. You had your 'He might be a commie!' moment and had your Beavis and Buthead 'heh heh. Heh. Heh heh heh' laugh. And then you admitted you just might work with a commie yourself, in deference to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, which give any state the right to be commie if that's what their constituents want, if they would help you end this federal tyranny (and were from a different state). Making you exactly like Ender, but slower to realize you're exactly like Ender.

Except you're not exactly like Ender. Someone might work with Ender. No one will work with you, because they heard you do the Beavis and Butthead laugh in public.

Proud?

Do you think Madison and I are one and the same?

You do know that this thread is not about who we will work with right?

This thread is about which side of the spectrum is a greater threat to liberty and must be dealt with more cautiously.

[Swordsmyth]

Probably. So, you would pass on a chance to end the Fed now, and have a debate with these idealistic fools on whether this brave new currency could stand competing currencies later?

If not, you'd be a piss poor ally in this fight.

When has anyone on this thread said they wouldn't work with anyone or take their votes?

I love the way you expect us to make Kucinich a blood brother but you won't give Trump any credit for the times he is on our side.:rolleyes:

[acptulsa]

No one has said not to work with anyone on any issues where they are willing to vote the right way.


Do you think Madison and I are one and the same?

You set the parameters, not me.


You do know that this thread is not about who we will work with right?

This thread is about which side of the spectrum is a greater threat to liberty and must be dealt with more cautiously.

Everything one says in public determines who one will be working with, if anyone.

Democrats have had the superior position on many civil liberties for decades and decades. Posting threads for the purpose of insulting them is playing into the divide and conquer game, and shooting yourself in the foot. The Democrat politicians have taken the superior position on personal freedom and the Republicans on economic freedom for years and years for a reason. If the two parties were the Libertarian Party and the Communist Party, they couldn't have caused us to sacrifice our liberties on the Lesser Evil Altar all this time, because everyone could see what is Stalin-level evil and what is not evil at all.

[Swordsmyth]

You set the parameters, not me.



Everything one says in public determines who one will be working with, if anyone.

So Rand doesn't want to work with Trump? Or Ron didn't want to work with Kucinich?

Ron routinely condemned bills that Kucinich voted for but they could still work together, it sounds to me like you are the one who won't work with anyone who says something you don't like.

[Natural Citizen]

Coalition is a good idea in practice. In fact, a great example of that would be what we've seen with Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul at the Federal level. Both have actually agreed on some principles and voted together in support of legislation that was against corporatism and the military industrial complex.

Of course, people would ask why Ron voted with a socialist and the answer was that they both were against corporatism and the benefits of other special interests. Their solutions weren't the same, but they agreed in principle on why they were voting for or against various legislation. Ron's solution would reflect the free market and Bernie's would float toward a socialistic solution.

But they both opposed corporate and military subsidies together and on their voting record.

So that's coalition. It's a good practice. So I'm glad to see that echoed in the thread.

[acptulsa]

So Rand doesn't want to work with Trump? Or Ron didn't want to work with Kucinich?

Ron routinely condemned bills that Kucinich voted for but they could still work together, it sounds to me like you are the one who won't work with anyone who says something you don't like.

Uh huh. Obviously I'm not upset for a legitimate reason, like saying toxic things about people discourages them from working with me.

Rand will work with Trump, will he? Is this you admitting what the rest of us already know, that Trump is a Democrat in drag?

[Swordsmyth]

Uh huh. Obviously I'm not upset for a legitimate reason, like saying toxic things about people discourages them from working with me.

Rand will work with Trump, will he? Is this you admitting what the rest of us already know, that Trump is a Democrat in drag?

I never claimed Trump was one of us, I have criticized him many times, I have yet to see you or your friends give him the same treatment you give Kucinich.

[acptulsa]

I never claimed Trump was one of us, I have criticized him many times, I have yet to see you or your friends give him the same treatment you give Kucinich.

And have you seen Trump show the slightest sign that he might work against the wars and/or the Fed?

[Natural Citizen]

This is my all-time favorite Kucinich moment. He's one of the few people that actually talk about Santa Clara county vs Pacific Railroad (http://www.iiipublishing.com/afd/santaclara.html). Which is the specific place in time when natural citizens had their identity and political power hijacked. Had the events of Santa Clara county vs Pacific Railroad not taken place, there would be no events of 1913.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6FY3YlxND4

[Madison320]

Fine. You had your 'He might be a commie!' moment and had your Beavis and Buthead 'heh heh. Heh. Heh heh heh' laugh. And then you admitted you just might work with a commie yourself, in deference to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, which give any state the right to be commie if that's what their constituents want, if they would help you end this federal tyranny (and were from a different state). Making you exactly like Ender, but slower to realize you're exactly like Ender.

Except you're not exactly like Ender. Someone might work with Ender. No one will work with you, because they heard you do the Beavis and Butthead laugh in public.

Proud?


I have no earthly idea what you're talking about.



Probably. So, you would pass on a chance to end the Fed now, and have a debate with these idealistic fools on whether this brave new currency could stand competing currencies later?

If not, you'd be a piss poor ally in this fight.

You think Kucinich's first step would be to end the Fed and go to a free market banking system? And then step two would be to nationalize the banking system? Ha! Ha! Ha!
Not a chance in hell! He would much prefer The Fed to a free market banking system. He wants MORE government control over banks not LESS. The only way he would end the fed would be a direct move to a government controlled system.

On a slightly different topic, calling someone a communist is not an insult, it's merely a factual description. And I never called Ender a communist I called Kucinich a communist. Do some research on communism and Kucinich's positions.

[Natural Citizen]

Wait. What's wrong with Ender? I like Ender.

[acptulsa]

I have no earthly idea what you're talking about.

You also have no earthly idea what you're talking about. And here's the proof:


You think Kucinich's first step would be to end the Fed and go to a free market banking system? And then step two would be to nationalize the banking system? Ha! Ha! Ha!
Not a chance in hell! He would much prefer The Fed to a free market banking system. He wants MORE government control over banks not LESS. The only way he would end the fed would be a direct move to a government controlled system.

On a slightly different topic, calling someone a communist is not an insult, it's merely a factual description. And I never called Ender a communist I called Kucinich a communist. Do some research on communism and Kucinich's positions.

Firstly, ever since Stalin, everyone considers 'communist' an insult--especially communists. Proof one you don't know what you're talking about.

Secondly, an idealistic socialist believes that getting the right people in charge makes all the difference, and will remove the evil from positions of power at any cost. They know having a Stalin in charge of your communism makes all socialism look bad, and will pay just about any price to get him out. So much for your theory that a Kucinich would rather suffer an evil Fed than let the market have a chance to prove itself. They believe a conscientiously-run centrally planned currency will prove itself just as surely as we believe the market will crush it in a minute. Proof two you don't know what you're talking about.

But that won't keep you from insulting potential allies with threads like this. Will it?

If you had ever actually spoken to these people you blindly revile, you would know these things.

[Champ]

Just looking back at the last few pages, it reminds me of how effective Dr. Paul was at bringing people together that were coming from vastly different political backgrounds and beliefs.

There had been strict constitutionalist and libertarians that had been following RP for decades leading up until 2007/2008. There were also Republicans in 2008 that were tired of the neocon republicans abandoning their stance on a humble foreign policy or on economics as they spent hugely and maximized executive power. Then there were the liberals that were maybe reluctant Democrats or Nader Green Party folk that hated anything having to do with war and knew the Democrat anti-war policies were a farce. Some just wanted to watch the world burn in a sense and have a guy that would blow it all up. Ron Paul was the only politician anywhere at the time basically saying he literally wanted to destroy most of the departments and replace them with nothing.

Then there were the Obama voters in 2008 that got fed up, wanted change, and went all in for RP because he was the best person for the job by that point that was actually talking about making change happen. There was an abnormal and surprising amount of these that rallied behind RP in 2012. And then you had even a further amount of furious conservatives that saw the failures of the Republican Party during the Bush years, compounded by the same failed strategy with a super neocon McCain in 2008 yelling war everywhere he went and drove even more out of the clutches of the GOP establishment. I think the bias by the media by this point was almost self evident after watching the 2008 elections, furthered by 2011/2012, and this awakened yet another group that just wanted someone that was not from the establishment/msm backed empire, a true outsider.

All these groups wildly different, but supportive of the same free thinking, honest, and principled Ron Paul that met many of their needs politically speaking. There are still echoes of who we were before we came to get behind this man. Some are libertarian purists, others like to be more pragmatic about making change happen, and yet others prefer to build coalitions with people even if they have disagreements.

I'm sure there are many more factions that merged to all support RP that I missed. I think when you have these kinds of discussions, it's important to remember just how much RP united so many different factions. Liberty comes in many different forms to a lot of people and we really have only just begun to have discussions on a larger scale about what it means after nearly all being indoctrinated by the public education system for at least the last 5 decades. Not everyone started off supporting RP as a constitutionalist or a small government loving person or got home schooled and had a more direct path to understand what liberty and Ron Paul were all about without having the enormous baggage of propaganda they needed to disperse with. We each came from unique backgrounds and had to experience our own set of failures with trial and error decisions in choosing the philosophy we supported and who was best to actually carry out said philosophy before we were ready to wake up.

[timosman]

This is my all-time favorite Kucinich moment. He's one of the few people that actually talk about Santa Clara county vs Pacific Railroad (http://www.iiipublishing.com/afd/santaclara.html). Which is the specific place in time when natural citizens had their identity and political power hijacked. Had the events of Santa Clara county vs Pacific Railroad not taken place, there would be no events of 1913.

The government is a corporation. How would it work if the excessive rights of corporations were abolished?:cool:

[Raginfridus]

I used to think splitting Republicrats was impossible. Then I briefly heard Ron Paul and saw how much he was hated by the establishment. I think it was Jon Stewart who introduced me to Ron. Wasn't he a guest on a few episodes?

[Natural Citizen]

The government is a corporation. How would it work if the excessive rights of corporations were abolished?:cool:

The Act of 1871 is Treason.

I'm not sure that I understand where you want to go with it, splain yoself, please.

[Cleaner44]

I agree. I would say the hierarchy goes something like this...

Dogshit > Republicans > Democrats

[Swordsmyth]

And have you seen Trump show the slightest sign that he might work against the wars and/or the Fed?

There are other issues that are just as important where he beats Kucinich by a mile.

[acptulsa]

There are other issues that are just as important where he beats Kucinich by a mile.

More important than peace and prosperity? Really?

The government is sending our children to die, even though we are not in danger. They are alienating all the people of the whole world and turning them against us. The government is degrading our wages and stealing our savings.

You say there are more important issues than these. I don't agree. Period.

[Swordsmyth]

More important than peace and prosperity? Really?

First I said "just as" not more than.

Second here is a quick spitball list:

National Sovereignty: so world government communists don't strip us of all peace and prosperity
De-Regulation: for prosperity
Gun Rights: for liberty
Immigration control: so millions of communist barbarians can't take over our culture and government and strip us of all peace and prosperity.

[acptulsa]

I don't think you realize just how the Fed enables government by allowing them to borrow, thus bypassing our input on their spending by making our cash contribution a matter of us not becoming poorer by direct taxation, but rather by inflation.

I don't think you've seen enough peace in your time to understand how the exigencies of war stifle debate.

Important? indubitably. Unquestionably. Beyond a shadow of a doubt. More important? May I refer you back to what I said about the Fed being the one domino which can topple a million other dominoes?

[Natural Citizen]

I don't think you realize just how the Fed enables government by allowing them to borrow, thus bypassing our input on their spending by making our cash contribution a matter of us not becoming poorer by direct taxation, but rather by inflation.

I don't think you've seen enough peace in your time to understand how the exigencies of war stifle debate.

Blog it, then. Show him your wisdom. Otherwise you're just dick waving.

[timosman]

The Act of 1871 is Treason.

I think The Act of 1801 is also questionable.


I'm not sure that I understand where you want to go with it, splain yoself, please.

Just pointing out the collusion between the corporations and the government.

[Natural Citizen]

I think The Act of 1801 is also questionable.



Just pointing out the collusion between the corporations and the government.

Oh, The Circuit Court Act. they expanded that one in the following year in 1802, for anyone who doesn't know what he'stalking about. Meaning the Federal Judiciary was expanded.

Eeeyep. They got us by the feet, alright.

[Natural Citizen]

That was John Adams and the Congress doing, btw. The late nature of the passage resulted in the the new expansion of the Judiciary being called "Midnight Judges."

[acptulsa]

...just dick waving.

Are you sure you couldn't think of anything more ridiculous to say?

He's no idiot. He can figure it out, if he knows what to look for. He needs look no farther than this forum. War stifling discussion is hardly a new concept. And inflation as tax has been explained on this forum more times than we can count even if we remove our shoes, and by people who do it better than I.

[AuH20]

The last good democrat was Larry McDonald and he's been dead for 34 years. There is nothing remotely redeemable about the contemporary democrat party.

[acptulsa]

The last good democrat was Larry McDonald and he's been dead for 34 years. There is nothing remotely redeemable about the contemporary democrat party.

That's your opinion of Tulsi Gabbard. It isn't mine.

[Natural Citizen]

Are you sure you couldn't think of anything more ridiculous to say?

He's no idiot. He can figure it out, if he knows what to look for. He needs look no farther than this forum. War stifling discussion is hardly a new concept. And inflation as tax has been explained on this forum more times than we can count even if we remove our shoes, and by people who do it better than I.

Nope. You were dick waving. That's not functional debate. Pull your chest back in, Tarzan, we're all friends here.

Hear them out, at least. Give them a chance to make their points without interrupting them, reframing their words, and putting them on trial. You'll get around to what you agree on and what you don't. Then go from there.

This is why I recommended blogging your wisdom. We like to learn.

[acptulsa]

You've confused me with someone who has something nice to say about either major party.

I'm here to object to the very presence of this thread, not to prolong it.

[Swordsmyth]

I don't think you realize just how the Fed enables government by allowing them to borrow, thus bypassing our input on their spending by making our cash contribution a matter of us not becoming poorer by direct taxation, but rather by inflation.

I don't think you've seen enough peace in your time to understand how the exigencies of war stifle debate.

I do understand all that.


Important? indubitably. Unquestionably. Beyond a shadow of a doubt. More important? May I refer you back to what I said about the Fed being the one domino which can topple a million other dominoes?

Again I did NOT say "MORE IMPORTANT", I said "JUST AS IMPORTANT".


National Sovereignty: so world government communists don't strip us of all peace and prosperity This is existential, all your worst nightmares will happen if we lose our sovereignty


Gun Rights: for liberty If we lose our guns we will lose everything else in short order


Immigration control: so millions of communist barbarians can't take over our culture and government and strip us of all peace and prosperity. If the Demoncrats flood us with permanent super-majorities of communist barbarians who don't know or care about the fed and the wars we will NEVER have peace and prosperity.

[Swordsmyth]

You've confused me with someone who has something nice to say about either major party.

I'm here to object to the very presence of this thread, not to prolong it.

I have nothing good to say about the Republican party, in fact I have many bad things to say about it, I have far more and far worse things to say about the Demoncrats though.

[Ender]

This thread has gotten way crazy.

dannno mentioned that Tulsi was similar to Kucinich and Madison320 started ripping on Kucinich- my response was:

That both parties were meh- but Kucinich did agree with Ron Paul on some things and they both liked working together.

Then suddenly I was a "communist" because I showed links that supported this. :rolleyes:

I am a libertarian and I believe that there is no TWO PARTIES. It's all lies to make the sheeple concentrate on crap like this and miss what's actually going on.

[H. E. Panqui]

...madison 320, i believe you have revealed your preference for the republican puppets vs. the d puppets based on your unique qualitative, subjective criteria...as to any QUANTITATIVE OBJECTIVE criteria it appears that only a math-challenged republicrat could/would quibble about any important difference$...i believe you'll find that when republicans have controlled the federal legislature and executive branches the levels of government $pending are nearly-identical with the record of spending when democrats are in control...

....and aren't government $pending levels [gov. spending vs. gdp, etc.] a better indicator of 'big government' 'socialism' than anything else? :confused:

...what's important to me is promoting people who are aware of the hideous nature of the monetary order under which you [i assume] and i are enslaved and abused...as to this issue only a fool could quibble over either wing of republicrat monetary ignoramuses and puppet$..[btw, good writing/thinking, acptulsa!...you hit some near-perfect chord$]

...'war and peace' is another important issue to me...on this issue, again, both parties suck LOUDLY...but personally i prefer cynthia mckinney, kucinich, jim traficant, some in the black congressional caucus, etc., to madison 320's republicans....although i like ron paul...even though he voted for the stinking afghan war fraud..

...to me, rand's warmongering 'radical islam rhetoric', 'iran rhetoric,' etc., condemn and disqualify him...that and his apologist rhetoric favoring iZrael...it appears to me all the vaunted 'liberty caucus' members are iZraeli apologists, puppets...just like the rest of the stinking republicrats...

[HVACTech]

Exactly. I've said that many times. Socialist's core principle is theft. That's not a good foundation.

all humans are "social"
that is why they lean that way. we are all social creatures.
socialism, like Anarchy...
will become possible when all people have a force field and a replicator.
:)

[Anti Federalist]

all humans are "social"
that is why they lean that way. we are all social creatures.
socialism, like Anarchy...
will become possible when all people have a force field and a replicator.
:)

Working on it...

[Madison320]

First I said "just as" not more than.

Second here is a quick spitball list:

National Sovereignty: so world government communists don't strip us of all peace and prosperity
De-Regulation: for prosperity
Gun Rights: for liberty
Immigration control: so millions of communist barbarians can't take over our culture and government and strip us of all peace and prosperity.

I'll disagree with you a little on this. If Kucinich has his way the number one problem, far above anything else, is that we be dirt poor in few years. I mean, stand in line, waiting for your food ration, dirt poor.

If you just judged the candidates by their official positions (which is a stretch I admit) Kucinich would be about the last one I'd vote for. I'd vote for Hillary over Kucinich. I'd vote for McCain over Kucinich. I'd rather take the chance that McCain might not blow us all up vs the 100% certainty that I'd be standing in a bread line with Kucinich.

[timosman]

I'll disagree with you a little on this. If Kucinich has his way the number one problem, far above anything else, is that we be dirt poor in few years. I mean, stand in line, waiting for your food ration, dirt poor.

If you just judged the candidates by their official positions (which is a stretch I admit) Kucinich would be about the last one I'd vote for. I'd vote for Hillary over Kucinich. I'd vote for McCain over Kucinich. I'd rather take the chance that McCain might not blow us all up vs the 100% certainty that I'd be standing in a bread line with Kucinich.

Look at the positives. Your social life would improve.:cool:

[Madison320]

This thread has gotten way crazy.

dannno mentioned that Tulsi was similar to Kucinich and Madison320 started ripping on Kucinich- my response was:

That both parties were meh- but Kucinich did agree with Ron Paul on some things and they both liked working together.

Then suddenly I was a "communist" because I showed links that supported this. :rolleyes:

I am a libertarian and I believe that there is no TWO PARTIES. It's all lies to make the sheeple concentrate on crap like this and miss what's actually going on.

Show me where you were called a communist.

When I call Kucinich a communist, it wasn't in the "Hey, Pinko Commie" insult sense. It was in the textbook, Karl Marx sense. What the hell am I supposed to call him? "Kucinich is someone who believes in many of the principles of communism but he's not a communist."

[Madison320]

Probably. So, you would pass on a chance to end the Fed now, and have a debate with these idealistic fools on whether this brave new currency could stand competing currencies later?


Did you read the part Kucinich wants to replace a Fed controlled monetary system with a government controlled monetary system?

[Madison320]

Look at the positives. Your social life would improve.:cool:

That's a good point. Those rat barbecue get togethers would be awesome! Nothing like rat over an open fire.

[Krugminator2]

https://www.thenewamerican.com/freedom-index

New Jersey

Sen. Cory Booker (https://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38&Itemid=828&nameid=B001288) - 12%

Colorado

Dist.2: Jared Polis (https://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38&Itemid=828&nameid=P000598) - 24%

Oregon

Sen. Ron Wyden (https://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38&Itemid=828&nameid=W000779) - 16%



Yup, Real liberty warriors! :rolleyes:


There are no liberty leaning Democrats. The least bad Democrats are pragmatists. Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, and third way Democrats are not catastrophically bad. If Kucinich, Gabbard, or Corey Booker ran against a Republican, I would vote for the Republican no matter what. It wouldn't even matter how terrible they are.

If the country were in such bad shape that Dennis Kucinich got elected, a military coup would be the best option.

[Madison320]

There are no liberty leaning Democrats. The least bad Democrats are pragmatists. Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, and third way Democrats are not catastrophically bad. If Kucinich, Gabbard, or Corey Booker ran against a Republican, I would vote for the Republican no matter what. It wouldn't even matter how terrible they are.

If the country were in such bad shape that Dennis Kucinich got elected, a military coup would be the best option.

I totally agree. Good point about the pragmatists. The ones I worry about are the committed socialists/communists like Kucinich.

Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro were against war as far as I know but I wouldn't want to live under their rule either.

[nikcers]

The moderates always become the president though and moderates are the opposite of libertarian.

[RJ Liberty]

I used to think splitting Republicrats was impossible. Then I briefly heard Ron Paul and saw how much he was hated by the establishment. I think it was Jon Stewart who introduced me to Ron. Wasn't he a guest on a few episodes?

He was. He was very well received by both Stewart and his audience.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QuLZ1FSnzc

Jon Stewart also discussed, repeatedly, the media blackout on Ron Paul:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAL5rMu8N5Y

[Ender]

Did you read the part Kucinich wants to replace a Fed controlled monetary system with a government controlled monetary system?

Perhaps you should read some history- the US had a government controlled monetary system until 1913.

http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/general/a-brief-history-of-central-banking/central-banking-in-the-united-states.php

Do I think this is the best way to handle it? No. But it's still in step with the first 120 years of American government.

[AuH20]

Are the republicans actually worse because their perceived standards are much higher than avowed socialist control freaks? The democrats are pretty frank about their sinister goals in 2017. Sure, they may camouflage their rhetoric with the appeal to the middle class, but's it's pretty clear cut. Dealing with the external enemy is easier than combatting the enemy within, which defines the Republican party in a nutshell.

[Madison320]

Perhaps you should read some history- the US had a government controlled monetary system until 1913.

http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/general/a-brief-history-of-central-banking/central-banking-in-the-united-states.php

Do I think this is the best way to handle it? No. But it's still in step with the first 120 years of American government.


I doubt that we've ever had anything remotely close to what Kucinich wanted to implement which is an unbacked government monopoly fiat currency.

[Ender]

I doubt that we've ever had anything remotely close to what Kucinich wanted to implement which is an unbacked government monopoly fiat currency.

You mean like the FED which has been backed by almost every politician since its inception, except Ron Paul? It was a Republican president that got rid of the gold standard.

[Madison320]

You mean like the FED which has been backed by almost every politician since its inception, except Ron Paul? It was a Republican president that got rid of the gold standard.

I think you're confused about my argument.

Let me explain:

Normally wanting to "End the Fed" is a good thing. But only if you replace it with something better like a free market, most likely gold backed system. But if you want to replace the Fed with the government, that's worse than the Fed and that's what Kucinich wants to do.

Suppose to want to eliminate the $7 minimum wage. That'd be good thing unless you wanted to replace it with a $15 minimum wage, right?

[Swordsmyth]

Are the republicans actually worse because their perceived standards are much higher than avowed socialist control freaks? The democrats are pretty frank about their sinister goals in 2017. Sure, they may camouflage their rhetoric with the appeal to the middle class, but's it's pretty clear cut. Dealing with the external enemy is easier than combatting the enemy within, which defines the Republican party in a nutshell.

Are we talking about the voters of each party or the politicians or both?

Also who is worse the man who beats me up or the man who tries to slit my throat?

[Ender]

I think you're confused about my argument.

Let me explain:

Normally wanting to "End the Fed" is a good thing. But only if you replace it with something better like a free market, most likely gold backed system. But if you want to replace the Fed with the government, that's worse than the Fed and that's what Kucinich wants to do.

Suppose to want to eliminate the $7 minimum wage. That'd be good thing unless you wanted to replace it with a $15 minimum wage, right?

I agree completely about the free market. We are much more on the same page than you think. ;)

My explanation in another post was to show that Kucinich was wanting to basically restore how the US had operated before the FED. I am NOT in favor of this (or the FED), but I do believe Kucinich was a pretty honest man, even if I do not particularly agree with his POV. I think this is why he and Ron were friends. Ron didn't have to agree with him but he knew he could trust him.

[AuH20]

Are we talking about the voters of each party or the politicians or both?

Also who is worse the man who beats me up or the man who tries to slit my throat?

The politicians mainly. Republican voters haven't been represented for decades.

[acptulsa]

The politicians mainly. Republican voters haven't been represented for decades.

That's what they get for nominating Democrats in drag for no logical reason other than they're not politically correct. They certainly can't blame us for that.

So, is torpedoing the theory of the headline of the thread really the best way to keep it bumped, and keep that divisive message atop the New Posts board? Are you really so committed to keeping that false impression of libertarians prominent that you'll deny it just to promote it?

[pcosmar]

That's what they get for nominating Democrats in drag for no logical reason other than they're not politically correct. They certainly can't blame us for that.

So, is torpedoing the theory of the headline of the thread really the best way to keep it bumped, and keep that divisive message atop the New Posts board? Are you really so committed to keeping that false impression of libertarians prominent that you'll deny it just to promote it?

Not exactly.
But "torpedoing the theory " is a good idea.

Ron Paul was Inspired to run for office by a Democrat. and was advised that party made no difference.

And this partisan bickering distracts from the issues and Principles behind them.

Torpedoing the petty idea that one is any better intrinsically is a valid ambition.

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16711516_627042574170635_3082389083079978039_n.jpg ?oh=6a74adf5682db6b951f95bdacd20d2bf&oe=5A3FE5DE

[Swordsmyth]

The politicians mainly. Republican voters haven't been represented for decades.


That's what they get for nominating Democrats in drag for no logical reason other than they're not politically correct. They certainly can't blame us for that.

So, is torpedoing the theory of the headline of the thread really the best way to keep it bumped, and keep that divisive message atop the New Posts board? Are you really so committed to keeping that false impression of libertarians prominent that you'll deny it just to promote it?


Not exactly.
But "torpedoing the theory " is a good idea.

Ron Paul was Inspired to run for office by a Democrat. and was advised that party made no difference.

And this partisan bickering distracts from the issues and Principles behind them.

Torpedoing the petty idea that one is any better intrinsically is a valid ambition.

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16711516_627042574170635_3082389083079978039_n.jpg ?oh=6a74adf5682db6b951f95bdacd20d2bf&oe=5A3FE5DE

Most Republican politicians are bad, ALL Democrat politicians are bad.

Most Republican voters are salvageable, few Democrat voters are.

Republican politicians do great harm to liberty, Democrat politicians do massive harm to liberty.

Republican voters generally want less government than Democrat voters.


???? I wonder which side is easier to convert or work with ????

[unknown]

As much as I can't stand republicans, democrats are a lot worse. If you disagree, name a few of the top freedom favoring republicans and then name a few of the top freedom favoring democrats.

Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Thomas Massie.

Your turn....


I agree but why would anyone embrace this attitude of settling for the lesser of two turds?

[nikcers]

???? I wonder which side is easier to convert or work with ????
You can't afford these politicians you praise, only principled politicians aren't bought and sold. We should only support liberty folks, people that have not been bought by Goldman Saches like Ted Cruz. As far as the people we should try to educate anyone who wants to listen on the benefits of society that promotes the most amount of freedom.

[unknown]

Most Republican politicians are bad, ALL Democrats politicians are bad.

Most Republican voters are salvageable, few Democrat voters are.

Republican politicians do great harm to liberty, Democrat politicians do massive harm to liberty.

Republican voters generally want less government than Democrat voters.


???? I wonder which side is easier to convert or work with ????


I think it depends on the issue.

Dems are good on some civil liberties.

Example, decriminalization of drugs/non-violent drug offenses, Dems are more receptive.

The police state, I'm thinking Dems object more so.

Civil asset forfeitures, not sure. Republicans say theyre for the rule of law, due process etc, but their unquestioned support for the police clouds their decision making.

For profit prisons, again probably the Dems.

The global empire, both groups are bad but the Dems probably object more to our non-stop warfare.

The Second, smaller government, no taxes and fiscal conservatism, obviously the Right, at-least in rhetoric.

[H. E. Panqui]

... i have a buddy who votes for/supports these miserable stinking republicans because they are 'good on guns'...:rolleyes: [ime, 'the gun issue' is more 'urban vs, rural' than 'd' vs. 'r']

...he's normally pretty smart about many things, but he, like all of the radio-republicans i know, can't get it through his skull that the gun violence which drives much of the stoooopid democrat legislative efforts to 'ban guns' is GREATLY EXACERBATED by these goddamned fool conservative republicans and their miserable 'war on drugs'/drug prohibition...

...please stop voting for these stinking republicans and democrats!!!..you are only encouraging these fools and thieves!...:mad:

...btw, i'd be very very very interested in hearing a somewhat detailed explanation of how a [imo, really stooooopid] 'gold money' system would/could work...i'm especially interested in the issuance/creation of 'new money'...detail$ please...;) ....i must tell you i've never met a republican/conservative 'gold-bugger' face-to-face i could not leave with a really really confused, dejected look on their :confused: face after exposing them as a monetary ignoramus......just simple questions...who, how, why, etc.. ;)

[Madison320]

I think it depends on the issue.

Dems are good on some civil liberties.

Example, decriminalization of drugs/non-violent drug offenses, Dems are more receptive.

The police state, I'm thinking Dems object more so.

Civil asset forfeitures, not sure. Republicans say theyre for the rule of law, due process etc, but their unquestioned support for the police clouds their decision making.

For profit prisons, again probably the Dems.

The global empire, both groups are bad but the Dems probably object more to our non-stop warfare.

The Second, smaller government, no taxes and fiscal conservatism, obviously the Right, at-least in rhetoric.

I agree that dems are better on some civil rights, although they also support a lot of fake group rights that actually violate individual rights.

But the dems are worse on property rights and to me that's more important. To me you start with property rights and then build from there. If you can't own property what good is it if you can smoke weed?

Also as far as police brutality is concerned I would argue that the most practical solution is again to enforce property rights. I think there'd be way less problems with the police if we didn't have crime ridden slums caused by the lack of property rights. The democrats argue more against police brutality but their solution of more wealth distribution (= theft and less property rights) only makes the root problem worse.

[heavenlyboy34]

I think it depends on the issue.

Dems are good on some civil liberties.

Example, decriminalization of drugs/non-violent drug offenses, Dems are more receptive.

The police state, I'm thinking Dems object more so.

Civil asset forfeitures, not sure. Republicans say theyre for the rule of law, due process etc, but their unquestioned support for the police clouds their decision making.

For profit prisons, again probably the Dems.

The global empire, both groups are bad but the Dems probably object more to our non-stop warfare.

The Second, smaller government, no taxes and fiscal conservatism, obviously the Right, at-least in rhetoric.
Pretty much. Republicans declared "war on drugs", "war on crime", and "war on terror". Dems declared "war on poverty". Either way, The People lose. :( :mad:

[Madison320]

I agree completely about the free market. We are much more on the same page than you think. ;)


I've seen you support the free market before which is why I'm confused about Kucinich. Kucinich is arguably the most anti free market and anti property rights US politician on record.




My explanation in another post was to show that Kucinich was wanting to basically restore how the US had operated before the FED. I am NOT in favor of this (or the FED), but I do believe Kucinich was a pretty honest man, even if I do not particularly agree with his POV. I think this is why he and Ron were friends. Ron didn't have to agree with him but he knew he could trust him.

No, you're wrong. Kucinich doesn't want to return to the US before the Fed where we had a gold standard much of the time and inflation was controlled. He wants to move to something much worse than before the Fed or during the Fed. He wants a government fiat currency unbacked by gold where printing money is unrestricted.

So the only redeeming quality for Kucinich is that he's anti war. But like I said before so was Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez. That's not good enough.

[Krugminator2]

I agree that dems are better on some civil rights, although they also support a lot of fake group rights that actually violate individual rights.

But the dems are worse on property rights and to me that's more important. To me you start with property rights and then build from there. If you can't own property what good is it if you can smoke weed?

Also as far as police brutality is concerned I would argue that the most practical solution is again to enforce property rights. I think there'd be way less problems with the police if we didn't have crime ridden slums caused by the lack of property rights. The democrats argue more against police brutality but their solution of more wealth distribution (= theft and less property rights) only makes the root problem worse.

I always look at this way.

Singapore curbs civil liberties. You can't speak out against the government. They execute you if you deal drugs. You can get brutally cained for graffiti. They rank very low in political freedom and civil liberties. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/singapore

Whereas Portugal ranks much higher than the US on civil liberties and personal freedom. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/portugal https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/united-states It is one of the freest places in the world in those areas.

Where would I rather live: Singapore or Portugal? Singapore without a doubt. They have a much greater respect for property rights. Portugal is almost a third world country. I just won't spray paint cars and I will be okay. Nothing else matters without economic freedom.

[euphemia]

Example, decriminalization of drugs/non-violent drug offenses, Dems are more receptive.

No, they are not. They want to give the market to their friends so they can make money and get taxes from it.

The only one who mentioned it in the campaign was Rand Paul.

[Madison320]

I always look at this way.

Singapore curbs civil liberties. You can't speak out against the government. They execute you if you deal drugs. You can get brutally cained for graffiti. They rank very low in political freedom and civil liberties. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/singapore

Whereas Portugal ranks much higher than the US on civil liberties and personal freedom. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/portugal https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/united-states It is one of the freest places in the world in those areas.

Where would I rather live: Singapore or Portugal? Singapore without a doubt. They have a much greater respect for property rights. Portugal is almost a third world country. I just won't spray paint cars and I will be okay. Nothing else matters without economic freedom.

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Krugminator2 again."

[Anti Globalist]

The only way I could ever see myself voting for Kucininch would be if he made Ron Paul his Vp which I believe he's got on record a few times saying he would do that. I'm sure Paul would be able to keep Kucininch in check.

[heavenlyboy34]

The only way I could ever see myself voting for Kucininch would be if he made Ron Paul his Vp which I believe he's got on record a few times saying he would do that. I'm sure Paul would be able to keep Kucininch in check.

Where does this "VPOTUS as a check against POTUS" theory come from? :confused: It would make a little sense in early US history when there was no such thing as "running mates" and VPOTUS was just the 2nd place winnar. When the POTUS gets to pick his own VPOTUS it isn't so plausible.

[H. E. Panqui]

But the dems are worse on property rights and to me that's more important. To me you start with property rights and then build from there. If you can't own property what good is it if you can smoke weed?

:rolleyes:

...good god man!...get real!...history has shown that your stinking republicans foist as much, if not more, government $pending as the stinking democrats!!...that $pending results, essentially, in a pledge of YOUR AND MY PROPERTY to pay for it!!...ugh...

[nikcers]

neocons are the worst democrat or republican.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX3t4TOjAAY

[morfeeis]

I like to look at policy over party, but i do have to say that the democratic platform is directly opposed to everything i find moral. I dislike republicans but i cant stand democrats.

[Madison320]

:rolleyes:

...good god man!...get real!...history has shown that your stinking republicans foist as much, if not more, government $pending as the stinking democrats!!...that $pending results, essentially, in a pledge of YOUR AND MY PROPERTY to pay for it!!...ugh...

They're not my republicans.

[unknown]

I agree that dems are better on some civil rights, although they also support a lot of fake group rights that actually violate individual rights.

But the dems are worse on property rights and to me that's more important. To me you start with property rights and then build from there. If you can't own property what good is it if you can smoke weed?

Also as far as police brutality is concerned I would argue that the most practical solution is again to enforce property rights. I think there'd be way less problems with the police if we didn't have crime ridden slums caused by the lack of property rights. The democrats argue more against police brutality but their solution of more wealth distribution (= theft and less property rights) only makes the root problem worse.

Right, the Dems are essentially socialists who dont believe in private property.

I would argue that the Second is the most important issue but I see your point.

I was referring more to the police state: mass warrant-less spying, civil asset forfeitures, the militarization of the police, SWAT raids, checkpoints etc.

[unknown]

No, they are not. They want to give the market to their friends so they can make money and get taxes from it.

The only one who mentioned it in the campaign was Rand Paul.

Crony Capitalism?

I cant defend that but again, I think theyre still more receptive to the idea of de-criminalizing drugs, acknowledging the injustice of jailing non-violent drug offenders etc.

Republicans are still clinging on to this idea that drugs are the root of all evil and that somehow it makes sense to strip people of their freedoms for getting high...

Referring to street drugs, not the legal ones: alcohol, tobacco or prescription meds.

[heavenlyboy34]

Most Republican politicians are bad, ALL Democrat politicians are bad.

Most Republican voters are salvageable, few Democrat voters are.

Republican politicians do great harm to liberty, Democrat politicians do massive harm to liberty.

Republican voters generally want less government than Democrat voters.


???? I wonder which side is easier to convert or work with ????
Source? I've found that what republicans say about smaller government is often not what they really mean. How do you know most are salvageable? Have you done a study with a significantly large sample?:confused: Anyone can throw claims around. Proving it is a different matter. ;) ~hugs~

[The Gold Standard]

Also as far as police brutality is concerned I would argue that the most practical solution is again to enforce property rights. I think there'd be way less problems with the police if we didn't have crime ridden slums caused by the lack of property rights. The democrats argue more against police brutality but their solution of more wealth distribution (= theft and less property rights) only makes the root problem worse.

At least you're right about this. If property rights were enforced, there would be no government police.

[Madison320]

At least you're right about this. If property rights were enforced, there would be no government police.

How?

[The Gold Standard]

How?

How are they going to pay the police without stealing your property (money)?

[Madison320]

How are they going to pay the police without stealing your property (money)?

Voluntary donations?

[RJB]

So everyone on the thread agrees that both parties suck. The all out forum war seems to be whether Kucinich is a commie or a socialist.

Carry on.