Tab Content
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Today, 01:09 AM
    Pointing out reality isn't a downer. All IMO... for some people, you can't complete. Most others aren't going to turn on a dime, it can nominally take around six months or more for someone to go from getting a seed of liberty and turning it into a new world outlook. Within that six months there is a lot of person reflection, withdraw from past ties, leaning new things and then starting to articulate new views. One key is to recognize when you are just planning seeds that you need to accept that you are doing just that, don't expect the quick change. Otherwise, there are a lot of do's and don'ts to this; another major topic. These things are doable for most people, and it's the people that are important, the vessel comes after that. While working towards it, I understand the scope of the problem, so it's in mind. The key however, is that it has to be planned for, and it's why we need better plans. The Liberty Blueprint is just the first layer of plans.
    92 replies | 2185 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:07 PM
    Yes, because your post (below) is like wizards, better reflects a knee jerk response to the title of "states rights" while completely ignoring the actual questions. When you read the questions it clear to see that soapboxing that the fed can do whatever they want (as you did) completely misses the point of the thread in that this is a case of states rights gone rouge, and states doing whatever they want, regardless of the federally supported rights of the people. So here, the fed stepping in and would actually be a good thing, as they would be protecting the people from a rouge state. The knee jerk response of states no longer have rights and the fed can do whatever they want isn't the issue at all, and I certainly have no idea what the picking up a gun as a political act has to do with any of this as you included. "The Feds claim the right and authority to over rule just about anything a state or states want to do. It appears they have enough firepower to back up that claim. "The last move in politics is always to pick up the gun." -- R. Buckminster Fuller"
    11 replies | 188 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:53 PM
    There are a few options, one is the courts. File a legal challenge. This would be pretty expensive so you'd want some institutional backing. I found this page, could be of interest to look at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_case_law_in_the_United_States Another option is legislative, basically get legislation drafted up, gain support, and push it through to become law. You'd want a good common sense bill so legislators will look bad to not support it. If they don't you work to expose them. Worst case, you get people to run against them. There are some established techniques to make this happen by applying pain to legislators. Obviously none of this is easy or cheap. I'm not a lawyer but -- state legislators can pass whatever law they want; more or less; the laws however can be challenged in a court which can strike them down.
    11 replies | 188 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:25 PM
    That's not the issue at all, you said "as opposed to giving aid and comfort to Hillary Clinton" as if this is a binary option, it is not and calling you out for framing this as a binary option does not equate to being threatened. It is understood that there may be "dozen data points where they are the same or similar to Ron/Rand on issues" and it could be argued that the GOP nominee may end up being better than the Democrat nominee but that doesn't mean that they have earned support, much less should enjoy having ones good name put behind the candidate. Some may think it's the best things, other will degree. I can very much respect people who have high standards of who they will put their name behind.
    35 replies | 648 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:57 AM
    I was just describing a similar system that was put together using similar concepts. Our straw poll system was pretty basic but it was just as fair execpt it was designed to allow people to buy votes, which was the point of the fund raiser. Otherwise the blockchain system presented lacks security as they do not describe a closed loop system to manage ballot stuffing. One could be added. The list of voters who received a key needs to be published, as does the keys that were not used. In this way people can validate that their unused vote was not cast for someone else. You can also flush out names of non voters. Without this the people who control the keys can add votes, thus weaking others. Ballot stuffing. As described you can validate your vote but have no way to know if it was weighed properly.
    10 replies | 134 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:13 AM
    While as a site we do not support Trump, we understand some of our members do and we are open to dialog on specific issues that focus on the issues. Starting a thread that insults other members, degrading a supported candidate framed around support for a candidate we are not in favor of, from a news person that isn't seen to have strong credibility will only serve to annoy members and cause problems. I hope it is understandable why this is being closed. Just be a little more careful in the future. We're not trying to kill discussion. Thanks.
    21 replies | 344 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:50 AM
    The block chain voting is a good topic, but going too much down a different rabbit hole vs the original topic, so splitting off. A few issues here. . You might need a better way to resolve candidates with the same name and similar looks if anyone can submit ballot access. Spammers would have a field day. There is some value to a private voting booth, it can prwvent your employer or others from pressuring your vote. This block chain could allow for votes to be solid, and massed in large numbers.
    10 replies | 134 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:27 AM
    ??? Is he addressing people that are totally opposed to Trump (per title) or the GOP establishment (per article)? If this is to the GOPe, I doubt they'd care to read. How does he know the demographics of other writers? What's the point in bring this up? Is he not making an argument of might over right? Not that either of these two factions are right... Does this statement not implies that 35 year olds will be out of the picture, dead or have lost interest in money and power by the age of 45? Any one see that happening? If your plan is to wait for people 35 years old to move out of the way I think you'll be waiting for at least 35 years, if not longer. Sounds like a bad plan and wishful thinking that the controls of power will be all but handed to you in 10 years.
    9 replies | 178 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-27-2016, 07:51 PM
    Recent political events have brought up questions as to how the political parties determine their party nominee for president. Ron Paul supporters ran into a lot of issues in 2008 and again in 2012. Here again, in 2016, more people are crying “foul”. All of this begs the question, what are the issues with the process and what specifically should be changed? Here are the issues that I see being brought up: • Does party leadership have too strong of an influence over the outcome of the delegate process, in part by manipulating rules and leveraging their pre-existing position? • Caucus systems aren’t desired by some people; they just want a primary vote to decide everything. You shouldn’t have to be a master at parliamentary procedures and have the party rule book memorized to have your voice heard. Is it reasonable to reform this overall structure? • Is it fair to have super delegates as part of the process? So what would the perfect liberty movement party nomination system look like? (Not that we’ll agree).
    9 replies | 221 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-27-2016, 07:07 PM
    Let's please keep thing civil, there is little value in attacking others, it's best to stick to the topic and debate the issues. Thanks.
    44 replies | 671 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-27-2016, 06:02 PM
    Thanks, great to hear from you.... so what will it take to remove that "almost"? :) Agreed, we do need liberty minded liberals. In a certain sense, we learn some to the right, but we also lean in other ways too. :) I'm not aware of that ever being a site policy, it all depends on the situation and what someone brings to the table.
    92 replies | 2185 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-27-2016, 05:53 PM
    One can argue that liberty has past us as nation, but the real question is, has it past your heart? If it has not, the only question is how you will fight. If you think it has past us as a nation and it is beyond repair, spread liberty outside of politics, don't bother with elections and such. Such an effort will always been necessary, and when done right, will always bear fruit. Otherwise, per my OP, I do agree that it's good to plan for hard time that may come to pass. Let's hope they don't, but there can still be room to do more.
    92 replies | 2185 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-27-2016, 05:47 PM
    :) As I've said, much of the knowledgebase material is just setting up the framework, it's not the actual content (and a bit dry). More content is coming. Otherwise, yes, when osan and I get after it, it's not going to be easy reading. :) To your other points, you're right that we need to talk a language that others understand, and some people are really good at that. For others, they fit in better with the deep philosophy material. It's good to be able to do both.
    92 replies | 2185 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-27-2016, 05:27 PM
    First cut of the analysis is complete, see OP. Final grade = F.
    31 replies | 949 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-27-2016, 01:26 PM
    An excellent question, which I will examine within framework of the Liberty Blueprint that I put forward. You are correct that the high-minded philosophizing won’t get the job done, but it does serve as a foundation for all other things to come from it. The Foundational Knowledgebase, Part #1 of the Liberty Blueprint , will have two level of explanation, one is a short form that is easy to read and gives simple explanations of the material. The long form will get into the cutting edge of liberty thought and be geared for the die-hard high-minded philosophizing type. The simple form however is still not a tool to win people over to liberty beyond being used as an educational point for a single issue. The Foundational Knowledgebase can serve as an education system for certain analytical learning styles but the point stands, the high-minded philosophizing won’t get the job done. To seize the moment or capture an audience, we do need as you say, something that will catch peoples imagination. This is Part #5 of the Liberty Blueprint , where Part a) is the development of the marketing campaign material and Part b) is the executing of the campaign. Exactly what that is, how it will look like is something that no one person can define. This is its own process and can change daily based on the news cycle. Ideally the site and the liberty movement can do better to coordinate with this. What we have found however, is that this is not enough. In the “state of the movement” thread presence pointed out (to which I’d agree) that a lot of the liberty movement was lost since they did not get entrenched into the liberty mindset, some were single issue voters, some just caught on to the Ron Paul campaign. This is why Part #4 of the Liberty Blueprint is important Once we do capture peoples imagination, then what? We can’t just send them off to the Foundational Knowledgebase and say “read all of this” – no, we need structured and well thought out educational material and pathways that will drive people to change their viewpoints on a fundamental level. One key however is that all of the material within Part #4 and Part #5 of the Liberty Blueprint has to be philosophically sound within the Foundational Knowledgebase, Part #1. Without this, the message gets confused and obfuscated; people in our own ranks won’t even be aligned.
    92 replies | 2185 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-26-2016, 09:50 PM
    Thanks for all of the input -- and you should post more. :) I'm well aware of the guidepost site as I did a lot of research on usage of the word "guidepost" - which was an earlier base word that was considered. It was ruled out for a variety of reasons but its association to the Christian site never come up as an issue with the advisors and experts I talked with. Guidepost is a common dictionary term with a concrete meaning and is well used in many things. So while there is a minor connection I don't see it as very strong, and I'm not seeing how they have a bad reputation that we'd want 100% distance from. Most people don't know about it.
    92 replies | 2185 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-26-2016, 09:26 PM
    Thanks, yes, in such cases one should call for a site issue evaluation on the matter, and help drive the evaluation to a close. Per: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/content.php?1989
    26 replies | 414 view(s)
More Activity

24 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
  2. View Conversation


    As promised... Great Tits.
  3. View Conversation
    Where are you? This is the last morning meeting!
  4. View Conversation
    Please check your PM.
  5. View Conversation
  6. View Conversation
    Get in chat NOW

    Cancel the other hotel and book Omni online: http://www.omnihotels.com/FindAHotel...formation.aspx

    It's cheaper, better, and closer. HURRY

  7. View Conversation
    Thanks a million! ^_^
  8. View Conversation
    Hi Gage,
    I saved some of the pictures you took at the last Ron Paul event because they were some of the best face shots I'd seen. Would you mind if I used them in order to create custom tote bag iron-ons in Photoshop? I would post a thread up here and link back to your picture thread, giving you 100% credit for the source images. I'll understand if no, but I'd be so grateful if yes :P Thanks!
  9. View Conversation
    CAn you help us on promoting the black this out moneybomb ?
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 24
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
About Gage

Basic Information

Date of Birth
May 16, 1993 (22)
Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
1
Select if you "Stand with Rand":
I Stand with Rand (This will add a "Stand with Rand" icon by your name.)
Political Campaign Skills
Campaign Workers:
Fund Raiser
Graphics:
Graphic Artist, Graphic Designer, Photographer, Web Designer / Developer
Video and Audio:
Video Producer
Computer and Technical:
WebMaster, Social Network Developer
Entertainers and Events:
Event Promoter, Event Planner

Signature


"We have nothing to fear except our own unwillingness to defend what is naturally ours, our God-given rights. We have nothing to fear that should cause us to forget or relinquish our rights as free men and women. To thrive, we must believe in ourselves again, and we must never, never trade our liberty for any fleeting promise of security." - Rand Paul

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,393
Posts Per Day
1.13
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
24
Most Recent Message
12-31-2012 02:00 PM
General Information
Last Activity
04-27-2016 05:27 AM
Join Date
01-27-2008
Referrals
1
Home Page
http://www.flickr.com/gageskidmore

24 Friends

  1. 2ndfor1st 2ndfor1st is offline

    Member

    2ndfor1st
  2. Brandywine Brandywine is offline

    Member

    Brandywine
  3. Bryan Bryan is offline

    Admin

    Bryan
  4. CaptainAmerica CaptainAmerica is offline

    Member

    CaptainAmerica
  5. ChristinaJade ChristinaJade is offline

    Member

    ChristinaJade
  6. compromise compromise is offline

    Banned

    compromise
  7. Don't Tread on Mike
  8. DrewAZ DrewAZ is offline

    Member

    DrewAZ
  9. HarrySeaward HarrySeaward is offline

    Member

    HarrySeaward
  10. Jeremy Jeremy is offline

    Moderator

    Jeremy
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 24
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
No results to display...

03-24-2016