• dannno's Avatar
    3 replies | 214 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 03:40 AM
    He's whatever you want him to be, bae.....
    8 replies | 170 view(s)
  • Anti Federalist's Avatar
    Today, 02:04 AM
    Agencies and Apparatchiks by eric • April 28, 2016 http://ericpetersautos.com/2016/04/28/agencies-and-apparatchiks/ Why is the government even involved in dictating “safety” standards for new cars? Did the EPA ever get put to a vote?
    0 replies | 47 view(s)
  • Anti Federalist's Avatar
    4 replies | 105 view(s)
  • 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 | 2164 view(s)
  • Anti Federalist's Avatar
    Today, 01:05 AM
    Yup, without a doubt. And if a man went 1962 era "Mad Men" on you to perform your "wifely duties", you'd howl blue murder about it, I'm quite sure. More importantly, you must of missed the part about "compliance sex" being less satisfying than masturbation. It's degrading and demeaning to both parties and renders the act pointless...at least to me.
    79 replies | 994 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 12:43 AM
    When did Stefan ever claim he was never wrong and has never changed his mind? In fact he has said the opposite.. he changes his mind when he runs into reason and evidence to the contrary. For example, long, long ago before the podcast he supported multi-culturalism. He is ok with multi-culturism now to the extent that it is voluntary, he says that cultures can potentially assimilate, slowly, over time, potentially in a healthy way, but that multi-culturalism should not be something to promote because it usually ends up badly. He has also changed his mind on race and IQ. If he did ever argue that immigrants don't come here because of welfare or that a wall is a bad idea, then in a sense perhaps he has changed his mind on those - although I will have to take some time later to watch that video because I have a hard time believing that he really made the argument that immigrants don't come here for welfare but it is certainly possible. Why people make stupid youtube videos that show he changed his mind on something and claim he is contradictory when he has changed his mind based on reason and evidence is kinda ridiculous. He has said some really great things about Ron Paul - I am not totally happy with his treatment of Ron Paul at times, and I don't intend on supporting Trump - but in general he is a great source of philosophy discussions and research based podcasts and he does do a good job of supporting his views with reason. I mean, a wall does help curb immigration, but it isn't the end all solution. So that means you can make a valid argument in both directions, which he has.
    19 replies | 255 view(s)
  • Anti Federalist's Avatar
    Today, 12:12 AM
    That "@ so and so" makes an annoying message alert...please cut it out. Certainly there were some unrepentant monarchists among the crowd in Philadelphia, but I don't think their arguments carried any weight. I think it was flawed from the get go, in that it in granted the new central government essentially unlimited power.
    87 replies | 1280 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:58 PM
    He admits he is wrong when he finds evidence and reasoning that shows he was wrong, not when some random pseudo-intellectuals on the internet who don't take the time to understand his positions say he is wrong. I don't agree with him all of the time, but most of his stuff is pretty solid and well reasoned.
    19 replies | 255 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:55 PM
    No, he's actually very intelligent. The people who who don't like him are often incapable of reasoning well, or just don't take the time to understand his arguments.
    19 replies | 255 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:53 PM
    Then you haven't been listening to his latest podcasts on the topic..and yes it is absolutely a strawman. Immigration currently exists as a government program.. Most immigrants come here and are on government assistance. They are committing aggression against current citizens without paying into the system. Immigration control prevents that aggression from happening, using less aggression - additionally - immigration brings in more people who will vote for more welfare and socialism, which is even more aggression. He is picking the lesser of the evils and not abandoning his original position in any way, shape or form. He has no issue with immigration in a voluntary society.
    19 replies | 255 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"
    8 replies | 160 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.
    8 replies | 160 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:37 PM
    No, I listen to all of his podcasts now and I don't need doctored up bullshit strawman video to tell me what his views on immigration are.. He does not hold contradictory points on immigration, he's taken hours and hours to go over his positions extensively and I've listened to many of them and pretty much all of them in the last year or so.
    19 replies | 255 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.
    34 replies | 629 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:33 PM
    Meh, a few days ago Molyneux asked an eastern European if he thought their country would consider removing the socialist policies that support immigration, and strike at the root of the problem, because in Serbia I think it was they set aside a bunch of land for Muslim immigrants - but they wouldn't be able to collect any welfare there - and turned out none of the immigrants wanted to move there..none... and the guy agreed that was very unlikely they would end their socialist policies and so they would have to use force to keep them out. Here is a nice little 15 second video that he put out the other day that makes a good point about immigration to socialist countries as well: Ultimately they both seem to agree on the issue, I'm not sure what the big complaint is. I don't think Ron Paul is completely opposed to a wall, he just knows that there are more effective ways to deal with the problem - they both seem to agree so I'm not sure what the issue is. If I go back and watch the original video that Molyneux posted, will I find that there was a lot of audio editing done to the version you posted?
    19 replies | 255 view(s)
  • Anti Federalist's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:25 PM
    But there are times that you feel you're part of the scenery all the greenery is comin' down, boy And then your wife seems to think you're part of the furniture oh, it's peculiar, she used to be so nice.
    79 replies | 994 view(s)
  • Anti Federalist's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:11 PM
    Thank Christ...Pulling for you brother, pulling for you.
    67 replies | 2957 view(s)
  • torchbearer's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:24 PM
    not going to happen for it will alienate voters during his senate re-election. the article shows that those who post it are desperately trying to hold together a fiction.
    28 replies | 513 view(s)
  • GunnyFreedom's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:09 PM
    Learn to what, piss on the US Constitution? No thanks.
    34 replies | 629 view(s)
  • ChaosControl's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:43 PM
    Okay just anti "undesireable" immigrant. Close enough to the same thing. I don't think someone is anti immigrant just because their oppose illegal immigration, but Trumps rhetoric is way over the top. I will agree immigration policy needs to be reformed but a wall or a ban list of people based on their religion is just nuts.
    44 replies | 645 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:42 PM
    Wow, I would be pretty surprised if that happened.. but not totally surprised.. Ted Cruz totally sucks as a human being.
    28 replies | 513 view(s)
  • Anti Federalist's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:36 PM
    Vermin Supreme in 2016!!!
    2 replies | 89 view(s)
  • Anti Federalist's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:08 PM
    Still wishin...
    102 replies | 2257 view(s)
More Activity
About silverhawks

Basic Information

About silverhawks
Biography:
Aiming to misbehave.
Interests:
Freedom, justice and liberty.
Occupation:
Building a better future, one free mind at a time.

Signature


People should not be afraid of their governments -
governments should be afraid of their people.

In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.
~ Mark Twain

Audemus Jura Nostra Defendere: We Dare To Defend Our Rights!

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,300
Posts Per Day
0.47
General Information
Last Activity
09-03-2011 12:17 AM
Join Date
10-07-2008
Referrals
0

25 Friends

  1. A. Havnes A. Havnes is offline

    Member

    A. Havnes
  2. acptulsa acptulsa is offline

    Member

    acptulsa
  3. Adam Kokesh Adam Kokesh is offline

    Member

    Adam Kokesh
  4. akihabro akihabro is offline

    Member

    akihabro
  5. Anti Federalist Anti Federalist is offline

    Needs a bigger boat...

    Anti Federalist
  6. AuH20 AuH20 is offline

    Temporary Ban

    AuH20
  7. Bryan Bryan is offline

    Admin

    Bryan
  8. BuddyRey BuddyRey is offline

    Member

    BuddyRey
  9. ChaosControl ChaosControl is offline

    Member

    ChaosControl
  10. CMoore CMoore is offline

    Member

    CMoore
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 25
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...