Tab Content
  • luctor-et-emergo's Avatar
    Today, 02:28 AM
    If you won't vote for Johnson, then please don't tell me you're about to vote for Trump or I'll die laughing.
    33 replies | 307 view(s)
  • Natural Citizen's Avatar
    Today, 02:19 AM
    Well. Is the agenda to forward the concept of Individual Liberty fully or piece-meal? It is dishonest to create the illusion that Individuals or groups of Individuals may benefit fully from the principles of Individual Liberty unless the foundation that provides for the principles of Individual Liberty itself is genuinely accepted in whole with them. That is to say that if one rejects and accepts them piece-meal, then, they will not benefit from them as an Indivisible whole at all. Do you agree that the primary fundamental principle of Individual Liberty itself is that Individuals or groups of Individuals should be free to make rules for themselves provided that the rules that they make for themselves doesn't prohibit others from equally doing the same? If so, then, do you accept that a rejection of this primary fundamental principle is, by default, aggressive toward the concept of Individual Liberty fully? Do you accept that Individuals should be free to exchange in trade without restriction provided they exchange in trade honestly? More precisely, Gary Johnson openly acknowledged a position that he'd force an Individual or a group of Individuals to relinquish their property to another Individual or to another Individual by way of the barrel of a government gun. Again, he provided the position under the banner of Liberty itself. If you accept this fundamental principle as true and necessary for Individual Liberty to be had fully as an Indivisible whole, then, the primary principle must not be rejected in Liberty. Gary Johnson openly rejected Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle. And under the banner of Liberty, no less. As such; he rejects the foundation for its moral code. If it is the primary mission of this site to truly forward the cause of Liberty, then, its position should, in my view, reflect adherence and support for Individual Liberty's most fundamental principal. Because to reject Individual Liberty's most fundamental principal is to reject the concept of Individual Liberty fully. The only morally honest conclusion is, in my view, to correctly and accurately provide for him an F on principle alone. The principles of Individual Liberty must be accepted in whole with its fundamental moral foundation. Not piece-meal. If one accepts and rejects the principles of Individual Liberty piece-meal, then, they'll guarantee themselves that they'll not benefit from them at all. Of course, it is a given that anyone whose admitted position, from under the banner of Liberty itself, mind you, that he'd force Individuals or groups of Idividuals to relinquish their property to other Individuals or other groups of Individuals by way of the barrel of a government gun has a fundamental misunderstanding of what Individual Liberty actually is as well as the fundation for its moral code. Would you not agree with that assessment?
    160 replies | 1452 view(s)
  • Natural Citizen's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:58 PM
    A presidential candidate who is recklessly being promoted under the banner of Liberty and who openly admits a rejection of Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle is in no way a "pet issue." Not today. Not tomorrow. Not any day. If one is so led to accept that a presidential candidate's openly admitted rejection of Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle is some kind of "pet issue", then one's priorities are misguided. And if ones priorities are misguided to that extent, then, one likely has no fundamental understanding of or regard for what Liberty fundamentally and truly is. The government has one role. It's only role is to protect Individual Liberty. Nothing else. That said, you'd likely do well to try to think things through better if you're going to pop your mouth off in such a pompous way about political counterintuitiveness, scooter. Because if you're organizing in a political manner to promote a presidential candidate who openly admits a rejection of Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle, then, you're functioning in a manner that is politically and patently aggressive toward the concept of Individual Liberty fully. To your credit, though, it is true that most people who are led to indulge in coercion understand little of its function and often demonstrate very little regard for its consequence. People want to feel like a participant. People want to feel relevant. They want to feel like they are contributing to something. I get it. I really do. And while pride is certainly an ignorant sin, I can't be that Judge. Nor will I attempt to be. But if you're going to make a claim like you just did here about Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle being a "pet issue" or regard for it being extremely counterproductive, then, you'd sure as sht do well to think it through because you're going to be expected to support the claim. You won't receive the luxury of a free pass. It'd be a disservice to the concept of Individual Liberty, itself, to provide one.
    33 replies | 307 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:57 PM
    Maybe Obama won't be leaving...if there is a False Flag of some kind in Sept or October. I sure hope I am wrong but I feel it in my gut some thing is about to happen.
    5 replies | 68 view(s)
  • phill4paul's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:20 PM
    It. Is. A. Waste. Of. Time. We all knew it was rigged. Beyond all odds we supported, worked for, dedicated life and wealth to Ron Paul. We know where that went. This whole DNC shit should clue anyone else in. We experienced it and now Dems do. Voting ain't going to change shit. Ever. Succession might. But, who has the balls for that?
    23 replies | 199 view(s)
  • twomp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:27 PM
    I agree. Let me know when the "Je suis Japan" meme starts going around.
    24 replies | 201 view(s)
  • twomp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:24 PM
    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/289112-snowden-dems-replaced-one-anti-sanders-dnc-chair-for-another
    0 replies | 40 view(s)
  • Natural Citizen's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:22 PM
    Why do you hate Freedom?
    24 replies | 302 view(s)
  • Natural Citizen's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:19 PM
    It's not only that he doesn't believe in private property rights, but he openly and publicly professes that he'd force an Individual to relinquish his property to another Individual at the barrel of a government gun. True Liberty, as you know, means that an Individual or a group of Individuals should be free to make rules for themselves provided that those rules don't prohibit another Individual or another group of Individuals from equally doing the same. Gary Johson's admitted position is fundamentally contrary to Liberty itself as it is correctly defined. Consequently, Gary Johnson's admitted position is aggressive toward and contrary to the concept of Individual Liberty fully. The fact that staff here, on a platform which promotes itself on its pride in adhrence to the cause of Liberty, permits for a presidential candidate whose admitted position is patently contrary and aggressive to the fundamental principle of Individual Liberty itself to be promoted in the name of Liberty in a "2016 Liberty Campaigns" sub-forum tells me that I could never again trust any of them to honestly speak to, lead, or make judgement in any instance in the true and fundamental cause of Liberty. Of course, I don't particularly want to believe that. But inaction is, I think, equally participatory in this particular brand of coercion. It's akin to silently and knowingly handing immoral hitmen the very dagger that would pierce true Individual Liberty's heart, and, then, silently sitting by watching its life blood drip from afar. I don't really care if people support Gary Johnson. All I expect is that people don't promote him in the name of Liberty. His admitted position is a patent rejection of its most fundamental principle. And, again, to reject Individual Liberty's most fundmental principle is to reject Individual fully. It is not possible to obtain or possess Individual Liberty without accepting its fundamental principles and moral foundation as a whole. They must be accepted as a whole and in full in order to enjoy its benefits as an Indivisibe whole. They cannot be accepted and rejected piece-meal. To recklessly accept and reject them in a piece-meal manner is to sacrifice their benefits in whole.
    24 replies | 302 view(s)
  • Natural Citizen's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:08 PM
    Does he profess his position under the banner of Liberty?
    24 replies | 302 view(s)
  • LibertyEagle's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:50 PM
    He doesn't believe in private property rights and he said he would sign the Trans Pacific Partnership. Huge fail.
    24 replies | 302 view(s)
  • Natural Citizen's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:47 PM
    I sent it precisely to whom it was intended.
    42 replies | 479 view(s)
  • phill4paul's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:44 PM
    Indeed. Was out driving today with my dad. At a stop light and turning left for him to draw money from his bank. He takes off his seat-belt to get out his wallet. Cop directly facing us at the red. Tell him "Dad, that's a cop right there. Please put you seat belt back on." He tells me "Screw him. If he has a problem then he can talk to me." Of course I'm not going to explain to my dad that in N.C. the driver is culpable. After the light change the cop goes by and as I'm making a left I can see the cop pull a u-ey. Thankfully he headed on down the road, but I just had a flash in my head "this is the day I can die, over a fucking seat-belt." Mexicans and Mooslim terrorists don't mean shit to me. Rarely see either one. These fuckers in Gestapo uniforms? Everyday. Everyday.
    12 replies | 109 view(s)
  • Natural Citizen's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:41 PM
    Again...Gary Johnson admittedly and publicly rejected Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle. Gary Johnson, admittedly, would force an Individual or a group of Individuals to relinquish their property to another Individual or to another group of Individuals by way of the barrel of a government gun. Gary Johnson openly rejects Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle in the name of Liberty itself, no less. His admitted position is one that, because it rejects Individual Liberty's most fundamental principle, is patently a wilful aggression toward the concept of Individual Liberty fully. Please consider re-evaluating the summation with which you've concluded your assessment so that you may better understand the foundation for moral code that truly defines a decent, honest good guy. Seems like the foundation for moral code with which you've premised your assessment isn't the relative foundation for moral code that establishes the principles of Individual Liberty. Thank You, 69360.
    24 replies | 302 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:37 PM
    We're all in the same boat. ;)
    57 replies | 685 view(s)
  • phill4paul's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:33 PM
    From TMOT's FB page.... https://www.facebook.com/tmotofga
    1 replies | 58 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:33 PM
    SMDH
    8 replies | 239 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:27 PM
    57 replies | 685 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:49 PM
    57 replies | 685 view(s)
  • phill4paul's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:40 PM
    And people wonder why their "protectors" are getting shot.... Source: Man With Down Syndrome in Clash With Cops | NBC 6 South Florida http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Man-With-Down-Syndrome-in-Clash-With-Cops-129820353.html#ixzz4FTjYLx6C Follow us: @nbcmiami on Twitter | NBCMiami on Facebook
    12 replies | 109 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:34 PM
    57 replies | 685 view(s)
  • LibertyEagle's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:30 PM
    Yes, that's what you should do if you want the Trans Pacific Partnership. I, however, do not.
    14 replies | 207 view(s)
  • phill4paul's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:26 PM
    It's like asking how many licks it takes to get to the bottom of a Tootsie pop.
    33 replies | 307 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:26 PM
    57 replies | 685 view(s)
More Activity

127 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    I just bought the book. I cannot wait to read it. Thanks!!
  2. View Conversation
    ....
  3. View Conversation
    You're welcome, Darlin'. <3
  4. View Conversation
    {Hugs!}
  5. View Conversation
    I am just getting over some respiratory crud, but doing well all and all. Yeah, this LaVoy Finicum is tragic. Alex Jones has reporters up there right now, and they are trying to get in to talk with the militia to try to get them out unharmed.
  6. It's me??? LOL. Sorry! I'll fix it.
  7. I'm kind of a pack rat when it comes to messages, never want to delete anything just "in case".

    My mailbox said 98/100 full, didn't realize that the two message receipts I had count too so, guess it was full thanks for the heads up.

    ---

    LOL nevermind, guess it's not me.

    "Deborah K has exceeded their stored private messages quota and cannot accept further messages until they clear some space."
  8. View Conversation
    ....
  9. View Conversation
    ....
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 127
Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
About Deborah K

Basic Information

Signature


Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
"I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
Give me messy freedom every time!

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
17,984
Posts Per Day
5.47
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
127
Most Recent Message
02-16-2016 06:46 PM
General Information
Last Activity
03-11-2016 03:25 PM
Join Date
07-27-2007
Referrals
1
Home Page
http://www.paulfestival.com

87 Friends

  1. A Son of Liberty A Son of Liberty is offline

    Member

    A Son of Liberty
  2. acptulsa acptulsa is offline

    Member

    acptulsa
  3. AdamT AdamT is offline

    Member

    AdamT
  4. affa affa is offline

    Member

    affa
  5. amy31416 amy31416 is offline

    Member

    amy31416
  6. angelatc angelatc is offline

    @AngelaTC

    angelatc
  7. BeFranklin BeFranklin is offline

    Member

    BeFranklin
  8. Birdlady Birdlady is offline

    Member

    Birdlady
  9. bobbyw24 bobbyw24 is offline

    Banned

    bobbyw24
  10. brushfire brushfire is offline

    Member

    brushfire
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 87
Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
No results to display...
No results to display...

06-19-2016


03-09-2016


03-08-2016


03-07-2016


03-06-2016