Tab Content
  • heavenlyboy34's Avatar
    Today, 07:55 PM
    Indeed! PC is as destructive to language and rational thought as Newspeak. If the State and various connected institutions/interests can control language, they can control debate and policy parameters-and thus leave those of us with dissenting opinions Shit Out Of Luck.
    74 replies | 728 view(s)
  • MelissaWV's Avatar
    Today, 07:29 PM
    If you add up the basic numeric equivalents for each letter in my name, you get 123. If you use the 1-9 means of assigning numbers to those same letters, the total is 33 --- year of Christ. And yes, a lack of logic does cause me to reject information. It's in my nature I guess :) Or maybe I was born in 1947 (everyone born in that year is a spook).
    5 replies | 40 view(s)
  • MelissaWV's Avatar
    Today, 07:04 PM
    I like the part about how people who watch Game of Thrones are messed up, which the author knows from not watching the show, but looking up a 16-minute montage of nude scenes. People who look up montages of nudity contained in shows they are too good to watch are definitely not messed up.
    5 replies | 40 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 06:01 PM
    It Makes for a strong America.
    63 replies | 761 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 05:59 PM
    Well. Infractions can lead to banning, but you don't care I guess. I joked about CPU being a troll, and she reported me and I got infraction with a warning
    75 replies | 30 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 05:55 PM
    Seriously? Are you worried about Canada or Mexico sending troops across the border? The Militia had a role in the Revolutionary war. Maybe that was pooh-poohed in your regular Army experience indoctrination. A large standing army is not only unconstitutional, it is unnecessary. Any army on the move can be easily wiped out with airpower. Look at the Saddam's Highway of death.
    15 replies | 260 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 05:46 PM
    I guess Bryan will give you an infraction. You are not even joking.
    75 replies | 30 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    74 replies | 728 view(s)
  • MelissaWV's Avatar
    Today, 05:09 PM
    No, businesses (mostly restaurants) that only accept cash as payment. It's going well for them.
    95 replies | 3192 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 05:03 PM
    I'm getting a Chinese phrasebook for next time I go.
    76 replies | 154 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 05:01 PM
    Do we have to bomb them to do that?
    75 replies | 30 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    2 replies | 71 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 04:42 PM
    Just went thru security in Beijing. A young, very fit gal in uniform felt me all over, so I decided to exit and go through that again. Just make sure she didn't miss anything. Safety first.
    76 replies | 154 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 04:06 PM
    FRIEND, ALL YOUR LIFE YOU’VE BEEN TOLD THAT THE 16TH AMENDMENT was a transformational event in the history of the United States Constitution by which an unapportioned direct federal tax on "all that comes in" was authorized. You’ve been told that the amendment reversed the preceding 137-year-old Constitutional tax structure prohibiting such taxes-- under which the American people had grown to be the freest, most prosperous, and most optimistic people in the history of the world-- in favor of a radically-different structure under which the scandal-ridden and deeply-distrusted denizens of Washington, DC were granted carte blanche to reach directly into every wallet, be it that of a Wall Street tycoon or that of the average working stiff. Explanations as to why the rich and happy Americans of the early 20th Century would do such a thing to themselves have always been vague-- they typically amount to something about a populist or progressive impulse that swept the country in favor of sticking it to the “Robber Barons”. Missing is any reason why such an impulse would embrace a universal tax reaching not just the robber barons, but their alleged victims in the working class, as well (along with every little shopkeeper, every mid-level success-story working out the American dream, and everyone else, too). Also missing from these stories is any explanation of why the several states would ratify such a tax, under which they would inevitably lose power and significance in favor of their federal competitor. Further, these stories leave out the fact that there already WAS an income tax on the books and still in force at the time of the 16th Amendment, which had been successfully deployed over the preceding 52 years without Constitutional problem, save for a single instance in which the US Supreme Court had taken issue with its application to merely two single varieties of realized income. These stories don’t mention that, in fact, huge portions of our modern body of income tax law pre-date the 16th Amendment, even though this is plainly stated in the preamble to the 1939 Internal Revenue Code, and even though Congress publishes a comprehensive derivation table explicitly identifying the pre-16th-origins of these still-current statutes. (See a little video presentation on this subject here.) The fact is, an awful lot is left out of these stories purporting to explain the seemingly inexplicable decision of the prosperous American people of the early 20th Century to chuck a system that had served them so well for so long-- because they’re just stories. They’re fiction, so they don’t have to make sense. Those telling these stories want you to believe otherwise for reasons of their own, but the truth is, the 16th Amendment did nothing these story-tellers want you to imagine it did. Instead, the amendment merely overruled a Supreme Court decision that had briefly interrupted the application of the already-long-standing tax (the twice-heard case of Pollock v. Farmer’s Loan & Trust, 157 U.S. 429, and 158 U.S. 601, (both 1895)), while making no changes to its pre-amendment nature.
    207 replies | 4161 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:29 PM
    Slow down, buddy... I agree Stef has been talking about some of this stuff for a while, but his viewership base has increased substantially since Trump has been running, he has been making this argument, so go take it up with the man himself... As far as MSM dying, ya, I said it was dying before, but Trump has done a lot to speed up that process.
    29 replies | 240 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:21 PM
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/04/18/poll-just-6-percent-people-say-trust-media/
    29 replies | 240 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:08 PM
    No stats needed, all you have to do is have been paying attention to the increasing popularity of various segments of the alt-right - not necessarily the ones who are racist and obsessed w/ saying cuck, but there has been a huge push back against SJWs on campuses and there is more open debate on many issues that just weren't debated before Donald Trump announced his candidacy. It's not ALL because of him, it was an idea whose time was coming, the SJWs were getting crazier and crazier, South Park did an entire season on it, but Trump is really the one who has helped push some of this stuff more mainstream.
    29 replies | 240 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:04 PM
    He had some very hard hitting debates on foreign policy during the GOP debates, he took the side of non-intervention - and he gave a pretty good speech about it as well. I agree he is all over the map, I don't personally trust him, but I'm glad he has come out and made it so people can talk about those things more openly. As far as immigration, I'm not a fan of mass deportation at all, but I do like the idea that we can actually talk about different cultures and their impact on the US. If we keep letting in massive amounts of immigrants, we are just going to become more and more socialist and our country will deteriorate. If Europe keeps letting in more and more Muslims they are going to have a civil war. Immigration is a serious issue. I'm ok with multi-culturalism, I like many aspects of it and have lived in relatively mono-culture neighborhoods that don't share my primary ethnicity and been ok with that, too. But on a large scale it is not working out well for our country. We need to stop giving away government services to illegal immigrants, but if that isn't possible we need as an alternative to curtail our immigration so we have some chance at not becoming even more socialist.
    29 replies | 240 view(s)
  • heavenlyboy34's Avatar
    Today, 02:03 PM
    Thanks for your interesting and enlightening posts! :D ~hugs~
    57 replies | 776 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 01:56 PM
    It isn't about him or his supporters.. it's about people like Milo and Stefan Molyneux talking about feminism for what it is, or discussing racial issues honestly, or conservative/libertarian economics, even foreign policy.. without Donald Trump these kind of issues and conservatism in general were totally marginalized and now people are actually talking about them more openly..the mainstream media is dying, 6% of the population trusts the MSM...they were dying before but the process was sped up very quickly..all in large part because of Donald Trump.
    29 replies | 240 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 01:35 PM
    Oh for crying out loud!
    14 replies | 156 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 01:08 PM
    Dude, you are totally over-reacting.. I am all for businesses having the right to put up "No blacks allowed" signs or doing whatever or serving whoever they want on their property, I wouldn't patronize them, but they have every right to do it imo.. We need to be realistic here, Gary Johnson is right - the discrimination issue is a black-hole issue at this point in time. He may even agree with you and I, but either way he knows it isn't a winning issue right now and will sink everything else we want to accomplish. I think Rand had balls to come out against the CRA, but it's probably one of the major reasons he isn't taken as seriously on the national stage (despite all the fantastic work he does in the senate). Anybody who thinks the way you or I do will not be able to win the general election right now. If people move in a more liberty oriented direction and we have more of these conversations with people it could happen, in time, but we aren't there right now. Gary Johnson said that every pro-gay legislation he ever signed or backed always stipulated that priests would not be forced to marry gay couples. He doesn't think that cake bakers should be forced to bake a penis shaped cake for a gay wedding, but if a gay couple comes into their business and orders something they should be treated equally. That doesn't mean the cake baker has to customize their cake any specific way that goes against their beliefs because he said that would be violating their first amendment rights. Religious freedom is pretty high on my priorities, despite the fact that religious fuckers are primarily the ones responsible for the war on drugs which takes away my freedom to perform my personal religion... And I have gay friends who I have told straight up that being pro-gay marriage is not something I actively support in most cases because it is being used to take the rights away from religious people.. But we have to be realistic here and see what areas are most important and where we can make the most headway and Gary Johnson is the person who has the best chance at reducing the size of government, ensuring our personal privacy, ending the war on drugs and reigning in our foreign empire. I respect purists like Ron Paul, and Ron Paul was great at being a purist and drawing in people from the left.. But I also respect people who can bring large swaths of people together to help tackle the most important issues of the day because in the end we need a multi-pronged attack at authoritarianism.
    23 replies | 288 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 12:48 PM
    Did you even read the article? He didn't vote for Trump, he doesn't support Trump's bad policies, he just likes that people are actually able to talk about things that were essentially banned from public discourse not too long ago and calling out the left on their antics.
    29 replies | 240 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 12:33 PM
    He makes a pretty good point that any rando who started saying the stuff he says would automatically be labelled racist, homophobic, misogynist, prude, etc... but for his character, that shit just doesn't stick, nobody can label him those things and so he has sort of a bullet proof vest when it comes to telling the truth on stuff like this.
    74 replies | 728 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 12:18 PM
    First, if I recall, he was also running while Ron Paul was running. I was a little pissed at him at the time for that, I would never compete against Ron Paul for office. I think others were a bit upset about that as well. I probably would have been willing to consider him, but he wasn't perceived as being able to win or do very well at all, but now he is at 10% in the polls and he has a great shot at picking up Sanders supporters, disaffected Republicans and libertarians. He's right on the economy, and he is pro-gay marriage, pro-choice, wants to end our foreign empire and the war on drugs and so he has a lot in common with the left. But he also is good on economics, so he can attract anti-authoritarian people on the right who won't be able to hold their nose for Trump. It's really could be the perfect storm for Gary Johnson right now - not McAfee, I actually like McAfee more than Gary Johnson especially on policy but he just won't be taken seriously.. and he won't be able to attract many people on the left, and there are many who can't stand Hillary.
    115 replies | 1506 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 11:59 AM
    You are comparing him to when Ron Paul was running?? Really? Even though Ron Paul dropped out, the enthusiasm was still there and GJ was an after thought.. people wanted to write in Ron Paul.
    115 replies | 1506 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 11:54 AM
    Ya, fuck that guy. I can't believe anybody here actually supports him.. Gary Johnson is not my favorite candidate for President, but he is my favorite candidate to win the Libertarian nomination because he will capture the most support and bring more people on the left into the liberty fold, or at least take votes from Hillary. If they choose Peterson, that will draw the most votes away from Republicans in the general, and he sucks.. I don't get the point.
    23 replies | 288 view(s)
More Activity

308 Visitor Messages

  1. I have to share this info that has changed my mind on vaccines, you seriously need to check it out: http://www.howdovaccinescauseautism.com/
  2. View Conversation
    Ron Paul > Rand Paul.
  3. View Conversation
    I actually did recently create one for a college scholarship. But I've literally never used that account other than for that. I literally have zero friends on my facebook account, and deliberately so. I don't like using it. Seems like a waste of time for me. I'd rather spend time here on serious stuff
  4. View Conversation
    I don't use facebook, BTW.
  5. View Conversation
    I did???I did not mean to!!! I meant to neg the guy who made the off-topic anti-Rand comment! Sorry sorry sorry.
  6. View Conversation
    Thanks ed, have a wonderful and blessed day brother!
  7. View Conversation
    "How did this thread escape me?" Look what you gone and done! Too soon!
  8. View Conversation
    If you're around when it be morrow afternoon/evening, we should troll the feminists again.
  9. View Conversation
    Sad to see your thread locked. We were on a roll. /sad
  10. View Conversation
    I do indeed love your new signature!
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 308
Page 1 of 31 12311 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 31 12311 ... LastLast
About eduardo89

Basic Information

Date of Birth
October 16

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
21,306
Posts Per Day
7.96
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
308
Most Recent Message
06-24-2014 11:23 AM
General Information
Last Activity
01-19-2016 05:35 PM
Join Date
01-28-2009
Referrals
1

29 Friends

  1. alexaforronpaul alexaforronpaul is offline

    Member

    alexaforronpaul
  2. AmberH AmberH is offline

    Member

    AmberH
  3. amy31416 amy31416 is offline

    Member

    amy31416
  4. bolil bolil is offline

    Member

    bolil
  5. Christian Liberty
  6. ClydeCoulter ClydeCoulter is offline

    Member

    ClydeCoulter
  7. compromise compromise is offline

    Banned

    compromise
  8. Crotale Crotale is offline

    Member

    Crotale
  9. Danke Danke is offline

    Goldmember

    • Send a message via Skype™ to Danke
    Danke
  10. dannno dannno is online now

    Bubs

    dannno
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 29
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
No results to display...

05-11-2016