Tab Content
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 01:37 PM
    Again, what group are you talking about?! The left neocons? The right neocons? The Trumpian neocons?? Even within those factions of neoconnery, you will have much disagreement on tactics. But, if you look at it more broadly, they all have the same goals. Grow and exert power.
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 01:32 PM
    The first Amendment was written when people had to publish hand-written pamphlets if they couldn't afford their own printing press. They certainly didn't have the internet in mind!!
    7 replies | 197 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 01:13 PM
    What you and Dannno are missing is the second piece of that definition. Just because you use the collective term "neocon" does NOT mean that they are in lockstep with each other. You are ascribing your understanding of the group to each of the individuals in that group. John McCain is a neocon. Obama is a neocon. GWB is a neocon. And yet, they all argue amongst themselves incessantly. How can that be if they are all neocons?!! Like I stated before, what unites these men is not any particular use or implementation of that power, it's that they want to control the world. It's a chess game to them. They're all playing on different teams, but they're all playing the game. Trump is doing the same damned thing - just another neocon. But what's been happening with dannno, is that he sees some neocons attacking Trump and assumes that he must not be one. He is, of course, just playing the chess game in the way he wants to play it. So when you put the emphasis on the individuals within that group, you'll see that their aims are almost identical: Gain as much power as possible and use it as "I" see fit. It's only when you focus on the group over the individuals that you make the mistake of believing they all want to make the exact same moves.
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 01:02 PM
    Ok, you're getting better... But if you really listened to what he "SAID" and not just what you wanted to hear, you would have noticed that everything he SAID was contradicted by other things he said. He called for less intervention, but then also said he was going to go after ISIS no matter where they were. He said he wanted us out of the ME, but also said he wanted to get involved MORE. But some of you got all excited when he said things you liked and dismissed the things you didn't like. So now, when you think he isn't "walking his talk", it's because you only listened to what you wanted to hear.
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 11:21 AM
    Wasn't that the quid pro quo from the beginning?! I mean, that's what Trump elected and that's what got the media their huge ratings! Why look a gift horse in the mouth? Or a cash cow, as the case may be.
    125 replies | 1925 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 11:02 AM
    It's easy to agree with 1/2 of what Trump says. "A lot of the speech actually spoke to me, there", too! Thomas is smart to focus on the 1/2 where he aligns. It's just that the other 1/2 of the things he says (and does, btw) are completely opposite. Thomas is being magnanimous by not calling BS, but I don't have to be.
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 10:56 AM
    @2:08... He starts talking about the real problem... SPENDING! And how people in his own party don't want to cut spending in any manner. (I can't get a Republican to sign on)
    6 replies | 285 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 10:51 AM
    :rolleyes: Nice try, dannno. :rolleyes: You should really watch that video. I think you missed the point.
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 07:08 AM
    BS. Trump NEVER even talked about it. Sure, he may have indicated (for political purposes) that we should intervene less in SOME places, but at the same time he was talking about intervention and tougher sanctions in other places! Hell, sometimes he'd say the same things in reverse in the same week! There were never any guiding principles he followed other than agreeing with whatever audience was in front of him. But I suppose this is more of that selective-Trump-hearing to which you guys cling. :rolleyes: Only hearing what you want to believe he is saying. For the rest of us, he's pretty much behaving exactly as expected. You definitely want to be the last person to talk to Trump before he does something!
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-19-2017, 05:31 PM
    This collectivism of yours is really going to keep you confused. People are not groups. They are individuals. Each of them have individual desires. As a group, what you consider to be "establishment" are really just a bunch of individuals who jockey for position to use the power acquired over the populace for their own benefit. Their main concern is how to use the power for their own wishes and how to grow that power. So, if you think of things in those terms, Trump is "beholden" to the same "group" as the rest of the establishment. But I guess you're talking about left/right??? Does that even matter to you?
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-19-2017, 04:42 PM
    Precisely! Usually, it’s whoever is the last person in the room with him that convinces him which policy will do that.
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-19-2017, 01:14 PM
    EITC is a form of a UBI, (so this isn't really a "first"), but they never use it as a replacement - only as an addendum. Which is just stupid and pointless.
    46 replies | 700 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-19-2017, 01:12 PM
    Because that's what they do. Lefties complained about Bush... but did the same thing. Righties complained about Obama... But they do the same thing. They both complain about Trump... But he's doing the same things! Dammit, dannno, we've been over this. The "establishment" fight amongst themselves about EVERYTHING! They all want the ring of power. But they all want to make the ring more powerful, too! That's what unites them. Here's a simple test... Are any of them talking about "not" intervening with force or sanctions?! Or are they just arguing about which force and which sanctions to use in which places??? They all want to govern the world - they just have different ways of using the power. But NONE of them ever thinks about giving the power up.
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-19-2017, 10:46 AM
    Who said what now?? :confused: I was commenting on your post - not Bush policies. (the video wasn't posted when I replied) You seemed to suggest that neoconservatism wasn't rampant in the current administration. And that globalism is a bad thing, without making the distinction between global trade and global governance. GWB is an idiot! But that doesn't make the current direction of this country any LESS idiotic!
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-19-2017, 09:51 AM
    I can support a UBI. But ONLY as a replacement for ALL other forms of welfare.
    46 replies | 700 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-19-2017, 09:49 AM
    Last gasps?! Are you serious? Neoconservatism is alive, well, and thriving! North Korea?? Iran?? Syria?? Yemen??? I mean, is there a place where we are NOT intervening either by force or sanction?! Is there a place where we have fewer sanctions or less force? I really think you guys need to get your heads back in the game. Remember, global trade is a good thing - it's global governance that is the problem. Trade globally, govern locally.
    60 replies | 986 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    6 replies | 137 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    10-17-2017, 09:25 PM
    That was a great interview from Sen. Paul (not that I'm surprised). He schooled those panelists so much that they looked like they were ready to leave for recess. Their questions were loaded and misleading, but Sen. Paul still knocked them out the park. I'll bet they had to Google "economies of scale" after his interview. :D
    13 replies | 446 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-17-2017, 11:07 AM
    Ok, first, I think we need to temper our sci-fi imaginations a little. When thinking in terms of future and past, people tend to remove real human beings from the mix. In the past, humans become a sort of caricature memory. In the future, humans become non-thinkers. I guess it's just human nature to only truly live in the present. But anyway, I digress... Even if the augmentations you envision were to become a reality - and yes, it's just a matter of time - there will be real human interactions and individual incentives that will drive people's access to it. When you say the astronomical gaps between people - you have to realize that there are already astronomical gaps between people in different stages of their lives. I was dirt poor for the beginning of my life, but now I'm fairly successful. Those two "people" couldn't be further from each other if one were just throw a dart on the board and compare them. But the individual was able to move. And with technology, that movement becomes easier - not harder. If you use your imagination within the parameters of real people interacting with technology and the market, it becomes a whole lot less scary. If those super-human technologies exist, they will be available for people to purchase. And there will be a market for a lower-quality technology for a lower price. And there will be those who use the level of tech that they can afford to progress to the higher levels. For me, the argument always comes down to freedom vs. control. If you have freedom, you don't need to worry about technology. It's only when you try to limit technology via some control, that things get really messy. Technology is a tool. It can be used for good or bad. Our job is to make sure it's used for good - and the market will always do that. Our job is NOT to futilely try to prevent technology - that's a recipe for disaster and very much bad governance!
    47 replies | 734 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-17-2017, 10:27 AM
    I'm always suspicious when I hear people speak about "groups of people" based on wealth, and so should you be. In a economically free society - even one that is relatively economically free - most people do not remain in one group. In fact, there is a great deal of economic mobility between classes. What you're really talking about are people at different stages of their lives. Ironically to that post, technology has always led to an INCREASE in economic mobility, not the opposite.
    47 replies | 734 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-16-2017, 05:31 PM
    :rolleyes: Some people will never learn. Trump says all kinds of things...
    36 replies | 662 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-16-2017, 12:29 PM
    Sure. As long as you see it for what it is. There are many circuses afoot - might as well be entertained by them. It's the same sensation I get watching the nooz, only with skilled athletes. The game is still the same: selling viewers to their sponsors.
    439 replies | 7008 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-16-2017, 12:20 PM
    I still watch. I find it enjoyable. Really... If I were to boycott something every time the organization did something that didn't agree with my politics, I'd never go out of the house. I really couldn't care less about the snowflake controversy du jour.
    439 replies | 7008 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-16-2017, 11:59 AM
    With Trump, it always seems to be whoever is last in the room with him. John Bolton? Chuck and Nancy? Rand Paul? Doesn't matter. You just want to be the last one to talk to him before he uses a pen.
    10 replies | 382 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10 replies | 281 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-06-2017, 08:11 PM
    Ha! The 2nd amendment was supposed to be a check against unfettered tyranny. I think the Founders would think what an utter failure it was. Totally ineffective. Government found a way to become tyrannical in spite of the weaponry of its subjects.
    489 replies | 10441 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    10-06-2017, 08:54 AM
    Hmm... Interesting... I would say that might be true to a locality - maybe even a state. But this whole nation?? Parts of California couldn't feel more foreign to me if they were on another continent. I've never even been to Hawaii. I'm not sure I have much "kinship" with them other than by law. What about Guam or Puerto Rico? Do they count? As part of this blood and soil? I'm not sure how I can claim any sense of ownership or sense of pride there. I mean, I know there's a paper somewhere that says they're a part of the country, but I didn't have any part in writing it. Nor, did I or my kin build anything there.
    489 replies | 10441 view(s)
More Activity

13 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    LOL You're ridiculous. Go away, you globalist troll and race-obsessed collectivist hack.
  2. View Conversation
    You're lying again, and your obsession with race is pathological and also boring. Go issue directives to someone else, you globalist troll.
  3. View Conversation
    That is a lie, and on Good Friday of all days. Your obsession with dragging race into so many conversations is getting real tired.

  4. View Conversation
    erowe1, are you seriously taking the position that cops are "innocent until proven guilty"? Or are you just messing with people here to see if they are parroting what they've been told without thinking about it?

    Mind you, I'm not talking about the not-so-subtle "Let's lynch 'em" attitude. I tend to think that's a bad idea, even if I philosophize in weird directions sometimes (its part of my efforts to stay sane while surrounded by statists IRL, give me a break). But, there is a difference between saying "we shouldn't condone harming X for Y or Z reasons" and saying "X is actually innocent."

    Note, also by "innocent" I don't even mean morally sinless, I just mean per the NAP. I'd honestly be shocked if there is a single cop who's been on the force for more than a week who isn't an NAP violator. Do you disagree?
  5. View Conversation
    You should comment on this thread: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ps-exist/page2 I am curious about your argument.
  6. View Conversation
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-marital-union

    I know you said you agreed with me that the sex = marriage argument is wrong, so you might want to get involved in this thread... I could use some help here as I don't know as much about this as I probably should.
  7. View Conversation
    I genuinely wonder how that would have gone over in my church. Probably not nearly as well.
  8. View Conversation
    Thanks for the sermon. Good stuff. I passed it on to my parents. My dad's a pastor so I'd love to see him converted to the view of Romans 13 that you take or a similar one.

    Just out of curiosity, how well received was that message in your church?
  9. View Conversation
    Thanks. One of my brothers in Christ who I respect and love told me that a Christian man should spend more time with his brothers than people in the world. I was spending so much time on the forums with these unbelievers, and when he said that, I was extremely convicted. There is nothing like spending time with brothers who build you up in the Lord and sharpen you.
  10. View Conversation
    I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your insight on topics like we just discussed. (existence, god, reality, etc) You give me much to mull over.
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 13
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
About erowe1

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
1
Select if you support the site's Mission.:
I support the site Mission. (This will change your user title to "Supporting Member".)
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Select if you "Stand with Rand":
I Stand with Rand (This will add a "Stand with Rand" badge by your name badge by yourr name in all posts.)
Select if you do not support Trump or Hillary.:
No Trump. No Hillary. (This will add a "None of the Above" badge by your name in all posts.)

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
32,173
Posts Per Day
8.70
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
13
Most Recent Message
03-25-2016 03:25 PM
General Information
Last Activity
08-23-2017 06:45 AM
Join Date
09-07-2007
Referrals
0

12 Friends

  1. bobbyw24 bobbyw24 is offline

    Banned

    bobbyw24
  2. CaptUSA CaptUSA is offline

    Member

    CaptUSA
  3. Christian Liberty
  4. compromise compromise is offline

    Banned

    compromise
  5. coyote_sprit coyote_sprit is offline

    Banned

    coyote_sprit
  6. DonVolaric DonVolaric is offline

    Member

    DonVolaric
  7. enrique enrique is offline

    Member

    enrique
  8. IndianaPolitico IndianaPolitico is offline

    Member

    IndianaPolitico
  9. onlyrp onlyrp is offline

    .

    onlyrp
  10. realtonygoodwin realtonygoodwin is offline

    Member

    realtonygoodwin
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 12
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

07-16-2016


06-04-2016


05-30-2016

  • 05:39 PM - Hidden

05-05-2016


05-04-2016

  • 06:38 PM - Hidden

04-27-2016


04-23-2016


04-21-2016


04-20-2016


04-19-2016


04-16-2016


04-12-2016


04-02-2016


04-01-2016


03-12-2016


No results to display...
Page 1 of 84 1231151 ... LastLast

04-21-2017


11-11-2016

  • 11:57 PM - Hidden

11-10-2016


10-22-2016


10-13-2016


10-11-2016


10-10-2016


10-09-2016


10-08-2016



Page 1 of 84 1231151 ... LastLast