Tab Content
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 10:11 PM
    https://www.facebook.com/DiamondandSilk/videos/611523256334200/
    237 replies | 7660 view(s)
  • pcosmar's Avatar
    Today, 09:51 PM
    Wow What a Total lack of simple common sense.. Trump can not Pardon Him.. He is an innocent man that has never been convicted anywhere.. let alone the United States. It would require a conviction in a US Court.. Assange is Not a US Citizen and nothing he has done has been illegal.
    17 replies | 218 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 09:45 PM
    No, his boyfriend.
    11 replies | 405 view(s)
  • familydog's Avatar
    Today, 09:23 PM
    1) Why did the Supreme Court in 1833 declare that the Bill of Rights did not apply to the States? 2) Why did it take almost 150 years for the Court to make moves towards incorporation? 3) Why has the Court used the 14th Amendment to apply incorporation instead of Article 6? 4) Where in either the ratifying debates or the Federalist papers does it indicate that Article 6 meant incorporation? This is incorrect. Why? Because not every group of people saw the same government actions as a violation of rights. The Puritans had a more collectivist and centralized view of liberty. On the other hand, the Quakers had a much more individualistic and libertarian view of liberty. You must understand that the colonies were made up of regions and groups of people. They were not monolithic in their views on rights and liberties. The only thing they had in common was that they viewed their colonies as sovereign and no outside force has the right to rule them.
    40 replies | 1849 view(s)
  • familydog's Avatar
    Today, 09:15 PM
    Questioning my mental state is not an argument. If you have counter evidence to suggest that the Founders intended the Bill of Rights to apply to the States, then I'm open to having my mind changed. That is correct. This is a tradition that is rooted in English constitutionalism that was brought here from Great Britain. For further study on this, I highly recommend the book The Constitutional Origins of the American Revolution by Jack Greene. With all due respect, just saying something is true does not make it a reality.
    40 replies | 1849 view(s)
  • familydog's Avatar
    Today, 08:58 PM
    Perhaps you haven't been participating in this conversation long enough to understand, so I will repeat myself as a courtesy. The Framers of the Constitution intended that the only limits on State authority were to be listed in Article 1, Section 10. Any other actions by a State were lawful and Constitutional. Had the Federalists insisted that the Bill of Rights apply to the States, the Constitution would have never been ratified. You can find all of this information by simply reading the notes on the ratification debates. Again, that is a valid argument to make. But let's not pretend that it is an argument that is rooted in the founding period.
    40 replies | 1849 view(s)
  • JoshLowry's Avatar
    Today, 06:59 PM
    Towers will go from the ~300,000 that exist today to literally hundreds of millions of towers. How far apart do 5G stations have to be? Every 400 feet?
    12 replies | 283 view(s)
  • jkr's Avatar
    Today, 06:35 PM
    THIS and they claim its "more efficient" reeeellly? where does your food TRUCK from? cities are an abomination-even if there is sum cool architecture.
    12 replies | 117 view(s)
  • jkr's Avatar
    2 replies | 54 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 03:31 PM
    Judicial Watch: Emails Show Involvement of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page in Launching of Crossfire Hurricane https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-emails-show-involvement-of-peter-strzok-and-lisa-page-in-launching-of-crossfire-hurricane/?fbclid=IwAR0Kd7vLWvK9iZM63TNeSi3Z89l_pQYK16u3IAhQBgfEmoTWKFyVKmx1hDc
    17 replies | 370 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    17 replies | 370 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 03:00 PM
    Yep, no mention of Seth Rich...
    17 replies | 370 view(s)
  • Anti Federalist's Avatar
    8 replies | 140 view(s)
  • Todd's Avatar
    Today, 02:02 PM
    Sorry. I didn't hear anything disturbing. She may be ignorant and equate Rich with entitled but the facts are there is a quasi Oligarchical Kleptocracy in this country that oppresses using people with power and oh yes....lots of money sure helps you control more. Yeah it's class and racial tactics but there has always been some truth about class division. I just disagree with her that we need more government to achieve equality under the law.
    8 replies | 140 view(s)
  • Todd's Avatar
    Today, 01:50 PM
    Now Assange, and Snowden. The really important people. Then I'll start to believe this guy is interested in freedom even if he doesn't completely understand it.
    32 replies | 578 view(s)
  • Todd's Avatar
    Today, 01:41 PM
    Todd replied to a thread Stop the Pink Tax! in Economy & Markets
    Yep, I always thought it was a supply demand thing. Women want more pretty stuff clothes and shoes, so it's gonna cost more.
    10 replies | 144 view(s)
  • Todd's Avatar
    Today, 09:17 AM
    Related. Sure hope this thing goes mainstream and stirs people up. https://consortiumnews.com/2020/02/17/doctors-for-assange-ratchet-up-pressure/
    17 replies | 370 view(s)
  • Todd's Avatar
    Today, 08:49 AM
    https://consortiumnews.com/2020/02/17/part-four-of-ukrainegate-inconvenient-facts/ Part IV completed. Does it matter? Cause Biden is most likely done anyhow.
    4 replies | 185 view(s)
  • Todd's Avatar
    Today, 08:23 AM
    Here's a good article by Chris Hedges about how badly the DNC elites don't want Bernie. We all can't stand the Progressive left anymore than we can stand the DNC, but the comparisons to our 2008 Libertarian grassroots Ron Paul base and Bernie's are very similar. People on the real left in this country see the DNC and most Democrats as too far right...if you can believe that.
    6 replies | 111 view(s)
  • Todd's Avatar
    Today, 08:07 AM
    I think Bloomtard is the silver bullet. It really should concern Bernie lovers what shenanigans are getting ready to happen with this guy. I could seriously see him getting the nomination.
    6 replies | 111 view(s)
  • familydog's Avatar
    Today, 05:19 AM
    You can defend the incorporation doctrine. That is a valid argument to make. I disagree with it, but it is perfectly reasonable. However, let us not pretend like incorporation is something that it is not. The concept is the complete opposite of the Founder's intentions that gained traction in the Supreme Court during the progressive era. The objective of the progressive was two-fold. The first objective was to centralize and concentrate power within the general government. Their second goal was to try and eliminate as much State sovereignty as possible. State sovereignty is seen as undemocratic and backwards. But this is nothing new and we saw these arguments during the ratification debates.
    40 replies | 1849 view(s)
  • nobody's_hero's Avatar
    Today, 03:08 AM
    What are we doing to make our choices better? You can't be active during election years, get stomped, and then go hide in the exclusive libertarian treehouse club until it's election year again. It doesn't seem to be an effective strategy.
    111 replies | 3128 view(s)
  • Danke's Avatar
    Today, 02:35 AM
    @TheTexan https://www.yahoo.com/news/large-majority-nonvoters-plan-cast-050200321.html Nearly three-quarters of habitual nonvoters plan to cast ballots in the November election, according to a first-of-its-kind poll on this bloc released Wednesday by the Knight Foundation. The report, titled "The 100 Million Project: The Untold Story of American Nonvoters," surveyed 12,000 persistent nonvoters nationwide and aimed to understand the characteristics of nonvoters, why they are disengaged from the political process and the effect this group could have on the coming election if they turn out at the polls. The study defined chronic nonvoters as those who aren't registered or had voted only once in the last six national elections. More than 100 million eligible American voters don't vote, according to the study, which noted that in the 2016 election, 41.3 percent of qualified voters didn't cast ballots. Hillary Clinton won 3 million more voters than Donald Trump but lost the Electoral College.
    6 replies | 157 view(s)
  • ProBlue33's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:39 PM
    As to the media for those of us here in 2008 and 2012, Ron and his supporters called it out, there was all kinds of "fake news" directed at him. But the general public paid no attention, this time however everybody that doesn't have TDS can see the media spin BS daily and maybe they always did, but with phone camera's, and drones, and the internet that has sleuths on Reddit and 4Chan it gets exposed very quick. Trump did that, not Ron, because he was just too nice. The supreme court is where all these 50/50 polices are going, THAT is more important than anything else in America, and that is why many former Ron Paul supporters reluctantly vote for Trump. The next DNC President without a court to stop them will wipe out all the liberties this forum holds dear. The supreme court is the only thing stopping a complete revaluation and definition of the 2nd and the end of gun rights in America. And for those spouting off about the morality, think about this, 4 more years of Trump means we actually have a shot at slowing down the genocide of the unwanted unborn millions of aborted innocent babies, when he get more conservative judges on board stop the slaughter of the innocents. This is the biggest travesty of morality currently. http://www.numberofabortions.com/
    111 replies | 3128 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:26 PM
    First of all, Donald Trump is nowhere near the same type of man as Samson. I'm not going to lay out my theological arguments as to why that's the case, here, because I want to get to a more important point. Last of all, your post didn't answer my question at all. I asked for Scriptural basis to support the idea that it's righteous (or moral) to vote for the lesser of two evils (or least of possible goods). You're a man of God, and I know you know the Scriptures, Swordsmyth. So please explain to me where in God's holy, inspired word He teaches that it's okay to have a voting ethic of choosing the lesser of two evils. I'm not looking for Biblical comparisons of Donald Trump to judges, prophets, nor apostles, which even to do so is insulting to those great men of the Faith, anyway.
    111 replies | 3128 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:05 PM
    In light of the quote in your signature from Alexis de Tocqueville, "You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith," can you explain to me where in the Scriptures is the method of "voting for the lesser of two evils (or least of possible goods)" supported as a righteous thing to do? :confused:
    111 replies | 3128 view(s)
  • pcosmar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:38 PM
    Been wondering if what I though was Tinnitus, might actually be a Frey effect from ambient radiation. It does not seem to be sound waves,,and is in a crystalline range. and before you all think I am Stoned.. I am, but that is irrelevant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_auditory_effect
    12 replies | 283 view(s)
More Activity

105 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    dupe
  2. View Conversation
    Theo!!!!! hugs!!!
  3. View Conversation
    I just started looking at the Constitution Party platform since you recommended it awhile back. There are some good things in it, but there are also some concessions to statism that I think are dangerous despite the fact that I'm moving away from strict anarcho-capitalist libertarianism. They support regulation of "obscenity", which isn't really defined, they support some drug restrictions, and they are careful to show their respect for agents of our currently illegitimate state (veterans), as well as condemning attempts to cut their benefits despite the fact that they are paid out of our pockets and for participating in unjust wars for an unjust system.

    The Constitution Party isn't all bad, and I might support some of their candidates, but I don't think there is any party I can support on principle (LP is pro-choice so not an option) I respect strict theonomy even though I'm not sure I agree with it yet. I don't think anybody believes what I'm starting to believe these days.
  4. View Conversation
    My vm from June 15
  5. View Conversation
    Are you purposely dodging that last one?
  6. View Conversation
    Do you believe that it is possible to ethically justify joining the military or the police in modern day America? Or would you agree with me that it cannot be justified with our country in the state that its currently in? What would be your reasoning for your answer, one way or another?
  7. View Conversation
    We don't have to agree on everything to feel affection for each other and treat each other with dignity and respect!
  8. View Conversation
    Thank you Sir!
  9. View Conversation
    OK, so my question is, with relations to Galatians, how is it that you can call Roman Catholics on this board "brothers" even though they add works to the gospel just like the Judaizers did? How is adding baptism as a requirement in order to be saved any different than adding circumcision as a requirement?
  10. View Conversation
    Out of curiosity, how do you interpret Galatians 1:8-9 and 2 John 9-11?
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 105
Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
About Theocrat

Basic Information

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" badge by your name badge by yourr name in all posts.)

Signature


"Then said He [Jesus] unto them, 'But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it and, likewise, his scrip, and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.'" - Luke 22:36

"Our freedoms are based on a philosophy called the 'Libertarian Philosophy.' That means we have a right to own anything we want, including guns, as long as we harm no other person." - Dr. Ron Paul

Contact


This Page
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?4634-Theocrat&s=61ca39c298a018f33c93c6581c773ab7
Instant Messaging

Send an Instant Message to Theocrat Using...

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
9,204
Posts Per Day
2.04
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
105
Most Recent Message
01-31-2016 11:07 AM
General Information
Last Activity
Today 10:23 PM
Join Date
10-04-2007
Referrals
4

245 Friends

  1. A. Havnes A. Havnes is offline

    Member

    A. Havnes
  2. acptulsa acptulsa is offline

    Member

    acptulsa
  3. AFPVet AFPVet is offline

    Member

    AFPVet
  4. allyinoh allyinoh is offline

    Member

    allyinoh
  5. Alternative 336 Alternative 336 is offline

    Member

    Alternative 336
  6. american.swan american.swan is offline

    Member

    american.swan
  7. ammorris ammorris is offline

    Member

    ammorris
  8. amonasro amonasro is offline

    Member

    amonasro
  9. amy31416 amy31416 is offline

    Member

    amy31416
  10. angelatc angelatc is offline

    Banned

    angelatc
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 245
Page 1 of 25 12311 ... LastLast

02-19-2020


11-07-2016

  • 08:25 AM - Hidden

06-18-2016


No results to display...
Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast

02-18-2020


02-17-2020



Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast