Tab Content
  • GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:06 PM
    My youngest son got a job before graduating college. He has been there 4 years and got a good promotion. His bonus last year was $30,000. He has over $375,000 net assets and isn't even 27 yet. He owns 2 cars paid for and a 2 family home. The first floor rent covers the mortgage and he has roommates where he occupies the 2nd and 3rd floor. He has 1700 sq ft on those 2 floors. So his transportation is paid for and his housing is free. I think his base salary is around $150k plus stock and bonus. Youngest daughter working as chemical engineer making close to $100k but she spends way more than my son. Son plans on being financially independent after working 10 years. Maximizes his savings, retirement, and wealth, and minimizing his taxes. All his accomplishments are his to take credit for. No handouts from the parents. But he is a rare case and exceptional person. In the 70's any person that wanted to work hard could prosper without college.
    13 replies | 280 view(s)
  • GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:57 PM
    I guess there was more to it than finding a job and buying things for cash. We had jobs since we were small. Everyone of us had paper route that got passed from kid to kid. In those days you had to purchase the paper route. You were a business man. You bought the papers and it was your responsibility to collect from your customers. I had a morning and afternoon route. We cut grass and shoveled snow and raked leaves. Once 16 people worked. My mother made sure that money was saved. In 1970 a brand new C10 was less than $2,000 so all those years of work and savings made purchasing a vehicle possible. Houses cost less than $30,000 so with a small downpayment you were a homeowner. Two of my brothers purchased 2 family homes and lived on one floor and rented the other. As mentioned one brother still lives in the home he purchased when he was 18.
    13 replies | 280 view(s)
  • Dr.3D's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:21 PM
    Sh!t is always hitting the fan over there.
    16 replies | 368 view(s)
  • Dr.3D's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:56 AM
    I'm pretty sure narcissism pride day would correspond with the booming time of Daffodils. I believe that would be sometime in the month of April in the northern latitudes. Narcissists study Daffodils as they are part of the family Narcissus.
    18 replies | 442 view(s)
  • Dr.3D's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:46 AM
    When is Schizophrenia pride day?
    18 replies | 442 view(s)
  • GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:48 AM
    Back in the early 70's all my older brothers purchased homes prior to age 24. 2 of them purchased brand new half ton trucks one Chevy one Ford and paid cash. Everybody worked menial jobs. One brother purchased his home when he was 18 and still lives there today. So when you are talking about purchasing a home, a car, or even being able to just live on a wage, that has changed.
    13 replies | 280 view(s)
  • Dr.3D's Avatar
    05-18-2024, 04:00 PM
    I didn't realize we had such a large group of mentally ill people in our country.
    18 replies | 442 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    05-17-2024, 09:46 AM
    CaptUSA replied to a thread MTG vs. AOC in U.S. Political News
    41 replies | 1317 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    05-17-2024, 06:58 AM
    71415 replies | 1682103 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    05-17-2024, 06:58 AM
    71415 replies | 1682103 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 05:53 PM
    0 replies | 79 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 05:41 PM
    Yep. The bill expands on the definition of what "discriminating against Jews" is and outsources that to a private entity.
    155 replies | 7731 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 12:33 PM
    True story. So when I first met my now ex-wife and her family back in 1998, I thought they were really homophobic. Like they would talk about the "gay agenda" and how Disney secretly pushing gay and sexual messages in their movies and all of that. I was pretty liberal then. I supported ending the ban on sodomy laws because I don't want to know what other people are doing in their bedroom. (Seems like these days certain people want everybody to know what they are doing in their bedroom.) I was okay with ending the ban on gays in the military because I had no intention of joining the military. When it came to gay marriage, I was okay with that until I went to law school and had to read the IRS vs Bob Jones University case. That's the case where BJU lost it's tax except status for having a ban on interracial dating. The holding was since SCOTUS had struck down separate but equal, congress had passed the CRA and President Truman had desegregated the military, all 3 branches of government had decided segregation was against public policy. (After they lost they just banned all dating on campus period). That case greatly concerned me because the SDA church operates a lot of colleges and universities and they all follow the traditional view on sexuality and marriage. About that time Obama had repealed don't ask don't tell. (Branch 1) Sometime later SCOTUS struck down DOMA. (Branch 2). And there was language barring discrimination against transgenders in medicine in Obamacare. (Branch 3). Back to my former in-laws. Four years ago when we were all together for my sons graduating college I overheard them talking to each other about how "terrible" it is that Trump was trying to take away transgender rights to healthcare. This was the first I heard of that and I wasn't sure what that meant. But I bet they thought it was about whether or not a transgender having a heart attack would be turned away form the hospital. I didn't argue with them, but I was thinking "I bet there's more to it than that." Sure enough, within a year I heard of a case of a "transman" suing a Catholic hospital for not doing a hysterectomy because the hospital said it didn't want to be involved in any gender affirming surgeries. I've never asked my ex or her family what they thought about that. At that same graduation event a pastor who is married to one of my exes sisters wanted to talk to me about politics because I guess he wanted to "set me straight" about being a "republican" and a "Trump supporter." I am neither but I get accused of that all of the time because in some circles if you aren't lining up to kiss the donkey's ass and/or if you don't totally despise Trump (and despite what some here think, I don't hate the man), then you must be a Trump supporter. Finally I asked the pastor "You have a daycare with your church right? How would you feel if the feds told you that you have to hire an openly gay teacher?" Boom! i had him! He hadn't thought about that. (Actually religious schools are allowed to discriminate in hiring of teachers because they are the same as hiring clergy and that falls under the same "ecclesiastical exception" that excempts churches form the CRA when dealing with clergy.) Anyhow, I have transgender relatives. If any of the were having a heart attack I'd want them to be able to go to any hospital and have treatment. But that is not what Obama was pushing or is being pushed now. /long rant
    7 replies | 271 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 12:09 PM
    What...the actual....hell? Like what? That man has to be possessed.
    7 replies | 271 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 10:36 AM
    No fed funds for health plans that don't surgically transition minors. To paraphrase Norm... "The first part of what you said makes me really happy. The second part scares the fuck outta me!"
    7 replies | 271 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    7 replies | 271 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 09:38 AM
    56 replies | 10175 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 09:13 AM
    :rolleyes: If I was not correct then they wouldn't be offering this amendment! Yes there have been CRA cases based on antisemitism such as calling someone "Jew boy" but this is an escalation. Part of proving discrimination is showing animus against the protected class. The definition that this bill brings in by proxy includes saying you don't support the state of Israel as evidence of such animus. That is the problem. Read the case I linked to above before responding so we can have an intelligent conversation.
    155 replies | 7731 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 08:36 AM
    Yes. Exactly. Full stop. This is a hypothetical question. But it's based on advances that are actually being developed. Okay. And yet there are exceptions that you mentioned where you would allow it. And that's why "the government is part of the question." There's nothing "casual" about evictionism. We know that abortion will continue to happen. Ban it in one state, it will happen in another state. Women might even travel to Canada at some point.. Harm reduction is not casual. That's a disingenuous argument.
    99 replies | 6353 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 08:26 AM
    It's never been enforced based on an expansive definition of antisemitism that includes what most sane people would NOT call antisemitism. That's the point that I and Anti Federalist and Matt Gaetz are saying. Congress would never be able to pass a law that included a definition of antisemitism that said "If you say Jews killed Jesus that's antisemitism." Based on the text from the law that I already gave you this expansive definition of antisemitism can be used to trigger a federal instigation and can be used as evidence in a discrimination lawsuit. You're just being obtuse now.
    155 replies | 7731 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 05:49 AM
    71415 replies | 1682103 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 05:48 AM
    71415 replies | 1682103 view(s)
  • CaptUSA's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 05:44 AM
    Yeah - just drastically change the rules for voting! Extend the windows. Allow mail-ins. Place unguarded drop boxes everywhere. Cover everyone's faces at the polls. Use shady machinery. Then call it the most secure election in history!! Oh, and a bridge collapsed.
    173 replies | 9289 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 09:35 PM
    My realist side says that since government is already in the business of doing that, it should at least be done right. It also says that the worst case scenario is when government starts making public policy based on some un-elected groups definition of something like the recent antisemitism bill where a private group is being allowed to rewrite the Civil Rights Act by proxy.
    6 replies | 152 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 07:56 PM
    My favorite Trump / Giuliani moment.
    6 replies | 667 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 07:13 PM
    I don't know if this had been posted before. It's a year old but I'm just now seeing it. If there is an old thread please merge.
    0 replies | 104 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 06:48 PM
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again. And that's the sneaky part. Candace Owens was right to reject that rabbi's claim that definitions for bigotry must be allowed to morph and change over time.
    155 replies | 7731 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 06:33 PM
    The power of the evictionism argument is that it makes things like arguing whether or not the abortion is really for the "life or health of the mother" or whether the mother was raped or whether the baby is viable is irrelevant. The baby isn't being killed. So who cares about the reason it's being evicted? The only counter arguments I've heard so far is "I don't like anything but natural birth" (tough titty as there is no libertarian argument against c-sections) and "Maybe there will be fewer adoptive parents than women who want to evict." To that I say "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good." The technology could be used under any current abortion legality framework as a harm reduction method. In scenarios where abortion is legal, some women might be convinced to "evict" and give up for adoption rather than going 9 months, giving birth and giving the baby up for adoption. In scenarios where abortion is illegal, it could offer women a way out of a pregnancy they don't want to continue without having to fit into some arbitrary exception. Anyway, while the technology is ready for human trials to help save premature babies, it's not expected to be available as a general womb replacement anytime soon. See: https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/09/29/1080538/everything-you-need-to-know-about-artificial-wombs/ But 50 years from now, who knows?
    99 replies | 6353 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 06:09 PM
    A) It's already legal to doom them to death so that "point" is irrelevant. ​ B )In a 100% anarchist it would even be legal to doom your toddler to death, because there would litterally be no state to punish you for killing your toddler, so again your point is irrelevant. That's why your question, as framed, makes no sense. The reason for your "doomed to death" scenario is 100% because of the social structure you've chosen to look at the technology through and not the technology itself. Back to reality. If we looked at it through the lens of a state, a mother who was in a state of pregnancy where abortion is illegal could have the option of evicting the pregnancy. Who pays? Pick one. In Alabama they are currently pushing a bill to make child support retroactive to conception. Or the mom could pay. Or the potential adoptive child could pay. The state already pays WIC which covers prenatal care so that amount could be applied to artificial womb care. It's estimated that pregnancy costs $19,000.so it's not like natural birth is somehow "free." Could birth by machine be cheaper? Possibly. You don't have to worry about liability for the machine "dying" but only for the baby. Right now there are programs where prospective adoptive parents pay for the healthcare of poor expected mothers in exchange for the right to adopt their babies once they are born. An artificial womb regimen would allow that to happen without the mother having to go through the 9 months of being pregnant. There are no downsides. At least not based on any argument you've put forward so far.
    99 replies | 6353 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 03:48 PM
    I saw this on a progressive YouTuber I follow. See: https://www.foxnews.com/media/tara-read-timeline-joe-biden-staffer-political-firestorm Even on the left, Tucker is making an impression. Summary : There is credible evidence that Joe Biden sexually assaulted Tara Reade. Her mother made a call to Larry King Live back in 1993 when the alleged assault happened. Yet Tara Reade is facing a sealed indictment against her! That's why she's in Russia. There's are criminal charges against her that she can't even know what they are. A year ago Tucker reported that Tara Reade was forced to pay the lawyer fees for the New York Times after she sued them over putting her Social Security Number on the Internet.
    0 replies | 94 view(s)
More Activity

49 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    Please stop trying to "out" Erowe1. Let it go.
  2. I know. Like I said I was going to yank your chain but realized that in the current circumstances it would be bad taste even for me.
  3. View Conversation
    At least until every county or so willingly decided to submit to Christ, which I think will happen eventually because I'm a postmillennialist.
  4. View Conversation
    I wish things were a lot more local too. I'm really not looking for a country of 300 million at all. I think that's too big. Those who didn't want to live by Christian law could live somewhere else and choose God's judgment over his blessings.
  5. View Conversation
    And while I do believe the BIble requires civil authorities to punish homosexuality, and with death as the maximum penalty, I don't think it would be legitimate even for the government to just round up people in a gay bar.

    My reasons on the bearing arms bit are much closer to yours (resistance against tyranny.)
  6. View Conversation
    To be perfectly clear, I absolutely oppose vigilantism. I know you were joking around but I just want you to be clear on where I stand.
  7. View Conversation
    Will you kindly give a tongue lashing to the racist of the board, AmericanSpartan? Thank you. I'd like to see it.
  8. Sorry, but you have failed. That verse does not contain the words "Grace is irresistible." You can interpret it that way, but that's not what the verse says. You had to admit there was "relational language" in the Bible. Yet you have stuck to your guns that there isn't a verse that says "Have a relationship with Jesus." Likewise there is no verse that says "Grace is irresistible." If you were honest you would simply admit that. But you aren't honest.
  9. View Conversation
    Acts 13:48
    And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 49
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
About jmdrake

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.)
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.)

Signature


9/11 Thermate experiments

Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
49,044
Posts Per Day
7.92
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
49
Most Recent Message
11-05-2016 03:40 PM
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 06:05 PM
Join Date
06-06-2007
Referrals
5

41 Friends

  1. affa affa is offline

    Member

    affa
  2. billjston4 billjston4 is offline

    New Member

    billjston4
  3. bobbyw24 bobbyw24 is offline

    Banned

    bobbyw24
  4. bv3 bv3 is offline

    Member

    bv3
  5. Cap Cap is offline

    Member

    Cap
  6. Captain Shays Captain Shays is offline

    Member

    Captain Shays
  7. CaptUSA CaptUSA is offline

    Member

    CaptUSA
  8. Christian Liberty
  9. cjm cjm is offline

    Member

    cjm
  10. Crowish Crowish is offline

    Member

    Crowish
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 41
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
View jmdrake's Blog

Recent Entries

How Ron Paul could smack down Iran critics

by jmdrake on 05-15-2013 at 08:34 AM
Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
Ron needs to quit playing defense and go on offense. It's not enough to say "the Soviet Union was worse than Iran." If he could point out the following documented facts it would shut the naysayer up for good or at least make them back-peddle.

1) In 2003 Iran was the only Muslim country to help us fight and remove the Taliban from power.

See: Jane's Defense Weekly India joins anti-Taliban coalition. "India is believed to have joined Russia, the USA

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

The new bill of rights.

by jmdrake on 05-15-2013 at 08:33 AM
Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
This parody is an attempt to "rewrite" the bill of rights in keeping with the current application by our criminal government. Original text will be in italics followed by a list of possible options.


Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Federal Reserve advised gold standard for Russia

by jmdrake on 05-15-2013 at 08:32 AM
Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
I ran across this information by accident (providence?) while looking for something else. The first link is an essay from Jude Wanniski who went with fed governor Wayne Angell to Moscow right after the collapse of the soviet union. Note that Angell advocated the new Russia to go to a gold backed currency! The second link is an online Google book from the Mises institute that talks about the same essay. I've excerpted the essay bellow. (It's too long to post directly). It's interesting to note

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Washington Post 2002 : The U.S. pushed jihad on Afghan schoolchildren.

by jmdrake on 09-13-2011 at 01:15 PM
Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
From U.S., the ABC's of Jihad
Violent Soviet-Era Textbooks Complicate Afghan Education Efforts


By Joe Stephens and David B. Ottaway
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, March 23, 2002; Page A01

In the twilight of the Cold War, the United States spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings, part of covert attempts to spur resistance to the Soviet occupation.

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized
Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast

05-16-2024


05-14-2024


05-09-2024


05-03-2024


05-02-2024


05-01-2024


04-22-2024


04-16-2024


12-12-2023


08-29-2023


08-06-2023


08-03-2023


08-01-2023


07-21-2023


07-17-2023


07-16-2023



Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast

11-17-2017


Page 1 of 426 1231151101 ... LastLast

05-16-2024


05-15-2024



Page 1 of 426 1231151101 ... LastLast