Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 54

Thread: Nick Freitas 2018 | Liberty Rising in Virginia

  1. #1

    Default Nick Freitas 2018 | Liberty Rising in Virginia

    RVO˩UTION



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    And tomorrow is the Primary...
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  4. #3

    Default

    He probably lost to Stewart by a very small amount.

    Bright is looking like he may not even make the runoff, by a small amount too if that happens.

    This is all people falling for Trump's bull$#@!, that's the difference maker.
    Authoritarianism and neoconservatism cannot be made great again.
    Trump was an enemy of Ron Paul, before he was an enemy of Rand Paul, before he was an enemy of the Freedom Caucus.
    One thing that he has remained consistent in is his hate of liberty and those who promote it.

  5. #4

    Default

    Sadly, Nick didn't make it. 100% in and 5,000 votes between Stewart and Freitas.

    https://www.politico.com/election-re...2018/virginia/

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffro97 View Post
    Sadly, Nick didn't make it. 100% in and 5,000 votes between Stewart and Freitas.

    https://www.politico.com/election-re...2018/virginia/
    Well I guess the silver lining is he didn't have much of a chance anyway. Virginia is generally seen as a safe Democratic seat. Maybe he can run for something else in 2020 that he can actually win now that he's generally built a positive profile.
    Authoritarianism and neoconservatism cannot be made great again.
    Trump was an enemy of Ron Paul, before he was an enemy of Rand Paul, before he was an enemy of the Freedom Caucus.
    One thing that he has remained consistent in is his hate of liberty and those who promote it.

  7. #6

    Default

    Anti-nationalist "liberty" people have no serious electoral prospects. They are too small and isolated a group, without any political allies with which to form a coalition. Guaranteed failure.

    There is something sociopathic about this new strain of alleged libertarians that discomforts me greatly. "Libertarians" who are intentionally unresponsive to the crying needs of the people in favor of too-rigid ideology, yet bid to represent them - there is a big mismatch there, morally and intellectually this is not consistent behavior.

    The people know, for example, that immigration has had catastrophic outcomes for citizens. It is not a matter in dispute for serious people. It does not matter how many figures, charts, and arguments one may have to the contrary; the known reality is baked in from decades of firsthand experience.

    Likewise for our trade deals. The known reality is that we're not getting the benefits of free trade. Yet the wailing about (counter-)tariffs assumes and pretends that they are violating some existing state of free trade, a state of affairs that is completely insulting to those who have watched these deals unfold over time and seen the destruction wrought by them.

    Represent, or get the hell out of the way. That's the message of this election.
    Oligarchy delenda est

    “If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams

  8. #7

    Default

    Freitas deserved to lose when he went into the gutter. You expect those type of vile attacks from the left. It sounded like the SPLC was running his campaign at one point.
    “Force the normies into taking sides. At the moment they are just like "meh, I am minding my own business" retreating culturally into their private bubbles and "safe-spaces" since they don't understand what is going on. When the actual "us vs them" starts, they will be forced to fight or they'll die.” - Anonymous Poster

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Anti-nationalist "liberty" people have no serious electoral prospects. They are too small and isolated a group, without any political allies with which to form a coalition. Guaranteed failure.

    There is something sociopathic about this new strain of alleged libertarians that discomforts me greatly. "Libertarians" who are intentionally unresponsive to the crying needs of the people in favor of too-rigid ideology, yet bid to represent them - there is a big mismatch there, morally and intellectually this is not consistent behavior.

    The people know, for example, that immigration has had catastrophic outcomes for citizens. It is not a matter in dispute for serious people. It does not matter how many figures, charts, and arguments one may have to the contrary; the known reality is baked in from decades of firsthand experience.

    Likewise for our trade deals. The known reality is that we're not getting the benefits of free trade. Yet the wailing about (counter-)tariffs assumes and pretends that they are violating some existing state of free trade, a state of affairs that is completely insulting to those who have watched these deals unfold over time and seen the destruction wrought by them.

    Represent, or get the hell out of the way. That's the message of this election.
    Liberaltarians are guilty of the same dissociation from reality as their statist brethren, they pretend that all people are good and the same and that groups don't exist, even if groups could be eliminated (they can't, they are part of human nature) they exist right now and must be dealt with until they don't exist. (never)
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Liberaltarians are guilty of the same dissociation from reality as their statist brethren, they pretend that all people are good and the same and that groups don't exist, even if groups could be eliminated (they can't, they are part of human nature) they exist right now and must be dealt with until they don't exist. (never)
    They are still playing checkers. Dumb $#@!ers. It doesn't matter who started the war. It's here.
    Last edited by AuH20; 06-18-2018 at 07:55 PM.
    “Force the normies into taking sides. At the moment they are just like "meh, I am minding my own business" retreating culturally into their private bubbles and "safe-spaces" since they don't understand what is going on. When the actual "us vs them" starts, they will be forced to fight or they'll die.” - Anonymous Poster

  12. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    They are still playing checkers. Dumb $#@!ers. It doesn't matter who started the war. It's here.
    Their worst problem is that they think they can change the whole world all at once, those who don't think that think that people will automatically be converted to their philosophy just by coming in contact with it, those who realize that neither one is possible would rather let the whole world go to the devil than enforce any rules or take control of any area since they consider those to be cardinal sins.

    It doesn't matter if they are sincere useful idiots or pied pipers, both drive ordinary people away from small government and into the arms of one side or the other of the big government spectrum.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  13. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Their worst problem is that they think they can change the whole world all at once, those who don't think that think that people will automatically be converted to their philosophy just by coming in contact with it, those who realize that neither one is possible would rather let the whole world go to the devil than enforce any rules or take control of any area since they consider those to be cardinal sins.

    It doesn't matter if they are sincere useful idiots or pied pipers, both drive ordinary people away from small government and into the arms of one side or the other of the big government spectrum.
    Imagine a relatively watertight room filling up with water. Libertarians want to claw through the concrete walls with their bare fingernails, rather than to attempt shut off the accessible valve.
    Last edited by AuH20; 06-18-2018 at 08:18 PM.
    “Force the normies into taking sides. At the moment they are just like "meh, I am minding my own business" retreating culturally into their private bubbles and "safe-spaces" since they don't understand what is going on. When the actual "us vs them" starts, they will be forced to fight or they'll die.” - Anonymous Poster

  14. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    Freitas deserved to lose when he went into the gutter. You expect those type of vile attacks from the left. It sounded like the SPLC was running his campaign at one point.
    What did he do?
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  15. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    What did he do?
    He basically labeled Stewart a Nazi. Really low blows.
    “Force the normies into taking sides. At the moment they are just like "meh, I am minding my own business" retreating culturally into their private bubbles and "safe-spaces" since they don't understand what is going on. When the actual "us vs them" starts, they will be forced to fight or they'll die.” - Anonymous Poster

  16. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Their worst problem is that they think they can change the whole world all at once, those who don't think that think that people will automatically be converted to their philosophy just by coming in contact with it, those who realize that neither one is possible would rather let the whole world go to the devil than enforce any rules or take control of any area since they consider those to be cardinal sins.

    It doesn't matter if they are sincere useful idiots or pied pipers, both drive ordinary people away from small government and into the arms of one side or the other of the big government spectrum.
    Anti-nationalist liberaltarianism is fundamentally based on the false premise that all people given liberty, will respect the liberty of others - or at least enough will to keep the situation from devolving into all-out liberty-destroying chaos.

    But that's not true. Understanding liberty requires a cultural context most of the world doesn't have, and the cultures of much of the world's population forbids the respect of liberty in others. These cultures are not compatible with the liberty of free peoples. Mixing them in doesn't extend the reach of liberty - it removes it from the people who are left unprotected by the guardians set up to ensure their security.
    Oligarchy delenda est

    “If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams

  17. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Their worst problem is that they think they can change the whole world all at once, those who don't think that think that people will automatically be converted to their philosophy just by coming in contact with it, those who realize that neither one is possible would rather let the whole world go to the devil than enforce any rules or take control of any area since they consider those to be cardinal sins.

    It doesn't matter if they are sincere useful idiots or pied pipers, both drive ordinary people away from small government and into the arms of one side or the other of the big government spectrum.
    Ever since the first time I watched the For Liberty documentary, I guess I've thought that people will join the movement because it just makes sense- the whole thing, the ideology, the grassroots, the values. And in my experience, people my age have been receptive, or at least tolerant and understanding. People older than me tend to laugh it off (don't steal- funny, right?) or shut me off. Obviously most people are not going to be converted on contact, but it's really all I know how to do. What am I doing wrong/missing and what is the answer?
    If you find this to be a worthwhile message, spread it throughout the land.
    Ron Paul

  18. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Anti-nationalist "liberty" people have no serious electoral prospects. They are too small and isolated a group, without any political allies with which to form a coalition. Guaranteed failure.
    Like Rand, Ron, Massie, Justin, and the hundreds around the country in lower offices


    Now if they make anti-nationalism their entire platform during the election, then yeah, they are probably going to lose. But that is why the smart ones don't make that their central focus.



    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    There is something sociopathic about this new strain of alleged libertarians that discomforts me greatly. "Libertarians" who are intentionally unresponsive to the crying needs of the people in favor of too-rigid ideology, yet bid to represent them - there is a big mismatch there, morally and intellectually this is not consistent behavior.
    No, not at all. It isn't the government's job to respond to "the crying needs of the people" but the trick is politically to still care without making it into policy.





    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Likewise for our trade deals. The known reality is that we're not getting the benefits of free trade. Yet the wailing about (counter-)tariffs assumes and pretends that they are violating some existing state of free trade, a state of affairs that is completely insulting to those who have watched these deals unfold over time and seen the destruction wrought by them.
    And there is the problem. Free trade doesn't require "deals" or treaties that are 30,000 pages long. Free trade is the unrestricted ability for people to do commerce with whomever they like, so long as they aren't harming others. And tariffs = taxation which is always bad and should always be opposed.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17

    Default

    Matt, a protection of the states from foreign invasion is written in black and white as a fundamental duty of this government.

    Ron voted for border security measures himself, as a Congressman. I'm pretty sure if I checked the others all but perhaps Amash would be similarly on the record as voting in support of such measures. On the record, these are, or were while in office, nationalist libertarians.

    This is a function so fundamental that if you stripped government all the way down to doing only one single thing, this would be that one thing.

    Anyone who can't deal with enough government to establish sovereignty is de facto an anarcho-communist at this point. A real an-cap would take advantage of any of the vast, all but completely lawless places on this planet to do their thing, so I ain't buying the virtue signal from any of them.

    It is grossly irresponsible to expose Americans to the real risks and extreme costs that come from large scale third world immigration. One can't make a "oh you really can't keep government small, minarchists!" argument and then fight tooth and nail all the things needed to make that happen, and be credible.

    Everybody thinks they know it all but when we look at examples of these high-minded theories playing out in real life, it turns out that there are always way more variables than comfortable philosophers predicted.
    Oligarchy delenda est

    “If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams

  21. #18

    Default

    I am one of those potential 5,000 votes, and all anyone is doing here is trying to piss me off and make me continue not to participate.
    I, and people like me, are the demographic that will make the difference in these elections. We are either a bigger factor than you realize, or we're a bigger factor than you want to admit. At some point, if winning is your goal - and let's face it, winning is the only thing you've ever cared about - you need to recognize that my voting block is kind of holding the keys here, so it's well past time to STFU with your statist nonsense and listen.

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Anti-nationalist liberaltarianism is fundamentally based on the false premise that all people given liberty, will respect the liberty of others - or at least enough will to keep the situation from devolving into all-out liberty-destroying chaos.
    Or, maybe what we've been saying ever since Rand left the fold is true. Maybe the problem we've been screaming for 6 years is that we HAD someone we would have voted for (Ron), who was willing to take a second away from pushing things we didn't agree with (like unconstitutional and fascist immigration policy) to TEACH people why they should support the things we DO agree with (like almost everything else he said).

    Maybe we're right when we tell you, ad nauseum, that the reason nobody supports liberty is because nobody is running on it. Don't give me that Rand bull$#@! - the man spent 17 hours bleating about how if we're going to extrajudicially murder citizens on US soil we need to fill out some paperwork, and this is what you're calling a liberty-loving candidate.

    When we get another candidate who says "cut five cabinet level departments immediately" we'll come out of hiding and canvas and call and do all of that stuff. Until then, you're always going to be 5000 votes short.

    But that's not true. Understanding liberty requires a cultural context most of the world doesn't have, and the cultures of much of the world's population forbids the respect of liberty in others. These cultures are not compatible with the liberty of free peoples. Mixing them in doesn't extend the reach of liberty - it removes it from the people who are left unprotected by the guardians set up to ensure their security.
    I voted for Ron, so I'm willing to bend on the immigration thing in the short term, provided it's kept free of the cultural superiority bull$#@! like in this quote. Leaving aside that I already pointed out you're not making any attempt to educate anyone and that's the root of the problem, let's move on to the point that only a remnant of Americans have any concept of liberty to begin with. Are you seriously claiming that Americans are culturally more free? Do you seriously not know that America hasn't been in the top 5 of any meaningful measure of freedom in over a decade?

    There might be little to work with in an immigrant, but there's objectively more there to work with in a man who actively sought to escape his situation, than there is in an inner city baby momma who flunked out of the 9th grade, or the corn fed school bully in a blue uniform who is groping strangers at the airport.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  22. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Matt, a protection of the states from foreign invasion is written in black and white as a fundamental duty of this government.
    And when you can produce evidence of a foreign invasion, you won't get any argument here.
    Invasion has three definitions:

    • an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, especially by an army.
    • the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
    • entrance as if to take possession or overrun

    There is no army, so it doesn't fit definition 1.
    You cannot show a concerted effort to overrun, so it doesn't fit definition 3.
    All you have is definition 2 - which means you consider these people a disease.
    That's not at all surprising since it fits with all the other anti-immigration rhetoric: They don't have rights, they aren't citizens, they aren't people.

    Just cut the $#@!ing foreplay and call for their extermination. It's what you really want. It gets rid of the ones that are here, and if that won't prove to be an effective deterrent to future immigration, nothing will.

    Anyone who can't deal with enough government to establish sovereignty is de facto an anarcho-communist at this point. A real an-cap would take advantage of any of the vast, all but completely lawless places on this planet to do their thing, so I ain't buying the virtue signal from any of them.
    Right, here we have the classic "if you don't like it you can leave" argument, but explicitly calling for us to move to Antarctica. Real solution-minded of you.

    I do also love the implication that if we're not in favor of your particular brand of fascist government, we must be in favor of a form of government that demonstrably can't exist, because it presumes both total state control and also no state.
    You guys do a pretty good job making me think I've gone insane, you know. I mean, one hallmark of insanity is recognizing something as real which isn't really... but the problem you have is that other people show up here periodically and agree with my assessment that you're talking nonsense, so either they got into the same blotter sheet as I did, or we're right, and you're not making any sense.

    It is grossly irresponsible to expose Americans to the real risks and extreme costs that come from large scale third world immigration.
    I know, I mean, I got my entire kitchen remodeled for under $5000, we can't have that happening!

    One can't make a "oh you really can't keep government small, minarchists!" argument and then fight tooth and nail all the things needed to make that happen, and be credible.
    You can't make a "we have to kick 20 million people out and secure thousands of miles of open border" argument and not explode the budget light years beyond the gigantic, uncontrollable problem we have right now.
    You can't keep the government small because you are actively shilling for making it exponentially larger.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  23. #20

    Default

    Before we switch to Islamic immigration in Europe, I'd like to point out that large-scale third-world immigration has been happening in this country for at least 40 years, so whatever risks come with that, we're already exposed.

    I'm perfectly willing to discuss Islam as a problem, and I'm willing to go farther than any of you anti-immigration types in decrying it, so if you want to have that discussion, let's. But don't wrap an anti-Islam position in an anti-immigration blanket.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  24. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    And when you can produce evidence of a foreign invasion, you won't get any argument here.
    Invasion has three definitions:

    • an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, especially by an army.
    • the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
    • entrance as if to take possession or overrun

    There is no army, so it doesn't fit definition 1.
    You cannot show a concerted effort to overrun, so it doesn't fit definition 3.
    All you have is definition 2 - which means you consider these people a disease.
    That's not at all surprising since it fits with all the other anti-immigration rhetoric: They don't have rights, they aren't citizens, they aren't people.

    Just cut the $#@!ing foreplay and call for their extermination. It's what you really want. It gets rid of the ones that are here, and if that won't prove to be an effective deterrent to future immigration, nothing will.


    Right, here we have the classic "if you don't like it you can leave" argument, but explicitly calling for us to move to Antarctica. Real solution-minded of you.

    I do also love the implication that if we're not in favor of your particular brand of fascist government, we must be in favor of a form of government that demonstrably can't exist, because it presumes both total state control and also no state.
    You guys do a pretty good job making me think I've gone insane, you know. I mean, one hallmark of insanity is recognizing something as real which isn't really... but the problem you have is that other people show up here periodically and agree with my assessment that you're talking nonsense, so either they got into the same blotter sheet as I did, or we're right, and you're not making any sense.


    I know, I mean, I got my entire kitchen remodeled for under $5000, we can't have that happening!


    You can't make a "we have to kick 20 million people out and secure thousands of miles of open border" argument and not explode the budget light years beyond the gigantic, uncontrollable problem we have right now.
    You can't keep the government small because you are actively shilling for making it exponentially larger.
    Invasion does not require a formal army. If they meant that they would have said so. They didn't, because they were quite aware of Indian attacks on the frontier.

    The Constitution is also quite explicit about the duty of the feds to regulate immigration. No way to do that without enforcement against unregulated entry. We regulate to prevent the entry of disease, dependents, criminals, and enemies. Basic sovereignty 101 and if you aren't in favor of that you are a time wasting bull$#@! artist.

    The rest of your arguments are dishonest nonsense and don't deserve to be responded to. Genuine truth seeking questions only please, to that alone I will engage.
    Last edited by thoughtomator; 06-20-2018 at 10:50 AM.
    Oligarchy delenda est

    “If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams

  25. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    He basically labeled Stewart a Nazi. Really low blows.
    Liberty people eat their own worse than any other group.

  26. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by not.your.average.joe View Post
    Ever since the first time I watched the For Liberty documentary, I guess I've thought that people will join the movement because it just makes sense- the whole thing, the ideology, the grassroots, the values. And in my experience, people my age have been receptive, or at least tolerant and understanding. People older than me tend to laugh it off (don't steal- funny, right?) or shut me off. Obviously most people are not going to be converted on contact, but it's really all I know how to do. What am I doing wrong/missing and what is the answer?
    If you are in favor of controlled immigration then you aren't missing anything, if you think anyone who wants to should be able to come here in unlimited numbers and gain citizenship and the right to vote then you are flying in the face of reality, unlimited immigrants will not assimilate into libertarian political philosophy before they turn the country communist, some percentage of people never will listen and it takes time to convert the rest.

    The point is supposed to be to create and maintain a liberty nation and you can't do that if you are constantly overwhelmed with people whose native culture is totally ignorant about liberty.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  27. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    And there is the problem. Free trade doesn't require "deals" or treaties that are 30,000 pages long. Free trade is the unrestricted ability for people to do commerce with whomever they like, so long as they aren't harming others. And tariffs = taxation which is always bad and should always be opposed.
    You only control one side of the trade, if the other side tries to take advantage of your low tariffs and puts up high tariffs you need to get an agreement for them to not do so, the only way to get that agreement is to put up defensive tariffs and then negotiate for both sides to drop their tariffs.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    And when you can produce evidence of a foreign invasion, you won't get any argument here.
    Invasion has three definitions:

    • an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, especially by an army.
    • the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
    • entrance as if to take possession or overrun

    There is no army, so it doesn't fit definition 1.
    It does fit definition 1, 1 says "especially by an army" especially doesn't it has to be an army, it just means that if it is an army then it fits even more.

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    You cannot show a concerted effort to overrun, so it doesn't fit definition 3.
    We most certainly can, the Demoncrats have stated their intention to change the demographics to create a permanent majority for them and the Mexicans have stated their intention to take the southwest back for Mexico.

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    All you have is definition 2 - which means you consider these people a disease.
    That's not at all surprising since it fits with all the other anti-immigration rhetoric: They don't have rights, they aren't citizens, they aren't people.

    Just cut the $#@!ing foreplay and call for their extermination. It's what you really want. It gets rid of the ones that are here, and if that won't prove to be an effective deterrent to future immigration, nothing will.
    They are not the disease anymore than a TB patient is TB, but just like a TB patient they carry a disease, that disease of communism is far more dangerous and incurable than TB.
    We don't call for their extermination and we don't need to, they can revel in their communism for all we care as long as they stay in their country and don't come here.




    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    You can't make a "we have to kick 20 million people out and secure thousands of miles of open border" argument and not explode the budget light years beyond the gigantic, uncontrollable problem we have right now.
    You can't keep the government small because you are actively shilling for making it exponentially larger.
    That is nonsense, they will self deport if you start to have any decent level of enforcement and securing the border is easy if we bring the troops home and have them patrol it.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  30. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Matt, a protection of the states from foreign invasion is written in black and white as a fundamental duty of this government.

    Ron voted for border security measures himself, as a Congressman. I'm pretty sure if I checked the others all but perhaps Amash would be similarly on the record as voting in support of such measures. On the record, these are, or were while in office, nationalist libertarians.
    You are confused. Having secure borders, whether open or not, does not equate to the same thing as "nationalism"





    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    It is grossly irresponsible to expose Americans to the real risks and extreme costs that come from large scale third world immigration.
    Maybe, maybe not. The jury is out on that. In some ways open borders are very beneficial, and in other ways they could be potentially damaging. There are two sides to that issue which is not settled.

    I personally lean more towards tight immigration restrictions, but I also realize that the government's job isn't to set the price and supply curves for labor.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  31. #27

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    You only control one side of the trade, if the other side tries to take advantage of your low tariffs and puts up high tariffs you need to get an agreement for them to not do so, the only way to get that agreement is to put up defensive tariffs and then negotiate for both sides to drop their tariffs.
    Or how about "in a free society none of this is the government's job"
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  32. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Or how about "in a free society none of this is the government's job"
    Protecting the citizens against foreign predation is government's job.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  33. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    You are confused. Having secure borders, whether open or not, does not equate to the same thing as "nationalism"





    Maybe, maybe not. The jury is out on that. In some ways open borders are very beneficial, and in other ways they could be potentially damaging. There are two sides to that issue which is not settled.

    I personally lean more towards tight immigration restrictions, but I also realize that the government's job isn't to set the price and supply curves for labor.
    If you cannot find it in your brain or heart to prefer your countrymen over any arbitrary foreign national who shows up, it's time to leave the United States. What is to come will not be comfortable for you or anyone else who can't bring yourself to align with the principles enumerated in the Declaration of Independence.
    Oligarchy delenda est

    “If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams

  34. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Protecting the citizens against foreign predation is government's job.
    Only militarily. The government has no authority to have anything to do with the economy really, other than coining money and determining weights and measures.


    Besides there are few things the government can do that are more anti-freedom than tell me who I can and cannot do business with, or raising my taxes, or penalizing me for doing business with certain people.
    Last edited by Matt Collins; 06-21-2018 at 09:21 AM.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Nick Freitas speaks...
    By osan in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-07-2018, 01:06 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-07-2018, 01:05 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-06-2018, 11:44 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-03-2018, 11:32 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-11-2011, 06:36 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •