Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: Liberty folks are "Like Afrikaners in apartheid South Africa..."

  1. #1

    Exclamation Liberty folks are "Like Afrikaners in apartheid South Africa..."

    Progressives sit stymied as ‘regressives’ party likes it’s 1959

    https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/...219737260.html

    BY LEONARD PITTS JR.

    October 09, 2018 04:09 PM

    Here’s what gets me about progressives.

    They never seem to realize that they are the majority. Yet on issue after issue, the polling consistently shows that they are.

    Abortion? Sixty-four percent of Americans support Roe v. Wade.

    Guns? Sixty-seven percent want stricter laws.

    Taxes? Sixty-one percent say the rich need to pay more.

    Healthcare? Fifty-six percent want government to ensure coverage to all Americans.

    But it’s not just opinion polls. It’s also presidential polls. Republicans have won the popular vote only once since 1992.

    So liberals could have the world they say they want — with sensible gun laws, immigration reform, universal healthcare, reproductive rights, healing of the planet — if they only had the wit, the will and the courage of their convictions.

    (Secede, please. - AF)

    Instead, we have a world of weekly mass shootings, children in cages, the Affordable Care Act barely escaping repeal, Roe v. Wade endangered and a dire new United Nations report forecasting planetary catastrophe. Also: Brett Kavanaugh was just confirmed to the Supreme Court.

    He is a man credibly accused of attempted rape and blackout drunkenness, a man who, under pressure, demonstrates the temperamental restraint of a sugar-addled toddler two hours past nap time. Yet he sits now on the highest court in the land.

    ( Brian Bates was also "credibly accused" of rape. - AF )

    That didn’t just happen. Rather, it was the capstone of a long-term scheme to reshape the judiciary as a right-wing rubber stamp. Maybe you remember how Republicans stole a seat on the high court by refusing to give a hearing to President Obama’s nominee. Now, with the mostly party-line vote that shoved Kavanaugh through, the court suddenly seems less a disinterested referee of democracy than a partisan tool, its legitimacy sacrificed on an altar of political expedience.

    But what’s going on here is bigger, even, than the court. Consider the Census Bureau projection that, within about 25 years, America will no longer be a majority white nation, but rather, a nation in which no racial group is numerically superior. Consider the visceral terror of many in the white majority as “Others” — blacks, Muslims, LGBTQ, Hispanics — rise and demand voices. Consider the gutting of the Voting Rights Act, the corresponding rise of voter suppression, the use of gerrymandering to neuter black ballots, mass incarceration and rising hostility toward immigrants from the south.

    Consider all those factors and the true shape of things becomes clear. Like Afrikaners in apartheid South Africa, conservatives seek to enshrine minority rule, to ensure that, even as they decline as a percentage of the population, the forces of white patriarchy, of racial, religious and cultural homogeneity maintain their stranglehold on power.

    And with apologies to Malcolm X, they are willing to do so by any means necessary. The question is: What are the rest of us willing to do in response?

    Are we willing to play the long game as conservatives have?

    Are we willing to play with the ruthlessness and calculation they’ve shown?

    Are we willing to organize, to meet at the intersection of our manifold causes, concerns and lives?

    November 6 will give us the beginnings of an answer. Until then, one can only hope.

    Progressives are the larger of the two main ideologies in American politics. Yet they were just forced to watch in impotence as conservatives reshaped the top court by an act of sheer political thuggery. The lesson should be clear. It’s great to have size on your side.

    But it’s how you use it that counts.
    Last edited by Anti Federalist; 10-10-2018 at 03:07 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Fake polls and voter fraud do not a majority make.

    If they don't like us so much they need to secede but instead they will soon openly embrace "KILL THE BOER REPUBLICAN".
    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

  4. #3
    Getting real tired of your $#@! liberals and your straw men arguments.
    "Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration is minding my own business."

    Calvin Coolidge

  5. #4
    Temporary Ban


    Blog Entries
    110
    Posts
    5,109
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Want to build a wall around the nation and create a massive police state with a large enough domestic army to beat, rob, and kill millions of innocent people for the "crime" of peacefully engaging in the free exchange of goods and services without first seeking the permission of the almighty centralized state is not the position of "liberty folks."


    All you see here are two forms of socialists fighting over whose vision gets implemented- the Marxists or the Fascists. Those who really support human liberty and universal rights recognize you for what you are, the enemies of freedom.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    Want to build a wall around the nation and create a massive police state with a large enough domestic army to beat, rob, and kill millions of innocent people for the "crime" of peacefully engaging in the free exchange of goods and services without first seeking the permission of the almighty centralized state is not the position of "liberty folks."


    All you see here are two forms of socialists fighting over whose vision gets implemented- the Marxists or the Fascists. Those who really support human liberty and universal rights recognize you for what you are, the enemies of freedom.
    Please explain how allowing in millions of people who want to kill us and create a communist country is supporting liberty.

    Your lies are getting old and worn out.
    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

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    Want to build a wall around the nation and create a massive police state with a large enough domestic army to beat, rob, and kill millions of innocent people for the "crime" of peacefully engaging in the free exchange of goods and services without first seeking the permission of the almighty centralized state is not the position of "liberty folks."


    All you see here are two forms of socialists fighting over whose vision gets implemented- the Marxists or the Fascists. Those who really support human liberty and universal rights recognize you for what you are, the enemies of freedom.
    Basically what you are saying is that you are completely unable to grapple with the real world trade-offs involved in securing liberty, so you have to create extreme strawman scenarios to justify obstinance.

    What you will need to seek is not the permission of a centralized government per se, but the permission of your countrymen who seek to strike a rational balance between the conflicting imperatives of maximizing personal liberty and maintaining the environment of law and order that is an absolute non-negotiable requirement for the Western concept of liberty to exist.

    If you want anarchist "liberty", go ahead and cross the border now before the walll goes up. Northern Mexico should be a dream locale for the person who wants to be completely unfettered by law.
    Last edited by thoughtomator; 10-10-2018 at 04:43 PM.

  8. #7
    This article doesn't make any sense. It especially doesn't make sense when you add the word 'liberty' to it in your title for this thread, which implies something which was never written in the original document. In fact, the word 'liberty' never appears in it. You're twisting the meaning to something that neither agrees with the article nor reality.
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Trump hasn't even been in 6 months, you can't call him a boondoggle President unless he has overseen a military boondoggle for at least a year or two.


  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Basically what you are saying is that you are completely unable to grapple with the real world trade-offs involved in securing liberty, so you have to create extreme strawman scenarios to justify obstinance.
    He is saying that "real" liberty includes the right to tyrannize others and that if you deny others the right to tyrannize you that makes you the tyrant.
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    This article doesn't make any sense. It especially doesn't make sense when you add the word 'liberty' to it in your title for this thread, which implies something which was never written in the original document. In fact, the word 'liberty' never appears in it. You're twisting the meaning to something that neither agrees with the article nor reality.
    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

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    He is saying that "real" liberty includes the right to tyrannize others and that if you deny others the right to tyrannize you that makes you the tyrant.
    He's falling into the anarchist "liberty of the savage state" trap that too many here have become enamored with.

    Man's rights are natural for sure, but the maintenance of them is not natural - the rule of law and the defense of sovereignty are required to enforce those rights.

    In an anarchist world, you have the right to free speech as far as the other guy is not willing to kill you for what you say. As we see with TDS/SJW types, they're willing to do anything to shut other people up including killing them. In anarchist world the Communists win and impose their despotism, which is why the only places on earth that can be said to be in some state of anarchy are those too sparsely settled for mass phenomenon to occur, or those that are active combat zones.

    If it were a workable idea, sometime over the centuries some serious person would have established it and made it work - anarchism is not a new idea, it's arguably the oldest idea in politics - the starting point. Anarchists want to go back to zero on the development of human relations, entirely clueless of the full implication of the suggestion, or sociopathic enough that the orgy of violence that would surely ensue is of no concern.

    The reality is that concentrated humans behave differently from dispersed humans. Humans cognitively network and new, mass behaviors emerge which in an anarchist context will always lead to war. It is the methods of peacefully resolving human conflict which are the subject of politics, the ultimate reason why we engage in political behavior at all, and anarchism offers no other solution than a mass kill-off.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    This article doesn't make any sense. It especially doesn't make sense when you add the word 'liberty' to it in your title for this thread, which implies something which was never written in the original document. In fact, the word 'liberty' never appears in it. You're twisting the meaning to something that neither agrees with the article nor reality.
    The article said that people who want to protect the second amendment and who are against universal healthcare, pro-life and want to keep out people from third world countries who are attracted here by our welfare state are in the minority. Those are fairly liberty oriented people..

    You seem to just want enough "liberty" to ensure its destruction.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  14. #12
    Liberals only make up a 1/4 of the country, but their wicked media and peer controlled social system bullies the undecideds with an unrelenting wave of propaganda. Ultimately, it's all about dictating one's will over the undecided or sheep. We must prevail in dominating the fence sitters.
    Last edited by AuH20; 10-10-2018 at 05:28 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

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    He's falling into the anarchist "liberty of the savage state" trap that too many here have become enamored with.

    Man's rights are natural for sure, but the maintenance of them is not natural - the rule of law and the defense of sovereignty are required to enforce those rights.

    In an anarchist world, you have the right to free speech as far as the other guy is not willing to kill you for what you say. As we see with TDS/SJW types, they're willing to do anything to shut other people up including killing them. In anarchist world the Communists win and impose their despotism, which is why the only places on earth that can be said to be in some state of anarchy are those too sparsely settled for mass phenomenon to occur, or those that are active combat zones.

    If it were a workable idea, sometime over the centuries some serious person would have established it and made it work - anarchism is not a new idea, it's arguably the oldest idea in politics - the starting point. Anarchists want to go back to zero on the development of human relations, entirely clueless of the full implication of the suggestion, or sociopathic enough that the orgy of violence that would surely ensue is of no concern.

    The reality is that concentrated humans behave differently from dispersed humans. Humans cognitively network and new, mass behaviors emerge which in an anarchist context will always lead to war. It is the methods of peacefully resolving human conflict which are the subject of politics, the ultimate reason why we engage in political behavior at all, and anarchism offers no other solution than a mass kill-off.
    Yes, these anarchist societies ought not continue to lead the charge for the war, poverty, and death the world has. That would just be silly.

    Human behavior and all.

    So riddle me this: since human behavior predisposes violent mobs of tyrants will ultimately control a given geographical area, what makes the people who seek public office a different cast/e than those people who would inhabit those otherwise free areas?

    It's almost like you acknowledge that people are inherently flawed yet you wish to give them carte blanche authority to create laws (insofar as the Constitution is and ahs been powerless to defend against their usurpations).

    Rather mild hot sauce.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    you wish to give them carte blanche authority to create laws
    You will have more success in clearing your confusion once you dispense with the strawmen and see that no valid non-strawman argument against the nature of liberty as I have described it exists.

  17. #15
    Temporary Ban


    Blog Entries
    110
    Posts
    5,109
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Basically what you are saying is that you are completely unable to grapple with the real world trade-offs involved in securing liberty, so you have to create extreme strawman scenarios to justify obstinance.

    What you will need to seek is not the permission of a centralized government per se, but the permission of your countrymen who seek to strike a rational balance between the conflicting imperatives of maximizing personal liberty and maintaining the environment of law and order that is an absolute non-negotiable requirement for the Western concept of liberty to exist.

    If you want anarchist "liberty", go ahead and cross the border now before the walll goes up. Northern Mexico should be a dream locale for the person who wants to be completely unfettered by law.
    Talk about a silly response.

    You can immediately know that anyone talking about trading liberty for security is absolutely just another thief looking to rob you for you and tell you it is for your own good.

    There is no trade off for security when you choose liberty. Maximum liberty also allows for you to have maximum security and complete order. Thinking that surrendering your body, property, and mind to constant brainwashing, theft, and violation somehow makes you safe isn't just stupid, it is delusional. Reducing yourself to servility to the government makes you weak, not strong, exposes you to its constant harassment, danger, and violence; it does not make you safe. It creates disorder on a mass scale as it submits everything to the whims of those in power.

    Nor do I need to ask permission from you or the warlords you support to engage in peaceful trade with any other person, nor do they need to ask it from you. And if you insist on forcing me to do so or you will beat, cage, or kill me or another then you know nothing of the law. The only Law is Natural Law, the natural right of human beings to engage in peaceful relationships and interact as long as they do not violate the rights of others. This is the essence of what Life, Liberty, Property, and Pursuit of Happiness mean. What you propose is none of these things and it is not Law. It is Chaos, the chaos of those in power to force their will on the masses through overwhelming violence. And their edicts change with their whims, leading to social, political, and economic chaos.

    There is nothing anarchist in this understanding. That you would suggest it only demonstrates you know little about that which you profess to care about- liberty and order. This is basic classical liberal thinking. It is Locke, Jefferson, and Bastiat boiled down to their most concentrated message. That you do not recognize it speaks more to the mental conditioning you were subjected to as a child that has taught you obedience, subservience, and the surrender of your liberty for the idol of Security. Do yourself a favor and start educating yourself in the power of liberty. Bastiat's "The Law" -available at the link as a free pdf- is an easy place to start.

    https://mises.org/sites/default/files/thelaw.pdf

    As for a straw man, I've done nothing of the sort. I merely refuse to submit to your authoritarian delusion.

    How do you think you are going to attack 11 million people and deprive them of their lives, liberty, and property without your roving bands of jackboots? How are you going to know who is and isn't an immigrant without national registration, tracing, and monitoring? How are you going to violate the property, association, and exchange rights of all 325 million Americans without using militaristic police violence to enforce your rule? How are you going to militarize the border and pay for your $25 billion+ in upfront costs and billions more in endless costs without the violence and theft of taxation? How you are going to prevent the free exchange of goods and services across borders without extortion, theft, and police state monitoring of said exchanges and the use of violence against those who don't follow your edicts? All of these things, and everything else required to bring about your vision, require a giant, expansive militaristic police state to force your will upon the masses.

    You can always pinpoint the tyrants easily. They're the ones who want to explain how reducing you to slavery is "sensible" and "moderate." And it is funny how you always want to call others Communist. Yet you're the one promoting National Socialism as the cure to the imaginary problems of the world, when the only real problem is that you're terrified that someone might turn the tools of tyranny you've used so effectively against the masses against you.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    Talk about a silly response.

    You can immediately know that anyone talking about trading liberty for security...
    You can stop right there because everything that follows is low-IQ garbage.

    One quote from Benjamin Franklin is not the touchstone of the creed of liberty. The Declaration of Independence is.

    The ignorance of the significance and contents of the Declaration of Independence should be a raging embarrassment for many of the users of this forum. It's an utter disgrace that people who claim to be supporters of liberty argue directly against its main premise:

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
    Anarchists love Benjamin Franklin's quote because it saves them the trouble of thinking.

    But the reality is that the true lineage of liberty runs to its apex with the Declaration, which does not share the simplistic foolishness of those who attribute far too much significance to an offhand comment from Franklin.

    If you think the very intention to secure rights itself is inherently anti-liberty, your philosophy is complete garbage and you should be ashamed to be seen peddling such reckless dreck.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    This article doesn't make any sense. It especially doesn't make sense when you add the word 'liberty' to it in your title for this thread, which implies something which was never written in the original document. In fact, the word 'liberty' never appears in it. You're twisting the meaning to something that neither agrees with the article nor reality.
    From the OP:

    Consider all those factors and the true shape of things becomes clear. Like Afrikaners in apartheid South Africa, conservatives seek to enshrine minority rule, to ensure that, even as they decline as a percentage of the population, the forces of white patriarchy, of racial, religious and cultural homogeneity maintain their stranglehold on power.
    I realize to you and a few others, "conservatives" are nothing more than some mirror-image dopplegangers of Marxists.

    The fact of the matter is that "conservatives", to the Bolshevik and Jacobin left, means anybody to the right of Trotsky, which includes you and a few other of the anarcho left, open borders, one world crowd.

    They would be doing the exact same thing, using the exact same rhetoric, if it was Ron in the White House.

  21. #18

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    You can always pinpoint the tyrants easily. They're the ones who want to explain how reducing you to slavery is "sensible" and "moderate." And it is funny how you always want to call others Communist. Yet you're the one promoting National Socialism as the cure to the imaginary problems of the world, when the only real problem is that you're terrified that someone might turn the tools of tyranny you've used so effectively against the masses against you.
    Exactly.

    The 1st Concentration Camps were in Africa, where the British enslaved both the Africans & the Dutch. It started off with so-called "good intentions" but turned into bloody hell.

    https://allthatsinteresting.com/boer-war

    It was a horror that the world had never seen anywhere outside of the Bible. As one woman put it, “Since Old Testament days was ever a whole nation carried captive?”

    And yet the first genocide of the 20th century started with good intentions. The camps were originally set up as refugee camps, meant to house the families that had been forced to abandon their homes to escape the ravages of war.

    As the Boer War raged on, however, the British became more brutal. They introduced a “scorched earth” policy. Ever Boer farm was burned to the ground, every field salted, and every well poisoned. The men were shipped out of the country to keep them from fighting, but their wives and their children were forced into the camps, which were quickly become overcrowded and understocked.

    The native South Africans, too, were sent to the camps. Some had their villages circled with barbed wire, while others were dragged off into camps, where they’d be forced to work as laborers for the British army and kept from giving food to the Boers.

    Soon, there were more than 100 concentration camps across South Africa, imprisoning more than 100,000 people. The nurses there didn’t have the resources to deal with the numbers. They could barely feed them. The camps were filthy and overrun with disease, and the people inside started to die off in droves.

    The children suffered the most. Of the 28,000 Boers that died, 22,000 were children. They were left to starve, especially if their fathers were still fighting the British in the Boer War. With so few rations to pass around, the children of fighters were deliberately starved and left to die.
    There is no spoon.

  23. #20
    As far as the polling goes, the libertarians consistently show that a majority of voters agree with the libertarian positions when the platforms are broken down issue by issue. that tells me something is not right with the polling
    * Enforce Border Security – America should be guarding her own borders and enforcing her own laws instead of policing the world and implementing UN mandates.

    * No Amnesty - The Obama Administration’s endorsement of so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, will only encourage more law-breaking.

    * Abolish the Welfare State – Taxpayers cannot continue to pay the high costs to sustain this powerful incentive for illegal immigration. As Milton Friedman famously said, you can’t have open borders and a welfare state.

    * End Birthright Citizenship – As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be granted U.S. citizenship, we’ll never be able to control our immigration problem.




    Reprinted from http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/immigration/ [Nov. 29, 2011]

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    From the OP:



    I realize to you and a few others, "conservatives" are nothing more than some mirror-image dopplegangers of Marxists.

    The fact of the matter is that "conservatives", to the Bolshevik and Jacobin left, means anybody to the right of Trotsky, which includes you and a few other of the anarcho left, open borders, one world crowd.

    They would be doing the exact same thing, using the exact same rhetoric, if it was Ron in the White House.
    :vomit:

    You've really let them get to you...

  25. #22
    Temporary Ban


    Blog Entries
    110
    Posts
    5,109
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    As far as the polling goes, the libertarians consistently show that a majority of voters agree with the libertarian positions when the platforms are broken down issue by issue. that tells me something is not right with the polling
    Same thing with immigrants. When polled for party loyalty they vote Democrat, largely because of the slightly less severe immigration policies of the Democrats over the Republicans. At least the Democrats will let children stay with their mothers while the family is thrown into the gulag.

    Of course even this difference largely disappears by the time you get to the second generation, where immigrants are more likely to be Republican than teh first generation.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.aacb3edadbfb

    But once you start breaking down issues to each position immigrants start favoring position much more attuned to libertarian ideas than either major party.

    The issue is that people in American treat political parties as part of some idiotic tribal identity. It is nationalism within nationalism.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    Same thing with immigrants. When polled for party loyalty they vote Democrat, largely because of the slightly less severe immigration policies of the Democrats over the Republicans. At least the Democrats will let children stay with their mothers while the family is thrown into the gulag.
    Oh my feelz! Just kidding - I don't have any. ButI stopped reading here because recent history proves otherwise. Obama separated the families of illegal immigrants too.
    * Enforce Border Security – America should be guarding her own borders and enforcing her own laws instead of policing the world and implementing UN mandates.

    * No Amnesty - The Obama Administration’s endorsement of so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, will only encourage more law-breaking.

    * Abolish the Welfare State – Taxpayers cannot continue to pay the high costs to sustain this powerful incentive for illegal immigration. As Milton Friedman famously said, you can’t have open borders and a welfare state.

    * End Birthright Citizenship – As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be granted U.S. citizenship, we’ll never be able to control our immigration problem.




    Reprinted from http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/immigration/ [Nov. 29, 2011]

  27. #24
    Supporting Member
    Phoenix, AZ
    Cleaner44's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    4
    Posts
    8,005
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Facts:
    • Democrats don't control the House of Representatives
    • Democrats don't control the Senate
    • Democrats don't control the White House
    • Democrats don't control the majority of Governors
    • Author of article incorrectly believes Democrats are the majority
    Citizen of Arizona
    @cleaner4d4

    I am a libertarian. I am advocating everyone enjoy maximum freedom on both personal and economic issues as long as they do not bring violence unto others.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    At least the Democrats will let children stay with their mothers while the family is thrown into the gulag.
    Dude, will you please just go back to Democratic Underground??? You are so transparently dishonest..

    President Barack Obama separated parents from their children at the border.
    Obama prosecuted mothers for coming to the United States illegally. He fast tracked deportations. And yes, he housed unaccompanied children in tent cities.
    https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/pol...213525764.html
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    Same thing with immigrants. When polled for party loyalty they vote Democrat, largely because of the slightly less severe immigration policies of the Democrats over the Republicans. At least the Democrats will let children stay with their mothers while the family is thrown into the gulag.

    Of course even this difference largely disappears by the time you get to the second generation, where immigrants are more likely to be Republican than teh first generation.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.aacb3edadbfb

    But once you start breaking down issues to each position immigrants start favoring position much more attuned to libertarian ideas than either major party.

    The issue is that people in American treat political parties as part of some idiotic tribal identity. It is nationalism within nationalism.
    Washington Compost lies.
    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



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 103
    Last Post: 09-06-2018, 07:50 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-08-2017, 11:41 AM
  3. Shoes hit "war criminal" Obama's photo during his South Africa visit
    By enhanced_deficit in forum World News & Affairs
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-03-2013, 02:20 AM
  4. "You figure this would be going on in South Africa, or Russia, not in St Paul,"
    By Monolithic in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-31-2008, 02:43 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
  •