Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 241 to 270 of 293

Thread: NFL HELL: Owners/TV networks face mounting losses as Trump called boycotts spread

  1. #241
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    What if they do both?
    They get to use either bathroom?
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #242
    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    Depends. Do they do yoga or lift weights?
    FTW

  4. #243
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumba of Liberty View Post
    Answer these:
    The Bill of Rights: Left or Right?
    The Antifederalists: Left or Right?
    The British Empire: Left or Right?
    Monarchs, Industrialists & Bankers inventing limited-liability corporations to shield their personal wealth from lawsuits and hide their identites from the public: Left or Right?
    European Bankers buying politicians, creating central banks, printing paper money, fraudulently buying the worlds natural resources and capital, and robbing nations and individuals of their Natural Right to Independence: Left or Right?
    All of the above: Extreme, Ultra-Right, in roughly descending order of Right-ness, with the exception of the last one which becomes left enough we could probably still consider it left. This is in relation to Current Year. See, these are relative terms, of course. Left of what? Right compared to what? Because Cthulu swims left, we find ourselves having gotten way, way, super left of anything normal in the past in this Current Year. So, any document or occurrence or person that existed/happened/lived more than 100 years ago is automatically guaranteed to be ultra-hardcore-right-wing nutcase. If you transported literally any adult European -- any! -- alive more than 100 years ago to the present, he would be a uber-reactionary, traditionalist hard-rightist.
    Last edited by helmuth_hubener; 11-08-2017 at 10:13 AM.

  5. #244
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    There are times for ideological purity and times for practicality, there was no reason to believe Trump would perform as well as he has due to his past history, I did not vote for him, but I might in 2020 if there is no better choice.

    Meanwhile you display a marked sympathy for Mandela and Kucinich and an absolute intolerance for others like Molyneux who I dislike but is demonstrably less of a threat to liberty than the other two, THAT is what is being discussed and what you refuse to make a judgement on when directly confronted about it.
    That sums it up pretty well. I'd add one thing. Ender STARTED this whole thing by criticizing people for NOT supporting the NFL protestors. That just takes it to another level of annoyance for me. Not only is he wrong, he's in your face about it.
    Last edited by Madison320; 11-08-2017 at 08:58 AM.

  6. #245
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    You DO know that Ron Paul said "Neither!" on Trump and Hillary- right?

    So, you are in fact calling him an ideologue incapable of making a judgment.
    Now that we know Trump a little better, Trump and Hillary are pretty close on the liberty scale. I'd give Trump a 5 and Hillary a 3. So "neither" is an understandable response. But Mandela/Kucinich are not even close to Molyneux. Mandela and Kucinich are at the bottom of the scale, they don't even believe in individual rights, while Molyneux is considered to be a libertarian, most of his positions are similar to Ron Paul's.

  7. #246
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    That sums it up pretty well. I'd add one thing. Ender STARTED this whole thing by criticizing people for NOT supporting the NFL protestors. That just takes it to another level of annoyance for me. Not only is he wrong, he's in your face about it.
    Wrong.

    I initially said:

    MY POV:

    This is all bull$#@!.

    No one should have to pray to the state; the National Anthem should never have been made the opening of ANY game or public gathering- it is nothing but state worship.

    What’s Worth Standing For?

    By Butler Shaffer

    October 20, 2017

    In America you can say anything you want, as long as it doesn’t have any effect.

    – Paul Goodman

    The vacuity of serious thought in America is revealed in so many instances that it is difficult to put together a top-ten list of candidates. Among the fatuous contenders is that involving the question of whether NFL players should stand for the playing of the national anthem. Not since the 1988 presidential campaign, when George W. Bush focused on the sanctity of the Pledge of Allegiance to satisfy members of the boobeoisie to elect him president, has so much mental energy been spent on such a hollow topic.

    Patriotic rituals serve one purpose: to reinforce the conditioning begun in childhood with flag salutes and daily Pledges of Allegiance, reminding the citizens of a state that their lives are subservient to the collective interests of the established order. Where hundreds or thousands of individuals gather for an event of common interest – such as sporting events – the dynamics of mass psychology can be mobilized to remind those in attendance of the importance of commitments to matters that transcend the interests of their home team. Out come the flags accompanied by color-guards; a military band; and a singer to lead the crowd in the statist hymn: The Star-Spangled Banner.

    The refusal of athletes or fans to stand for this observance of state dominance, is a public challenge to the homogenization of obedience to constituted authority; an admission that some – if only a handful – may be stepping to A Libertarian Critique... Butler Shaffer Buy New $5.50 (as of 11:24 EDT - Details) the beat of a different drummer than the one in the Marine Corps band. The fear that not everyone is committed to group-thinking is what bothered Ron Paul’s critics when he was in Congress. His dissent cast in a 434-1 vote on a bill was certainly no threat to its enactment, but that it raised the specter of dissent challenged the political mantra e pluribus unum. The “One” that all collectivists insist upon cannot be maintained if some are able to get away with not playing the game.

    Statists have long exploited dead soldiers in the peddling of guilt on behalf of their ambitions for power. We are told we “should honor the sacrifice of those who fought and died to protect our freedom.” As often as I have heard this plea, I have yet to have anyone inform me of any liberty I enjoy by virtue of soldiers going to foreign countries, at risk to their own lives, to kill people! Of what is one “free” when fighting or killing others? Soldiers fight because they are ordered to do so, and the selection of the “enemy” is made by persons who have absolutely no interest in benefiting or protecting me.

    In a televised press conference, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell tried his best to resolve the contradictions that abound in all of politics. While stating that the NFL was “trying to stay out of politics” in this dispute, he failed to recognize that the national anthem is about nothing but politics. He acknowledged that the anthem is “an important part of our game.” How can this be? Does the home-team get six points added to their score if they out-sing the visiting fans? If this music is such an “important” part of the game, have you ever seen people at a football or baseball game leave the stadium once the anthem has been performed?

    If the national anthem is of such importance, why do we not perform it in everything we do? Is breakfast, or the start of our workday, or going to a grocery store, or undergoing root-canal work at the dentist’s, to be preceded by this tune? Do we refrain from extending such collective foolishness into our daily lives because the numbers of persons are not sufficient to convert individuals into fungible components of a mob?

    There is one very effective way for the NFL and other sectors of the entertainment world to end the squabbling over whether fans and players should stand for this song. As it has absolutely no bearing on the content or performance of the games people come to watch, stop playing it altogether. No more than people should be expected to sing “fight on for USC” when attending an opera, should they be expected to sing hymns to the state.

    Perhaps a little history will put the National Anthem in perspective. It is known by every school-child that Francis Scott Key was the author of the poem upon which the anthem is based. What is not so well-known is that Key was a lawyer who not only owned slaves, but defended the practice. Like Abraham Lincoln, Key represented slaveowners, and regarded slaves as “an inferior race of people.” He strongly opposed the abolition movement. As district attorney for Washington, D.C., he prosecuted abolitionists and enjoined the publication and distribution of abolitionist literature. The music to which Key’s poem was set, was taken from the song “Anacreon in Heaven,” an 18th century tune sung in a London gentlemen’s club. The song celebrated drinking and sex.

    Perhaps the NFL players are onto something!
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/10/...-standing-for/
    Maybe Mr. MAGA President should just keep his ugly mouth shut?
    I quoted the respectable Butler Shaffer- and I was agreeing with his criticizing state-worship & the condemnation of some people over peaceful protests.

    Violent protests are a whole different thing but a peaceful protest should be respected, even if you do not agree with the subject.
    There is no spoon.

  8. #247
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    Now that we know Trump a little better, Trump and Hillary are pretty close on the liberty scale. I'd give Trump a 5 and Hillary a 3.
    Consider: How much does it matter how high on the "liberty scale" a given President is? What effect does that have?

    What about long term?

    I mostly like to think long term. That's the most interesting! And challenging. And, and here's the kicker, important!

    So is it possible that what's more important than how liberty-oriented they are in the present, is what long-term effect their policies will have for the prospects of liberty? For the next 100 years? I think it is. I think that is important. Something to think about.

  9. #248
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    Now that we know Trump a little better, Trump and Hillary are pretty close on the liberty scale. I'd give Trump a 5 and Hillary a 3. So "neither" is an understandable response. But Mandela/Kucinich are not even close to Molyneux. Mandela and Kucinich are at the bottom of the scale, they don't even believe in individual rights, while Molyneux is considered to be a libertarian, most of his positions are similar to Ron Paul's.
    Ron Paul and the Self-Hating u2018Libertarians'
    by Walter Block
    Recently by Walter Block: Ron Paul and Liberty
    Karen Kwiatkowski wrote a magnificent blog exposing Reason magazine as critics, not supporters, of libertarianism. I would now like to add to her so far list of one "libertarian" who trashes Ron Paul. My nomination to be second on this list is Stefan Molyneux. Full disclosure: his speech attacking Dr. Paul goes on for almost an hour, and I didn't have the sitzfleisch (patience) to listen to all of it. But, in the first 10 minutes or so he criticizes Congressman Paul for, yes, wait for it, favoring the Constitution! Molyneux also correctly allows that if President Paul takes office, we "slaves" will have far fewer beatings, but claims that this is an insufficient reason for supporting him. I did indeed, until recently listening to this rant, have some respect for Molyneux (unlike for Reason magazine, which has long ago turned against libertarianism). He has authored some very persuasive material on anarcho-capitalism. But, evidently, Molyneux is one of those free market anarchists who does not really "hate the state" (see Murray Rothbard on this) certainly not enough to support one of the greatest enemies of statism the world has ever known.
    Here is Molneux on the "disaster Ron Paul".

    There is no spoon.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #249
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    What if they do both?
    Then they are probably left-leaning. The yoga heuristic wins out, by far. Obviously. No traditional, conservative man anywhere does yoga.

    Now what if he eats granola AND hunts grizzly bears?

    You guys are joking around, which is great, but surely you do know that what I'm saying is true. When you meet someone in person, and talk to him, get to know a few things about him, you will be able to almost always have a very good prediction of where he stands politically. It's just a thing we humans can do.

    Left and right are real. The CIA was not there in the French Revolution. Just because libertarians don't always fit on either left or right doesn't mean almost everyone else in the world doesn't. We have to live with and accept facts.

  12. #250
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Here is Molneux on the "disaster Ron Paul".
    Sorry. I can't handle Molyneux for 46 minutes. Lots of libertarians disagree with each other. What's your point? He's still 1000 times better than Mandela or Kucinich. Don't you agree?

    Neg rep for serial avoidance of questions.

    Now that I think about it, I think Molyneux leans towards anarchy and I'm guessing his opposition to Ron Paul is that Ron Paul believes in a minimal state (correct me if I'm wrong - like I said I can't listen to Molyneux for nearly that long). Which means that you and Molyneux are probably extremely close in political philosophy.
    Last edited by Madison320; 11-08-2017 at 11:24 AM.

  13. #251
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Consider: How much does it matter how high on the "liberty scale" a given President is? What effect does that have?

    What about long term?

    I mostly like to think long term. That's the most interesting! And challenging. And, and here's the kicker, important!

    So is it possible that what's more important than how liberty-oriented they are in the present, is what long-term effect their policies will have for the prospects of liberty? For the next 100 years? I think it is. I think that is important. Something to think about.
    I'm on record for wanting Hillary to win. I think the coming massive recession is going to get wrongly blamed on Trump/Capitalism when it should correctly be blamed on decades of government stimulus. I'm afraid we're going to get a Sanders/Kucinich type in 2020. If Hillary was elected I think there's a chance we could've gotten a Rand Paul type president in 2020.

  14. #252
    Got a -neg rep from Madison320 for "avoiding answering questions".

    I answered your questions- you just don't like the answers.

    Last edited by Ender; 11-08-2017 at 12:51 PM.
    There is no spoon.

  15. #253
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Got a -neg rep from Madison320 for "avoiding answering questions".

    I answered your questions- you just don't like the answers.
    No you didn't. You answered "neither" and that's not an answer.

    Molyneux or Mandela.

    Still waiting...

    I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself. What really irks me about the whole "racial injustice" debate is the existence of discrimination laws. That makes the whole debate irrelevant since it's already been decided by force how we're supposed to think. So my question for you is "are you against all discrimination laws?"

  16. #254
    helmuth_hubener
    helmuth_hubener is offline
    Temporary Ban

    Posts
    9,479
    Join Date
    Nov 2007

    You people better straighten up and fly right!!!!
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    ...I believe that when the government is capable of doing a thing, it will.
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    which one of yall fuckers wrote the "ron paul" racist news letters
    Quote Originally Posted by Dforkus View Post
    Zippy's posts are a great contribution.




    Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members

  17. #255
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    Now that I think about it, I think Molyneux leans towards anarchy and I'm guessing his opposition to Ron Paul is that Ron Paul believes in a minimal state (correct me if I'm wrong - like I said I can't listen to Molyneux for nearly that long). Which means that you and Molyneux are probably extremely close in political philosophy.
    That is correct.

    The analogy in the video was that if the Constitution said that slavery was OK, but you could only beat your slaves twice a week and 100 years later people were beating their slaves twice a day and some guy came along and said, "hey, we really need to get back to our roots and only beat our slaves twice a week" then that is not a moral position. Also, even if you could achieve it, the clock would just begin moving forward again and eventually people would be beating their slaves much more often.

    I disagree with Molyneux on this argument. First of all, if you could vote for someone who didn't believe in slavery, but promised to reduce slave beatings by ten fold within the current system, and the population largely supported the current system, then attempting to get that politician into power may have huge benefits. It may OR may not be the best course of action, but I don't think you could say it is definitely NOT the best course of action.

    Also, the Constitution gives states the power to govern, the Federal Govt. was not supported by forced taxation but user fees and such. So you could theoretically live free within a state that was friendly to liberty, and in addition, it would be easier to secede and form an anarchist society in these conditions.

    Nowhere in the video that I heard, did Molyneux say that Ron Paul was bad because he believed in liberty, he didn't say that Ron Paul was bad because he thought the war on drugs was bad, or that we had an attrocious foreign policy or that income tax and the Fed are immoral.. no no!! They completely and totally agree on 99% of the issues.. But because Molyneux had a different approach of how to achieve liberty back then, Ender becomes a supreme whiner about how horrible he is... lol, it's completely ridiculous..
    Last edited by dannno; 11-08-2017 at 01:36 PM.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "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."

  18. #256
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    No you didn't. You answered "neither" and that's not an answer.

    Molyneux or Mandela.

    Still waiting...

    I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself. What really irks me about the whole "racial injustice" debate is the existence of discrimination laws. That makes the whole debate irrelevant since it's already been decided by force how we're supposed to think. So my question for you is "are you against all discrimination laws?"
    I STAND WITH RON PAUL: NEITHER.

    Ron Paul: I will not vote for Trump
    QUOTE]
    Former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) said on Thursday he wouldn't vote for Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump.

    "I was very explicit about that. I wouldn't vote for Donald Trump," he said on CNN on Thursday.

    "If you can't stand any of them and you happen to be a dedicated progressive, you ought to make your vote count and vote for the Green Party and if you happen to be a libertarian, vote for the Libertarian Party," he continued.


    Paul noted that some people say Trump is "far superior" or the lesser of two evils, but he doesn't know what the celebrity real estate mogul would do if elected president.

    "Quite frankly, I'm not sure exactly what he'll do and that bothers me as well," he said, "because he can give two positions in one speech."

    Paul, who ran for president in 2008 and 2012, predicted earlier this month that the Republican Party would do everything possible to stop the Trump from securing the nomination.

    "The Republican Party is obviously threatened by Trump being his own boss," he said at the time. "Trump's not going to go away easily. ... That's not going to happen. He likes trouble and he doesn't mind threatening people."[/QUOTE]

    When asked if he voted for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, Ron Paul responded, “No, I did not vote for him,” Paul continued, “But I did not vote for Donald Trump either.”
    http://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/...ain-swamp.html

    WHY?

    Molyneux is NOT a libertarian leader; can't stand to listen to him anymore than Trump.
    Too much garbage written about Mandela to discern what the real truth was about him and I wasn't in his country or alive for most of his life.

    Discrimination laws are messy. People should have equal justice but laws seem to separate more than equalize.

    Getting gov out of all business, allowing free trade and real capitalism and sticking to the Bill of Rights would solve most problems.
    There is no spoon.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #257
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    That is correct.

    The analogy in the video was that if the Constitution said that slavery was OK, but you could only beat your slaves twice a week and 100 years later people were beating their slaves twice a day and some guy came along and said, "hey, we really need to get back to our roots and only beat our slaves twice a week" then that is not a moral position. Also, even if you could achieve it, the clock would just begin moving forward again and eventually people would be beating their slaves much more often.

    I disagree with Molyneux on this argument. First of all, if you could vote for someone who didn't believe in slavery, but promised to reduce slave beatings by ten fold within the current system, and the population largely supported the current system, then attempting to get that politician into power may have huge benefits. It may OR may not be the best course of action, but I don't think you could say it is definitely NOT the best course of action.

    Also, the Constitution gives states the power to govern, the Federal Govt. was not supported by forced taxation but user fees and such. So you could theoretically live free within a state that was friendly to liberty, and in addition, it would be easier to secede and form an anarchist society in these conditions.

    Nowhere in the video that I heard, did Molyneux say that Ron Paul was bad because he believed in liberty, he didn't say that Ron Paul was bad because he thought the war on drugs was bad, or that we had an attrocious foreign policy or that income tax and the Fed are immoral.. no no!! They completely and totally agree on 99% of the issues.. But because Molyneux had a different approach of how to achieve liberty back then, Ender becomes a supreme whiner about how horrible he is... lol, it's completely ridiculous..

    I didn't ask me to pick Molyneux or Mandela- that was never my idea.

    You write threads and threads about your dear Molyneux but I'm the whiner. Poor baby.
    There is no spoon.

  21. #258
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    I STAND WITH RON PAUL: NEITHER.

    Ron Paul: I will not vote for Trump
    Neither Madison nor even I voted for Trump.. but we can both see how Molyneux is a trillionbillion times better than Mandela..
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "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."

  22. #259
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    I didn't ask me to pick Molyneux or Mandela- that was never my idea.

    You write threads and threads about your dear Molyneux but I'm the whiner. Poor baby.
    You are a whiner because you attack someone who espouses the ideals of peace and liberty due to very minor disagreements that you don't even take the time to understand why you are disagreeing.

    Name one person who I have disparaged, ever, who consistently espouses the ideals of peace and liberty?
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "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."

  23. #260
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Neither Madison nor even I voted for Trump.. but we can both see how Molyneux is a trillionbillion times better than Mandela..
    Good- that's your choice.

    My choice is neither- it's called

    FREEDOM.
    There is no spoon.

  24. #261
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    You are a whiner because you attack someone who espouses the ideals of peace and liberty due to very minor disagreements that you don't even take the time to understand why you are disagreeing.

    Name one person who I have disparaged, ever, who consistently espouses the ideals of peace and liberty?
    I didn't attack your god- I just don't agree with him. Yet YOU attack me for that.
    There is no spoon.

  25. #262
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Good- that's your choice.

    My choice is neither- it's called

    FREEDOM.
    You do not choose neither, you defend Mandela and denounce Molyneux.
    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

  26. #263
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Discrimination laws are messy. People should have equal justice but laws seem to separate more than equalize.
    So that means you are against discrimination laws?

  27. #264
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    You do not choose neither, you defend Mandela and denounce Molyneux.
    I never "defended" Mandela.
    There is no spoon.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #265
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    I didn't attack your god- I just don't agree with him. Yet YOU attack me for that.
    No, my point is that you do agree with him on 99% of the issues... but Molyneux likes to spend time around the edges and you don't take the time to think through what he is actually saying and then you take these things too personally.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "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. #266
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    I never "defended" Mandela.
    Except here:

    Quote Originally Posted by Ender
    Can anyone tell me how he killed all these people when he was in prison during all those years? He was in solitary confinement much of the time. And he was a revolutionary fighting to free his people. Shall we say the FF are terrorists because of the Boston Massacre? Because they learned and used guerrilla warfare from the Indians were they savages?

    At least you don't think Mandela is perfect:

    And what I said about Mandela was true- he was in jail when some of the things he was accused of happened. Was he perfect? Absolutely not.

  31. #267
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    I didn't attack your god- I just don't agree with him. Yet YOU attack me for that.
    He's not a god, he is just an intelligent dude who believes in liberty (at least as much as you do) and likes to have, and can handle intelligent discussions and disagreements. I've seen him have NUMEROUS guests on his show where they are explaining their POV and he has to bite his tongue on one thing or another, he is WAAAY better at handling these disagreements in favor of open discussion than you are.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "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."

  32. #268
    #BoycottNFL boycotts are shaping up for Vday now.






    Nov 11, 2017
    Veterans Day Boycott Will Show Roger Goodell How Out Of Touch NFL Is With America


    a month ago, a Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) in Florida has canceled its National Football League (NFL) subscription amid the ongoing protests of the national anthem at recent games. Another: visitors to Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 3360 won’t find professional football on TVs there anytime soon. The post is protesting the protest. These are emblematic anecdotes of what is happening throughout the country.Most emblematic, people around the country are standing up for the veterans and Star Spangled Banner.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeoza...s-with-america



    NFL boycotts scheduled on local, national, personal levels


    • By Jeff Steers | Herald staff writer
    • Nov 9, 2017



    FILE - In this Oct. 2, 2016 file photo, San Francisco quarterback Colin Kaepernick, left, and safety Eric Reid kneel during the national anthem before an NFL football game against the Dallas Cowboys in Santa Clara, California.
    AP


    “We will be not be watching or listening to NFL games on Nov. 12 in solidarity with veterans around the country, as football players have continued to disrespect the national anthem, the American flag, and everything our nation stands for,” the group noted on its page.
    The hashtag #BoycottNFL is also gaining popularity on Twitter.

    A conservative group is encouraging Americans across the United States to show support for the flag and the national anthem on the upcoming Veterans Day weekend.
    Main Street Patriots, based in Georgia, wants to send a message about the importance of standing and respecting the flag during NFL games, as players continue to kneel during the anthem in protest.



    Sam 💎‏ @Freedomchick813 Nov 6
    This is at coin toss. The @NFL is officially dead.#BoycottNFL






    Pub won't show NFL games to honor veterans

  33. #269
    muh koolaid
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  34. #270

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Trump Boycotts Fox News Citing Unfair Treatment
    By kahless in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 09-26-2015, 03:55 PM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-08-2010, 09:27 PM
  3. Bailouts: Taxpayers face heavy losses on auto bailout
    By bobbyw24 in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-09-2009, 05:28 AM
  4. Liberty Videos and Networks, help spread the message
    By AlexMerced in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-06-2007, 07:28 PM

Posting Permissions

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