• Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:31 PM
    I expect that talk about that, and more generally about yearly vaccines to keep up with new strains of COVID, is coming around the bend. For now, they're still focused on getting the unvaccinated vaccinated. They haven't given up on that yet. But they still will need at some point to put some focus on getting the vaccinated to get vaccinated again, and along with the booster shot idea I'm sure that keeping up with new strains will be part of the argument.
    7 replies | 215 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:20 PM
    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to enhanced_deficit again." Truly outstanding and entertaining post. Ever since Zippy got banned and TheTexan got all serious, you've become the most fun poster here.
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:55 PM
    Invisible Man started a thread LRC in Open Discussion
    lewrockwell.com didn't post any articles today. It just has a message saying, "Tomorrow's Page is Coming Soon. Please check back shortly." I don't recall seeing them skip a weekday like that before. Anybody know what's up?
    5 replies | 156 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:25 AM
    I get that. But I see no reason to infer from what Cruz says in that article that he agrees with you. What you're saying is the same thing I've heard leftists use as a defense for every other regulation placed on employers that they want. It seems to me that, if someone needs their job that badly, and they in their own cost-benefit analysis of the choice between getting the jab to keep their job vs. refusing the jab and losing their job, decide that the benefit of keeping their job outweighs the cost of getting the jab, then far from being a victim of an employer forcing them to do something, they should thank their employer for giving them a job that is worth that much to them. That employer, according to the employee's own evaluation, is doing them more good than harm. And if there are enough prospective employees out there who don't want to get the vaccine, then the market will reward the employers who take advantage of that available labor. They may even find that those employees will be willing to accept lower pay in exchange for not having to get vaccinated, thus getting a lower cost per unit of productivity than their competitors, and the market will reward those who don't require the vaccine with higher profits as a result, until the messages sent by the market in the form of prices, wages, and profits, get listened to, and the ratio of employers requiring vaccines to those not requiring it settles down at the level of equilibrium the market demands. On the other hand, if there aren't enough prospective employees to result in a market advantage for employers refraining from requiring the jab, then it wouldn't be the cruel employers causing that condition by their collusion and refusal to hire unvaccinated people. It would be a reflection of the will of the overwhelming majority of employees themselves who at the end of the day are fine with getting the vaccine.
    32 replies | 548 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:56 AM
    First of all, Noem said nothing at all about businesses forcing anyone to take vaccines. Furthermore, do you assume that because Cruz objects to government forcing you to take a vaccine that must mean that he also supports legislation prohibiting private businesses from requiring their employees to take it? Because that doesn't follow from what he said. I see no indication at all that Cruz disagrees with anything Noem said. If he does, then Breitbart should have provided a quote from him that made that clear, because the quote they did provide doesn't imply that at all. Nor does anything they quote Noem saying indicate that she disagrees with what Cruz said. She may well also object to government forcing people to get the vaccine. If she doesn't object to that, then we have no way of knowing she doesn't just from the quotes provided in the article, and again Breitbart should have provided quotes from her making that clear. My guess is that the reason they didn't provide any quotes from Cruz showing that he disagreed with Noem, or any quotes from Noem showing that she disagreed with Cruz, is because they couldn't find any such quotes.
    32 replies | 548 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:26 AM
    I don't follow you. What I don't agree with is that there's a difference between what Cruz said and what Noem said in that article. Breitbart tried to contrast the two as if they're different, because they're hacks.
    32 replies | 548 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    32 replies | 548 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:40 AM
    I don't supposed there's a transcript or written summary of the video in the OP is there?
    5 replies | 275 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:37 AM
    Another great Zippy thread. Free Zippy.
    261 replies | 9493 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:30 AM
    Is Breitbart implying that Cruz's position is any different than Noem's? Because based just on what's said in this article, I don't see any reason to think she differs from him on that point.
    32 replies | 548 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-02-2021, 01:21 PM
    Multiple things that I'm sure you can see just by a glance yourself: the size and position of his body relative to hers, his right leg somehow being in front of hers even though it looks perfectly straight, the weird attempt to blend in the blue background around that same right leg of his, and the way it looks like a sliver was taken off from hers, the size of his right foot not matching the rest of him, the way his left leg shows up in the gap between her legs doesn't make any sense, the way her hair isn't affected by his hands or face that are touching it, and the way the shadows on the wall in back come from her silhouette without Biden there.
    269 replies | 28814 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-02-2021, 11:41 AM
    Here's another update. Looks like a little behind in realizing this. I just found this today by following a link provided at his latest article at realclearmarkets. In May of this year Jeffrey Tucker founded the Brownstone Institute. This looks like it has potential to be a good source for anti-lockdown type articles. https://brownstone.org/about/ https://brownstone.org/articles/
    10 replies | 582 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-02-2021, 09:30 AM
    Obviously not.
    269 replies | 28814 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    08-02-2021, 09:30 AM
    Are you saying you think that photo is real?
    269 replies | 28814 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-30-2021, 02:31 PM
    What is it that you think masks accomplish?
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-30-2021, 11:46 AM
    I think it's good to acknowledge that noncitizens shouldn't be allowed to vote. But once you face that, and consider the reasons they shouldn't, I think that the conclusion will inevitably follow that citizens shouldn't be allowed to vote either for the same reasons.
    28 replies | 700 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-30-2021, 11:44 AM
    Sure it did. The original US Constitution required that the President be a natural born citizen. It only required that Representatives be citizens for 7 years. Senators, 9 years. It refers to citizens of individual states in Articles 1, Section 2, and Article 4 Section 2. It delegated to Congress the responsibility of making a uniform code of naturalization. Different states had different voting rules, some of which required citizenship, while others didn't. That said, given those facts, I'm not sure what the essential difference was between a citizen and a noncitizen who met voting requirements.
    28 replies | 700 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-30-2021, 11:29 AM
    If a pastor kicked you out of church because you smoke, would you not consider that a punishment for smoking? And that's really beside the point anyway. Call it a punishment or call it something else. It doesn't change my point, which it sounds like you understand perfectly well in spite of your verbal gymnastics. Just because I don't want to kick someone out of church for doing something, that doesn't mean that I support doing whatever that thing is.
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-30-2021, 06:45 AM
    I actually did think that was apparent.
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-30-2021, 06:45 AM
    Then you understand that just because I don't want to punish someone for doing something, that doesn't mean that I support them doing it.
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-29-2021, 03:28 PM
    I didn't trash him. I criticized his position. And in criticizing it, at no point did I defend mask wearing. As for the scripture I quoted in post 20, I didn't defend mask wearing there either. But if you disagree with what that passage says, your quarrel isn't with me. It's possible to disagree with something and also not support punishing people for doing it. If a pastor kicked someone out of church for smoking cigarettes and I criticized the pastor for doing that, would you say that I was "defending the stupidity of smoking cigarettes"?
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-29-2021, 03:24 PM
    Remember 5 months ago when you had the opinion you expressed in this post? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?552854-Effeminacy-Is-Not-Working-for-the-Christian-Church&p=7025899&viewfull=1#post7025899 When I look at passages about excommunicating people, like Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 5, I don't see how they jive with the idea that this is to be done single-handedly by the fiat of a pastor or any other individual. I also don't see how this is protecting anyone from anything. If someone wears a mask in your presence, that doesn't harm you. And it doesn't harm the congregation of a church in any physical, mental, or spiritual way, just to have someone in their presence wearing a mask. Kicking a person out of church for that doesn't protect anyone from anything.
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-29-2021, 03:11 PM
    Please give the quote of where you think I did that.
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-29-2021, 02:54 PM
    If you think that seeing a difference between someone wearing a mask in your presence and someone trying to sodomize you is hair splitting, then we're just talking past each other.
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-29-2021, 10:56 AM
    I can't answer for why unbelievers may think that, nor do I need to concern myself with that. I just need to concern myself with how I respond to them when they do. I hope that I and my brothers and sisters in Christ will speak and act in such a way that God may use us to bring about a result like what 1 Corinthians 14:23-25 encourages: But this kind of thing would be disallowed if we started off with a policy that the enemies of Christ weren't welcome in our presence when we assembled.
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-29-2021, 10:40 AM
    No they shouldn't, and that has to do with more than just respect vs. disrespect. But the question isn't whether they should or not, but how Christians should respond when they do.
    78 replies | 1551 view(s)
More Activity
About Invisible Man

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
11
Activist Reputation (Staff Rated):
1
Select if you support the site's Mission.:
I support the site Mission. (This will change your user title to "Supporting Member".)
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Select if you "Stand with Rand":
I Stand with Rand (This will add a "Stand with Rand" badge by your name badge by yourr name in all posts.)
Select if you do not support Trump or Hillary.:
No Trump. No Hillary. (This will add a "None of the Above" badge by your name in all posts.)
Political Campaign Skills
Computer and Technical:
Scientists and Engineer

Signature


There is nothing to fear from globalism, free trade and a single worldwide currency, but a globalism where free trade is competitively subsidized by each nation, a continuous trade war is dictated by the WTO, and the single currency is pure fiat, fear is justified. That type of globalism is destined to collapse into economic despair, inflationism and protectionism and managed by resurgent militant nationalism.
Ron Paul
Congressional Record (March 13, 2001)

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,516
Posts Per Day
2.51
General Information
Last Activity
Today 01:10 PM
Join Date
12-09-2019
Referrals
0

1 Friend

  1. tfurrh tfurrh is offline

    Member

    tfurrh
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1

05-18-2021


05-14-2021


04-29-2021


02-28-2021


02-20-2021


02-10-2021


01-11-2021


12-27-2020


No results to display...
Page 1 of 59 1231151 ... LastLast

08-04-2021

  • 11:47 AM - Hidden
  • 11:13 AM - Hidden
  • 09:12 AM - Hidden
  • 08:35 AM - Hidden
  • 08:27 AM - Hidden

08-03-2021


08-02-2021


07-31-2021


07-30-2021



Page 1 of 59 1231151 ... LastLast