Page 19 of 29 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast
Results 541 to 570 of 842

Thread: Site policies on Trump support

  1. #541
    Quote Originally Posted by CPUd View Post
    Trump's campaign is destructive to the site mission. Ignoring it doesn't stop the destruction.
    How could anybody ignore it? It just shouldn't be promoted here. If that causes too extreme butthurt head on over to Trumpbart.
    "The Patriarch"



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #542
    Quote Originally Posted by afwjam View Post
    I don't post much, but I've been a consistent supporter of the Paul's , even though I was labeled a dissenter for not being enthused about rands establishment camouflage.
    That is completely hypocritical.

    And cpu says he isn't a libertarian. Talk about taking over a forum to attack the people whose messages created it.

  4. #543
    Quote Originally Posted by afwjam View Post
    Man I miss 2007 when it was just Ron Paul guys on here and the operatives had not started full on Astro turf operations.
    And I also miss 2007, when I joined here, and when I started one of the first five Ron Paul meet ups in the country (no. 5), when it was about distributing info and media about the candidate and our causes by DVD, flyers, blimps or whatever means. Back when it was about ending the wars, the Fed, and the IRS, tax truth, 9-11 truth, and so on, without certain Napoleons decreeing that the grassroots was only supposed to be about Paul and being "respectful."

    Back when electing Paul was meant to be only a point of focus to unify and advance the entire liberty movement, not a point of idolatry, or used as a shield for certain Napoleons to project their hostility to many views held by much of the grassroots, by marginalizing non-conformers as "hijackers" or "infiltrators." Those censoring forces moved in by late 2007 like a cancerous polyp, and appear to have reached a malignant crescendo with the current controversy. But the real good old days were good, while they lasted.
    Last edited by Peace&Freedom; 03-21-2016 at 03:46 AM.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...f-destruction/

  5. #544
    Anyone who believes Trump discussions should be forbidden is no lover of liberty.

    /sarc

    i simply enjoy saying, "You sir, are no lover of liberty."

    makes me want to put on my powdered wig and bust out the dueling pistols.
    Last edited by Jamesiv1; 03-21-2016 at 09:46 AM.



  6. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  7. #545
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesiv1 View Post
    Anyone who believes Trump discussions should be forbidden is no lover of liberty.
    Agree.
    I dont think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president, he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. Hes the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul

  8. #546
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesiv1 View Post
    Anyone who believes Trump discussions should be forbidden is no lover of liberty.
    Damn, can't people read? Look through the forum, do you see any discussion about Trump? Why yes you do. It is P R O M O T I O N that is not allowed. Are people being purposely dense or are they really that brain dead?
    "The Patriarch"

  9. #547
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    Damn, can't people read? Look through the forum, do you see any discussion about Trump? Why yes you do. It is P R O M O T I O N that is not allowed. Are people being purposely dense or are they really that brain dead?
    Yes.

  10. #548
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    Damn, can't people read? Look through the forum, do you see any discussion about Trump? Why yes you do. It is P R O M O T I O N that is not allowed. Are people being purposely dense or are they really that brain dead?
    Neither. The objection is that little to no promotion of Trump as a candidate has been going on, and that it was a phony issue to begin with. The issue is that the Trump bashers have been conflating posts that acknowledge there are beneficial aspects to the Trump phenomenon for the liberty movement with "promotion." That is fostering chilling, or stigmatizing free discussion on the subject, hence the comments stating that is the case.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...f-destruction/

  11. #549
    Quote Originally Posted by Peace&Freedom View Post
    Neither. The objection is that little to no promotion of Trump as a candidate has been going on, and that it was a phony issue to begin with. The issue is that the Trump bashers have been conflating posts that acknowledge there are beneficial aspects to the Trump phenomenon for the liberty movement with "promotion."
    ...

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbleboy View Post
    You are digging a dummy hole even deeper, please continue. President Trump train is coming an your tied to the track.
    Quote Originally Posted by bubbleboy View Post
    yea. Trump train choo choo. A male in America with balls, is very rare.
    Quote Originally Posted by bubbleboy View Post
    Trump is going to Thump. Bust it up Trump! All the way to to White House yeAAAA WOOOOO!

  12. #550
    Quote Originally Posted by Peace&Freedom View Post
    Neither. The objection is that little to no promotion of Trump as a candidate has been going on, and that it was a phony issue to begin with. The issue is that the Trump bashers have been conflating posts that acknowledge there are beneficial aspects to the Trump phenomenon for the liberty movement with "promotion." That is fostering chilling, or stigmatizing free discussion on the subject, hence the comments stating that is the case.
    TRUTH
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  13. #551
    Quote Originally Posted by Peace&Freedom View Post
    Neither. The objection is that little to no promotion of Trump as a candidate has been going on, and that it was a phony issue to begin with. The issue is that the Trump bashers have been conflating posts that acknowledge there are beneficial aspects to the Trump phenomenon for the liberty movement with "promotion." That is fostering chilling, or stigmatizing free discussion on the subject, hence the comments stating that is the case.
    Little to no promotion now. That was not the case. You either weren't paying attention or are being duplicitous.
    "The Patriarch"

  14. #552
    Bubbleboy (whose postings I never even noticed) is the exception that proves the rule.

    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    Little to no promotion now. That was not the case. You either weren't paying attention or are being duplicitous.
    For every bubbleboy there are 20 people who have been accused of being promoters, or duplicitous, for simply noting they support the emergence of the outsider trend as currently embodied by Trump. You either haven't been paying attention to that, or...
    Last edited by Peace&Freedom; 03-20-2016 at 09:48 PM.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...f-destruction/



  15. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  16. #553
    Quote Originally Posted by Peace&Freedom View Post
    Bubbleboy (whose postings I never even noticed) is the exception that proves the rule.
    There are lots more of those "exceptions."

  17. #554
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    There are lots more of those "exceptions."
    You mean, lots more people you prefer to lump in the wrong category.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...f-destruction/

  18. #555
    Quote Originally Posted by Peace&Freedom View Post
    Bubbleboy (whose postings I never even noticed) is the exception that proves the rule.



    For every bubbleboy there are 20 people who have been accused of being promoters, or duplicitous, for simply noting they support the emergence of the outsider trend as currently embodied by Trump. You either haven't been paying attention to that, or...
    What I have seen are a lot of posters carefully phrasing themselves to appear not to be promoting Trump while doing exactly that. Save your spin for someone else.
    "The Patriarch"

  19. #556
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    What I have seen are a lot of posters carefully phrasing themselves to appear not to be promoting Trump while doing exactly that. Save your spin for someone else.
    You are spinning any posts supporting the outsider trend as Trump promotion, while accusing others of spinning. Save yourself.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...f-destruction/

  20. #557
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    What I have seen are a lot of posters carefully phrasing themselves to appear not to be promoting Trump while doing exactly that. Save your spin for someone else.
    This is called paranoia. relax. this election is the finest show I've ever seen.

  21. #558
    Quote Originally Posted by Feelgood View Post
    Of course there is no free speech here, BECAUSE it is a privately owned forum, and has national users that are not bound by the Constitution.
    Right. Glad we can agree. So I'm still wondering, what's the problem?

    Unlike so many of you here, I actually adopt and adhere to a more Libertarian, free thought, freedom to choose, mentality then the closed minded we hate Trump bunch that have plagued these forums.
    Since you are so genuine and pure in your libertarian beliefs in comparison to the rest of us here, why do you then not let the owners and mods use that freedom of choice to choose what they want to do in their own interest and in the best interest of the website, and let users of this website to also, freely choose how they would like to move forward given the new rule set?

  22. #559
    Quote Originally Posted by Peace&Freedom View Post
    You mean, lots more people you prefer to lump in the wrong category.
    Lots more like bubbleboy.

    ...maybe slightly less stupid, on average, but just as Trump-trollish.

  23. #560
    Staff - Admin
    Houston, TX
    Bryan's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    6
    Posts
    8,469
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Bryan wrote: "In what way does anything that I have written indicate that we are shutting down sincere debate? Please explain, this will help me better communicate in the future since there is zero intent to shut down debate."

    Quote Originally Posted by openfire View Post
    Because it already has. I, and others I'm sure, have had many insightful arguments to add to the so-called "sincere" debate that we haven't, out of this fear of violating this "policy".
    The statement of "Because it already has" does not answer my question as to what I wrote could indicate it would be an issue.

    Otherwise, this question was posed to @Meritocrat - it's still open. thanks.
    This site has a specific purpose defined in our Mission Statement.

    Members must read and follow our Community Guidelines.

    I strive to respond to all queries; please excuse late and out-of-sequence responses.



  24. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  25. #561
    Staff - Admin
    Houston, TX
    Bryan's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    6
    Posts
    8,469
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty View Post
    You just think it doesn't.

    Cruz and Hillary will spend the young people like Kleenex..
    Quote Originally Posted by Bryan View Post
    Do you have proof that they will be any different than Trump? Or is that your speculation?
    Bump to get an answer from @Smitty - thanks!
    This site has a specific purpose defined in our Mission Statement.

    Members must read and follow our Community Guidelines.

    I strive to respond to all queries; please excuse late and out-of-sequence responses.

  26. #562
    Hillary's warmonger history and Cruz's alignment with the Bush clan,...which also has a history of warmongering.

  27. #563
    Trump, on the other hand, has said that he would have no problem getting along with Putin and has expressed a desire to tone down the stress which currently exists between Russia and the USA.

  28. #564
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty View Post
    Hillary's warmonger history and Cruz's alignment with the Bush clan,...which also has a history of warmongering.
    Trump's connection to the Clintons is at least as strong as Cruz's to the Bushes.

  29. #565
    Trump's association with the Clintons was business and maybe a small amount of socializing.

    Cruz's association with the Bush clan was governmental. Not to mention his wife's connection with Citi Bank, Goldman Sachs, and the CFR.

  30. #566
    Staff - Admin
    Houston, TX
    Bryan's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    6
    Posts
    8,469
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Feelgood View Post
    While I personally cannot stand Trump, I must say this is a sad day for these forums. The blatant quashing of free speech on a forum that was founded on it, is just sad. If someone chooses to support Trump, that is their right and their decision to do so. The whole principle of freedom and liberty and the stance of Libertarians is freedom. Including the freedom to make bad choices. If they support Trump and try to get others to do so, so be it. If your position to counter them is so weak, then that is your problem and perhaps you then are backing the wrong candidate or position.

    Anyone here that truly believes in Liberty should be able to counter anyone here who advocates for someone like Trump. If you can't, then you have the problem moreso then they do. But telling people they are not allowed here because they have freely chosen to support Trump, well that's just wrong.

    Bryan, your bad decision in this regard has just negatively affected the Liberty Tree. You have begun its wilting process. Good job.

    Now with that said, I support Bryan's right to make a bad decision. The forums are his to elevate or run into the ground, as he sees fit.
    There has never been absolute free speech on the site, we've always have had guidelines that limit what you can post. In this case we are adding that you can't promote Trump to win the presidency - as in the OP. Based on my extensive assessment, I respectfully disagree that it's a bad decision as the Trump campaign is not in-line with our Mission.

    Thanks for the input.
    This site has a specific purpose defined in our Mission Statement.

    Members must read and follow our Community Guidelines.

    I strive to respond to all queries; please excuse late and out-of-sequence responses.

  31. #567
    Staff - Admin
    Houston, TX
    Bryan's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    6
    Posts
    8,469
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by thoughtomator View Post
    Perhaps the issue here is that you genuinely believe such a case could be taken seriously.

    He Who Shall Not Be Named is far from ideal but he's not within light years of the level of pure evil that the other two are.
    It's OK, you can name him.
    This site has a specific purpose defined in our Mission Statement.

    Members must read and follow our Community Guidelines.

    I strive to respond to all queries; please excuse late and out-of-sequence responses.

  32. #568
    Staff - Admin
    Houston, TX
    Bryan's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    6
    Posts
    8,469
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by ProBlue33 View Post
    I agree, you guys just seem to want a small cheer leading team of those with the same purist ideology posting here now, news flash you are being left behind, having been here in 2008, 2012 and now 2016 the movement peaked in 2012 in every way, more and more people are moving on, so they can be relevant to current politics.
    These can be serious concerns, and I think there are some things that are important for the movement to discuss. That said, I don't think that not supporting Trump is a linchpin to being relevant, I also don't think we compromise our principles, but that doesn't mean we still can't be strategic in what we do, and not expect a home-run at every turn.


    Lead, follow or get out of the way.
    I see too many politically stagnant deadheads influencing Bryan now, get relevant people, or get sidelined.
    How so, please explain. Use PM if needed if you're going to name names. Thanks!


    The delegates that were for Ron Paul in 2012 that return to the state conventions in 2016 and get certified as delegates will be very relevant, especially if they are bound to Trump on the first round but not on the second round, that is real relevance, for those people they get the best of both worlds, and they will get a chance for payback on the GOP for 2012.
    The delegate process is something that everyone should be involved with, even for 2016. Find a way to make things work for you as best possible. Good points.
    This site has a specific purpose defined in our Mission Statement.

    Members must read and follow our Community Guidelines.

    I strive to respond to all queries; please excuse late and out-of-sequence responses.



  33. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  34. #569
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty View Post
    Trump's association with the Clintons was business and maybe a small amount of socializing.
    Right, giving her money and praising her in public, just business...

    And no doubt it's a coincidence that his own professed political beliefs closely match hers.

    Cruz's association with the Bush clan was governmental. Not to mention his wife's connection with Citi Bank, Goldman Sachs, and the CFR.
    No no no, Cruz just worked for Bush for the money, as does his wife for Goldman.

    And joining the CFR was just a way for her to get ahead at her job, to impress the bosses, you see.

    Just business.

  35. #570
    Staff - Admin
    Houston, TX
    Bryan's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    6
    Posts
    8,469
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by squirl22 View Post
    There were a lot of people actively supporting Cruz while Rand was still running...why was that ok?
    Any support for Cruz was limited, didn't cause major conflicts and a site evaluation had not been performed - it is still not complete. Things aren't perfect here, that's for sure.
    This site has a specific purpose defined in our Mission Statement.

    Members must read and follow our Community Guidelines.

    I strive to respond to all queries; please excuse late and out-of-sequence responses.

Page 19 of 29 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast


Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

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