Reason: Huckabee Knocks "Libertarian faux-cons" in his new Book

Those pilgrims bought the land from those indians...there are also title deeds in the original form preserved in the museum. Problem was...the indians didn't understand property rights..and they came back and did whatever they wanted to on the land after they sold it. tones

You just seem to be just selectively choosing vaguely remembered lines out of a government history book, not really having a good idea what you are talking about.

This thread has been going no where for the past several pages.
 
i get so sick of arguing with nimrods. If we can't agree on the ORIGINAL HISTORY of this country...then we can't take it back. You can NOT live in a brainwashed politically correct world and expect to take this country back. It is best to go back to the history that is CLOSEST TO THE EVENT. tones
 
with the "faux-cons" bs from Muck Hickabee . . .

the Arkansas lardhead just became our GOP enemy #1 for 2011, (with an ideology not going to survive much into 2012 whether or not RP gets into the race) -
about as much as Judy Riuliani was dissed throughout 2007.

GovernorMikeHukabeeToursIsraelV6Meu.jpg

Huckabee wants to be the new fascist for the GOP - carrying a cross draped in the flag . . .

but he had better tread carefully with the "walking on water" part.

Even with ice now forming over the Iowa rivers, he won't get out very far this time before he cracks right through and sinks to the bottom.
 
That is NONSENSE...i TOlD you i went and read the writings of the pilgrims..here is a link..go read it for yourself. tones

http://www.pilgrimhall.org/museum.htm

ZOMG UR SO RESEARCHED



1. That site does not exactly look like its concerned with objectivity, as a museum it seems more concerned with presenting one side of early American colonization - the bright side. Not that there is anything wrong with that, however its not the full picture.

2. Selectively choosing some of the pilgrim's writings does not give you a good idea of how some of the first colonies started out. If you were writing a diary, or a letter trying to encourage more people to come to the new land from England, you wouldn't mention how you had to resort to cannibalism and looting the Indians just to survive. First person sources are not always infallible.

All I'm trying to say is that you should be more opened minded instead of so arrogant, most of your posts seem to be nothing but blurry rhetoric.
 
Last edited:
My message:
Sorry Huckabee, the cat's out of the bag and no amount of sucking up would've stopped me from sending this message. I put it to you that YOU and the religious right are what's wrong with the Republican party. Our fore-fathers did not suffer through a harrowing journey across the Atlantic and a war with England just so tyranny and religious law can be brought back 200 years later. Although many of them were Christian, some were not, and they rejoiced in the freedom to believe whatever they wanted to believe without persecution. I care not if you want to spread the word of God from a pulpit, a soap box, a book, a magazine, a newspaper, a radio or a TV show. Don't you feel proud, don't you feel blessed to live in a country where you can where your faith on your sleeve and not only receive no punishment for it, but you are protected by those who violently oppose your views? In some countries, based on religious law, it is perfectly acceptable to kill a family member for dishonoring the family. Do we want to become so wrapped up in religion and morality that basic human rights no longer apply? I do not disagree that morality and spirituality are lofty goals, but governments, which are meant to protect the rights of the people, are not the proper vehicles to reach those goals. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are rights given to us by God. The #1 infringer of these rights though, is government.
 
I get my morality from the teachings of Ayn Rand and the morality of the individual.

I tend to work to get the government to subscribe to my morals through force (or lack thereof).
 
Here is another thing I'm getting sick of...the pilgrims did NOT cut the head off of an indian chief and kick it around like a ball on Thanksgiving. The pilgrims did NOT steal land from the indians..they PURCHASED the land from the indians. I get so sick of revisionist history. I just went and read all the old writings of the original pilgrims that I could find. Even though the europeans expanded..and pushed the natives over...the pilgrims did NOT steal the land. There were only 102 original pilgrims..and half of them died during the winter. yes, some of the natives were not immune to sicknesses brought by the pilgrims but there is NO evidence the pilgrims gave the indians blankets filled with smallpox. NONSENSE. Matter of fact..one of the european gentlemen saved the life of the native chief. There were issues later...but a lot of that stuff is just nonsense. tones

:eek: You have a very poor understanding of colonial America. Not that I care, the natives lost, whatever, but don't try to sugarcoat it like that. Lying, or re-telling lies told to you, is just bad karma.

Regarding the actual topic, I just don't understand how social conservatives think. I'm Christian, but as a Lutheran, I was taught that salvation is a matter between me and God. Going to church is pretty much irrelevant and trying to play culture-warrior and legislating morality would get me a ticket to Hell as I understand it. It is not for you to judge, it is for Him to judge. Assuming that you have to right to enforce His will=a trip to the furnace when you pass on.
 
Huckabee wants to be the new fascist for the GOP - carrying a cross draped in the flag . . .

but he had better tread carefully with the "walking on water" part.

Even with ice now forming over the Iowa rivers, he won't get out very far this time before he cracks right through and sinks to the bottom.

Religious fascism?
 
Quote:
Here is another thing I'm getting sick of...the pilgrims did NOT cut the head off of an indian chief and kick it around like a ball on Thanksgiving. The pilgrims did NOT steal land from the indians..they PURCHASED the land from the indians. I get so sick of revisionist history. I just went and read all the old writings of the original pilgrims that I could find. Even though the europeans expanded..and pushed the natives over...the pilgrims did NOT steal the land. There were only 102 original pilgrims..and half of them died during the winter. yes, some of the natives were not immune to sicknesses brought by the pilgrims but there is NO evidence the pilgrims gave the indians blankets filled with smallpox. NONSENSE. Matter of fact..one of the european gentlemen saved the life of the native chief. There were issues later...but a lot of that stuff is just nonsense. tones


I see what you're saying but WHO CARES? MONGOLOID-INDIANS AREN'T EVEN NATIVE TO THIS COUNTRY. They come from asia and actually came in AFTER the original Caucasoids(european rooted) did.

Evidence.

http://first-americans.blogspot.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFJ1XL65Jfw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrfSGizvRPM
 
Last edited:
Homah..yes we are pulling the GOP back to morality. More to the Goldwater, early Reagan days. The GOP IS supposed to be Limited government, non interventionism, (although the bankers control foreign policy on both sides), Fiscal responsibility, balanced budgets, possibly the Fair Tax, but not the social liberalism embraced by the Libertarian Party. And for the poster above ..please read Thomas Paine Society and Government. You must have a moral society to have very little government....immorality FORCES government force. Tones

Limited government sounds great, however Immorality Forces is going to cause blow back. My question is, who is to determine what is moral and who gives them the right over god to judge me and my actions? Do what you please when it comes to YOUR life but please don't tread on me and my liberties.
 
Is anyone else encouraged that an establishment candidate is afraid Ron Paul wields enough influence to split the party? I sure am. I've heard an establishment hack so candidly express that fear.
 
Was Huckabee not paying attention? The growth in the party - the youth - were excited about only one man representing one philosophy:

Ron Paul, the libertarian conservative:
Individual Liberty
Sound Money
End the Fed
Non-Interventionism
Strong Defense
Follow the Constitution
Reduce Taxes
Shrink Federal Gov't to Constitutional Levels by eliminating entire Departments
Protect Freedom & Property
Free the Markets
Free Trade

Mike, what part of this is confusing to you? The GOP lost this year, and will continue to lose, if it does not re-embrace its core libertarian conservative message.
 
Mike, are you going opposite Paul in some twisted way to promote sales of your new book due to the resulting controversy?

This seems quite contrary from what your buddy Chuck Norris was doing a few months back.
 
I am not a he..and I am not a neo con. Do you even know what a neoconservative is? Doubtful that you do. Google neoconservative. I am a Ron Paul Republican...i'm a paleoconservative. Ron Paul is a paleoconservative like Pat Buchanan, Goldwater etc. tones

Most of us here are Ron Paul republicans. Why are you so hyper?? Ron Paul wants us to have freedoms, and that consists of being able to make our own choices on being gay, druggies or even gay druggies etc., instead of having morals of others stuffed down our throats! Why are you so hyper? You like Huckabee and come across as a major fascist which is anti Dr. Paul. Why are you so hyper?
 
Where are you getting this information? that is a LIE...Stop with the revisionist history. Why don't you read what those pilgrims actually wrote? There isn't much of it..so how do you conclude this bullshit. You must be indians! Just STOP the nonsense. tones

William Bradford's Of Plimoth Plantation is a very hefty read. Have you read it?
It is the journal of a govenor of Plymouth colony, and leader of the seperatist church.

Church attendance was mandatory for the colony. This would not exactly be seen as free from religious persecution since each town was its own congregation. However moving away could be seen as an option, I suppose. Not exactly as easy as it seems though...
 
Is anyone else encouraged that an establishment candidate is afraid Ron Paul wields enough influence to split the party? I sure am. I've heard an establishment hack so candidly express that fear.

That's a good point, no publicity is bad publicity.

Oh, and Gig'em, class of '03.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top