Why do the Paranoid in this movement want to march backwards?

[TotalLiberty]

I definitely think we should reconsider the very idea of government. Anarchy simply means "no ruler". I can't think of a reason I would want a stranger to rule part of my life...can anyone else? If there are bad people in society, it would seem to be that they would be the ones that gravitate to positions of power, so then we have bad people ruling over good people.

 

[constituent]

I definitely think we should reconsider the very idea of government. Anarchy simply means "no ruler". I can't think of a reason I would want a stranger to rule part of my life...can anyone else? If there are bad people in society, it would seem to be that they would be the ones that gravitate to positions of power, so then we have bad people ruling over good people.

Someone forgot their Thorazine...

 

[cheapseats]

You also got to remember, there are a few people with a few thousand posts that just keep fighting and fighting and fighting for their 'perfection'.

Sticking to principles and Perfectionism are not the same thing.

It makes it harder for the rest of us who just want to move in the right direction the best possible way with the best we have.

There is legitimate, bona fide disagreement over the best possible way and the best possible people. That doesn't automatically make "your side" Right.

I mean, jesus isn't running for congress any time soon, so for now we have to accept the imperfect human beings.

Insinuating Jesus into American Politics is blasphemous.

Accepting human imperfection is not incompatible with demanding higher standards from those who would lord over others.

but it's important for us not to allow the dissenters to undermine us or frustrate us.

Speaking of imperfection, do you concede that you and "your side" cannot HUMANLY be Right about everything?

We just have to keep moving forward...

Point me to the forward progress.

 

[cheapseats]

Because some of us are sick of "compromise".

When you do this for more than 25 years, like I have, it becomes very clear that 98.5 percent quickly becomes 80 percent that becomes 60 percent that becomes 30 percent that becomes nothing.

Feet will be held to the fire, consequences be damned.

I've "only" spent THREE YEARS OF A SHORT LIFE at this, and I cannot BELIEVE that pansy-assed Americans are still applauding "Baby Steps."

People need to get a few things straight.

APPEASEMENT NEVER APPEASES.

BEING DOLED BACK A FRACTION OF THAT WHICH WAS TAKEN FROM YOU DOES NOT CONSTITUTE PROGRESS, AND IT IS NOT EVEN IN THE SAME LEAGUE AS LIBERTY.

 

[silverhandorder]

I've "only" spent THREE YEARS OF A SHORT LIFE at this, and I cannot BELIEVE that pansy-assed Americans are still applauding "Baby Steps."

People need to get this straight. APPEASEMENT NEVER APPEASES.

Then I question if you know what appeasement is or that you really have any idea of what Rand and Schiff are doing.

Appeasement is when you continue to let people do as they wish without wanting to confront them.

None of that fits either of them. Their beliefs are as liberty minded as it can possibly be.

The facts are simply that both candidates spoke out vehemently against empire building, foreign intervention and war.

The fact that only a tiny fraction of their stances can be somehow misconstrued as anti liberty is more likely that you are grasping as straws then they are pandering to neocons. If they were really pandering they would simply run as neocons since running as neocons is much easier road to a senate seat then taking on liberty platform and in making some offbeat neoconish statement.

For example the infamous Schiff statement about "bombing nuke sites" was preempted with an "if we as a nation consider Iran dangerous". Something tells me that Schiff personally does not think Iran is dangerous. Maybe his twitter reply the next day saying that he does not want to bomb Iran tipped me off.

Point being you are either trolling, have your head in your ass or you are on some personal mission.

 

[cheapseats]

Then I question if you know what appeasement is or that you really have any idea of what Rand and Schiff are doing.

Interesting that you bunch Rand (one-name-like-a-star?) and Schiff together, for I do not speak out against Rand Paul except to warn that family dynasties in politics are, IN MY VIEW, definitively worse than garden-variety family dynasties.

Do you MEAN to imply that my criticisms of Peter Schiff are equally relevant to Rand Paul?

Appeasement is when you continue to let people do as they wish without wanting to confront them.

WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE DOING, ARE WE NOT? PUSSY-FOOTING AROUND WHILE WAR ESCALATES, CORRUPT POLITICIANS AND EXECUTIVES GET OFF SCOT-FREE, DEBT MOUNTS THEATRICALLY AND INALIENABLE RIGHTS ARE TRAMPLED.

Some animated typing, to be sure, but basically it's FULL STEAM AHEAD.

None of that fits either of them. Their beliefs are as liberty minded as it can possibly be.

You link them, IN MY VIEW, to Rand Paul's detriment. POINT ME TO PETER SCHIFF'S LIBERTY-LOVINGNESS OUTSIDE OF LIBERTY TO MAKE MONEY? C'mon, put a spin on the ABSENCE of a voting history.

Do EITHER advocate for rigorous prosecution of White Collar Criminals, private AND public sector?

Point being you are either trolling, have your head in your ass or you are on some personal mission.

Personal mission, as opposed to a COLLECTIVE mission?

How my country fares very much affects ME. In the spirit of Survival of the Fittest, I AM self-interested. I think y'all are setting up a repeat of 2008. That bodes ill FOR ME.

Setting ME aside, reluctant as I am to do so, there ARE the matters of the Least Among Us and Completely Innocent Strangers who are either falling off or being BLOWN OFF the game board while we peaceably and ineffectively pursue The Political Process. Death count in Afghanistan and Iraq, anyone know?

If we would force the confrontations that we steadfastly avoid, in the manner of COWARDS, the battles themselves would RENDER candidates. New leaders would MANIFEST as surely as cream rises to the top.

Instead, y'all elect to STAY SAFE, and pump your time/energy/money/emotion into particular people -- puny humans -- as though they are NEW Messiahs. What happens if Peter Schiff succumbs to Swine Flu and Rand Paul gets hit by a bus? Poof, that's it? Any chance of restoring Reason to American Governance is finito?

Y'all are STILL playing the game of equivocating and pulling punches "to GET elected," as though parallel compromise and back-peddling will cease to occur once they're IN office. Magical Thinking.

 

[DjLoTi]

Point me to the forward progress.

I'd say Ron Paul and the people at Ron Paul forums but you're already here, so idk what to tell u.

 

[cheapseats]

I'd say Ron Paul and the people at Ron Paul forums but you're already here, so idk what to tell u.

By EVERY tangible measure, the broadcloth of the American Citizenry is falling further behind. Read that, further toward Serfdom.

By measures both tangible and psychological, a New & NOT Improved World Order proceeds apace.

 

[silverhandorder]

Interesting that you bunch Rand (one-name-like-a-star?) and Schiff together, for I do not speak out against Rand Paul except to warn that family dynasties in politics are, IN MY VIEW, definitively worse than garden-variety family dynasties.

Do you MEAN to imply that my criticisms of Peter Schiff are equally relevant to Rand Paul?

From the way you sound (clinging to irrelevant issues) yes. Rand said something about Guntanamo, Peter said something about fighting terror. Same shit as far as anyone with a brain cell is concerned.

The facts are that both candidates are against the current wars and want our troops home.

WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE DOING, ARE WE NOT? PUSSY-FOOTING AROUND WHILE WAR ESCALATES, CORRUPT POLITICIANS AND EXECUTIVES GET OFF SCOT-FREE, DEBT MOUNTS THEATRICALLY AND INALIENABLE RIGHTS ARE TRAMPLED.

Some animated typing, to be sure, but basically it's FULL STEAM AHEAD.

Not everyone's main issue is war. I care more about not going bankrupt then morality of pre-emptive war. Don't get me wrong I am against both but my priorities are with stopping burrowing that we can never pay back.

Last I checked both Schiff was perfectly in line with ending our empire anyways.

You link them, IN MY VIEW, to Rand Paul's detriment. POINT ME TO PETER SCHIFF'S LIBERTY-LOVINGNESS OUTSIDE OF LIBERTY TO MAKE MONEY? C'mon, put a spin on the ABSENCE of a voting history.

Rand has a voting history? Both candidates are very outspoken and we can easily trace many of their stances a decade into the past.

POINT ME TO PETER SCHIFF'S LIBERTY-LOVINGNESS OUTSIDE OF LIBERTY TO MAKE MONEY?

Really?

Do EITHER advocate for rigorous prosecution of White Collar Criminals, private AND public sector?

I don't even know how this is at all relevant.

Personal mission, as opposed to a COLLECTIVE mission?

As in you don't like the guy for w.e reason and will distort and use dishonest tactics to attack him.

How my country fares very much affects ME. In the spirit of Survival of the Fittest, I AM self-interested. I think y'all are setting up a repeat of 2008. That bodes ill FOR ME.

Ok so you think Schiff is a long shot and that he will be a weak legislator. Yet you also do not like Rand because he is going for a family dynasty. So then what is your plan?

Setting ME aside, reluctant as I am to do so, there ARE the matters of the Least Among Us and Completely Innocent Strangers who are either falling off or being BLOWN OFF the game board while we peaceably and ineffectively pursue The Political Process. Death count in Afghanistan and Iraq, anyone know?

I am sorry I care more about my self being screwed then other people being screwed. Now I know foreign policy is tied in with the rest of the platform but I first want to stave of bankruptcy rather than end immorality of war. Maybe you should go to anti-war.com instead?

If we would force the confrontations that we steadfastly avoid, in the manner of COWARDS, the battles themselves would RENDER candidates. New leaders would MANIFEST as surely as cream rises to the top.

Disagreement on how to achieve our goals does not constitute avoiding confrontation. As I said before for me all that matters is that both candidates are against war and that I can count on them to bring all the troops home. So far nothing shattered my faith in that.

Instead, y'all elect to STAY SAFE, and pump your time/energy/money/emotion into particular people -- puny humans -- as though they are NEW Messiahs. What happens if Peter Schiff succumbs to Swine Flu and Rand Paul gets hit by a bus? Poof, that's it? Any chance of restoring Reason to American Governance is finito?

Just because you don't like a particular leader does not mean we are all lemmings. If you can't find one you like maybe you should lead your self?

Y'all are STILL playing the game of equivocating and pulling punches "to GET elected," as though parallel compromise and back-peddling will cease to occur once they're IN office. Magical Thinking.

Again within the liberty movement you are a huge minority. AKA people who think Schiff is backpedaling on anything. The only people I saw come out against Schiff are Anarchists and you. Don't seam like good odds.

 

[silverhandorder]

By EVERY tangible measure, the broadcloth of the American Citizenry is falling further behind. Read that, further toward Serfdom.

By measures both tangible and psychological, a New & NOT Improved World Order proceeds apace.

It's not like we were going to turn this around. If you think that you are not capable of critical thinking. However the only tangible metric by which liberty movement can fairly be judged on is it's growth and acceptance by mainstream. In both cases that is a tremendous success.

 

[CCTelander]

By EVERY tangible measure, the broadcloth of the American Citizenry is falling further behind. Read that, further toward Serfdom.

By measures both tangible and psychological, a New & NOT Improved World Order proceeds apace.

I've been actively involved in the so-called "liberty movement" for 35+ years now. I've yet to see that movement make any significant progress. Oh we make a lot of noise from time to time and express our righteous indignation, but EVERY SINGLE YEAR things get worse. Government gets bigger and more intrusive. More liberty is stripped away from the people. Unjust, incredibly destructive wars go on, and on with no end in sight. The dollar continues to lose its value, and hundreds of millions suffer as a result.

More of the same, working within the system, isn't going to do it. It's long past time to face reality. A completely different approach is needed.

 

[silverhandorder]

I've been actively involved in the so-called "liberty movement" for 35+ years now. I've yet to see that movement make any significant progress. Oh we make a lot of noise from time to time and express our righteous indignation, but EVERY SINGLE YEAR things get worse. Government gets bigger and more intrusive. More liberty is stripped away from the people. Unjust, incredibly destructive wars go on, and on with no end in sight. The dollar continues to lose its value, and hundreds of millions suffer as a result.

More of the same, working within the system, isn't going to do it. It's long past time to face reality. A completely different approach is needed.

So start something and if it works I'll join you.

Stefbot on youtube is doing pretty good educational stuff. Think of something your own.

 

[cheapseats]

I've been actively involved in the so-called "liberty movement" for 35+ years now. I've yet to see that movement make any significant progress. Oh we make a lot of noise from time to time and express our righteous indignation, but EVERY SINGLE YEAR things get worse. Government gets bigger and more intrusive. More liberty is stripped away from the people. Unjust, incredibly destructive wars go on, and on with no end in sight. The dollar continues to lose its value, and hundreds of millions suffer as a result.

More of the same, working within the system, isn't going to do it. It's long past time to face reality. A completely different approach is needed.

Empirical evidence abounds.

 

[CCTelander]

Empirical evidence abounds.

And continues to be ignored. That's the part that still astonishes and discourages me.

 

[cheapseats]

It's not like we were going to turn this around. If you think that you are not capable of critical thinking.

THAT'S THE WAY IT IS and YOU CAN'T FIGHT CITY HALL and THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO are all part and parcel of the DEFEATISM that is at the core of both Communism and Socialism.

However the only tangible metric by which liberty movement can fairly be judged on is it's growth and acceptance by mainstream. In both cases that is a tremendous success.

Bullshit. Talk is cheap. What does it matter how many more people nod their heads up and down that Government is out of control and that Taxpayers are getting shafted? That is worth precisely whatever satisfaction Misery derives from Company.

In THIS paradigm, yer tangible metrics are ROLL BACK of government, REPEAL of micromanagement, LOWERING of taxes, ELIMINATION of capricious fines, RELAXATION of authoritarianism, HEIGHTENING of fiscal responsibility, PROSECUTION of Elite Criminals, DE-ESCALATION of war.

NOWHERE evident. NONE of it.

 

[DjLoTi]

I've been actively involved in the so-called "liberty movement" for 35+ years now. I've yet to see that movement make any significant progress.

I think the Ron Paul movement did pretty good. I mean, yeah he didn't win, but I wouldn't say it's over yet. Personally I think it's the best chance we got to save our nation

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

LIBERTARIAN PARTY IN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS:

1972: 0.1%
1976: 0.21%
1980: 1.1%
1984: 0.3%
1988: 0.5%
1992: 0.3%
1996: 0.5%
2000: 0.4%
2004: 0.3%
2008: 0.4%

When you've been "educating" for nearly forty freakin' years and aren't moving up in the slightest, you're obviously doing a pretty piss-poor job of "educating".

I'm sick of all the arguments about "educating" people and throwing away winnable elections to "educate". As if going down in total flames is really going to make people think: "wow, what a great message that 0.5% guy had!" Most people just think: "wow, he must have been a real kook."

 

[silverhandorder]

THAT'S THE WAY IT IS and YOU CAN'T FIGHT CITY HALL and THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO are all part and parcel of the DEFEATISM that is at the core of both Communism and Socialism.





Bullshit. Talk is cheap. What does it matter how many more people nod their heads up and down that Government is out of control and that Taxpayers are getting shafted? That is worth precisely whatever satisfaction Misery derives from Company.

In THIS paradigm, yer tangible metrics are ROLL BACK of government, REPEAL of micromanagement, LOWERING of taxes, ELIMINATION of capricious fines, RELAXATION of authoritarianism, HEIGHTENING of fiscal responsibility, PROSECUTION of Elite Criminals, DE-ESCALATION of war.

NOWHERE evident. NONE of it.

Ok guy go start your ACTION party lets see how many will go along.

 

[Matthew Zak]

LIBERTARIAN PARTY IN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS:

1972: 0.1%
1976: 0.21%
1980: 1.1%
1984: 0.3%
1988: 0.5%
1992: 0.3%
1996: 0.5%
2000: 0.4%
2004: 0.3%
2008: 0.4%

When you've been "educating" for nearly forty freakin' years and aren't moving up in the slightest, you're obviously doing a pretty piss-poor job of "educating".

I'm sick of all the arguments about "educating" people and throwing away winnable elections to "educate". As if going down in total flames is really going to make people think: "wow, what a great message that 0.5% guy had!" Most people just think: "wow, he must have been a real kook."

This is exactly why we need to vote for candidates on a person-by-person basis, and not along 'Libertarian' party lines, because as long as it isn't "status quo" there will be no room for Libertarians in the political arena. We need to force the Libertarian platform into a big "R" and ram it down the establishment's throats. Classic Liberal, Modern Conservative, it's all BS. Some people know this, and those are the ones in control. Peter Schiff, Rand Paul, Gary Johnson, Ron himself -- none are perfect, all are a step in the right direction.

 

[cheapseats]

The facts are that both candidates are against the current wars and want our troops home.

The FACT is that NEITHER candidate was the subject of the thread.

Methinks thou dost protest too much.

Not everyone's main issue is war.

I've noticed.

I care more about not going bankrupt then morality of pre-emptive war. Don't get me wrong I am against both but my priorities are with stopping burrowing that we can never pay back.

I realize that Dot Connecting is not a popular pastime around here but . . . WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK WE'RE BORROWING ALL THAT MONEY FOR, IF NOT FOR ONGOING WARS? Note the plural.

Last I checked both Schiff was perfectly in line with ending our empire anyways.

The man said that American military bases on foreign soil are LUXURIES that we cannot afford AT THIS TIME.

That, to me, is a TYPE of thinking. Military bases ARE profitable for some. You DO realize that, yes? Moreso are they likely to be profitable to people with Investment Portfolios.

I don't even know how this is at all relevant.

As in you don't like the guy for w.e reason and will distort and use dishonest tactics to attack him.

That you do not LIKE my thinking/beliefs/analyses does not make my "tactics" dishonest. Your defensiveness is making you reckless.

Ok so you think Schiff is a long shot

It's just ME that thinks so, eh? Remind me, what's he polling at?

and that he will be a weak legislator.

I think he is not a Legislator TYPE. Mind, I don't think ANYONE is gonna get in office and, LIKE MAGIC, set everyone straight and ram through heretofore elusive reforms.

Yet you also do not like Rand because he is going for a family dynasty.

Because I do not approve of family dynasties in politics, I do not like Rand Paul? If A, then R?

So then what is your plan?

Hold that thought, or don't.

I am sorry I care more about my self being screwed then other people being screwed.

Why are you sorry? Or are YOU being dishonest?

Now I know foreign policy is tied in with the rest of the platform but I first want to stave of bankruptcy rather than end immorality of war. Maybe you should go to anti-war.com instead?

Maybe you should re-think Interconnectivity.

Disagreement on how to achieve our goals does not constitute avoiding confrontation.

It kinda DOES when there is biased censorship, but that's not what I'm talking about.

I'M TALKING ABOUT OUR STEADFAST AND CHICKENSHIT REFUSAL TO GO AFTER WHITE COLLAR BAD GUYS.

As I said before for me all that matters is that both candidates are against war and that I can count on them to bring all the troops home.

Elsewhere you took the liberty of suggesting that my critical thinking is not up to snuff. To avoid charges of Racism, I will suggest that the pot calls the kettle Wrought Iron.

So far nothing shattered my faith in that.

Would anything?

Just because you don't like a particular leader does not mean we are all lemmings.

I KNOW everyone here isn't a lemming. People keep asking me why I'm here, that's one of the reasons. There are some uber Good Eggs mixed in with the Bad Apples. Just like in the population at large.

If you can't find one you like maybe you should lead your self?

If we can agree on nothing else, I'm thinking we can agree that I do NOT have the temperament of a leader. Benign Dictator, MAYBE, so long as you don't countermand me.

Again within the liberty movement you are a huge minority.

That's right.

And the Liberty Moovement is a distinct minority among All Voters.

Ergo, I am in the Majority.

AKA people who think Schiff is backpedaling on anything. The only people I saw come out against Schiff are Anarchists and you. Don't seam like good odds.

Then don't PLAY them. To each his own, yes? But tell me this. Why is it fine for YOU to disagree with ME, while MY disagreeing with YOU is cause for insult unto impolite suggestion that I remove myself from the premises?