Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Ron Paul in 1997 on Armed BLM - Video

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    699

    Ron Paul in 1997 on Armed BLM - Video


  2. #2
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,100
    Wow, can we get a round of applause, please?

    Thank you for digging this up and posting it, onus. I find it very interesting.
    Last edited by stealthyeliminator; 04-28-2014 at 06:02 PM.
    Advocate freedom please

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    699
    you are very welcome.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Resto Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    183
    Yes, thank you. I've shared it on another site. Every American should be required to watch this video.

  5. #5
    Regular Member MurrayRothbard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    64
    SO glad this nutjob didn't win in 2008 or 2012....can you imagine someone with such a lack of wisdom and foresight being in office????

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Only The Constitution Party represents America's conservative Country Class against the progressive Ruling Party.
    I continue to disagree with you on this point.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,200
    "Yes we need gun control. We need to disarm our bureaucrats, then abolish the agencies. If government bureaucrats like guns that much, let them seek work with the NRA."

    Win.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    ...particularly that mistake an epithet with the reality.
    I will agree that this is an easy trap to fall into. "Liberals" and "conservatives" and "libertarians" are all equally at risk.

    Of course, it could be that "constitutionalists" are as well.

  9. #9
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Sure. Just what we suffer now, the government that we deserve, inspiring progressives, that are libertarians, democraps and repugnicans at every turn.

    Only The Constitution Party represents America's conservative Country Class against the progressive Ruling Party.
    I personally don't give a **** whether or not your class is represented well enough in government. Can you express what it is that you want in plain English? Do you want liberty or no? A society will never have liberty as a result of representation in government. Do you disagree? It would certainly seem so.
    Advocate freedom please

  10. #10
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    830
    I can well imagine what would happen if he had been elected. The constitution would be respected and many of the battles we face today would never have needed to be fought.

    Sent from my GT-I8190N using Tapatalk
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,898
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    I can well imagine what would happen if he had been elected. The constitution would be respected and many of the battles we face today would never have needed to be fought.

    Sent from my GT-I8190N using Tapatalk
    How so? He could not possibly stem the tidal wave of tyranny from the other members of the gang by himself, and he most certainly would have stood alone. The only thing he could have effectively done was to stonewall their efforts as much as possible, but we've clearly seen that government will still do whatever the fcuk it wants.

    After all, who is capable of ACTUALLY stopping them?

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    16,172
    I predicted 9-11 on 7-29 ... gov't does not care

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,411
    Quote Originally Posted by MurrayRothbard View Post
    SO glad this nutjob didn't win in 2008 or 2012....can you imagine someone with such a lack of wisdom and foresight being in office???? /sarcasm
    Fify

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,411
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    I continue to disagree with you on this point.
    I read the Constitution Party's platform prior to the 2012 election and based on that, I agree with your continued disagreement.

  15. #15
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    I find it amusing that correspondents here expect concepts in neat, one paragraph or webpage bundles.

    I have been reading (George Soros' handbook), The Open Society and Its Enemies, by epistemologist Karl Popper, for more than six months, and am ~400 pages into ~800 pages. I expect to read it and then re-read it following all of the internal and external citations, and taking two years. It took me more than two years of much more diffuse reading to read and understand, as much as I do, Popper's Logic of Scientific Discovery that established falsification as an answer to the Problem of Demarcation.

    Try it, you might like it. http://www.amazon.com/Open-Society-I.../dp/B00C791JIO I have both the print and e-book editions. I can read about two pages at a time before I nod off in a reverie (A state of dreaming while awake; a loose or irregular train of thought; musing or meditation; daydream).
    I find it amusing that you'd use 151 words to answer my three yes or no questions negatively, implying that it would take too much to explain your position. I would probably - no, most certainly - benefit from reading the book.

    The reason I ask is because I often find myself reading your posts and asking how it's relevant... At first I may have thought you were "missing" the mark, missing the point, or missing the "bullseye" if you will... More recently I think that perhaps you aren't missing the bullseye, but you're shooting at a different target entirely. Perhaps you're hitting the bullseye of your target, I just don't guess I know what that target is.

    I don't think that asking whether or not your goal is liberty is asking for a "concept in neat, one paragraph or webpage bundle." I don't think that asking whether or not you think that liberty can be achieved by acquiring more representation in government is asking for it, either.
    Last edited by stealthyeliminator; 05-01-2014 at 07:33 AM.
    Advocate freedom please

  16. #16
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    16,690
    I think the libertarian party should stop referring themselves as the large L. The true libertarians are the small l.

    I work with them and sad to say that many do fight Nightmares assessment of lying and compromising. I do not.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  17. #17
    Regular Member MurrayRothbard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by georg jetson View Post
    Fify
    exactly

  18. #18
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,100
    Hitting the reset button won't help. This is why I have a hard time "believing in" the Constitution Party. Get back to basics, get government to abide by the Constitution. Then what? We still don't truly have liberty, and we'll probably have to hit reset again in another few generations. If not, then the Constitution probably wasn't necessary in the first place, because it won't have been the Constitution that kept society in a state which needs not a reset.

    I would have to disagree that "progressivism" is inherently bad. Progressivism in politics is bad because politics is bad. It doesn't matter what is mandated if mandate is unjustified. "Making things better" isn't bad. If it was, it wouldn't be making things better, it'd be making things worse. How can you make things worse by making them better? Making things worse under the guise of making things better is certainly bad. Is such progressivism?
    Last edited by stealthyeliminator; 05-01-2014 at 07:53 PM.
    Advocate freedom please

Posting Permissions

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