Ron Paul 2012!!! Your thoughts on who we should pick for our "Cause"?

[bentom187]

Psywar: Manutacturing consent through public relations and propaganda
1Hr 39min

this video brings to light the methods of propaganda,chomsky and a few of the other philosiphers i beleive are completley wrong about capitalisim and democracy, they demonize capitalisim but chose to highlight copratist ideals as capitalisim wich isnt being honest,and democracy is taking from the 49% to give to the 51% reguardless of law of our republic.
other than that the methodology is the important part.
[YOUTUBEIF]-tjKNOzfd-E[/YOUTUBEIF]

 

[dramamine]

darn, and here I thought that not stoning women to death because they wore pants instead of skirts was just a matter of common-sense rather than political ideology.

you got me there, champ!

Common sense does not involve bombing citizens to protect them from being stoned to death. See what I'm saying? You don't punch someone in the face to stop them biting their nails. The US government was never given the power to mold and control the rest of the world, but they have taken it. True altruism calls for diplomacy and reason, not war. The rest of the globe is laughing at you for thinking the US war program is well-intended. No one thinks the emperor is wearing clothes.....but again.....you were the one to scoff at trying to "fix something based on ideology". Now it's a foregone conclusion? I see that being the protector of the world is, to you, not an idealogical position. In any case, as I've heard RP say repeatedly, we don't have the money or resources to "fix" the rest of the world. That fact alone trumps all else. These aren't humanitarian wars....they are Crusades, subterfuges. It's too bad that yours is the prevailing attitude here in the States. Very naive, very misinformed...

 

[whodare]

you sure your not from america bom,

sure seems like your a typical product of the system of american indoctrination.

unwilling to do actual historical research and use as basis for argument, check

ignorance of history, check

calls opponents names or ignores arguments when they are right, check

puts words in peoples mouths, check

contradicts themselves in the same arguments repeatedly, check





yep id say your a sad representation of the stereotypical "dumb american"

 

[monkey5]

RON PAUL is still the only one running who even talks about cannabis being legal .. My vote goes to Ron! And that is what this thread is about..not stoning woman to death in other countrys! Maybe I missed that part of the conversation?? Sorry..stoned my self! ..monkey5

 

[monkey5]

bentom187, Great post!! Thank you sir!! And thank you to everyone of you, good posts by each of you...for bringing sanity to this thread.. I have run out of manna! You all rock!!!! This is why.. I LOVE THE USA .. not the Gubbernment .. but the people!! Thank you again for taking part! monkey5

 

[SpasticGramps]

specially comming from peeps who owned slaves, that's a classic.

Who didn't own slaves back then? The African's who enslaved their own people and then sold them to white eye? Roman slaves before then? Slave's of south america?

The slaves of today who make the western world cheap trinkets. Enslaved by monetarism and our need for cheap unsustainable consumerism?

The slave argument to attempt to distract from the philosophical founding principles and ideology of our country is elementary.

Your arguments and logic are riddled with inconsistencies, simplicities, and plain ignorance.

You hide your ignorance in veiled attempts at sarcasm that only make you look more painfully more ignorant.

How quick I'm reminded why I put you on ignore. Silly of me to take you off the list (which consists of only you) thinking you might have something intelligible to offer.

 

[SpasticGramps]

specially comming from peeps who owned slaves, that's a classic.

Who didn't own slaves back then? The African's who enslaved their own people and then sold them to white eye? Roman slaves before then?

The slaves of today who make the western world cheap trinkets. Enslaved by monetarism and our need for cheap unsustainable consumerism?

The slave argument to attempt to distract from the philosophical founding principles and ideology of our country is elementary.

Your arguments and logic are riddled with inconsistencies, simplicities, and plain ignorance.

You hide your ignorance in veiled attempts at sarcasm that only make you look more painfully more ignorant.

How quick I'm reminded why I put you on ignore. Silly of me to take you off the list (which consists of only you) thinking you might have something intelligible to offer.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^Awesome I did get to give positive rep to the same post twice.

 

[bentom187]

IITWI 4/15!

 

[bentom187]

...

 

[bentom187]

Ron Paul at University of Rhode Island Town Hall

Start:April 18, 2012 7:00 pmEnd:April 18, 2012 8:00 pmVenue:Keaney Gymnasium University of Rhode Island Address:
Google Map Tootell Road, South Kingstown, RI, United States, 02881

 

[zymos]

What is funny about Bom calling me primitive minded is that my I.Q. is over 140. everyone else I know with an I.Q. over 140 is a Libertarian. One has a doctorate in law. two have a phd in chemistry. One has a phd in thermal engineering. one has a phd in psychology. one has a phd in economics and business and owns 6 successful businesses, one has a phd in Electrical engineering. I am a botanist.

Yes we are so primitive with our advanced understanding of math, science, history, economics, and society. I guess Bom must be in the top .001 percent of intelligence.

arrogant

Sorry Hash, I actually like many of your posts, but bragging about IQs just makes me want to break out the old John Stuart Mill quote:

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

I am not bragging. I am just saying a primitive mind can not have that level of comprehension. sorry for the confusion. an IQ to brag about would be 180.

 

[dagnabit]

i notice when asked for specifics on fixing the "outdated" document written by those evil slave owners ole bombadil disappeared...

what up with that?

couldn't be he was just parroting could it?

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

I sent him private messages of my post earlier to try to draw him back in to see if he could come up with one valid argument. Our buddy Disco Biscuit is Liberal but he can make good points on a regular basis.

 

[whodare]

i notice when asked for specifics on fixing the "outdated" document written by those evil slave owners ole bombadil disappeared...

what up with that?

couldn't be he was just parroting could it?

Lol he was a sardine swiming in shark laden waters, the school must have swallowed him back up...

 

[bombadil.360]

furthermore going with Bom's logic then I guess Beethoven, Bach, and Paganini are primitive too. They wrote their music over a century ago. there is no way they could have conceived the electric guitar and auto tuning technology we have today.

We are human. until we evolve passed human and humans are extinct through evolution we will always desire our unalienable rights.

if we assume the cult-mind going on in this thread, what would happen is that you all would say that since Beethoven and Bach already wrote such good music, we must all only study and listen to this music.

now change Beethoven and Bach with the Founding Fathers and their Constitution.

and what we have is your cult-mind stance.

your cult-mind stance is not primitive because it sees value in document that is already a few hundred years old; rather, it is primitive because you expect that within its pages you will always find guidance that applies equally to all ages and times and situations.

obviously, it does not. and again, it is not an infallible document, as it was written by flawed humans, hence why the argument that they owned slaves. how could have they ever produced such an idealized document as this cult of yours has it when they themselves deprived others of their basic freedoms?

if we were to think under this cult-mind of yours; and not give room for new developments in terms of "constitutionality", for lack of a better word, and only refer to the constitution as the sole point of reference for all things freedom-related; it would be exactly like only studying Bach; leaving no room for new ideas to arise; under such cult-mind, paradigm shifters like John Cage could not have arisen; Wes Montgomery, Stan Getz and Joao Gilberto would have never came together to create Bossanova under this cult-mind of yours.

Common sense does not involve bombing citizens to protect them from being stoned to death. See what I'm saying?.

I see what you're saying; however, I do not know why you make such an argument? as I have never proposed to bomb anyone; surely, you must have imagined it.

Who didn't own slaves back then? The African's who enslaved their own people and then sold them to white eye? Roman slaves before then? Slave's of south america?

so since everyone was doing it, we can justify the so-called blameless and perfectly enlightened founding fathers.

once again, mob-thinking rules.

the founding fathers were not perfect, and many of their conclusions and actions were wrong, as simple as that.

their consitution cannot be universally applied to all times, places and situations.

to think that today's world does not need new paradigms and the old ones presented to us by the 'founding fathers' are sufficient, is thinking like a primitive ape.

 

[CannaBunkerMan]

So you're saying that a 200 year old document is out of date, and has no place in our society today? You say this and probably go home to worship a 2000 year old book that was written before the dark ages. Our constitution has been around for 200 years because of it's adaptability and versitility. Old? Maybe. Outdated? Never.

 

[whodare]

Bom do you even know anything about how American gov is supposed to work, the constitution doesn't offer all the answers.

The fed was for the most part to worry about national defense and disputes between states.

The states were given leeway to solve their local problems.

The constitution just offers the framework and laws to prevent tyranny from a behemoth federal(read centralized) gov, the same type they had just fought and escaped and just the type we are headed for if we don't reign in federal power.


It also lists the basic rights, of people.
Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, not healthcare, food and housing.

 

[dagnabit]

so what specifically does the constitution not apply to in modern times?

what needs to be changed?

besides vague platitudes about unimagined technology and slavery. what specifically does not apply?

separation of powers?
judicial power?
limitations on congress?

what part of the constitution is irrelevant?

are you really saying the bill of rights is outdated?
it's a common mistake to equate the BOR with the constitution.
the constitution lays the framework for the operation of our representative republic while it's the BOR and subsequent amendments that most refer to.

so which is it and what specifically do you think needs to be changed?