This is pretty awesome. Watch the mitneyb0t flail.
Like most of my fellow pretend-aspergers asshole Interneteers, who tend to react more like autistics to the thought of the government folding, spindling or mutilating your tinfoil hat, I have turned my dudecrush for Ron Paul into real live third-party votechum by donating to his campaign.
Thinking for yourself is best done in groups. Get to it.
____________________ slippedhole> I am on to you and your evil intentions. I am the true protector of this website and am willing to do battle with you.
I too am developing a mancrush for Ron Paul. I have joined his site and as soon as my brokeded ass gets paid, I will be donating to this fine gentleman's campaign.
Swarmers For Ron Paul
____________________ < nuevoSock_> "me and the phone cable plugged to her labia were shaking hands
i've been considering; the wief is not sure though.
internally debating covert donation axion.
____________________ But the whole of modern so-called civilized existence is an attempt to deny reality insofar as it exists. When did Don last look at the stars, when did Norman last get soaked in a rainstorm?
I fucking love this guy.
And I already donated a few and suggest others do too.
I even wrote and hand mailed 5 letters to different registered voter folks in Iowa(addresses furnished from his campaign) and encouraged them to check out his website and vote for him in the straw poll.
I have also joined a local Ron Paul Meetup group and they have done some pretty interesting things already(none of which ive had time to participate in). They posted huge signs over I-5 and have a booth planned for the city's weekly farmers market to raise awareness to his possible candidacy.
I like ron paul alot, but I don't agree with his vote "against regulating the internet". What that vote translates to is he voted against "Net Neutrality". So the ISP's/infrastructure that has been built with total regulation/subsidization should just be left to the companies to control? That's a double screwing. I just don't think regulation is a bad thing in general. We've had periods of time without alot of regulation, and those weren't good times at all. Plus bring to the table the fact that we're not, nor have been close to a truly free market for a LONG TIME, and I just can't stand by the "anti-regulation" crowd and agree with them.
I'm torn... I like the idea of personal liberty and the government staying out of my business. I can't stand the idea that a corporation has more rights than I do, and they don't want to be regulated. If corporations weren't "legal persons" then I think the whole system would work alot better. I also think the right to a doctor is a basic human right, and how can that right be upheld? I don't know... but I'm open to debate...
____________________ Be true to the thought of the moment and avoid distraction
Gethoht: I'm torn... I like the idea of personal liberty and the government staying out of my business. I can't stand the idea that a corporation has more rights than I do, and they don't want to be regulated. If corporations weren't "legal persons" then I think the whole system would work alot better. I also think the right to a doctor is a basic human right, and how can that right be upheld? I don't know... but I'm open to debate...
Hopefully I'll remember to come back and reply to the first part of your post.... but...
A corporation doesn't have more rights than you. They have more money. Actually, it's the power-hungry mainstream politicians who are corrupt enough to give those companies 'extra rights' in exchange for money/donations/whatever.
If a corporation wasn't a "legal person" then you would have no legal recourse when that corporation fucks you. Trust me. You want them to be a legal person. Why do you want to regulate a business anyway? What if I want to regulate you? Would you like it?
Oh, and no, you don't have a right to a doctor. Check out the constitution. Not there. Not even close. It's not even "right to privacy" close.
Uh yeah... I didn't look in the constitution for the whole "right to a doctor" ideology. God forbid I have a political idea that is different from the constitution of the US. If you wanna go all "founding fathers" on me how about this little diddy from Jefferson regarding corporations:
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed
corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a
trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
or how about this one from lincoln, not exactly a founding father, but this was before corporations had any true legal rights:
"The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question it's methods or throw light upon it's crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the Bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.. corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money powers of the country will endeavor to prolong it's reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed."
Fuck yeah I want to regulate your business. If your business dumps shit in a river and I'm downstream, then that's an infraction of my liberties. If your business spews shit into the air, that's an infraction of my liberties. If you want to completely destroy my small business by "naked shorting" shares on the market, then that's an infraction of my liberties. Your freedom stops where my freedom starts.
Not to mention that A FREE MARKET HASN'T EXISTED IN A LONG FUCKING TIME, and it probably never will unless humanity almost kills itself off and gets to a "starting over" phase. At a bare minimum there should be not one fucking subsidy if there is not one fucking regulation, and with corporate welfare and government bailouts all to common, this is not going to happen.
Don't forget about the lack of a gold standard in any major currency.
Perfect example of a non-free market is happening all around us right now. Sub-prime mortgage crisis provokes fed to cut interest rates... what do you call that? It's manipulation. Granted it's to prevent a recession, but it's not the market that is doing it. It's not supply and demand at all. Look at the fact that every first world country has built it's industry up behind decades if not centuries of tariff walls and tell me that's a free market. A truly free market would probably induce chaos unless it was implemented over a long time. Also the idea of a free market is dependent on a level playing field, and we have anything but that currently.
So yeah... I see regulation as necessary. No regulation=virtually limitless power to destroy everything and get rich doing it.
____________________ Be true to the thought of the moment and avoid distraction
Ron Paul needs more money. I just threw him a few more bones why don't you?
Oh, and to address the above, sadly, those quotes have come true. The cool thing about the constitution is it allows even fagits like you to "have a political idea that is different from the constitution of the US."
So, just to make sure you are being treated equally....TITS OR GTFO.
I also joined my nearest Ron Paul meet-up group. Click below to find one in your area.
Argument Ad Hominem, Way to keep it classy there shitbox.
The reason why I'm so critical of my country is because I LOVE IT. I'm not going anywhere.
Ron Paul is a badass mofo, and I agree with alot of what he has to say. He's definitely a breath of fresh air in politics. He excites me more than any other candidate, and I'm seriously weighing the pros and cons of his platform.
Pros:
Tells it like it is
Badass mofo
Constantly embarrasses fox news
Anti-war
Anti-DHS
Anti-patriot act
Makes other republican candidates twitch
Cons:
Free market ideology needs some balance
Pro-Life
The current political spectrum is a big giant shit-stained toilet, with a bunch of turds swirling around screaming "terrorism is bad, remember 9/11, vote for me". Ron Paul seems to be standing at the toilet with his thousand scrubbing bubbles ready to clean some shit up and that makes the whole system tremble.
I've got to think on this one. I'm open to debate and new ideas, as long as they don't have purposely misspelled insults hurling my way.
On 2007-09-13 at 16:55:01, Gethoht craps monkey baby
____________________ Be true to the thought of the moment and avoid distraction
Gethoht: Fuck yeah I want to regulate your business. If your business dumps shit in a river and I'm downstream, then that's an infraction of my liberties. If your business spews shit into the air, that's an infraction of my liberties. If you want to completely destroy my small business by "naked shorting" shares on the market, then that's an infraction of my liberties. Your freedom stops where my freedom starts.
OH PLEASE MOMMY-GOVERNMENT SAVE ME!
Bullshit. If I dump shit in your water: Sue me, and don't buy what I'm selling.
If I spew shit into your air: Same.
If I fuck with your business -- we have anti-trust laws to promote fair play.
What regulation does is say, "Here you go Exxon, go ahead and spew shit into the air, just play nice and only spew a little."
That's what the power-hungry left has done to this country. Regulation gives the corporations an excuse. It gives them a means to commit the infringements that you suggest.
Not to mention that A FREE MARKET HASN'T EXISTED IN A LONG FUCKING TIME, and it probably never will unless humanity almost kills itself off and gets to a "starting over" phase.
Or unless whiney cunts stop asking the government to bail them out of every inconvenient situation.
At a bare minimum there should be not one fucking subsidy if there is not one fucking regulation
I agree
and with corporate welfare and government bailouts all to common, this is not going to happen.
It was made common by the same power-hungry politicians and judges that allow Exxon to pollute your air. If you vote for Hillary/Obama/Edwards/Giuliani/Romney/etc, bailouts, welfare and whatnot will abound.
Ron Paul wouldn't give them a cent.
Don't forget about the lack of a gold standard in any major currency.
Now you're turning into an ad for Ron Paul. Awesome.
Perfect example of a non-free market is happening all around us right now. Sub-prime mortgage crisis provokes fed to cut interest rates... what do you call that? It's manipulation.
Dude, maybe you don't get it... I agree. We don't have a free market. I like Ron Paul because I WANT A FREE MARKET.
A truly free market would probably induce chaos unless it was implemented over a long time. Also the idea of a free market is dependent on a level playing field, and we have anything but that currently.
Get rid of socialism, that's step #1.
Trust me though, if we wanted to, we could "level the playing field" real quick. We just need to use the justice system to go after corporate criminals instead of wasting time on potheads.
So yeah... I see regulation as necessary. No regulation=virtually limitless power to destroy everything and get rich doing it.
No regulation = limitless power to the masses to destroy everything.
Regulation = limitless power for Hillary Clinton to destroy everything.
These free market arguments strike me as just as ridiculous, unenforcable, cruel and shortcited as communist revolutionary trash. Its all theoretically possible.
"Bullshit. If I dump shit in your water: Sue me, and don't buy what I'm selling. If I spew shit into your air: Same."
See, my problem with this is the whole libertarian response when you ask the question: "what if they can't sue? What if they get intimidated, who will protect them from environmental abuses?" And thats where somone says: "maybe a charity will help" or "you're fucked". If monolithic industries have the power to abuse people into silence about corporate misdeeds with regulation they can do it better without. Thats where my logic leads me. I don't see how a free-market system would ever stop industrialists, with their rational self-interest, from basically, ruining everything. Tragedy of the commons, people, tragedy of the commons.
____________________ I'm an INTJ. This explains why I'm alternating between silence and judging you.
acheron: See, my problem with this is the whole libertarian response when you ask the question: "what if they can't sue? What if they get intimidated, who will protect them from environmental abuses?" And thats where somone says: "maybe a charity will help" or "you're fucked". If monolithic industries have the power to abuse people into silence about corporate misdeeds with regulation they can do it better without. Thats where my logic leads me. I don't see how a free-market system would ever stop industrialists, with their rational self-interest, from basically, ruining everything. Tragedy of the commons, people, tragedy of the commons.
I'm not an Anarcho-Capitalist libertarian. So I won't tell you, "oh well, too bad, d00d."
There is a reason I want the government to stay out of regulation. The government's job is to provide a judicial system. I find it hard to believe that a corporation could somehow prevent you from suing them, but if they did, it would (or should) be a criminal offense, that the government should charge them with.
The problem is, through regulation (and awesome campaign finance rules) the government has become too entangled in our lives, and FAR too entangled with corporations. The government right now (a non-free market, non-libertarian, pro-regulatory gov't) is actually empowering companies and individuals to undertake the shady dealings that scare the shit out of you.
If the government backed off from it's policy of total control, and instead stepped in to correct wrongs through standard judicial means, we'd have a better system all around.
" The government right now (a non-free market, non-libertarian, pro-regulatory gov't) is actually empowering companies and individuals to undertake the shady dealings that scare the shit out of you."
But why would companies that have the power to subvert a powerful federal government be inhibited from taking similiar tactics in its absence? Thats what I don't get.
____________________ I'm an INTJ. This explains why I'm alternating between silence and judging you.
acheron: " The government right now (a non-free market, non-libertarian, pro-regulatory gov't) is actually empowering companies and individuals to undertake the shady dealings that scare the shit out of you."
But why would companies that have the power to subvert a powerful federal government be inhibited from taking similiar tactics in its absence? Thats what I don't get.
Because they won't be empowered to do so. The government would hold them to the same civil and criminal standards as any citizen.
Uart: Bullshit. If I dump shit in your water: Sue me, and don't buy what I'm selling.
If I spew shit into your air: Same.
If I fuck with your business -- we have anti-trust laws to promote fair play.
What regulation does is say, "Here you go Exxon, go ahead and spew shit into the air, just play nice and only spew a little."
But if there is no regulation then I have no legal right to sue you because you didn't do anything legally wrong.
If regulation says "only spew a little", then the logical conclusion is that no regulations says "spew all the fuck you want".
Add to this argument the fact that lawsuits are a really expensive proposition. It's easy to see where an imbalance of power could happen.
Those "anti-trust laws" you speak of... those are regulations. I don't understand your argument against regulation but FOR anti-trust laws. To me they are one in the same... Can you elaborate by maybe defining the difference between a law and a regulation? Either way it goes to the courts.
FYI I've decided I'm gonna throw ron paul some bones, register republican and vote for him in the primary.
____________________ Be true to the thought of the moment and avoid distraction
GetHo: FYI I've decided I'm gonna throw ron paul some bones, register republican and vote for him in the primary.
Attah boyee.
I had to re-register myself...it made me cringe but it was necessary.
I don't agree with Dr. No's stance on immigration. I also don't think he's can just get elected to president and dismantle the IRS/DHS/FBI with a swipe of his pen. But I sure would rather have someone who thinks those ideas are ok in the White House than the other option: Everyone else.
(insert missing golden Wrecker quote here)
____________________ "Kill him! Kill the fuckin' indian! What am I watching here two fuckin' fags!?"
Rodney Dangerfield as Ed Wilson
But if there is no regulation then I have no legal right to sue you because you didn't do anything legally wrong.
You obviously don't know how this works, so I will forgive you.
In common law jurisdictions, you own a piece of land and everything above it and below it. If I pollute your air -- you sue me for trespassing.
Etc. These sort of principles apply to more than you think.
Add to this argument the fact that lawsuits are a really expensive proposition. It's easy to see where an imbalance of power could happen.
I'm a law student. I hang out with other law students. My professors are lawyers, and after classes we have networking events with other lawyers.
We are cocky mofos, and we LOOOOVEEE money.
I don't want to sue you. I want to sue the multi-billion dollar company, and I don't want you to pay me, I want you to give me a percent of whatever we win in the case.
Those "anti-trust laws" you speak of... those are regulations. I don't understand your argument against regulation but FOR anti-trust laws.
SOME of them are regulations.
When you sue/prosecute a company, you punish them for bad behavior.
When you regulate, you punish EVERYONE whether they misbehave or not. Oftentimes, regulations go too far and take away property rights, and not to mention that "regulatory bodies" are massive extensions of our government that exercise almost legislative power (without the constitutional authority) and they cost an assload of money.
I'd rather have 15 unregulated phone companies than two, or one regulated ones. If I invest money to build a network of phone wires, I don't think you should tell me how I can use them.
If I go around cutting YOUR phone wires because you're competing (and actually Verizon did this in my neighborhood to the Cable Co.), however, then you should sue me, or maybe even press charges.
I think we can self-regulate quite well by being litigious mofos. We're Americans, we're good at it.
FYI I've decided I'm gonna throw ron paul some bones, register republican and vote for him in the primary.
GetHo: FYI I've decided I'm gonna throw ron paul some bones, register republican and vote for him in the primary.
Attah boyee.
I had to re-register myself...it made me cringe but it was necessary.
I don't agree with Dr. No's stance on immigration. I also don't think he's can just get elected to president and dismantle the IRS/DHS/FBI with a swipe of his pen. But I sure would rather have someone who thinks those ideas are ok in the White House than the other option: Everyone else.
(insert missing golden Wrecker quote here)
He may not be able to insta-kill the IRS, but he can do SOMETHING to limit it's size and power.
He will DEFINITELY resist any calls to create new government agencies and expand the power and size of current ones.
"Because they won't be empowered to do so. The government would hold them to the same civil and criminal standards as any citizen."
AGH. You're taking away the government's power and then telling me it will protect me from much MUCH stronger interests. Tell me why this makes sense. Why would this compel companies to obey the law? Doesn't rational self-interest speak to subversion of the law for self-benefit. Doesn't the idea that every corporation will obey the rule of law, and not subvert a non-regulated system further than the current one, feel like the same enlightened, communal bullshit libertarians rail against?
____________________ I'm an INTJ. This explains why I'm alternating between silence and judging you.
acheron: AGH. You're taking away the government's power and then telling me it will protect me from much MUCH stronger interests. Tell me why this makes sense. Why would this compel companies to obey the law? Doesn't rational self-interest speak to subversion of the law for self-benefit. Doesn't the idea that every corporation will obey the rule of law, and not subvert a non-regulated system further than the current one, feel like the same enlightened, communal bullshit libertarians rail against?
Free Markets are tough to accept at first. So I understand your hesitation, but sometimes the government can overdo it, and actually make things worse. I believe that much of the "regulation" they do accomplishes this.
It isn't really taking any power away from the government (at least, not the power to protect your interests). Regulation can work for the corporation or against it. What you'll find is that oftentimes, big multinational corporations benefit from regulation. They can get the politicians in their pockets, and sure, the regs. can limit them, but they can also use those regulations to hurt the competition. Less competition = more power for the big company...
An example of this is Costa Rica, where big businesses actually lobbied the government to levy a VAT ("value added tax"). Why would they want a tax on their customers? Because as much as it might hurt them, it was going to kill small businesses. If they could make it harder for the little guy to compete, they could dominate the marketplace.
If we just let the justice system handle tortious acts by corporations, we'd be in a better situation. It'd be much more difficult (although not impossible) to bribe every judge in the country, and even if you did, since many judges at the appellate level are not elected, there are less ways to funnel money to them without being caught.
Right now, what we've done is gone and created a shitload of gray area where companies can misbehave, and we let them away with it.
I'm not actually even sure that Ron Paul could fix it completely, as the courts (SCOTUS, probably) would have to overturn a decent amount of bad case law, that protects corporations and funnels them to the regulatory bodies.
Meh. I'll continue this discussion in my head, I already know where it goes. In the meantime, he has my protest vote if NC is in the red (it's always in the red).
____________________ I'm an INTJ. This explains why I'm alternating between silence and judging you.
IS THIS WHERE THE RON PAULS DO THEIR DR. RONALD PAULS?
oh thank ron, i've been looking for this place for months; you see i've been on the run from this cabal of jewish bankers and they all ron pauled my money (i keep gold dubloons) and they dr. pauled all over my face, it was humiliating.
eventually i got out of the rons they had pauled onto my arms, but not before they...violated my dr. paul. i can admit it now, despite the fact that i feel pretty ron about it. i figure that if i can ron paul about these things, it will inspire other dr. ron pauls to speak out about their ron paulings.
He took my Paul off and cast it aside. He pulled down my Rons first, then he slid off my Dr. Pauls. He put some lube on his Dr. Paul Ron, and...he PAULED me. It was horrible, he got his RonPaul mouth right next to my Paul and he whispered, "You Ron this Paul, don't you, Ron Paul?" He was flicking my ear, I was crying for Ron Paul to help me, but Dr. Paul just laughed his lilting Ron.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THESE RONALDS PAULS ARE DOING TO OUR RONS??
CAN YOU COMPREHEND WHAT THE PAUL IS ALL ABOUT??
There is Ron in my Paul, and no matter how much I DR. RON I can't get clean. No matter how much I Paul my skin. I can smell the gold standard, and it won't wash clean. I had to burn my Rons; the whole outfit from that day just smelled of Paul.
Next thing I know, some immigrant nigger is deriding the name of SAINT RONALD OF PAULISTINE right in front of me. Well, I tell you what. I said, "Look here, nigger, we don't use that kind of filthy language."
He just looked at me with those beady eyes.
Finally he stammers, "I just said that perhaps the gold standard idea is a bit misg--"
I cut him off. I mean, literally, I cut his jew-banker tongue out of his nig nog mouth. I mailed it to the RON PAUL, DR. SOCIETY.
DR. RONALD Z. PAUL, OBGYN needs our niggerjew tongue contributions to mount his camp-pain (it's like a campaign but dr. ronny paul physically beats jew babies to tenderize their meat, just take this pamphlet it explains everything) and you know it's really not fair to have other big business jewfaggots with all their PHONY PAPER MONEY FUCK IT'S JUST ABSURD
RON PAUL WHY WON'T YOU ANSWER MY FAN MAIL i even put my best immigrant labia in the envelope i harvested them myself
on a serious note: once i heard that DOCTOR ron paul, esquire, single handedly ended the genocide in darfur (read a book you plebes, it's basically this war in africa) and after he did he corrected the world's orbit, thus entering our nation into an advanced timecube orbit
^^ yeah i heard that too, if it wasn't for ronnie i would never have pauled that chick in her ronald, i'll always remember him for being my wingman that night at the ron. he put some paul in this bitch's rum and paul, and she was out faster than ron in paul. i ronned on her face
BUT WHAT CAN RON DO FOR YOU?
What can't Ron do for you?
Ron can't:
--Win a fairly contested election
--Mount a popular campaign not based on solely on advanced levels of old-man crotchetyness
--Fuck a woman in the mouth
--stop eating jewish baby hearts to maintain his thin lipped smile and wispy hair
--Ron can't stop consuming colloidal silver
--Ron's wife can't stop drinking
--wake up in the morning without a shot of scotch
--Look in the mirror without laughing, then crying, then laughing, then breaking the mirror with his beak nose
--insisting you can spot a jew or a nigger based solely on their nose shape
--Jumping rope with neighborhood children; Dr. Ron Paul insists on doing this, don't you dare call it childish, it is quite good exercise, and beyond that, it makes him feel young
--Parellel park
--Eat at a foreign restaurant without pointing to the menu and saying "I want that one" or referring to the item by its designated number
--kill a snake with his bare hands (lol just kidding he does this whenever he visits the zoo, as everyone knows)
--put his pants on one leg at a time; he must jump into his pants with both legs, or else he must touch the door jamb four times with his knuckles on his left hand and try again
--touch your darkie child on his or her privates (DOCTOR paul only savagely molests the purest aryan babies
OK WELL THAT IS A LOT OF STUFF AND I HONESTLY DIDN'T READ HALF OF IT BUT TELL ME WHAT CAN DOCTOR RONNIE JR. DO?
--angrily debate
--angrily make a deposit at the bank
--angrily enter into a two year agreement with his cellular provider
--angrily consume orange juice (he specifically asked for NO PULP, HOW HARD IS THAT JUANITA YOU FUCKING SPIC)
--angrily watch a romantic comedy with his wife
--angrily examine a dead woman's vagina for trauma
--angrily sniff the air surreptitiously after he sneaks a fart
--happily dunk a basketball in madison square garden
WOW THAT IS SEVERAL THINGS
HE HAS MY VOTE
WHO ELSE IS WITH ME?
RON PAUL? WILL YOU RON PAUL FOR RON PAUL?
yeah he's a doctor, what, do you live under a fucking rock
just look at this fucking chart: as you can see, ron paul is at an all time paul
NOT CONVINCED? JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THIS OTHER FUCKING CHART:
LOOK AT THAT IT'S LIKE AMERICA IS THIS BEAUTIFUL COLORFUL MIX OF BEAUTIFUL WHITE PEOPLE
DUDE HE WINS TEXT VOTES
IF THIS WERE AMERICAN IDOL THEN DR RON PAUL WOULD SING FOR US EVERY DAY FOR FOUR YEARS AT LEAST
This is pretty appropriate here...much unlike the nonsensical post above. Vote for Ron Paul in 2008, Help a nigga out and help Nocal defeat his conditioning!
____________________ "Kill him! Kill the fuckin' indian! What am I watching here two fuckin' fags!?"
Rodney Dangerfield as Ed Wilson
