Printable View
That's my point. Half of that freak show is going to end up in Group 2, and the other half in Group 4. That's why I'm aiming to be in Group 3. Their vote may count as much as mine, but if I end up in their category, I'm doubling the value of their vote, rather than offsetting it.Quote:
Originally Posted by midnight rambler
Love your cherished delusions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
I learned my lesson 20 years ago with Perot. If they can cap (neutralize) Perot* and his billions...I have an analogy for ya - dream into one hand and **** into the other, see which one fills up first.
fwiw, there's no time for your 'plan' to work itself out, time's up. There are WAY too many people invested in/receiving benefits from either side of the beast system (and they are NOT giving up what they're emotionally involved in - PERIOD) for there EVER to be anything like you envision. You're only kidding yourself.
*I was there in the very beginning with Perot (as close as one could get to the top of the PPC), and in the very beginning Perot was *intent* on launching a 3rd party via real grassroots (which ultimately became the Reform Party) - and as only one example, due to the grassroots getting Perot on the ballad in Texas, the two whore parties passed legislation in the Texas Lege which substantially raised the bar for someone to get on the ballot via the petition process, i.e. as a 3rd party candidate.
Next you will be expecting me to come in your bus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-0IdxytsOE
Dont forget TAXES....Quote:
Originally Posted by midnight rambler
ONLY White male land owners could vote, because only white male land owners PAID TAXES.
Ive said this here a MILLION times:
If your elected officials were going to do their only job of protecting the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic then why do you care WHO is in office? Dem/Repub, male/female, old/young, red hair/brown hair would make NO DIFFERENCE if they actually did their job.
Do we see the scam yet?
Property taxes I presume?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sui Juris
Ron Paul should just start his own political party. He should cal it the Ronpaulian Party; that way all the Fox News creeps won't want to co-opt it.
I statrted a little argument with Steve Goddard, a well known AGW skeptic. Our discussion was degrading into an insult fest, so I invited him over here. I don't know if he will come. Here is our discussion up to this posting:
- August 31, 2012 at 11:55 am
I thought you truthers were supposed to stick to correcting true statements about Obama (with spin), not creating new lies about Romney.
Reply
- http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/c82e9fc...=identicon&r=G JohnQ says:
September 1, 2012 at 1:35 am
Same as 2008: The few oligarchs who control the 2 parties and pick our candidates for us picked two candidates who have a potential constitutional conflict. Granted if the supreme court would hear a case or two these issues may be settled, but they won’t here it.
In 2008, both Obama and McCain had potential natural born citizen issues (recall McCain got a “statement” from the senate that his situation was not an issue).
Funny that in 2012 it comes around again (Mitt’s father may not have been a citizen when Mitt was born, making natural born citizen status questionable).
It could be a case of the oligarchs wanting both potential dictators to have a weakness that can be manipulated if required to “convince” them of their position on any given issue.
- http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/c82e9fc...=identicon&r=G JohnQ says:
August 31, 2012 at 7:44 pm
Romney is a facist that stole the nomination. The entire convention was scripted, even to the point that the teleprompter scrolled “the ayes have it” before Boehner responded, etc. Look how the state conventions were handled, and the convenient last minute rules changes. They were so scared of Ron Paul, that they exposed their corruption for all to see. Are you blind? Use the same skepticism you use for climate change and apply it to politics.
Reply
- http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/d36b3bc...=identicon&r=G stevengoddard says:
August 31, 2012 at 7:45 pm
Obama supporter.
Reply
- http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/c82e9fc...=identicon&r=G JohnQ says:
August 31, 2012 at 8:51 pm
Not at all. Paul supporter.- http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/c82e9fc...=identicon&r=G JohnQ says:
August 31, 2012 at 8:53 pm
I do understand your argument by the way (reject Mitty, support Obama by default). But you know what?
Obama =~ Mitt
In terms of the important things (like are we supporting America or Israel, the Fed, NDAA and police staste, etc.), there is not real difference.- http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/d36b3bc...=identicon&r=G stevengoddard says:
August 31, 2012 at 9:24 pm
Paul supporter == Obama supporter- http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/4a3938f...=identicon&r=G Don Sutherland says:
August 31, 2012 at 10:53 pm
Governor Romney is not a fascist nor did he “steal” the nomination. He received both the largest number of votes during the campaign and the largest number of delegates. As for Ron Paul, he lost because he was unable to build support beyond the his narrow but passionate base. One needs broad support to have a chance to win the nomination. Republican voters were looking for a candidate whom they believed offered the combination of ideas, practical experience, leadership, and integrity to make an effective President. In 2012, Gov. Romney was able to make a successful case on those attributes to enough Republican voters to gain the nomination. When one’s preferred candidate loses, one need not automatically assume that somehow the race was “stolen.” Even President Reagan, who enjoys enormous affection among Republicans and Conservatives, did not win all his elections (e.g., 1976 primary). Reagan’s supporters did not claim that the election was “stolen.” They celebrated the competitive finish to the race and built a foundation for electoral success in 1980.
Reply
- JohnQ says:
September 1, 2012 at 1:23 am
Paul won the Iowa caucus. We heard Mitt did, then suddenly Santorum. Well the truth is Paul did. Variations of this weer repeated in other states. Plus, the rule was that if teh candidate carried 5 states, he would be up for nomination. This is the rule the delegates and caucus/primary voters voted under. Just before the convention, the Republican [fascist] party changed the rule to 8 states. They tried for 10 states, but this was defeated.
The truth is it is the parties that are the issue. A very few individuals get to decide for the only two viable parties (republicrat and demipublican) who we all get to vote for, and it is very clear how devious, corrupt, and fascist they are. This story will be told in the coming weeks and many (who put the good of the country over their narrow self interests, and have the open mind to see the evidence) will see this as a fact.
The truth is that we are an oligarchy, and their power has been exposed thanks to Paul.
- JohnQ says:
August 31, 2012 at 9:55 pm
Mitt Supporter == facism supporter
Reply
- stevengoddard says:
August 31, 2012 at 9:57 pm
You obviously want to see Obama reelected. What a moron.
Reply
- JohnQ says:
September 1, 2012 at 1:26 am
We could go at this ad infinitum, but it would be counter-productive. I appreciate your work on climate science, but we need to agree to disagree on this, unless you want to come over to my forum to discuss it (we have a few threads going).- JohnQ says:
September 1, 2012 at 1:28 am
And frankly, I don’t care, nor do I expect any substantive difference whether Obama or Romney are elected. Election after election, the few people with strings to the two parties give us crap candidates to vote for who represent not us, but the oligarchs. If it makes you sleep better at night, go ahead and vote for Mitt.- JohnQ says:
September 1, 2012 at 1:50 am
[Video posted by Steal is here]- JohnQ says:
September 1, 2012 at 1:59 am
If you want to come over, join the forum, and maybe start here:
http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthre...l=1#post569593
This is a prime example of how controlling the media allows them to control the people. It wouldn't matter if 80% of the population supported RP. As long as they can keep us from seeing each other they win. They can convince each of us that we are alone and cannot make any difference on our own. So we don't try. No one wants to stick his neck out if he can be convince that no one will follow his lead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertytree
Over the last 4+ years, I can't count how many people I've talked to who completely agree with RP's positions, but they ended up voting for another candidate because of "electability." I try to tell them that RP would be more electable than any other republican if people would vote their conscience. They look at me as if we are the only two people in the country who like RP and I'm crazy for wasting my vote while they do the "responsible" thing and vote for frothy.
Steve Goddard [pseudonym perhaps], an otherwise intelligent person is in that position.Quote:
Originally Posted by horseshoe3
Attachment 3571
lol, our government is so illegitimate compared to the developed world
http://s13.postimage.org/jus921tvb/turnout.png
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnQPublic
This guy isn't interested in the truth,
these types are into Marvel Comics Captain America, and watching Newton's cradle click back and forth on their desk.
Vacuum's voting table shows that not voting doesn't help. An analogy would be if your store keeps getting robbed, you stop bothering to lock the door because it seems pointless. You're just making it easier for the criminals.
I understand your point about not voting. If you were only allowed to vote for either Democrat or Republican, I'd support not voting. But you can become part of the "other" vote, either via another party, or write-in.
So you do believe in dictatorship powers fueling nuclear war, and the Apocalypse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
Those are exactly the people that ARE voting, Sparky.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
So BT, do you think I'm lazy and uninformed?Quote:
Originally Posted by BrewTech
When was the last time you voted? Were you a retard then? I'm going to vote one more time and until then I reckon I'm a stupid fuck.
Congratulations! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertytree
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamboni
i think if Ron Paul had made it to the Repub. nomination, he would beat Obama.
hence the enormous expenditure to put Romney in the GOP slot.
Right, that's exactly where I'm coming from. Jeesh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn
Those are the people that are voting D/R. Jeez, this isn't that hard a concept.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrewTech
Stop The Revolution Start The Evolution
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAdw8xV8ICs
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAdw8xV8ICs
Published on Aug 31, 2012 by TruthNeverTold
To Ron Paul Supporters: I'm Sorry
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvbyHvNsHHU
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvbyHvNsHHU
Published on Aug 31, 2012 by stefbot
"The only winning move is not to play."
And where in that sentence do you see that I was addressing you? Besides, you have no dog in this fight, you cut tail and ran.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horn
You know what I meant. Perhaps I should have qualified the statement with "generally speaking".Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertytree
I last voted in 2008. I also gave RP's campaign a sizable amount of financial support. I also took a day off work to go stand in the rain to see him speak in San Diego.
I agree with those that contend that by voting, one gives their consent to be governed based on the results of the "election".
Since the entire campaign/election system is rigged and fake, (like most everything in this place known as the U.S. ), I choose to opt out, and not give my consent.
That's cool BT, I understand where you're coming from and I'm gradually getting to where you and many others are. I just don't see much difference in playing the game one way or another if it's rigged, with the exception of being in the registered voter rolls...and as far as I know that only opens you up to serving jury duty. I could be wrong about that too though.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrewTech
If Ron Paul would decide to run with Gary Johnson I'd vote for them. To hell with those other SOB's
A few GSUSers are still learning the definition of insanity. Eventually it will sink in.
According to the majority of people from a longtime ago I've been certifiable since then, no reason not to be consistent.
What will sink in? That the game is rigged? Who here doesn't know that?Quote:
Originally Posted by midnight rambler
Which of these results is a bigger threat to our current corrupt system:
Obama 25%
Romney 25%
EveryoneElse 5%
No Vote 45%
Obama 25%
Romney 25%
EveryoneElse 25%
No Vote 25%
Apparently what you're not getting is that in order to 'participate' in this nonsense (as a 'registered voter') one has to swear under the pains and penalties of perjury that one is a 'U.S. citizen' (under the FRAUDULENT 14th Amendment). Once one has become aware of the total and complete fraud of the 14th Amendment one would necessarily have to be an utter fool to claim to be a 'U.S. citizen' in light of the facts of the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
That said, do you claim complete ignorance of the fraud of the 14th Amendment?? ('cause it's either that or apparently you're an utter fool)
That's assuming the votes are tallied correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
I have ZERO reason to believe that they are.
so you guys keep thinking any other party can win , the only party that will win will be the welfare party . i once gave money for no reason i see this now . to the point i dont give a fuck who win now there all the same
'Welfare party' = entitlement party, which has two wings, i.e. 'the world owes me so hand it over suckers', and the other, 'I've got mine, give me more, screw the rest of you suckers' - either way it breaks down to "from those according to their ability, to those according to their need", the very easiest form of manipulation imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by mick silver