Caught this guy on the radio a while back. Looked for a thread here on Austrian economics in the mainstream but couldn;t find it.
Butler on Business
There was a lady with a late night show (same area, maybe same channel) who is a self proclaimed ancap, but I can't recall her name (suzy ?, nice jewish lady from NJ or NY)
We are the soldiers for righteousnessAnd we are not sent here by the politicians you drink with - L. Dube, rip
this just in: technology moves too fast for the human brain to know right from wrong..
Wheylous:Don't know if anyone has posted this already, but this is truly disgusting
So even though I already replied (see the very last post on the first page), I just noticed you probably got this from the recent Lee Doren video. It looks as though he's updated it to let everyone know he didn't do his research before making the video (again, as this was a story at least 4 months ago) and now the charges have been dropped and the state is appealing...
Charges dropped http://www.theagitator.com/2011/09/17/illinois-judge-dismisses-charges-agains... Now Appealed by State of Illinois: http://www.theagitator.com/2011/12/02/state-of-illinois-will-appeal-case-agai...
So of course since the announcement was just made that Cain's gone, I went to his website to see how it looks. First thing I noticed was how the layout looks strikingly similar to Ron Paul's...with the slideshow banner and everything. But you've got to see this slide...
The guy was always attacked for not having a clue about foreign policy, and this was solidified with his Libya debacle...and his response is to put up the map his advisers used to educate him on foreign relations and call it is foreing policy plan. Why is it not hard for me to imagine him sitting in a room with a bunch of guys with their sleeves all rolled up and their hair all ruffled from being on a 12 hour instructional session, and them going: "Okay Herman, let's try this again..." And one guy at the front of the room uses a pointer to pinpoint specific countries on a world map and Herman responds with "friend", "foe", "competitor", "rival", "our bitch", "assholes" for each respective region.
I could totally see them breaking out this map with all the labels for him to study and him going "Hey guys, this awesome! Why didn't anyone show me this before! Why don't we just show this to the American people! Prove once and for all I know what's what. Look how simple this is. Just break it down. The whole world is like one big office." I can't believe anyone thought this guy ever had a chance.
What's even funnier is it reminds me of the stereotype maps that bbnet linked earlier.
Get a load of the foreign policy page (while you still can).
This guy was on a roll ... until the end:
Terrorists very demonstrably hated us for our freedom. We passes the Patriot Act and - Walla! No more 9-11s!
Ron Paul recommended that Americans read The Law by Frederic Bastiat during tonights 'forum' on Fox News!
This is a video from a friend based (loosely) on a post of mine. EDIT- Here's my post: http://www.libertariansforum.com/cgi-bin/freedom/YaBB.pl?num=1322348481/7#7. Most of it's probably overview of things you all are familiar with, but it seems OK, I hope!
Wheylous:Terrorists very demonstrably hated us for our freedom. We passes the Patriot Act and - Walla! No more 9-11s!
Just for the future...voilà
He's just not as well known as his father. Frequently when I mention Rand, I get emails like the one below. This one came after I reported on Rand's heroic opposition to Amendment No. 1274 of the The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2012 (S.1867)
From: mike school xxx@yahoo.com To: rw@economicpolicyjournal.com Subject: Isn't his name RON Paul? And you're "the editor"?
Subject: Isn't his name RON Paul? And you're "the editor"?
(via EconomicPolicyJournal)
Before deciding to sympathize with the OWS "movement", I recommend you watch these.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/05/chaos-video/
Some relevant sections of the California penal code:
California Penal Code Section 835: An arrest is made by an actual restraint of the person, or by submission to the custody of an officer. The person arrested may be subjected to such restraint as is reasonable for his arrest and detention.
California Penal Code Section 835a: Any peace officer who has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense may use reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape or to overcome resistance. A peace officer who makes or attempts to make an arrest need not retreat or desist from his efforts by reason of the resistance or threatened resistance of the person being arrested; nor shall such officer be deemed an aggressor or lose his right to self-defense by the use of reasonable force to effect the arrest or to prevent escape or to overcome resistance.
A peace officer who makes or attempts to make an arrest need not retreat or desist from his efforts by reason of the resistance or threatened resistance of the person being arrested; nor shall such officer be deemed an aggressor or lose his right to self-defense by the use of reasonable force to effect the arrest or to prevent escape or to overcome resistance.
California Penal Code Section 12403.7 (a) (8): (g) Any person who uses tear gas or tear gas weapons except in self-defense is guilty of a public offense and is punishable byimprisonment in a state prison for 16 months, or two or three years or in a county jail not to exceed one year or by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment, except that, if the use is against a peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, engaged in the performance of his or her official duties and the person committing the offense knows or reasonably should know that the victim is a peace officer, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in a state prison for 16 months or two or three years or by a fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment.
(g) Any person who uses tear gas or tear gas weapons except in self-defense is guilty of a public offense and is punishable byimprisonment in a state prison for 16 months, or two or three years or in a county jail not to exceed one year or by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment, except that, if the use is against a peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, engaged in the performance of his or her official duties and the person committing the offense knows or reasonably should know that the victim is a peace officer, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in a state prison for 16 months or two or three years or by a fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment.
California Penal Code Section 12403: Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit any person who is a peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, from purchasing, possessing, transporting, or using any tear gas or tear gas weapon if the person has satisfactorily completed a course of instruction approved by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training in the use of tear gas.
I don't think anyone here sympathizes with being douchebags and supporting socialist ideals. Any "sympathy" comes in the form of stuff like this. Have a look at some of the latest posts on the Mises blog if you need more evidence that Austro-libertarians around here aren't all too crazy about these people...
Check out the surprising support from Fox News...
The use of call-and-response chants is evidence of the involvement of these guys, who also happen to be Soros-funded.
Clayton -
Ron Paul needs to make an ad regarding this electability issue... it would be easy to do, just go back in history and pick a couple respected Presidents who started off as "long shots" who were dismissed by the media of their day and who not only won, but turned out to be well-remembered by Americans. That should put the matter to rest.
It would be funny if RP appealed to Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR in ad and if ad was tremendously successful and got him elected.
Last election, RP appealed to Bush II, but Bush II was tremendously unpopular at the time.
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
IMO, he's better off neglecting (rising above) the electability "issue" than giving it credence by addressing it. As the wider public gets acquainted with him and his positions it is becoming increasingly more difficult for his opponents (or talking head drones) to call him "inelectable" without having to explain themselves or without sounding like idiots that couldn't even conceive of an alternative to the evidently disastrous left=right paradigm of the status quo.
z1235:IMO, he's better off neglecting (rising above) the electability "issue" than giving it credence by addressing it. As the wider public gets acquainted with him and his positions it is becoming increasingly more difficult for his opponents (or talking head drones) to call him "inelectable" without having to explain themselves or without sounding like idiots that couldn't even conceive of an alternative to the evidently disastrous left=right paradigm of the status quo.
Agreed. He has almost nothing to gain from addressing it. Tom Wood's objections notwithstanding (some mentioned at the link included in this post), Paul's campaign is doing a lot of the right things. According to Paul 90% of his time has been spent in Iowa and New Hampshire, and the local campaigns there seem to be doing quite well. Again I think there would be much to gain from taking some Woods suggestions into consideration, but by and large I think they're doing it right.
He does well in Iowa, and NH or SC, and the "electability" "issue" will take care of itself.
Daniel Muffinburg:Last election, RP appealed to Bush II, but Bush II was tremendously unpopular at the time.
It would be more correct to say he appealed to Bush 43...as his whole point was in bringing up the fact that in the 2000 election Bush sounded a lot like Ron Paul on foreign policy. He brought this up in direct response to his critics directly saying he had an issue with electability because of his unique (in terms of the Republicans in the race) stance on the subject.
"Bush II" might be the reference to "Bush 43 after the first election"...when he stopped with the non-interventionist rhetoric and started with the warmongering and domestic statism. In fact Ron Paul specifically mentioned how unpopular the actions of the administration were at the time...that was his whole point. Bush got elected by saying the same things Paul was saying...AND now (2007) Bush was doing the exact opposite of that, and was more unpopular than ever.
So the electability hawks have always had it completely backwards. It's about being anti-Ron Paul...not any actual measure of electability.
@JohnJames
When did I ever say that libertarians are "crazy" about OWS? Why do people rip statements from context so much on this forum? I said before the rare person who might be planning to sympathize with them does so, he or she should watch videos like this one.
tunk:When did I ever say that libertarians are "crazy" about OWS? Why do people rip statements from context so much on this forum?
Dude, again, you need take things a bit more slowly. I never said you said libertarians were crazy about OWS. I said: "I don't think anyone here sympathizes with being douchebags and supporting socialist ideals." You said: "before deciding to sympathize" and I said "I don't think anyone here sympathizes". I used the exact same word you did. Then I used it again:
"Any 'sympathy' comes in the form of stuff like this."
The word "crazy" comes in at the end, in a throw-away clause that simply means to say people around here aren't exactly hyped up about OWS. It's a figure of speech. You've never heard someone say: "I don't know...I'm not too crazy about the idea of drag racing blindfolded in the middle of the street." It's not meant to imply anyone suggested you were actually crazy about it. It's a colloquial way of saying you're not really that into something.
Are you really unaware of this?
John James:"I don't know...I'm not too crazy about the idea of drag racing blindfolded in the middle of the street."
No, I've never heard anyone say that. You keep quite interesting company.
Have you ever heard anyone say: "I don't know...I"m not too crazy about that"...when no one ever suggested they were crazy in the first place?
This may be the most controversial program aired by the History Channel:
The Men Who Killed Kennedy, "The Guilty Men" Complete Episode 9
After it aired, the History Channel backed off.
Official TSA Blog - lotta double speak and fear mongering goin on in here, runnin on google blogger, comments allowed (IPs put on terrorist list?)
Welcome to the Delete-O-Meter
In the spirit of transparency, we proudly introduce the (drum roll please...) Delete-O-Meter.
This new, permanent feature of the TSA blog will update on a monthly basis the number of posts we have deleted during moderation
While we’re on the subject of deleted posts, it’s important to know why we do delete some posts. It all breaks down to the following reasons: Spam - It wasn't bad when the blog first rolled out, but now we get nearly 100 spam comments a day at times. Personal attacks (on both officers and passengers) Profanity (and I thought some sailors knew how to curse) Long embedded url strings (only because it messes up the format of the blog) Threats (enough said on this one) Duplicate posts (hitting submit 12 times won't make the comment appear any faster) Off-topic comments Sensitive information (TSA folks explaining exact procedures that could aid someone wishing to do us harm) Other than that, all's fair in love and blogging.
In Their Own Words: The Untold Stories of the 9/11 Families - Full Length
BIG DOG!
http://news.yahoo.com/85-old-says-she-strip-searched-jfk-200256556.html
This is disgusting, live a full life only for some TSA goons to treat you like a criminal. "i was just doing my job"
Man alive, Obama is such a bullshitter. He loves to say, "a majority of economists," or, "most economists." WHERE THE HELL DOES HE GET THIS SHIT?
+1 Ron Paul
That ad made me lol at work. I like how the narrator says "whining like little shitsssoos".
I think the ad was a bit too intense :P
Yeah, who the hell wrote it, the same guy from those Dennis Leary Ford commercials?
Yeah, it reminded me of those commercials.
I feel like I am buying a truck when I watch that ad. I expect "Beat the rocky terrain. 0% financing for the next 12 months. Buy now!"
Poll: Ron Paul only Republican to beat Obama judging by Iowa preferences
Wheylous: I think the ad was a bit too intense :P
I like it. I think it's perfect. Subliminally radiates Ron Paul's uncompromising, consistent, "take no prisoners", anti-flip-flop, anti-sleazy-politician attitude. No other candidate (including Obama) could pull it off without looking ridiculous. When Ron Paul says it, it fits.
60 Minutes Segment on The fight against counterfeit drugs
Below are 60 Minutes Segments on the economy:
Prosecuting Wall Street, pt. 1
Prosecuting Wall Street, pt. 2
State Budgets: Day of Reckoning
The 401k Fallout
The Mortgage Meltdown
Wall Street's Shadow Market
The Chairman Part 1
The Chairman Part 2
Your Bank Has Failed
The Man Who Knew
World Of Trouble
AIG: We Own It