1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Regulating Political Speech

JustMCMC Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 12:42 PM
Yep.
In response to:

Regulating Political Speech

JustMCMC Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 11:40 AM
Campaign finance laws are absolutely disgusting and hopelessly unConstitutional. The two-party establishment loves what they've created (which not surprisingly works to protect them the same way they protection they sell protects their cronies in business). If you are strongly believe in a candidate, as a little guy, you can only donate a relatively small amount ($2500ish) to his campaign. And yet, you see all these $10k to $50k per plate fundraising dinners with big business and Hollywood types. How come? Because the PARTIES can get HUGE donations from individuals, but candidates cannot. Keeping the crooked party establishments in control, and hamstringing the principled candidate who wants to do some good.
In response to:

Regulating Political Speech

JustMCMC Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 11:34 AM
Very, very, well said.
ruling oligarchy. And even then, their oppressive reign relies on ever greater theft from the declining producers, and an ever-growing police state. Until the total collapse and/or revolution.
1. I'm no fan of either party: the establishment core of both parties are simply crooks, robbing the people. 2. You are right that most are woefully ignorant of the Constitution and economics. Including you, based on your notion of the acceptability of massive, unConstitutional entitlement programs, and your complete ignorance of ruinous taxation through inflation, and the crime of outlawing and confiscating gold and destruction of the currency.
Since the creation of the Fed, whose NOMINAL purpose was to stabilize the value of money, our money has lost 97% of its value, and it is falling fast. If you knew some of the history of money, you'd know that taxation by destruction of the currency is a time-honored tradition of tyrants, and it is no different now. It RUINS economies and destroys the middle class and their savings. You also don't understand that the difference between socialism and fascism is a pedantic, academic one. Both use NOMINALLY different philosophies to arrive at the same place: the end of private property rights and individual liberty. In both cases it is claimed to happen for the NOMINAL benefit of the people but the ACTUAL benefit is only for the...
Peaceman, I agree that both parties are to blame. You're missing the stark reality that the People are responsible for keeping in check Congress (and all of govt). Hence, if you want to (foolishly) rank generations, you must hold each one accountable for what they let government get away with. You can't tout accomplishments without weighing them against failings. And you don't know the first thing about gold ownership and the dollar. The unConstitiutional destruction of our currency being the biggest hidden taxation in history, ruining the economy (not saving it). Monetary savings should INCREASE in buying power, which they did from the start of the Republic until 1913 (creation of the Fed) .
By the way, it's about time to call all the "greatest generation" nonsense what it is: nonsense (not surprisingly from liberal clown Tom Brokaw.). For all the triumphs, the so-called "greatest generation" presided over the gutting of the Constitution. They let government tell a farmer he can't grow wheat on his own land for his own consumption. They let ownership of gold be OUTLAWED. They got conned into non-defensive WW1, leading directly to WW2 and the cold war. They presided over the creation of ruinous entitlement ponzi schemes, bankrupting their offspring. The greatest American generation since the Founders will be anyone who can clean up the bankrupt socialist police-state mess that's about to explode.
In short GB, I'm not arguing that Wilson should have predicted Hitler and Lenin and Stalin would result from taking us into WWI. I'm arguing what George Washington and other Founders argued: ONLY ENTER PURELY DEFENSIVE WARS. And only when the American people want to. Wilson and others WORKED to con the American People into supporting a war that they didn't want until tricked into it by their own crooked leaders. That's not Monday morning quarterbacking, it's pointing out OBVIOUS BETRAYAL of the people, especially those who fnobly ought and died based on that betrayal.
Also GB, as for the causus belli bit about Poland, I think his point was that the NOMINAL pretense of the war was the freedom of Poland, which wasn't satisfied by all the fighting ending in an allied victory. Who cares about the Stalin/Hitler pact? The point is, we were supposed to be liberating Poland, and yet we handed them over to Soviet tyranny.
1 - 10 Next