Sitting here in one of the hearts of the American Empire, Los Angeles, I can’t help but post one of my favorite Ron Paul videos. It’s not a fancy remix of his greatest moments or anything like that, just a quick, simple, and to the point interview that highlights some of our most critical issues in the 21st century.
My favorite ones – because they are especially disgusting – are the personal income tax and “the draft” (by that I mean forced military servitude of any kind, for any reason).
Both of these ideas are morally bankrupt, and tragically absurd.
Perhaps more absurd is the idea that the federal government has the ability and authority to define it’s own power. This power was never delegated to the federal government, and as such, it remains with the people and the states respectively.
Think about it, how redundant would it be to limit your own power? That is the pinnacle of oxy-moronic contradiction.
The fact that the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) has ruled otherwise on the personal income tax and military despotism is irrelevant, null, void, and of no effect.
The constitution of these States united has no provision for the ownership of it’s people. It never has, and so long as I and other clear thinking people are alive, it never will.
In any case, assuming the dollar holds out until the next presidential election, Ron Paul will be our next chief administrator*. I find it inconceivable anyone else even has a shot against him should he choose to run. Forget the both entrenched and doomed mainstream political parties … the unspoken angst and panic setting in in our federal union is simply growing too big, too fast.
Nothing “works” anymore. Fiat money is a failure. Government intervention into the economy is an even bigger failure. Our federal government attempting to protect us from ourselves is perhaps the biggest nonsensical failure of all (see the diseases of civilization).
None of this shit works, ever has worked, or will ever work. I don’t know about you guys, but I’m 22 and I’m already sick of this crap.
*I say chief administrator and not president, because that’s all the president of our union actually is, ever was, and so long as our system of government remains relatively intact, ever will be. The president is not a king, dictator, celebrity, or anything else, other than a temporary chief administrator. Ron Paul will be the first president in a long time to understand this.
Ron Paul’s different. I like him! ALSO, I see where you got that DOLLAR crash ‘nonsense’ now. (;
Dude, the US dollar is hanging on Japanese and Chines threads no stronger than used, stretched out chewing gum. The minute they get sick and tired of propping up our debt-based currency it goes “poof”.
What you call “nonsense” I call “reality” in this case.
Gotcha (:
“I find it inconceivable anyone else even has a shot against him should he choose to run.”
Really? If by “inconceivable” you mean unbelievable, surprising, unlikely or unimaginable, I’d have to disagree. I look around and have little belief in the intelligent, independent thought of those around me. I would have used “incomprehensible” or “unintelligible” but Obama being re-elected is plausible (IMO).
I think Reps can’t find a candidate who can beat him and, sadly, I don’t think enough votes will be cast for RP. By default, we get 4 more years . . .
Passion and zeal aside, you honestly think RP wins in a landslide?
Obama being reelected represents linear, status quo thinking. We no longer have the luxury of thinking and acting in this manner.
http://www.thedreamlounge.net/2010/03/22/does-our-generation-have-the-luxury-of-ignoring-reality/
Assuming Ron Paul runs, he will win in a landslide, because this country is in a landslide.
People always do what they must.
When this country faces imminent economic, political, and social collapse (as it now does, difficult to discern as it is) Ron Paul or collapse will be the only choice left.
Ron Paul has the most intelligent and passionate people in the world supporting him.
What choice do you think our country will make? Ron Paul, or collapse?
I choose Ron Paul.
From the linked article you provided above: “I do hold the hope that the slim chance of Ron Paul winning the 2012 presidential election could turn this country around.”
What changed since March that has you now so thoroughly convinced he could win (albeit if he even runs)?
“Ron Paul has the most intelligent and passionate people in the world supporting him.”
This may be true, but winning does not require the most intelligent or the most passionate people supporting; just the MOST.
But you assume that voters will be wise enough to recognize Ron Paul as the correct choice of President in the face of a crisis. Only people who hold correct metaphysical, epistemological and ethical ideas will be able to see the truth. The rest are so far gone mentally that they will cling to whatever their college professors told them no matter how bad things get. Reality means nothing to people who treat facts as social constructs and assume that authority is proof of correctness. The reason this crisis has to happen is because people don’t think rationally. I hope it doesn’t come to pass, but I suspect that a major disaster will be required in order to break the hold that irrationalism has on peoples’ minds.
Ron Paul is no different than any other politician. To think this one man can or will fix the wrongs of over 100 years of a failed government is blind and crazy.
To think that anything but one man will is to think the impossible.
Time to start fact checking you bro.
“Sitting here in one of the hearts of the American Empire, Los Angeles, I can’t help but post one of my favorite Ron Paul videos. It’s not a fancy remix of his greatest moments or anything like that, just a quick, simple, and to the point interview that highlights some of our most critical issues in the 21st century.”
Simple, ridiculous, but simple. Fact check passed.
“My favorite ones – because they are especially disgusting – are the personal income tax and “the draft” (by that I mean forced military servitude of any kind, for any reason).
Both of these ideas are morally bankrupt, and tragically absurd.”
Actually, our nation was founded on this thing called the Constitution (You’d do well to read it. The Constitution clearly gives Congress the power to RAISE and SUPPORT armies. It also clearly gives the federal government the power to raise money in support of its Constitutional powers.
Let’s look at the notion… Raise an army… not merely supporting volunteers, but raising an army has been important in our history several times, including the time of the founding fathers… so Hmm… Constitution says yes, Congress can Raise an army, instead of merely supporting volunteers, and clearly gives the power to also “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defense and general Welfare of the United States.”
SO, on the immorality/unconstitutionality of a draft we have a failure, as do we have a failure on Congress’s ability to raise taxes. LOGIC FAIL.
“Perhaps more absurd is the idea that the federal government has the ability and authority to define it’s own power. This power was never delegated to the federal government, and as such, it remains with the people and the states respectively.”
Article III of the Constitution, my dear friend, clearly states different….
‘The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;–to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;–to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;–to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;–to controversies between two or more states;–between a state and citizens of another state;–between citizens of different states;–between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.’
That would clearly state that the Supreme court does have the power to decide cases arising from the Constition and laws of the United states. Again, Logic FAIL.
“Think about it, how redundant would it be to limit your own power? That is the pinnacle of oxy-moronic contradiction.”
Here, we have a very interesting thing, built into the Constitution, called a seperation of power. You see, there is an executive branch that enforces law, a legislative branch that makes law, and a judicial branch that decides legality. The branch that makes the laws is elected, although the other two are necessarily not. What we have here is a reason that there is no judge, jury, and executioner all in one… and another logic fail.
“The fact that the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) has ruled otherwise on the personal income tax and military despotism is irrelevant, null, void, and of no effect.”
Except the Constitution, as quoted above, clearly states that SCOTUS does indeed have the power to make these decisions, and in fact through simple logic these decisions are seen to be correct.
“The constitution of these States united has no provision for the ownership of it’s people. It never has, and so long as I and other clear thinking people are alive, it never will.”
Ironically, people were owned at the time of the Constitution, like really owned… not just whining about having to pay taxes owned. By the framers of said Constitution. LOGIC FAIL. (PS: You do know that you personally pay far less then you receive from the federal government at your income level, right? Might wanna lay off the PUBLIC transportation you depend on)
“In any case, assuming the dollar holds out until the next presidential election, Ron Paul will be our next chief administrator*. I find it inconceivable anyone else even has a shot against him should he choose to run. Forget the both entrenched and doomed mainstream political parties … the unspoken angst and panic setting in in our federal union is simply growing too big, too fast.”
No logic to support this clear opinion, and as opinion are not facts this cannot LOGIC FAIL… so good job. This stands as your opinion.
“Nothing “works” anymore. Fiat money is a failure. Government intervention into the economy is an even bigger failure. Our federal government attempting to protect us from ourselves is perhaps the biggest nonsensical failure of all (see the diseases of civilization).”
Actually, the government has protected us many times, from many diseases despite corporate protestations. The lead industry, and abestos, for example, would likely been here if our government didn’t protect us… nevermind countless medications that have shown great harm being removed, we definately need our government to stop corporate power. Yes, they’re not perfect… just like no parent is perfect, but they do a hell of a better job that if they hadn’t put forward the effort in the first place.
“None of this shit works, ever has worked, or will ever work. I don’t know about you guys, but I’m 22 and I’m already sick of this crap.”
Sick of what?!?! Getting more from the government then you give, sick of whining, or sick of not getting your education on? I know plenty of successful people that have been helped by public education, drive on public roads, grew up reading in public libraries, have needed public police protection, and even those that have needed occaisonal help from the public fire department. Although these are not perfect, they are far better then having Goldbond sponsored schools, getting told your house must burn because you can’t afford to pay for the fire company to put your house out, or better yet a police system where you can hand the cop a few hundred dollars and get out of trouble… or better yet get them to arrest you enemies. COMPLETE LOGIC FAIL.
*I say chief administrator and not president, because that’s all the president of our union actually is, ever was, and so long as our system of government remains relatively intact, ever will be. The president is not a king, dictator, celebrity, or anything else, other than a temporary chief administrator. Ron Paul will be the first president in a long time to understand this.”
Actually, the president is called the president in the Constitution.. Um… Complete Reading and Logic Fail?
“I work hard on my blog. I appreciate it when you get social.”
Cool, lets get social. Study the Constitution if you’re going to claim that something isn’t constitutional… have better arguments then just whining that it isn’t.
You have become a model Christian, making statements and then finding scant facts to back them up. You’re much better then this bro.
What part of “natural, unalienable rights” don’t you understand?
Now that I think about it, vegetarian as you eat, I wonder to what degree the lack of saturated fat and cholesterol in your diet has affected the way you think.
So personal, and vague arguments are the best ways you can combat the facts? Throughout history the greatest minds have been vegetarians, while the animal kingdom quickly teaches us the short lifespans and many health problems meat eaters encounter in comparison….
But lets get back to the facts…. refute something with facts… not unrelated personal attacks please.
That wasn’t a personal attack. I’m dead serious. You’ve been a vegetarian for years, and I’m wondering if the chronic starvation your brain has experienced as a result of this choice is influencing the way you think.
“…we definately need our government to stop corporate power”
If your happy with this infantile assumption that everyone is retarted in some way that they need the government to hold their hand throughout their life then thats your choice. However don’t you find that comment a little belittling and offensive to your own rationality?
“Getting more from the government then you give…”
Regardless of what is given in return, the initial act is theft de facto. My income the product of my labour and my personal property. Unless I give prior consent, or use it in an agreed trade no one has the right to take it from me. Especially at the barrell of a gun.
Implying that he is wrong because his brain has melted due to vegetarianism is a personal attack. And deflecting a logically laid out argument in this manner is classless. I am long time reader of your blog and, like Greg said, I know you are better than this.
I do not expect you to even answer him if you do not want to–time is precious and it is not your duty to do so. But the insult is unnecessary.
And, for whatever its worth, I agree with many of your points, but for completely different reasons. I do not care about whether the constitution says congress can draft me or not, I still do not think the government should have that power. It has been too long in this country that every word in the constitution has been considered sacrosanct. It is a document written by men and is fallible.
I know Greg personally and he has been vegetarian for many years without lapse. As a result of his diet, his brain is lacking vital nutrients, chronically.
This is not a joke, nor a personal attack, it is reality, and I suspect it affects his judgement on the deepest of levels.
What part of this anyone views as a personal attack escapes me.
Regarding the draft, the government does not, nor has it ever had, the power to draft you (or more accurately, authority).
Nor can it ever, as that would retard the entire founding of our country, and the very core of our written constitution (among other founding documents).
As for the perfection of the constitution … no such thing exists, nor should it. As the old saying goes, the perfect is the destroyer of the good – the good being the US constitution, one of the greatest documents ever written in human history.
Pay a little more tribute to it, it’s done a damn good job of protecting you and I from do-gooders of past and present.
I agree with Matt on the point of the constitution being a fallible document. I can’t say I’ve taken much time to scrutinise it, but much like I don’t need to spend time reading books about fairies to claim they do not exist, I don’t need to read it to know what my own unalienable rights are. Regardless of whether a document says it can extract property from me, or do anything else to alienate my right to liberty as a human being does not make it in anyway morally or logically correct. Acknowledgment of your life as your own, not as anyone else’s is first and foremost in establishment of a logical basis for morality. As corollary it compromises all other aspects of morality. My life is mine to live and no one else’s, as such I extend acknowledgement of that right to all others and do not attempt to control or live their lives for them or myself.
“Regardless of whether a document says it can extract property from me, or do anything else to alienate my right to liberty as a human being does not make it in anyway morally or logically correct. ”
What I said, much more eloquently.
Although the point I was making with the US constitution is right in line with this. The constitution (and the federal government it restrains), can never legitimately have the power to draft, to own individuals, and so on. No provision was ever made for state ownership of the individual (nor can it ever as it would void the entire document).
Income tax, despite the 16th amendment, is literally illegal on a federal level in our union. Similarly, despite the ruling of our supreme court, the draft is also illegal.
These things are illegal because they violate our supreme law, the constitution, a plan of government created by the states to protect our unalienable rights.
As Ayn Rand once said though, the problem with the constitution is that (and Im paraphrasing) it’s more a political than moral document. The founding generation had the right ideas, but only so many got down on paper =/
“Income tax, despite the 16th amendment, is literally illegal on a federal level in our union. Similarly, despite the ruling of our supreme court, the draft is also illegal.”
But because of the ruling, if you don’t pay taxes or ignore the draft you will literally be thrown in prison! So that pretty much makes it the law of the land . . .
You will be thrown in prison at the force of a gun, yes.
So, what is your option? Submit, or ignore/evade/resist (in that order).
In the case of income tax, I’ll submit for the time being. That’s a slavery I was born into and have no interest in becoming a martyr over. Its easy enough to avoid if you keep your business expenses high and personal income low.
In the case of a military draft, I say you ignore/evade as long as possible … and if necessary, defend your life – as that is what is at stake- by equivalent, and even lethal force if necessary.
Long story short, and as the old saying goes, nothing is illegal till you get caught, or in this case, get shot.
Hope your armed to the teeth
-Anthony
“I know Greg personally and he has been vegetarian for many years without lapse.
As a result of his diet, his brain is lacking vital nutrients, chronically.
This is not a joke, nor a personal attack, it is reality, and I suspect it affects his judgement on the deepest of levels.”
WRONG. WRONG.
I say let that man give full-speech at T21C and he’ll mellow (:
I might vote for this guy next time. I had a belief in Obama and I cant say I necessarily agree or disagree with what he has done but Ron Paul seems like he could do some change. I think its going to take a lot more then just Ron Paul to affect change, the president can only do so much.
A lot of the problem has to do with the federal reserve and the control they have over government and the economy. Even the institution of a federal reserve which is in its own right a private company with practically unlimited power when it comes to fiat money.
In all honest Greg aka Libido, you were the first to unleash ad hominem attacks by pointing out every flaw in his logic. Even going as far as to say “Simple, ridiculous, but simple” at one point. Personally I don’t agree with vegetarianism at all and I agree with what I read somewhere that its almost to the level of cult phenomenon. Id suggest you go out into the wilderness for a week or so and see how you fare eating plants, berries, nuts, etc.
What are your sources for your information as well Greg? Have you read “The Vegetarian Myth”, perhaps “Primal Blueprint”? Also “Throughout history the greatest minds have been vegetarians”, could it have been possible they already had great intellect and vegetarianism had no effect on it whatsoever? It seems a case of me for you of correlation not causation, correlating the fact that some of our greatest minds have been vegetarian, may have helped with their intellect in some manner? When in fact their is no proof or evidence that their vegetarian diet helped improve their intellect and thus cause it.
Politics is like diet. Most people aren’t intelligent enough to understand it so they go for what the consider the safe option.
http://www.oddschecker.com/specials/politics-and-election/us-presidential-election/to-be-elected-president
The homeless ARE very good at sacrifice.
There is a deep, underlying force far more powerful than illuminati, skull and bones or any other secret organization. This force, is God “The Spirit”
Sorry Jeff, I seem to remember you saying you weren’t religous.
@James: Yup. Religion is NOT Spirituality for the millionth time.