Ron Paul Revolution!!!!

[Soup forgot his password]

That's really all im saying. He's still a politician, and you've gotta judge a politician by the times. Washington owned slaves while preaching liberty and justice for all, Obama was saddled with the worst congress in history and the biggest debt in history while preaching he's gonna fix it. And sure, prez gets a SAY in a bill but only before and after it goes through congress... and with this congress NOTHING goes through. And if you dont believe me here's my source:

[Spambot5000]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/24/stimulus-boosted-us-gdp-b_n_693150.html

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2009-10-29/economy/30767973_1_third-quarter-growth-economy-stimulus

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/01/morning_report_white_house_say.html

 

Thanks for the links. On this topic I would make two brief points.

 

1. Stimulus growth is not quality growth. Economic action based on stimulus is not necessarily going to be sustained in absence of state support, nor does it necessarily reflect genuine economic improvement. Dumping federal money into Solaris is a neat example. Which leads to the second point;

 

2. GDP is a poor measure of economic well-being. It measures transactions rather than value, which is why the broken windows fallacy is trumpeted by Keynesians after every natural disaster.

[Soup forgot his password]

Im not saying being better than bush is an accomplishment. Im saying obama has to crawl out of the hole that bush dug, and hes doing that.

 

No other presidential canidate was ever going to cut diplomatic ties to israel, leave afganistan. Im shocked that we even declared iraq over.

 

Obama didnt create aeta. It was on the books before he got there. It wasnt on his HUGE bucket list before he was president. Why expect it to be on there now? Congress has been barely capable of passing a federal budget let alone healthcare or even sign off on an endgame for iraq.

 

And he doesnt have the same setup bush did. Dems were willing to comprimise, and reps had majority in senate and congress. Dems have half now, which means reps still hace the power to vote no and stagnate the process. Which they do. If youve been paying attention at all you know irs the republicans that are vetoing every fucking chance they get and are unwilling to budge on anything.

 

And obama explained that hes changed his inital stance on the war after learning about everything that is going on. He extended three parts of the patriot act until the end of this year. Frankly i trust his administration to use that power a lot better than bush who lied about wmds. Well see if it gets renewed.

[Soup forgot his password]

Jeeze I gotta stop posting using my phone. Look at all those spelling and grammar errors.

 

Thanks for the links. On this topic I would make two brief points.

 

1. Stimulus growth is not quality growth. Economic action based on stimulus is not necessarily going to be sustained in absence of state support, nor does it necessarily reflect genuine economic improvement. Dumping federal money into Solaris is a neat example. Which leads to the second point;

 

2. GDP is a poor measure of economic well-being. It measures transactions rather than value, which is why the broken windows fallacy is trumpeted by Keynesians after every natural disaster.

 

Uh Solaris lied about their growing debt. They're like Greece if the European Union was the Economic Stimulus bill. They're not exactly an example of what happened most of the time. In fact they failed because chinese ad japanese solar companies were MORE subsidized than Solaris. What's your keynesian blah blah blah have to say about that?

 

And if you don't like GDP, recommend another metric for measuring how the economy is doing. Oh that's right nobody has one.

[Soup forgot his password]

Really your whole argument against Obama is that he's focusing on the wrong things to win your vote. Instead of focusing in budgets and healthcare like he's been doing he should be busy reversing all the things that the last administration enacted. OR you don't understand why Obama doesnt have time to find alternatives to the patriot act and AETA.

 

My thing is, how is the AETA constitutionally wrong? If someone goes onto someone else's land and messes with their livestock, they're not respecting other people's constitutional rights. Do people who don't respect other people's constitutional rights deserve to be given constitutional rights of their own? I personally don't think so. Either you live and die by the constitution or you dont get the same rights as those who do.

[Soup forgot his password]

I. You said you didn't like obama and the only reason why you'd vote for him is because you didn't like the other candidates. You're going back on what you said and acting like Im just making this up.

 

II. Not really. He renewed three parts of the patriot act. Most of the patriot act is indefinite.

 

III. When you're presenting new information to a discussion it's YOUR job to cite it and bring it into the forum. Not mine. That said, I got it from the first sentence of the "AETA" wikipedia article. That's what AETA is designed to protect against: Animal rights activists who want to physically interfere with livestock for food or science. I havent found anything on shac 7. Every article i've read talks about why Shac 7 is against animal cruelty, not what they did to be arrested. They say its because they had a website against animal cruelty, but really? THAT'S what they did to be arrested? There's thousands of websites against animal cruelty.

 

IV. Couple things before I continue this. You need to post a few links:

a. Obama supporting AETA

b. Obama Supporting the Patriot Act

c. An authenticated report on Shac 7 about why they were arrested. Not some press release from the accused.

 

And no that's not what Im saying at all. If a rapist is thrown in jail, the jailer still deserves constitutional rights. How much sense does it make for the jailer not to deserve constitutional rights for being a jailer?

[Soup forgot his password]

Yeah you've got some mental issues or something because my description of what you said is exactly on-point with what you just quoted yourself saying.

 

And you sound like a dumbass 9/11 conspiracist on the rest of it. You just cited the ONLY article on the ENTIRE internet that has anything connecting Obama with AETA. "The only article I wont read" I READ IT before you posted it. I wanted you to find a real fact-based news source. BUT THAT'S THE ONLY ONE. If you google AETA Obama, THIS THREAD is in the top search results. That's how unfounded your whole argument is.

 

Basically, you're getting mad at me for quoting you as saying things you actually said. Mental issues. I think im done on this subject. Agree to disagree.

[Soup forgot his password]

There aren't a lot of articles on it, because shit bag liberals are willing to ignore things that make them uncomfortable.

 

You know what else there arent a lot of articles on? Obama smearing shit all over your mom's tits. That must be a liberal coverup as well.

 

 

 

 

YOu know what bugs me about you? In a few threads you've agreed with me and suppored my views on a lot of topics, but the things you say are completely unfounded and untrue, which makes ME look bad even though I can back up everything I say. Its lying conspiracist dipsshits like you that make not just liberals look bad, but EVERYONE. You post ONE article/blog post from a no-name website known to post 9/11 conspiracy theories and New world order bullshit, and soon as I say "that's not good enough" you launch into "liberals arent ready to hear the truth and blah blah blah blah."

 

Punch yourself in the dick and start over. Or don't.

[Soup forgot his password]

are you claiming the aeta doesn't exist? are you claiming that the patriot act doesn't exist?

 

really?

 

are those your claims?

 

seriously?

 

I don't believe in 911 conspiracy's. i believe in liberal apathy. case in point -you.

 

Please cite where i said any of those things. Thx. And after that cite why you're in support of Shac 7, why they were wrongfully accused of advocating violence and the physical endangerment of people and livestock invovled in farming and science. Cite why this is the pile of shit you want to stick your flag in because your method of debating with me is more than just dumb, it's boring—Two things I wont stand for while debating. Not to mention the problem I have with this post of yours is the exact same problem I've had with you all along: your whole argument is based on things nobody said and shit that didn't happen the way you said it did. THAT'S how you're conspiratorial. I want something a little less biased than a press release from the attorney who's making money by defending Shac 7.

[Soup forgot his password]

Are you a robot? You keep saying the same thing over and over and over. I feel like im talking to an automated telephone who's only programmed to say "Obama supports both the patriot act, and the aeta. both of which are unconstitutional." Like you've reached a limit on brain capacity and can't think beyond that. I asked you why you think Obama supports AETA and the patriot act, you just say "he autosigned an extension on some provisions." Like that means something. You probably think he's a warmonger of a president because he passed a military budget too. It would follow the same logic.

 

I asked you why you think AETA is unconstitutional and you regurgitate ONE press release over and over and over again that simply states, "These guys ran a website that advocated violence towards livestock and people involved in science and farming." Without even thinking "Do I support the advocation of violence towards people and livestock?"NOR can you confirm that that's the only charge they were convicted of because all you can find is a blog post on a conspiracy website and a press release from their attourney. I dont give a fuck if they're a civil rights group or not. If they're the appointed attourney in defense of SHAC 7, they're doing it for the money. What's funny is YOU think like a stupid fucking liberal. Pull your head out of your ass and try again.

[Fist 666]

this thread is cursed.

it doesn't matter who comes in here to "talk" it turns to this shit within 10 posts, every time.

[Spambot5000]

Jeeze I gotta stop posting using my phone. Look at all those spelling and grammar errors.

 

 

 

Uh Solaris lied about their growing debt. They're like Greece if the European Union was the Economic Stimulus bill. They're not exactly an example of what happened most of the time. In fact they failed because chinese ad japanese solar companies were MORE subsidized than Solaris. What's your keynesian blah blah blah have to say about that?

 

And if you don't like GDP, recommend another metric for measuring how the economy is doing. Oh that's right nobody has one.

 

You're quite hostile aren't you.

 

My point was that GDP should not be over-relied on as the basis of economic measurement. To say that the stimulus was proven to work because it reflected in GDP growth, is not necessarily to say that the stimulus package had a net benefit for Americans -for reasons I have already mentioned.

[Soup forgot his password]

@ Spambot

 

You do realize this is the nth time we've had a discussion about GDP, don't you? OHHHHH that's right you're not actually talking to me, you're using my post to launch into a libertarian thing about the GDP for all your avid readers. Hate to break it to you but nobody but me and two other people are reading anything in crossfire and we know all about GDP.

 

If you are talking to me, a lot of things are tied to GDP growth. Employment rates for example, are related to GDP growth. In fact its not even worth arguing with you over what the value of GDP is. If you dont think it has value, you should go find some. Every economist and person in the world already has.

 

@ Amprock

I already gave you a list of requests and questions you needed to respond about but you ignored all of them and continued to repeat yourself like, again, an automated hotline at the limit of its abilities .... I dont see why I should have to repeat myself just because you continue to. if you dont want to respond. fine. If you want to continue to make things up ok.

 

And to clarify, Im not insisting on Obama being anything. You can feel free to cite where I've been insistant on Obama being good or bad. What i've insisted on is you citing where your information comes from. You can't because you don't have any sources. Being a graphic designer for a newsletter must mean you get information "unfiltered" by newspapers and credible sources.

 

If you dont post another newsletter I'm going to count this discussion a loss. I've been asking you this entire time to post SOMETHING about Obama supporting the patriot act and AETA, but you haven't. I've asked you to post an article showing what exactly the Shac 7 organization was doing prior to being arrested but you havent. I've asked you to find a credible source citing why they were arrested but you haven't.

 

And the word "livestock" refers to animals on farms or for science. In the case of Shac 7, it would refer to beagles for science. THe term "livestock" is very clear in the definition of what AETA is designed to protect. So to answer your question, where i got the term "livestock" from. I got it from the actual AETA law as it's written. Whered you get YOUR information?

[Spambot5000]

@ Spambot

 

You do realize this is the nth time we've had a discussion about GDP, don't you? OHHHHH that's right you're not actually talking to me, you're using my post to launch into a libertarian thing about the GDP for all your avid readers. Hate to break it to you but nobody but me and two other people are reading anything in crossfire and we know all about GDP.

 

If you are talking to me, a lot of things are tied to GDP growth. Employment rates for example, are related to GDP growth. In fact its not even worth arguing with you over what the value of GDP is. If you dont think it has value, you should go find some. Every economist and person in the world already has.

 

Wow. Again I come to the realisation that it is impossible to interact with you. I made a point which you can take or leave. Discussion or no discussion; I don't care. Yet, you come out all guns blazing, determined to highlight your superior knowledge and, in contrast, my 'real' agenda. All based on a half reading of what I have said. Amazing...

 

I'm out.

[Soup forgot his password]

Nobody wants to talk to you about GDP. Get it now?

[Soup forgot his password]

From the NYT article

 

During the three-week trial, defense lawyers acknowledged that a Web site run by Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty posted home addresses and other personal information about animal researchers and others. But the activists said they were simply trying to shame their targets into dissociating themselves from the company, Huntingdon Life Sciences, and they disavowed any involvement with the vandalism, death threats, computer hacking and pipe bombs against those on the Web site.

 

Although federal prosecutors presented no evidence that the defendants directly participated in the vandalism and violence, they showed jurors that members of the group made speeches and Web postings from 2000 to 2004 that celebrated the violence and repeatedly used the word "we" to claim credit for it.

 

Keep in mind that this is coming out of a post 9/11 america where we were directly endangered by people who advocated violence over mass-media.

 

Prosecutors also produced telephone records indicating that the president of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, Kevin Kjonaas, called a man charged with bombing a California biotech lab shortly after the explosion.

 

I knew there was more to this than just a website ran by some humanitarians against dogs being used for scientific research. And you wonder why he has his lawyer present during the interview.

 

 

While the bill provides an exemption for “lawful public, governmental, or business reaction to the disclosure of information about an animal enterprise,” that exemption applies only to claims of economic “disruption” and not claims of economic “damage.” It also does not necessarily cover the entire range of expression protected by the First Amendment, which covers more than a lawful “reaction” to a “disclosure of information.” Ordinary persons would not understand which activities are prohibited and which are lawful.

 

In other words, the difference would be what Occupy Wallstreet did to the Port of Oakland. It would provide expemption to people who protest on private property and blockade people from doing their work, but that same exemption doesnt apply to damage or loss of property.

[Soup forgot his password]

Crap i accidently lost half of my post.

 

Here's the gist (all from that NYT article, btw)

 

Shac 7's president is associated with a convicted bomber

Shac 7's director is threatening scientists on tape shouting "The police can't protect you."

Shac 7's website condones violence, death threats, and posts the names and home addresses of scientists.

Shac 7 was convicted by a jury of piers.

Shac 7 was sentenced to 7-21 years. One of whom was out in 31 months.

Shac 7 was the ONLY example of any one ever being convicted under AETA, which is a twenty year old law.

 

So why would eliminating this law be important to Obama? Currently he has to deal with missle launches in Korea, nukes in Iran, China's navy threatening US, Healthcare reform, Social Security Reform, Immigration reform, and a million other things. Why would he take a stance that would make him look like he's in defense of a violent and retarded organization against scientific research? The flipside of the coin is that by defending Shac 7's right to make violent threats against Scientific Researchers, you're infringing on the consitutional rights of those scientists. Why put that on Obama? And what politician would do something differently in Obama's shoes? You can think of Obama as being a piece of shit for being a politician, but don't say he's a piece of shit over other politicians. How much sense does that make?

[Realism]

Tough shit hippies, AETA rules

[nsmbfan]

 

wooooooooo!!!

[McLovin]

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/91689761

[McLovin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL7BE34898EFC5C04E

[ipod90]

^

Unavailable.

[UPS!]

Rand Paul endoresing Romney almost made me vomit.

[Soup forgot his password]

Why would that make you almost vomit? Isn't Mitt Romney's every libertarian's dream? He comes from a very successful business/financial background. I would think from a libertarian perspective having a wealthy businessman run America would be perfect.

[UPS!]

Im not a libertarian.

 

Also anyone who hears Mitt Romney and dosent want to vomit must wipe their ass with dollar dollar bills yall.

[Spambot5000]

Why would that make you almost vomit? Isn't Mitt Romney's every libertarian's dream? He comes from a very successful business/financial background. I would think from a libertarian perspective having a wealthy businessman run America would be perfect.

 

Romney is definitely not a libertarians dream candidate; he is a socially conservative corporate puppet.

 

 

In other news, Peter Schiff gives a good

at the Fraser Institute.

[nsmbfan]

we have more pages in this thread than we had voters for Ron Paul at my polling place

 

 

smh

 

 

The elite bought everything. There's nothing left but ACTUAL REVOLUTION. Grab your brooms everybody!

[Soup forgot his password]

Romney is definitely not a libertarians dream candidate; he is a socially conservative corporate puppet.

 

 

In other news, Peter Schiff gives a good

at the Fraser Institute.

 

You're only proving my point. Libertarians are conservatives who believe in the rights of corporations.

 

 

Edit: and to add to that video that you posted, greece didnt fail because of government stimulus. It failed because the government lied about its finances when it entered the EU. Germany, Great Britain, all the other countries in the EU that are trying to keep greece afloat have stimuluses as well, so you can't logically come to Pete's conclusion.

[McLovin]

....

 

 

 

Most who are voting for romney feel it is their only chance to boot obama out. Most dont even like romney but prefer him to obama.

[Spambot5000]

You're only proving my point. Libertarians are conservatives who believe in the rights of corporations.

 

 

Edit: and to add to that video that you posted, greece didnt fail because of government stimulus. It failed because the government lied about its finances when it entered the EU. Germany, Great Britain, all the other countries in the EU that are trying to keep greece afloat have stimuluses as well, so you can't logically come to Pete's conclusion.

 

facepalm.jpg