Absolutely shocking facts about the GOP

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


We were talking about the socialists that are shaping policy in D.C, but you
keep ignoring that a great deal of monetary policy is formulated and written on behalf
of the financial industry, not La Raza... The bankers, who facilitate and fund capitalist
ventures are engaging in capitalism, those same bankers shape policy in DC based
upon their own interests which is banking. Tell me, when was the last time La Raza
lawyers penned a economic regulatory bill for DC lawmakers???

So again, you are changing the subject from economics to a racially centric group
that does not meddle in the financing of capitalism. Socialism is an economic system
and last I checked, banks do not support socialist doctrine because that would threaten
their profit or possibly, their entire existence.

What am I supposed to make of this information. People are being people, believing that their beliefs mean anything? All this talk of politics, and government and religion makes me wish humanity would just die off already. Human ego has guaranteed our destruction. So who cares who started what or where something originated? The issues are that we are actively choosing to live in a world where violence reigns and people are willfully ignorant to unequivocal truths. There is nothing shocking about anything people do today, or any day before this one. It will be shocking when we can stop giving a f*** about all of this and start over.

reply to post by Recce1


Classic Liberalism never believed in laissez-faire economic or free markets, that is a bunch of nonsense made up by modern day communists who have re-marketed communism as capitalism.

Classic Liberalism always believed, and still does, that banks should be kept in check to keep them from abusing the privileges they are granted through charters to control the monetary system.

Classic Liberalism firmly believed in regulating interstate commerce and conducting International treaties that represented the people of the U.S., not primarily international corporations as the current free market crowd concentrates on exclusively benefiting.

Once again, the laissez-faire economist people are communists, trying to pretend that they believe in market economics.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

If it were not so, communists would not be spending so much time fighting free enterprise and private property.

The communists are embracing free market economics with a vengeance, see what the former communists nations, Russia and China, are busy doing. They haven't changed their ways, just their marketing campaign.

At what point in time do you free market preaching people realize how badly you have been duped?

reply to post by orangetom1999

People who have wealth are not automatically guilty of some moral and ethical trespass.

Aren't they?

Who is responsible for the growing number of slave labors around the globe?

Who is responsible for the growing ecological and economic disaster that future generations face?

People who are extremely wealthy, in positions of power, are the ones driving the truck, who have the ability to change all of this, but instead they are trying to pick up speed as we race off the cliff.

It is not good guy verses bad guy, it is everyone who still has a shred of moral decency standing up for what is right, against a system controlled by the super rich that seems hell bent on self destruction.

The thing about politics is its a beast that has to constantly evolve in order to survive.

The reason the republican party has survived for the last 150 years is its ability to make the public feel like the party is standing up for the under dog. They wanted to keep the south from becoming too powerful, and enslaving workers, so they were willing to go to war over it.

What they accomplished is actually quite impressive when you think about it, especially looking at racial equality today.

However, things are basically going back to the way they were in the 1850's. The working class, and even the middle class is increasingly finding it harder to survive no matter how hard you work, especially if you work for the richest people in the world. For a long time hard work guaranteed success in this country.

Now, we have companies like Walmart which basically enslave their employees, they make them pay for their own health insurance, which sometimes costs more than their paychecks. They force them to work overtime for free, and they encourage their employees to take full advantage of welfare, public housing, and food stamps.

Regardless of what party affiliation, politicians are always looking out for themselves and their cronies. The fact that they trick the masses into donating money and their time in hopes of a better life is just sad.

Originally posted by mastahunta
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

We were talking about the socialists that are shaping policy in D.C, but you
keep ignoring that a great deal of monetary policy is formulated and written on behalf
of the financial industry, not La Raza... The bankers, who facilitate and fund capitalist
ventures are engaging in capitalism, those same bankers shape policy in DC based
upon their own interests which is banking. Tell me, when was the last time La Raza
lawyers penned a economic regulatory bill for DC lawmakers???

So again, you are changing the subject from economics to a racially centric group
that does not meddle in the financing of capitalism. Socialism is an economic system
and last I checked, banks do not support socialist doctrine because that would threaten
their profit or possibly, their entire existence.

Why do you insist on demonizing businesses which produce things and rationalize that la raza does no harm? You are sorely mistaken. It is likely that either you do not know what la raza is, or you agree to their policy of pushing for special treatment given to a specific demographic, many who are here illegally. This is ok in the liberal lexicon apparently.

But my point is that while the Occupiers are complaining so bitterly about corporations, they willingly ignore or defend other groups doing the same activiies. To suggest that a corporation has more influence than a group catering to a specific demographic is ludicrous at best. They both donate money and they both have influence.
Are you going to really sit there and tell me that one is ok and the other isn't?

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

If it were not so, communists would not be spending so much time fighting free enterprise and private property.

The communists are embracing free market economics with a vengeance, see what the former communists nations, Russia and China, are busy doing. They haven't changed their ways, just their marketing campaign.

At what point in time do you free market preaching people realize how badly you have been duped?

You mean former communist countries? If a person is embracing free market they are no longer communist. Please stop trying to convince me that communists are free marketeers. You are not making any sense at all. Are you for real?

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by mastahunta


Why do you insist on demonizing businesses which produce things and rationalize that la raza does no harm? You are sorely mistaken. It is likely that either you do not know what la raza is, or you agree to their policy of pushing for special treatment given to a specific demographic, many who are here illegally. This is ok in the liberal lexicon apparently.

I am not demonizing business, I am demonizing the banks, who fund the politicians,
who make the agenda in DC. Why do you keep parrying to an argument that has nothing
to do with the prior you are responding to??? We were talking about capitalism and
communism and then you brought up La Raza. Now you are off in a whole new direction...
If you dislike the course of Big Government spending, then you cannot rationally ignore
the role big business plays in shaping the spending agenda, in a very major way.

But my point is that while the Occupiers are complaining so bitterly about corporations, they willingly ignore or defend other groups doing the same activiies. To suggest that a corporation has more influence than a group catering to a specific demographic is ludicrous at best. They both donate money and they both have influence.
Are you going to really sit there and tell me that one is ok and the other isn't?


Now you are talking about occupiers... And I am not sure why...

When money becomes an object it changes the dynamics and the motives in a major way,
I do not think any entity should be able to buy a politician or their voting prowess, no
exceptions.

Thats crazy sauce right there. Great post and S&F.

As for the Awakes and the all seeing eye I wonder if thats were it originated and how it came to be on our currency?

reply to post by mastahunta


Yes, I'm talking about Occupiers because that is who is going around noisily complaining about corporations these days. Even one of the news stations did a special on the Occupy movement. I guess it was CNN or one of those.

Originally posted by Mcupobob
Thats crazy sauce right there. Great post and S&F.

As for the Awakes and the all seeing eye I wonder if thats were it originated and how it came to be on our currency?

The All-seeing eye is a masonic symbol. FDR was said to be a 33rd degree mason and had the symbol put on the one dollar bill. It would not be surprising that the darker faction of masons, the Illuminati who use that symbol for everything may have infiltrated both parties with operatives. Even DARPA used the Illuminati logo on their TIA webpage which later was removed.

Here it is in case you've never seen it

www.infowars.com...

reply to post by MarkJS


I see what you are saying...time to put our people to work and come down hard on companies in the US that pay slave wages under the table to illegals or those with work visas. Just wanted to show you the minutes of the meeting so all could see why Rep voted against it, because they have their own version....that old mine's better than yours junk. So it is not that they were against the bill, but wanted their version instead which, from what I could gather had even more protections for us workers. It is such a complex, round and round system...completely set up to take average citizens out of the process. What the founding fathers proposed for our government has become completely corrupted in favor of career politicians, as usual greed and power wins. Thank you for taking the time to read me post.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Exactly...I would love to have a true conservative like Paul...but the defense issue and the liberal drug ideas of his make me very uneasy. Now hopefully if his time is not now his son will step up in the future. As long as O is out in 2012, I guess anyone is better than him for another 4 years.

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Exactly...I would love to have a true conservative like Paul...but the defense issue and the liberal drug ideas of his make me very uneasy. Now hopefully if his time is not now his son will step up in the future. As long as O is out in 2012, I guess anyone is better than him for another 4 years.

With all do consideration, Ron Paul's opinions on controlled substances is very conservative. Both his personnel beliefs, as well as his opinions of governance both stay true to conservative values.

Personally, between you and me, it is a very Marxist, un-conservative thing to try and use force to control what another person does that you disagree with.

Rep. Ron Paul is personally against the usage of controlled substances as a Doctor(and as well a human being). But he recognizes how tyrannical your mind set is in regards to this issue and will not engage in such evil.

The thing is, your a sheep. Most people are sheep, heck most politicians are sheep, most CEO's etc.

People who are worried about ending the war on drugs(which seems fixated on just one thing really to protect several industries) because of the supposed legalization of the "hard stuff", are dumb.

As most controlled substances are (chemically made) poisons. Personally I think drug laws(and most law's) are the result of stupid people trying their hand at thinking.
People selling the chemically made stuff should be arrested for attempted man-slaughter(as anyone selling a known and potentially lethal poison for the purpose of human consumption would) and the people using it should be treated like attempted suicide cases.

No need to add new law's, or add tyrannical mindsets to society because you dislike if another person get's intoxicated(as it would force safer and safer alternatives).

Now let's take a look at the defense issue.

Would a real conservative agree with America being the global police? Would a real conservative support war mongering and war profiteering? Would a real Conservative support blank check diplomacy? Would a real Conservative be "OK" with willfully violating the Constitution in order to wage war?

The problem is, you aren't a conservative to begin with. So you and those like you, try to re-brand what Conservatism is to make yourselves feel better. And to hide the fact that you got a nasty Marxist streak inside of you.

Like an alcoholic that knows he or she needs to put the bottle down, you know in your heart that it isn't right to use force against others for the sake of lording over them. You need to put the Marxism down.

Continuing to engage in dialogue as you have is dishonest. Your deceiving not only yourself, but anyone you engage intellectual discourse with.

After going over this thread again I can safely say that this has been one of the most productive, respectful, and intelligent discussions on a particular subject spanning 5 pages on ATS that I have seen in a while. While my personal beliefs undoubtedly do not align with virtually any of the other posters I still find it enlightening to know that we find points of disagreement on this topic that is rather miniscule.

So, thank you to everyone who participated in this thread. It encourages me to work that much harder in finding the truth and posting it on ATS.

poet1b,


I wrote...

People who have wealth are not automatically guilty of some moral and ethical trespass.

and you posted..

Aren't they?

No they are not. They are not the government of these nations.

Who is responsible for the growing number of slave labors around the globe?

The governments over these people and nations. Not difficult to figure this out.


Who is responsible for the growing ecological and economic disaster that future generations face?

The governments of these nations.

People who are extremely wealthy, in positions of power, are the ones driving the truck, who have the ability to change all of this, but instead they are trying to pick up speed as we race off the cliff.

Are you advocating here for these 'Rich" people to sponsor an overthrow of governments and to take up your cause celeb. That these wealthy people have the duty and obligation to overthrow these foreign governments under which they are operating and take on your causes and beliefs??

It is not good guy verses bad guy, it is everyone who still has a shred of moral decency standing up for what is right, against a system controlled by the super rich that seems hell bent on self destruction.

I thought these were times of Enlightenment...of men not being bound by the olde religious dogmas of the past...where progress is happening. What you are describing here is not better in your opinion than in the olde days when the Church and State were in bed together and fleecing the people for a select few.
If this is the case...what is the name of this modern day religion?? I ask this because on the surface ..today..it appears not to be a religion...but since it proliferates ..devoutly it must be a religious dogma.

By the way...I don;'t believe in good guy verses bad guy...good cop verses bad cop. I believe we are all bad guys..no exceptions.

Thanks,
Orangetom


Thanks,
Orangetom

edit on 20-1-2012 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)