BF2S Forums The Last Conservative

He has my vote.

He's a republican.

He fucking wins, and wins hard.

King George is a clown and a disgrace. I only hope that Paul will have the opportunity to turn around all of Bush's follies.

I am not concerned with labels at all. Conservative, liberal, democrat, republican mean nothing to me. I choose to follow who makes the most sense for the betterment of the country.

I will vote for him and I hope he wins.

He probably won't win. Is Hillary Clinton the probable winner - maybe? That is not an endorsement - but rather a realization of what is most likely to happen.

Anyways, there can never be democracy (as we are nothing like a democracy now) until the root cause undermining liberty and democracy has been rooted out and utterly eliminated (democracy: as the constitution had intended it to be and has outlined it to be). His position on the relationship of the IRS (and Federal Income Tax) to the not-so Federal Federal Reserve (creating a relationship-agreement of the government with the banking sector - enforcing by law a privately owned banking cartel) is mostly correct. But, that is not sufficient reason to vote for him (IMO). Unless the people ("we the people") understand what the relationship is and why it is illegal and unconstitutional there will not be any meaningful governmental change.

The right to make money constitutionally rests in the hands of the government (not the Federal Reserve, who's membership corporate shares are privately owned, benefiting the for profit organizations who are member-owners, there is nothing truly Federal about it, nor does “quasi-governmental” actually mean anything - it is outright outlandish doublespeak). The Federal Reserve system in America enforces a privately owned banking cartel system, and that cartel exists for profit - for the few. There is nothing remotely healthy or fair about our current system. As Napoleon put it “The hand that gives is above the hand that takes.” The most important and meaningful change this country can make is to repeal the 1913 Federal Reserve Act; and, to repeal the Federal Income Tax act, the 16th amendment to the constitution (never legally ratified by the states as required) in that very same year 1913. The direct relationship of your Federal tax dollars to the private banking institutions that own all the shares in Federal Reserve should be self evident. They have no assets in proportion to the money they create (yes they create nearly all of the money you use, not the US Treasury), they do this by debt creation (& ledger entries). At times as much as 100% of ALL Federal Income Tax dollars go directly to the service of the debt (which was created out of thin air, pulled directly out of their arse, for the benefit of a few: those who own the shares in the Federal Reserve Banks, and are dependent upon debt creation & an inflationary cycle). A country that can create bonds - can create money (debt free in relationship to the GDP).

He might be wrong about the necessity of a gold standard for currency (though). The only benefit a precious metal standard can have - is in restricting deficit spending (but that might actual help at times, ... but, look around almost all of the modern world was built without gold coin transferring from one hand to another. It is hard for me to see it as a necessity). But the fact is paper money is worthless whether backed by gold or not. Even gold is a commodity and can be worthless in a world were bread is worth more than gold. Money is a standardized measure of value. Its value is solely determined by demand within the society (Nation) it exists (international currency trading actually undermines the sovereignty and value and intrinsic nature of why it was created in the first place). The demand gives it value - and that is: that it is “good for the payment of taxes.”

Carl Marx, stated this correctly. This (idea) is one of the few things he got right (IMO):
“This fact simply means that the object that labor produces, its product, stands opposed to it as something alien, as a power independent of the producer. The product of labor is labor embodied and made material in an object, it is the objectification of labor. The realization of labor is its objectification.“ In the absence of a monetary system - you have a barter system; therefore in a modern monetary system: money is the objectification of work and/or a work product.

a.) Money is the objectification of work.
b.) Money is the standardized sovereign currency of a Nation.
c.) Money has value based upon demand (not backing by another commodity).
d.) Money has value and demand - when it is “good for the payment of taxes.”

I would probably vote for him though, and it would help if enough people understood: you have no liberty or democracy at the moment. And what happened in 1913 has subverted all liberty and democracy.

The Federal Reserve banking cartel system (siphoning money off Americans, ad infinitum, via the IRS and debt creation, that has to be serviced by Taxes & more debt creation : the vicious cycle) is the structural problem making real liberty & democracy basically - a dream; not a reality. But, it doesn't have to be that way. That is just the way it is - by design (by an interested very interested few).

The structure as it is - depends upon an existing relationship (willed into existence and utterly designed, it didn't just happen by some sort of mystical evolution of economic principles - that just are; like nature's rules - just are). Change the (designed by a few people) structure and this relationship of: banking institution(s), corporation/industry - to - political cronies & then the public suffers (and the public is duped, & their future sold into debt) - is transformed into positive industrial/economic growth (and can be). And, it would probably take less than 1 or 2 years to change (completely) the fundamental structure - of society for profit - for the very few (eliminating control from the top; the banking/corporate control of the worlds political systems).

The public needs to be educated. If there is no support en masse - there will be no political movement towards reforming the system. The propaganda machine from the far right (the very very top, very rich, who own the banks, corporations, media) will go into overdrive to protect their interests - even though many of them will remain rich - even after reform. This is not a reformation to remove the concept of the corporate entity, nor to remove the concept of personal wealth. Nor is it economic suicide or even remotely radical. It is a matter of fairness, prosperity for all (as a fair and guaranteed pursuit) & democracy as the constitution intended it to be (as it literally is worded to be), etc.

American is still a dream - worth striving for. But, this dream is not a reality - at the moment.

PS: This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a fact. The Federal Reserve system (cartel: is a private-share corporate banking club with a government facade - exisiting for the for-profit institutions and) together with the IRS, are the root drains on the economy (standing in direct opposition to real & stable personal prosperity). I am a-political and could care less about anyone's false ideologies - left, right or the middle. I am pragmatic and dispassionate about politics in every way. Think about it? Nationalism creates the urge towards war - war creates debt. It seems like a no-brainer to me.... well - whatever - think & believe whatever you want. And, while I am thinking about it, everything this administration has done is a disgrace (irrespective of the financial reality underlying the personal motivations of select persons : for profit & power). There are two issues: the removal of your rights to prosperity under the structure of the current system (as is, as implemented in 1913) and the assault on your personal freedoms within the political sphere - which further seeks to make you powerless (which began long before this admin., this admin. just typifies everything that is wrong with the more visible political half).

Last edited by topal63 (2007-08-07 09:46:34)

I'm tarred as a liberal lefty on this forum but I can't argue with what he's saying in that speech ...if I had a vote he'd be on my shortlist at the very least.

Harmor wrote:

He has alot of Libertarian views that I like.  I'm just worried about what will happen globally if we pull out of all our zones of influence, especially Iraq in the near term.

Domestically I'm all for a national sales tax to replace our income/social security/medicare/state/local property taxes.  My only problem with a national sales tax is that I won't be able to write off my home, but that should be offset by the fact that I get to keep 50% more of my income.

If Ron Paul had at least 10% of the GOP vote right now I'm sure would have a much better chance, but right now Rudy, Guliani and Fred Thompson are the only hopefuls right now.  I like Gingrinch, but he's unelectable.  We need someone  to beat Hillary and I think only the three front runners currently have a chance at this time...Guliani the best of the three.

All things considered, I actually would prefer McCain out of the Republican frontrunners, but Guiliani (despite his warmongering nature) would still probably be a better president than Fred Thompson.  If there's one thing I hate more than hawks, it's lobbyists.

they would kill him before he would ever become the president.

topal63 wrote:

The right to make money constitutionally rests in the hands of the government (not the Federal Reserve, which is a privately owned, for profit organization, there is nothing Federal about it, nor does “quasi-governmental” actually mean anything - it is outright outlandish doublespeak). The Federal Reserve system in America is a privately owned banking cartel system, it exists for profit - for the few. There is nothing remotely healthy or fair about our current system. As Napoleon put it “The hand that gives is above the hand that takes.” The most important and meaningful change this country can make is to repeal the 1913 Federal Reserve Act; and, to repeal the Federal Income Tax act, the 16th amendment to the constitution (never legally ratified by the states as required) in that very same year 1913. The direct relationship of your Federal tax dollars to the private banking institutions that own all the shares in Federal Reserve should be self evident. They have no assets in proportion to the money they create (yes they create nearly all of the money you use, not the US Treasury), they do this by debt creation (& ledger entries). At times as much as 1/3 to 100% of ALL Federal Income Tax dollars go directly to the service of the debt (which was created out of thin air, pulled directly out of their arse, for the benefit of a few: those who own the shares in the Federal Reserve Banks). A country that can create bonds - can create money (debt free in relationship to the GDP).

This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a fact. The Federal Reserve system (cartel: is a privately owned for profit institution and) is the root drain on the economy (and stands in direct opposition to personal prosperity).

Care to explain how the Fed is a cartel and a banking trust? Any profit a district federal reserve bank sees is derived at the expense of its member banks and is either stored as reserves or payed out as dividends to the national treasury. The banks, as shareholders, only make decisions related to employees and bonuses within a federal reserve district bank. The federal reserve system is one of the few aspects of our government which works fairly well and is worthy of our pride as Americans. The primary failing of the Federal Reserve System in the economics at the top. The lack of checks on the board of governors and their use of poor mainstream economics (that is to say, mainstream economics is poor) in making their policy decisions. The system itself, as a beuracracy, is relatively effecient.

The major profitable benefit member banks see is their ability to loan with less intelligence, knowing the Fed will not allow them to fail.

Your assertion that the debt is imaginary and that creating currency and bonds are the solution: "A country that can create bonds - can create money (debt free in relationship to the GDP). First, Bonds are a form of debt, and are a part of the national debt. They are receipts for money loaned to the US government. Second, hyperinflation is a likely result of paying all debts through the printing of currency. The gross expansion of the money supply creates gross inflation. During Argentina's bout with hyperinflation the nation issued new larger denominations of currency on a daily or weekly basis to cope and workers were paid daily and immediately spent their money.

Bloomberg, I believe is more of a democrat than a Republican and if he ran it would take away more from Hillary than Guiliani.

This goes for Fred Thompson/Romney vs. Hillary as well.

A combination of Fred Thompson/Romney or Guiliani/Romney on one ticket could possibly beat Hillary/Obama, depending on three factors:

1.  The economy doesn't go to shit with this sub-prime deal + rising gas prices
2.  Another terrorist attack
3.  Iraq goes down the toilet

very nice post

Braddock wrote:

liquix wrote:

A rogue president would be a dream. I could only hope for someone to be elected who isn't controlled by corporate puppeteers, sadly, they couldn't get the party go-ahead, nor the funding to run if they aren't already puppets. Still, I absolutely hate that the president is as powerful as he is already, what ever happened to balance of power between the branches of government.

There used to be a romantic notion that any American could one day possibly become President ...sadly that's not the case anymore.

Romance and politics can both be found in the fiction section.

This is by far the best post I can remember in this forum.