White privilege isn't something that's given to you, it's a comparative advantage you gain via minority discrimination and prejudice. Since we live in a competitive market economy, every time a resume is thrown in the trash because it has a black-sounding name, yours moves that much closer to the top. Every time a black family is herded into the ghetto by redlining banks, that much more property in the more well-developed areas of town becomes available for you. Is this hard to understand?

[Edited on March 20, 2012 at 6:30 PM. Reason : .]

3/20/2012 6:29:05 PM

This shows me that you've never had to hire anyone in your life.

3/20/2012 6:46:15 PM

Vintage Ron Paul Video ~26 year old. Same message.

http://youtu.be/YjQx0KaAL9w

3/20/2012 7:22:12 PM

Quote :

"Ron Paul spoke to supporters at a luncheon in Los Angeles today and guaranteed that if he can pull out a hard-fought third place finish in tonight’s Illinois primary, he will win the GOP nomination for president. “The latest polls have me trailing Speaker Gingrich by just a few percentage points,” Paul told the anxious crowd. “If I can manage to pull off a third place finish, I guarantee I will end up winning the nomination. Don’t listen to anybody who claims they know the current delegate count. Trust me, we’re way ahead of what everybody thinks. A third place finish should give us the delegates we need, and lock up even more from the state party convention since I’m a proven winner. After that, it’s going to be a cakewalk. We’ll keep rolling with our momentum and defeat Barack Obama in November!” Paul’s claims are dubious at best, considering all delegate estimates have him trailing dreadfully behind Romney, Santorum and even Gingrich. That didn’t stop his supporters from jumping at the opportunity to praise their candidate, and accuse the media of a vast conspiracy to hide the truth. “MSNBC, Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS… they’re all in on it with the establishment,” said Paul backer Anita Blunt. “They’re downplaying Dr. Paul’s actual performance thus far in the campaign. Anybody who reads the internet or goes on Facebook knows Dr. Paul has the most support of any candidate, by far. You’ll see when all is said and done. Even if Dr. Paul finishes last in Illinois, he will still end up with the delegates needed to win the nomination. I am absolutely confident of this fact.” Paul campaign spokesperson Jesse Benton said the candidate will be eagerly watching results from a hotel in Los Angeles tonight after filming an appearance on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. “He’ll be watching with bated breath hoping to see that magical 10-15% number, which I’m confident we’ll get. Once the delegates are actually tallied, our consistent 3rd and 4th place finishes will have finally paid off, and the people will have spoken.”"

http://www.freewoodpost.com/2012/03/20/ron-paul-if-i-finish-3rd-in-illinois-primary-i-will-win-the-nomination/

3/20/2012 7:53:44 PM

3/20/2012 9:54:08 PM

^^
you realize that's a fake news site, right?

lol...

3/20/2012 9:57:20 PM

Ben Swann talks about voter fraud in Missouri here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eFcmw_8yscQ#!

At this point, it's not minor oversights here and there. What's going on is pretty scary. A lot of you are willing to look over it because you hate Ron Paul and libertarianism in general, but we have some very clear cut examples of people trying to participate in the political process and the police arresting them.

Unbelievable.

Video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4TrQc5iG2c&feature=player_embedded

[Edited on March 20, 2012 at 10:02 PM. Reason : ]

3/20/2012 10:00:50 PM

Can you post a non-video link? There has to be a blog post somewhere with easy-to-search-for references.

3/20/2012 10:07:32 PM

Quote :

"you realize that's a fake news site, right? lol..."

So is comedy central's news.

3/20/2012 10:07:54 PM

^^http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/police-intervene-arrest-ron-paul-backers-at-missouri-caucus/

3/20/2012 10:10:03 PM

^^I can't tell if you're joking, or just dumb...

^ It seems like they would have been able to achieve their goals better by following the reals, and NOT trying to create a disruption.

It makes sense for the tea baggers and OWS to create a disruption, but if your goal is to rock a vote, it's in your interests to follow the rules isn't it? Is there irony in Ron Paul-libertarians being upset in a group exercising their private property rights?

[Edited on March 20, 2012 at 10:15 PM. Reason : ]

3/20/2012 10:10:49 PM

Moron, why are you here? Why are you fighting against us when we are the ones trying to promote the ideas of true Americanism? It's like you don't want us to be right.

3/20/2012 10:15:17 PM

Quote :

"^^ you realize that's a fake news site, right? lol..."

It is like that Rep that believed a story from The Onion

3/21/2012 12:47:35 AM

You don't say

3/21/2012 1:03:22 AM

Quote :

"you realize that's a fake news site, right? lol..."

GeniusXBoy shows off his source-vetting skills once again.

[Edited on March 21, 2012 at 10:06 AM. Reason : .]

3/21/2012 10:04:40 AM

geniusboy has been trolling TSB since january about this.

this guy doesn't give a single fuck about paul. xgeniusxboyx will be writting in vladimir lenin in november. make no mistake.

3/21/2012 10:07:54 AM

Your jokes aren't going to change my mind.
Neither is teaming up on me.


I'll be laughing last.

3/21/2012 11:51:55 AM

lol ok.

[Edited on March 21, 2012 at 12:09 PM. Reason : ,]

3/21/2012 12:08:53 PM

Hidden camera footage of GeniuSxBoy as primary results come in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMo_HcRBnUY

[Edited on March 21, 2012 at 12:34 PM. Reason : .]

3/21/2012 12:34:06 PM

I gotta give my vote to geniusboy. pack_bryan is an unoriginal and boring troll, and he's so fucking transparent that nobody really even bothers engaging him anymore. geniusboy, on the other hand, plays the role so much better. And it's kinda funny to watch him and steal pack_bryan's thunder.

3/21/2012 3:02:41 PM

3/21/2012 3:32:46 PM

Let's talk shit about Thomas Jefferson now

3/21/2012 3:44:28 PM

conquering a continent from indigenous people....A-okay

letting private banks control currency...... ZOMG TYRANNY!!!




LOL, fuck you, Jefferson.

3/21/2012 3:48:44 PM

There ya go.

3/21/2012 3:50:41 PM

There's no proof that Thomas Jefferson said that. In fact, the terms "inflation" and "deflation" were not in use until well after Thomas Jefferson's death.

Jefferson did, however, say this:

Quote :

"And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity in the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."

3/21/2012 3:51:29 PM

pershiate that, destroyer



by the way, what is your source for that quote. I would be a fool not to ask


I found it:
Jefferson made in a letter to John Taylor in 1816. He wrote, "And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."


The quote that is mentioned in my picture is first seen in 1937. It was later noted as a spurious paraphrasing for reasons stated by destroyer. This quotation is often cited as being in an 1802 letter to Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin, and/or "later published in The Debate Over the Recharter of the Bank Bill (1809)."

http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/private-banks-quotation



[Edited on March 21, 2012 at 4:24 PM. Reason : .]

3/21/2012 4:06:02 PM

The whole letter is pretty interesting: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mtj:@field(DOCID+@lit(tj110120))

Quote :

"It is a wise rule and should be fundamental in a government disposed to cherish its credit, and at the same time to restrain the use of it within the limits of its faculties, "never to borrow a dollar without laying a tax in the same instant for paying the interest annually, and the principal within a given term; and to consider that tax as pledged to the creditors on the public faith. On such a pledge as this, sacredly observed, a government may always command, on a reasonable interest, all the lendable money of their citizens, while the necessity of an equivalent tax is a salutary warning to them and their constituents against oppressions, bankruptcy, and its inevitable consequence, revolution."

If this principle had been adhered to, we wouldn't be completely fucked. Liberals and conservatives alike have advocated funding current expenses with debt. We've all heard the half-baked justifications. Ultimately, though, we are paying for comfort today in exchange for a lower standard of living later.

It's abhorrent to me that mainstream policies of the day pass debt from generation to the next. This is seen as pragmatic. "This is how it has been, so this is how it must be." To oppose these policies is to be labelled "fringe", or an "ideologue".

[Edited on March 21, 2012 at 4:34 PM. Reason : ]

3/21/2012 4:30:39 PM

^x6 & ^*7

Quote :

"Do not consecutively reply to a topic - If you are within the alloted timespan for editing a message that no one has replied to and you think of something to add, EDIT the message. DO NOT REPLY AGAIN. Constant abuse of this will not be tolerated."

sincerely the management

3/21/2012 8:26:33 PM

If you don't have anything interesting to say, don't say it.

3/21/2012 8:27:34 PM

As a Ron Paul supporter(and Rand Paul when Ron dies), I have to say that we have to do everything in our power to abolish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Welfare, public education, the post office, public parks, public streets 7 HIGHWAYS, the EPA, OSHA, USDA, and the FDA.

These systems are beyond ridiculous. Can somebody here even name one family member or friend that they help?

Get real people.

Vote Ron Paul in 2012 and save this country from a horrific collapse.

3/21/2012 8:39:21 PM

Could those entities still exist without the funding of the government?


Surviving on public charity funding like the red cross and good will?


Can we use the government to oversee that they are not infringing on American's liberty?

[Edited on March 21, 2012 at 8:51 PM. Reason : .]

3/21/2012 8:47:31 PM

Quote :

"Obama Site Draws Most Traffic, Ron Paul Second: Nielsen More adults visited President Barack Obama's campaign website in January than the four Republican hopefuls combined, but Texan Ron Paul is leading the GOP pack. Nielsen Co. analyzed voter-aged traffic to the official presidential campaign websites. About 4.2 million people visited Obama's site, while 830,000 people visited the site for Paul, who represents Texas' 14th Congressional District. Just 773,000 people visited Mitt Romney's site, 696,000 for Rick Santorum's site and 609,000 visited Newt Gingrich's. Women made up more than 60 percent of all traffic to Santorum's site, the largest gender split of any candidate. Only Paul and Gingrich drew more men than women. Gingrich's audience was the most affluent and educated, with half having at least a bachelor's degree and 27 percent making over $100,000 per year. More than half of Obama's visitors were over age 50 compared to 34 percent for Romney. "

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/politics/Obama-Site-Draws-Most-Traffic-Ron-Paul-Second-Nielsen-143740126.html


I have no disputes with this article. Everything seems correct.

3/21/2012 8:55:16 PM

I can't read but so many posts in a row from you

if you consolidated that into 1 post and saved this website some bandwidth then i would read your post

[Edited on March 21, 2012 at 9:00 PM. Reason : -]

3/21/2012 9:00:20 PM

bandwidth has to do with transferring data over a medium at a specific size.

there is no advantage to consolidating the text. All that lies in between who different post is a horizontal line, in which, I would use anyway if <hr> was available to me.

if you want to reply to me, I have enough sense to understand which post you are referring to, and, if I am unsure, I will ask you what you're referring to. I'm confident that two posts in a row keep my thoughts more organized rather than jumping from one topic to another within a single post.

I hope this is the last time we have to discuss this for it's an old battle and it is a non-issue.

3/21/2012 9:19:34 PM

Ron Paul is my homeboy.

3/21/2012 10:21:01 PM

I'm not really outraged by this, and it may not be that out of the ordinary:

But atleast half of Ron Paul's family is on his campaign's payroll:

http://www.citizensforethics.org/page/-/PDFs/Reports/Family_Affair_House_2012_CREW.pdf?nocdn=1
(scroll to page 303)

[Edited on March 22, 2012 at 9:07 PM. Reason : its worth looking throught the NC reps just for the eye rolls (page 229)]

3/22/2012 9:06:14 PM

Quote :

"Rep. Alcee Hastings, (D-FL) paid his girlfriend $622,574. • Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) paid his wife $512,293. • Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) paid her daughter and grandson a combined $495,650. • Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) paid six different relatives a combined $304,599. • Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA) paid his wife $238,438. • In total, representatives paid $5,575,090 in salaries or fees directly to family members."

That's what? $50,000 per person? That's outrageous!

3/22/2012 10:23:43 PM

Well I'm sure his campaign director chose those family members on the basis of their experience and qualifications. Even if he didn't, nepotism in campaign-management is in no way an indication that he'd engage in nepotism once elected!

[Edited on March 23, 2012 at 3:50 PM. Reason : .]

3/23/2012 3:49:36 PM

Quote :

"There are three political parties in the United States today, and they are all fielding candidates for the presidency. The parties are the Republicrats, the Scared Religionists, and the Freedom and Peace Party. By far the largest party is the Republicrats, who have held sway with their current platform since at least the 1940s. They are offering two candidates for president in 2012: their names are Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. Being such a large party, they have adopted a clever means of ensuring that they hold power perpetually: they split themselves into two wings called "Democrat" and "Republican." This rather clever setup allows them to compete with each other in the formal competitions of American democracy by emphasizing different pieces of the platform, while ensuring that one of the wings will always hold sway, allowing them to implement their shared social democratic platform. And what is this platform? It is a corporate socialist one. They stand for enlarging government, the replacement of individual civil rights with centralized programs, the redistribution of wealth from working individuals to the non-working but mostly corporate and special interests (their main sponsors) and a military presence throughout most of the world. There are a number of ways to tell that their two candidates, Romney and Obama, are from the same party. Their have the same major donors (big banks, and other multinationals) -- and the most important legislation that they both favor includes the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act and most other bills that reduce our liberty (but always for our own good, and usually for our own protection). The other two parties are smaller. They each have one candidate in the race for president. There is the Scared Religionist party, represented by Rick Santorum, and the Freedom and Peace party, represented by Ron Paul. If you were to put the three parties simplistically on a one-dimensional spectrum -- a single line -- the Scared Religionists would be at the authoritarian end, and the Freedom and Peace party would be at the opposite, libertarian end. Between them, but closer to the Scared Religionists, would be the aforementioned Republicrats. The Scared Religionists deserve credit for the clarity of their message, if not necessarily for the consistency of its content. Their view of the world was wonderfully encapsulated by their candidate, Rick Santorum, who recently said: I am hopeful that some of the things we're seeing with respect to the nuclear program [,] the United states is involved in -- which, is on occasion, scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead. I think that is a wonderful thing ... And if people say you, well, can't go around and assassinate people, well, tell that to Al-Awlaki. We've done it. We've done it to an American citizen. Clearly, members of the Scared Religionists are sure they know best for everyone, and so do not have to worry about such traditional limitations as due process or respect for life. (The last one is a little ironic.) Consistent with his view of how the universe is run, Santorum would seek to run the nation in a way that ensures, by force if necessary, that everyone else behaves "rightly." To many non-members of this party, there is an apparent paradox that the Authority whose earlier work provided large lists of what is right, in some of His other books, asked that the judging be left to Him, and to leave everyone else to make their own choices. Although the Scared Religionist party are all about the aforementioned ends (and The End, itself, for that matter), they are somewhat too scared to follow fully the aforementioned means (free choice, judge not etc.) -- mostly because they are scared of how things could go down in the meanwhile if people very different from them get a big bomb, or God forbid, get married to a dog -- I mean daughter -- I mean member of the same sex... Not only is the desired political ends of this party somewhat absolutist, its means are absolutist too: pre-emptive strikes and assassinations have, after all, rather "absolute" consequences. Of course, there is a very high bar that must be overcome for such extraordinary actions: the religionists must be really, really sure that they are right about the need for them. It is a bar they are good at jumping. (They have had a great deal of practice and jump it so the rest of us don't have to.) Last, but not least, there is the Freedom and Peace party. Their current candidate is Ron Paul. The media don't say much about them, but when they do, you will hear that they are extremists. For example, they believe that we should be governed by law, including the Constitution, to ensure that we are not governed by the interested preferences of men -- powerful or rich or both -- since that would be tyranny. They don't believe in going to war unless it is "just" and their elected representatives declare it. Related to that word, "just," is their belief that people shouldn't have their life or liberty removed without due process. They also believe that laws should not be so many and so complex that all citizens are in violation at some point in a typical day, since such a situation gives authorities undue power over citizens, and that too is tyranny. They also believe that the people who make the laws should read the laws that they vote on. (That they haven't been very successful is indicated by the fact that last January, 43,000 new laws came into force. One wonders how on earth we held the country together without them.). One of their most extreme views of all is that if you make money honestly, you should be allowed to keep it, and if you lose it -- and especially if you lose other people's -- you should be left to go bankrupt. Paul's platform, like that of Obama and Romney, is reflected in the origin of the donations he received: most of his money comes in small donations from individual Americans. From those who are defending with their lives the values of the Freedom and Peace party -- the US Navy, Army and Airforce -- he receives more donations than do all the other candidates put together. Although the Republicrats have held power for many generations, they have made huge progress since 2001. From that year onward, the politics of fear have allowed them to move forward on massive violence internationally (against people) and domestically (against our way of life). The bailouts, TSA, elimination of 1st, 4th, 5th and 7th amendments (under the Patriot Act, National Defense Authorization Act, and other legislation) are all acts of fear as they all try to prevent bad things from happening. Only the Freedom and Peace party believes that the political energy used doing this could have been better used to make good things happen -- which is done best by letting honest Americans get on with their lives without the imposition of thousands of unnecessary laws and the taking of trillions of their dollars. I believe that not enough Americans are sufficiently mistaken to deliver a Santorum victory: culturally, his regressive party is in regress. And if enough of the USA stays sufficiently scared or absorbed in American Idol, Farmville and whatever other mass hypnotic media output is current prevailing, then the Republicrats will win again -- this time. But all monopolies end eventually, and the most interesting aspect of US politics is its firmest long-term trend: all the polls say that the Republicrat and Scared Religionist parties are shrinking, most rapidly among those who will lead our great nation in decades to come, and that it is that third party that is taking up the slack. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-koerner/the-three-political-parti_b_1355340.html "

For those who like to read... here is a beautiful and accurate picture of the political landscape.

3/23/2012 5:36:29 PM

Skip to 5:00.

Premeditated incriminating motion by state GOP chairman to rig caucus. Proposed cheating to be fair.


http://rpflix.com/6098

[Edited on March 24, 2012 at 1:18 PM. Reason : .]

3/24/2012 1:17:29 PM

Quote :

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court's ruling on the constitutionality of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul is likely to shake the presidential election race in early summer. But the winners in the court will not necessarily be the winners in the political arena. No doubt, a decision to throw out the entire law would be a defeat for Obama. His judgment and leadership, even his reputation as a former constitutional law professor, would be called into question for pushing through a contentious and partisan health insurance overhaul only to see it declared unconstitutional by the court."

http://news.yahoo.com/courts-health-ruling-could-shake-fall-elections-140135111.html

3/24/2012 8:39:53 PM

this is proof the GOP is in bed with Obama to get him re-elected.

since paul is the only possible candidate that would be able to beat him in the fall.

3/24/2012 9:08:06 PM

Quote :

"Ron Paul gets most delegates from GOP caucuses in Jackson County, St. Louis Ron Paul supporters have won the majority of delegates during caucuses in Jackson County and St. Louis. Most Missouri counties caucused last weekend, but Jackson County and St. Louis decided to move their caucuses to Saturday. One reason is both communities put on popular St. Patrick's Day parades. Party officials said that during Saturday's caucuses, Ron Paul supporters won all 36 of the St. Louis delegates and about two-thirds of Jackson County's 179 delegates. The remaining Jackson County delegates support Mitt Romney. The 2,123 people picked in the local caucuses will advance to congressional district conventions April 21 and a state convention June 2. It's at those meetings that the bulk of Missouri's 52 delegates will be bound to presidential candidates. | The Associated Press Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/03/24/3511021/ron-paul-gets-most-delegates-from.html#storylink=cpy"

In your face.


you know who they said won missouri? Santorum. http://news.yahoo.com/santorum-wins-missouri-214242976.html

Still in denial?


[Edited on March 24, 2012 at 11:21 PM. Reason : .]

3/24/2012 11:17:46 PM

In denial that santorum won 110,000 more votes than Ron Paul in Missouri?

No. Not at all.

3/24/2012 11:58:39 PM

You must not have read the article that I posted and bolded. I'll give you a second chance.

3/25/2012 12:00:36 AM

Santorum won the non-binding primary on June 7th.

The delegates are assigned during an entirely separate caucus whose official results wont be known until June.

This is all how the Missouri GOP rules work. Like so many other things, you don't understand how they work, that's why you're confused and outraged so often. Missouri has both a caucus and a non-binding primary. Santorum won the non-binding primary back in February, and the official caucus results wont be known for a long while.

[Edited on March 26, 2012 at 9:08 AM. Reason : .]

3/26/2012 9:07:20 AM

"This sign got its creator, Nick Styles, thrown out of a Ron Paul campaign event [in Iowa]"

3/26/2012 2:04:28 PM

Quote :

"What Wisconsin Media wont tell you! Due to the overhwelming demand for tickets, Ron Paul has been moved to a new venue If your original ticket listed Stock Paviliion, it is still valid -- you do not need to sign up again. Simply bring your voucher with you any time between 6:00 PM and 6:30 PM, and you can enter the Memorial Union Terrace (waterfront) before the general public. Event: Ron Paul at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Date: Thursday, March 29, 2012 at 7:00 PM (CT) Location: Memorial Union Terrace - Waterfront 800 Langdon Street Madison, WI 53706 For more information click here: Ron Paul at the University of Wisconsin-Madison - Youth for Ron Paul"

Viva la Revolution

[Edited on March 28, 2012 at 10:41 PM. Reason : .]

3/28/2012 10:40:28 PM

(3/24/12) Estblshmnt tries to stop Ron Paul supporters from becoming delegates in MN



http://youtu.be/l2m35LxPWs0

3/28/2012 10:45:15 PM

Quote :

"COLLEGE PARK, Md. (AP) - Texas Rep. Ron Paul has drawn a capacity crowd at the University of Maryland, College Park's Ritchie Coliseum. Paul, who is seeking the GOP's nomination to challenge President Barack Obama, is set to speak Wednesday evening. Roughly 1,500 people were inside the venue. Scores of students lined up outside were turned away. Supporters chanted "President Paul" before the congressman spoke. Paul is in last place in delegates of the four candidates who are still in the race for the GOP nomination. Maryland is drawing candidates this week, because the state's primary will be on April 3. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was in Annapolis on Tuesday. Mitt Romney was in Arbutus last week. Read more: http://www.abc2news.com//dpp/news/political/ron-paul-draws-capacity-crowd-in-md#ixzz1qTUtK1G7"

3/29/2012 12:00:58 AM