After the September 5th debate on Fox Hannity and Colmes I noticed during the Hunter interview Fox was showing the results from the text poll and while the results scrolled through Ron Paul the person doing the graphics put Hunters name up instead of the results for Ron Paul. I thought since the results stopped at R5 they would start up again at R6 which was Ron Paul but they started back at R7.
Just now at 11:58 they said the final results and Dr. Paul got 33% and is the winner by that poll.
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Casino Gambling
Around Western NY there is a discussion about gambling well not gambling but Casino gambling. Now gambling is all over NY I can drive 1 mile away and gamble my life savings away down at the local convenience store so for the complaints that the Casino is going to suck up people's life savings is insane. Now I would like to state I have never been to a Casino not because they are too far away I could get to one within an hour drive but because I don't see the fun in it but I also don't see the fun in running either but I would not advocate passing a law banning running.
Some people may become addicted to gambling and I think they should have to take responsibility for their addiction and not take any money from me. It is sad that people become addicted to gambling but people become addicted to many things like smoking, alcohol, caffeine, sex, drugs, money, even working out, and eating healthy. Should all these things become illegal because some people can become addicted to them. I don't think so and if they were guess what more people would be imprisoned and killed at the hands of police just for trying to pursue their own happiness which is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence which could be considered the cornerstone of the society of the United States.
OK guess what people are going to do things you don't approve of. Get over it, you don't own them, if you cant stand to see that stay in your home close the curtains and sit in the dark. I am being callous but this is one of the three ideas that our forefathers fought for.
Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
Some people may become addicted to gambling and I think they should have to take responsibility for their addiction and not take any money from me. It is sad that people become addicted to gambling but people become addicted to many things like smoking, alcohol, caffeine, sex, drugs, money, even working out, and eating healthy. Should all these things become illegal because some people can become addicted to them. I don't think so and if they were guess what more people would be imprisoned and killed at the hands of police just for trying to pursue their own happiness which is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence which could be considered the cornerstone of the society of the United States.
OK guess what people are going to do things you don't approve of. Get over it, you don't own them, if you cant stand to see that stay in your home close the curtains and sit in the dark. I am being callous but this is one of the three ideas that our forefathers fought for.
Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
Monday, June 18, 2007
The Free State Project
You may be asking what the hell is the Free State Project?
Well the Free State Project aka FSP is a idea currently but can be a reality with you. The idea is to get 20,000 people who want to be free to move to one state in the union and work for freedom. You may be asking why? Well with a mass migration of the 20,000 people moving to a state like California would do nothing but that amount of people moving to a state like New Hampshire the amount of people to bring about change would be much much less. The idea of people moving to one place to bring about changes has been done before take the mormons moving to Utah to congregate together that group of people moved to make a community that respected their religious values, even the pilgrims coming to America could even be considered a migration movement.
The FSP is open to anyone who wants to be free. Democrats, Republicans, unaffiliated, gay people, married people, single people, anyone as long as you want to be free. The only thing that the FSP asks is once you move take action to help bring around freedom. That is so vague almost anything could be considered working toward freedom you could talk with your co-workers and discuss politics, holding a sign in a protest, voting, writing letters to the editor, even running for office.
New Hampshire currently could be considered one of the most free places on the Earth. Right now in New Hampshire and you are over 18 you can choose not to wear a seat belt if you don't want to, you have the choice to not wear a helmet when driving a motorcycle. New Hampshire has passed a law saying the state will not participate in Real ID which is in essence national ID. But there is still a long way to go to make New Hampshire a a free state so if you like the idea of living free check out the free state project at www.freestateproject.org.
Oh and for the marijuana activist the state name means "New Hemp town".
Well the Free State Project aka FSP is a idea currently but can be a reality with you. The idea is to get 20,000 people who want to be free to move to one state in the union and work for freedom. You may be asking why? Well with a mass migration of the 20,000 people moving to a state like California would do nothing but that amount of people moving to a state like New Hampshire the amount of people to bring about change would be much much less. The idea of people moving to one place to bring about changes has been done before take the mormons moving to Utah to congregate together that group of people moved to make a community that respected their religious values, even the pilgrims coming to America could even be considered a migration movement.
The FSP is open to anyone who wants to be free. Democrats, Republicans, unaffiliated, gay people, married people, single people, anyone as long as you want to be free. The only thing that the FSP asks is once you move take action to help bring around freedom. That is so vague almost anything could be considered working toward freedom you could talk with your co-workers and discuss politics, holding a sign in a protest, voting, writing letters to the editor, even running for office.
New Hampshire currently could be considered one of the most free places on the Earth. Right now in New Hampshire and you are over 18 you can choose not to wear a seat belt if you don't want to, you have the choice to not wear a helmet when driving a motorcycle. New Hampshire has passed a law saying the state will not participate in Real ID which is in essence national ID. But there is still a long way to go to make New Hampshire a a free state so if you like the idea of living free check out the free state project at www.freestateproject.org.
Oh and for the marijuana activist the state name means "New Hemp town".
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Allowing sick people medicine
This is a fairly controversial topic in the world we currently live in and I personally don't see why anyone could condone not allowing people to make their own choices on what substances to use to make them feel better.
This morning I was made aware that Gov. Sptizer has changed his mind on medical marijuana for sick people specifically people with debilitating diseases for example Multiple Sclerosis, AIDS, and cancer. With our current medical knowledge we cannot cure these diseases and the people that are stricken with these terrible diseases are in extreme pain. I hope that no one ever has to go through this pain but this is real life and I know that people every day are diagnosed and are suffering with diseases.
As some of you know I am no fan of Spitzer or really any other politician but Spitzer is beginning to realize he made a mistake with medical marijuana but not because he thinks people should be able to make their own decisions on what people can put in their own bodies but because who wants to be on the side saying a dieing person cant take this substance because it could what kill them (I have never heard of anyone dieing from smoking marijuana). The people with these diseases do not have the time or the energy to fight for this that is why people like you and I need to stand up and say let them do what they want as long as they do not hurt other people.
This morning I was made aware that Gov. Sptizer has changed his mind on medical marijuana for sick people specifically people with debilitating diseases for example Multiple Sclerosis, AIDS, and cancer. With our current medical knowledge we cannot cure these diseases and the people that are stricken with these terrible diseases are in extreme pain. I hope that no one ever has to go through this pain but this is real life and I know that people every day are diagnosed and are suffering with diseases.
As some of you know I am no fan of Spitzer or really any other politician but Spitzer is beginning to realize he made a mistake with medical marijuana but not because he thinks people should be able to make their own decisions on what people can put in their own bodies but because who wants to be on the side saying a dieing person cant take this substance because it could what kill them (I have never heard of anyone dieing from smoking marijuana). The people with these diseases do not have the time or the energy to fight for this that is why people like you and I need to stand up and say let them do what they want as long as they do not hurt other people.
Friday, June 8, 2007
The 3rd Republican debate
OK I know I am a little late on this but hey I was in the hospital without my computer and Internet access. I was going though Internet withdrawal after the 1st night.
On to my thoughts. The winner of the debate was Ron Paul and that is not just a opinion but is what CNN's online poll said hands down. That poll does not mean anything really the only poll that means anything is on election day.
Dr Paul introduced himself as a congressman from Texas and "Champion of the Constitution" when I heard that tag line I was really shocked. But as I thought about it Ron is that in essence. During the debate I was disgusted with the camera work. The sound issues were understandable with the lightning that was going on but I am sure they could have used different mics and eliminated the sound dropping issue. OK enough with the technical stuff I think I would have noticed it less if I had a PC in front of me.
The best issue I thought that was brought up was what the question about what is the largest moral issue that is facing the United States and Dr Paul said it was the recently policy of preemptive war. I think preemptive war really isn't a new policy. You could definitely say Vietnam was a preemptive war and so was Korea. So that goes back to the 1950's. WWII was a little harder but the Japanese attack could because of the trade blockade and that blockade could be considered a military action. So that could be considered preemptive war that takes us back to 1940's. We could go further but that would take a lot of typing. But I do think that is a great answer to the question.
I would suggest if you have not seen the debate go watch and make up your own mind.
On to my thoughts. The winner of the debate was Ron Paul and that is not just a opinion but is what CNN's online poll said hands down. That poll does not mean anything really the only poll that means anything is on election day.
Dr Paul introduced himself as a congressman from Texas and "Champion of the Constitution" when I heard that tag line I was really shocked. But as I thought about it Ron is that in essence. During the debate I was disgusted with the camera work. The sound issues were understandable with the lightning that was going on but I am sure they could have used different mics and eliminated the sound dropping issue. OK enough with the technical stuff I think I would have noticed it less if I had a PC in front of me.
The best issue I thought that was brought up was what the question about what is the largest moral issue that is facing the United States and Dr Paul said it was the recently policy of preemptive war. I think preemptive war really isn't a new policy. You could definitely say Vietnam was a preemptive war and so was Korea. So that goes back to the 1950's. WWII was a little harder but the Japanese attack could because of the trade blockade and that blockade could be considered a military action. So that could be considered preemptive war that takes us back to 1940's. We could go further but that would take a lot of typing. But I do think that is a great answer to the question.
I would suggest if you have not seen the debate go watch and make up your own mind.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
My retort to a video on youtube
I was looking around YouTube and found this video.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7a2xHXP4Kn8
There were some things I wanted to correct from what I know personally these statements may be incorrect but I wanted to talk about some points and I could not do this in 500 characters or less.
First off the author Sonofnewo I think is the person in the video and he said that Ron Paul is pro-life when it comes to abortion. I believe Ron is pro-life and I think that can be backed up with some speeches but Ron Paul. Now Ron is also a constitutionalists and believes that the constitution is the supreme law of the land or should be and the 10th amendment says
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people."
With that in mind Ron would have to support what the states or the people decided. If a state wanted to outlaw abortions within the boarders of the state they do have that ability as stated in the 10th amendment, and if a state did not have a law that power to perform abortions would be in the hands of the people. So what does all that mean is means Ron would not stop people from getting abortions he personally may think it is terrible but that is their choice. I know you are probably not going to believe me but I actually have no opinion on the subject of abortion I can see their would be problems created with both sides. I don't think I should have any opinion on this subject until my girlfriend or wife asks me for that opinion.
Second subject the author hit on was the Federal Reserve. I don't think Ron Paul would shut down the Federal reserve. Now wait you may be saying I heard him say that, yes you did but the Fed is a complex issue we need to differentiate between the Federal Reserve which is a private company that lends to the United States just like XYZ Bank may lend you money for a house the difference is the payment book when you get a payment book for your house it usually looks like a check book and has pieces of paper that you send in with your payment. Well the Fed's payment book is a little different they have multiple payment books some are never seen by the public and some are seen every day, the ones you are familiar with is the dollars you have in your wallet. Those are the representation of debt that the US government owes to the Fed so when someone says money you think of the green papers but nope that is actually debt.
With that little lesson on the Fed we need to talk about the Federal Reserve Act which is a law that was passed back in the early 20th century this act sets up a monopoly for the Federal Reserve.
What I believe Ron Paul is talking about is the Act he wants there to be competition for the currency in the United States if this came to pass there may be one currency everyone in the United States uses or there could be regional currency for example everyone on the west coast uses currency A and everyone in the middle of the country uses currency B and everyone on the east coast uses currency C. The author also said he thought that eliminating the Federal Reserve could have adverse effects on the economy in the US I think that these competing currencies are probably going to actually have something behind them with most of the currencies around the world they are not back by anything other then the promise of the government that is using that currency, if you look back through history that is a bad idea because all governments have fallen and history seems to repeat so I think that governments will keep on falling. If the currency is backed by something like gold or silver companies would be more likely to use that currency because if the bank does go belly up they will still have something that can be sold and they would not loose all their purchasing power.
Now this is just brief overlook and I would urge you to look in to this further I do not know everything about the Fed but this is my opinion using the knowledge I currently have.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7a2xHXP4Kn8
There were some things I wanted to correct from what I know personally these statements may be incorrect but I wanted to talk about some points and I could not do this in 500 characters or less.
First off the author Sonofnewo I think is the person in the video and he said that Ron Paul is pro-life when it comes to abortion. I believe Ron is pro-life and I think that can be backed up with some speeches but Ron Paul. Now Ron is also a constitutionalists and believes that the constitution is the supreme law of the land or should be and the 10th amendment says
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people."
With that in mind Ron would have to support what the states or the people decided. If a state wanted to outlaw abortions within the boarders of the state they do have that ability as stated in the 10th amendment, and if a state did not have a law that power to perform abortions would be in the hands of the people. So what does all that mean is means Ron would not stop people from getting abortions he personally may think it is terrible but that is their choice. I know you are probably not going to believe me but I actually have no opinion on the subject of abortion I can see their would be problems created with both sides. I don't think I should have any opinion on this subject until my girlfriend or wife asks me for that opinion.
Second subject the author hit on was the Federal Reserve. I don't think Ron Paul would shut down the Federal reserve. Now wait you may be saying I heard him say that, yes you did but the Fed is a complex issue we need to differentiate between the Federal Reserve which is a private company that lends to the United States just like XYZ Bank may lend you money for a house the difference is the payment book when you get a payment book for your house it usually looks like a check book and has pieces of paper that you send in with your payment. Well the Fed's payment book is a little different they have multiple payment books some are never seen by the public and some are seen every day, the ones you are familiar with is the dollars you have in your wallet. Those are the representation of debt that the US government owes to the Fed so when someone says money you think of the green papers but nope that is actually debt.
With that little lesson on the Fed we need to talk about the Federal Reserve Act which is a law that was passed back in the early 20th century this act sets up a monopoly for the Federal Reserve.
What I believe Ron Paul is talking about is the Act he wants there to be competition for the currency in the United States if this came to pass there may be one currency everyone in the United States uses or there could be regional currency for example everyone on the west coast uses currency A and everyone in the middle of the country uses currency B and everyone on the east coast uses currency C. The author also said he thought that eliminating the Federal Reserve could have adverse effects on the economy in the US I think that these competing currencies are probably going to actually have something behind them with most of the currencies around the world they are not back by anything other then the promise of the government that is using that currency, if you look back through history that is a bad idea because all governments have fallen and history seems to repeat so I think that governments will keep on falling. If the currency is backed by something like gold or silver companies would be more likely to use that currency because if the bank does go belly up they will still have something that can be sold and they would not loose all their purchasing power.
Now this is just brief overlook and I would urge you to look in to this further I do not know everything about the Fed but this is my opinion using the knowledge I currently have.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Ron Paul's coments during the 2nd republican debate
Afternoon everyone this is going to be a intellectual post so dust off a few brain cells and you may need to look some things up to verify everything I am communicating is true. With that said lets chew the fat.
First off this second debate had more substance but still the debate lacked interaction other then the segment I will call the shock heard around the world between Representative Ron Paul and Giuliani. First off you need to know where Dr. Paul is coming from if you are going to figure out where he is going with his answers. Dr. Paul is a strict constitutionalists which means if something is not written in the constitution or the amendments to the constitution it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL this is the true meaning. The way the government was set up was that the supreme court was supposed to say this is constitutional this is unconstitutional that has not been the case for a long time. If you understand those facts you should be able to figure out where Ron Paul was coming from.
Now lets get to Ron Paul's message why 9/11 occurred. He said that it was because of the governments policies not just in the Middle East but all around the world. I hate to break this to you but guess what it's true. The U.S. government has been screwing around with other countries and have been supporting dictatorships around the world. If you don't believe me look in to the US policies in the Middle East. Lets just look at Iraq, Saddam did come in to power without the help of the US government but he would have been outed long ago by the citizens of that country if the US did not supply him with money and weapons. In Iran the US has empowered the Shah in Iran and gave tons of support. Just these two examples should be enough to make people realize that maybe the US government did contribute to the 9/11 attacks not to mention the CIA was working with Bin Laden in Afghanistan. I will tell you there are more examples I could keep going on for pages but please look in to the history of what the US government has done.
I know this is tough to understand and even harder to swallow but sometimes the truth hurts but truth is always better then lies. Now on to the idea that the terrorist hate Americans because of the freedoms Americans have and coke and Britney Spears. This idea is the craziest thing I ever heard. Do Americans hate people in Amsterdam because they have the freedom to buy and consume marijuana? No why would Americans care about what the citizens in Amsterdam put in their bodies. The argument holds about as much water as a collender.
Now I have been praising Ron Paul but I think he is wrong on a couple of his ideas but I know where Ron Paul stands on issues and I will agree with Ron on most issues I will take that rather then taking a fascist or a socialist.
First off this second debate had more substance but still the debate lacked interaction other then the segment I will call the shock heard around the world between Representative Ron Paul and Giuliani. First off you need to know where Dr. Paul is coming from if you are going to figure out where he is going with his answers. Dr. Paul is a strict constitutionalists which means if something is not written in the constitution or the amendments to the constitution it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL this is the true meaning. The way the government was set up was that the supreme court was supposed to say this is constitutional this is unconstitutional that has not been the case for a long time. If you understand those facts you should be able to figure out where Ron Paul was coming from.
Now lets get to Ron Paul's message why 9/11 occurred. He said that it was because of the governments policies not just in the Middle East but all around the world. I hate to break this to you but guess what it's true. The U.S. government has been screwing around with other countries and have been supporting dictatorships around the world. If you don't believe me look in to the US policies in the Middle East. Lets just look at Iraq, Saddam did come in to power without the help of the US government but he would have been outed long ago by the citizens of that country if the US did not supply him with money and weapons. In Iran the US has empowered the Shah in Iran and gave tons of support. Just these two examples should be enough to make people realize that maybe the US government did contribute to the 9/11 attacks not to mention the CIA was working with Bin Laden in Afghanistan. I will tell you there are more examples I could keep going on for pages but please look in to the history of what the US government has done.
I know this is tough to understand and even harder to swallow but sometimes the truth hurts but truth is always better then lies. Now on to the idea that the terrorist hate Americans because of the freedoms Americans have and coke and Britney Spears. This idea is the craziest thing I ever heard. Do Americans hate people in Amsterdam because they have the freedom to buy and consume marijuana? No why would Americans care about what the citizens in Amsterdam put in their bodies. The argument holds about as much water as a collender.
Now I have been praising Ron Paul but I think he is wrong on a couple of his ideas but I know where Ron Paul stands on issues and I will agree with Ron on most issues I will take that rather then taking a fascist or a socialist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)