More projection. You simply have no valid arguments. Not that I’ve seen, at any rate. Most of your arguments hinge on semantics, e.g., “That’s not real capitalism!”
Simply because I do not acquiesce in the face of your obfuscation does not mean I “ignore counterarguments.”
[quote]florelius wrote:I have observed that ryan have got a lot of irelevant and insulting replys on this forum.
he always get it when people are not able to come up with valid contra arguments.
the most silly was when jhon.s. said ryan was wrong because he only was 150pounds.[/quote]
What are you talking about, florelius? The right-wingers on this board are true thinkers. They woke up and now see the world as it is. It’s simply a coincidence that the truth happens to be the same thing they’ve heard all their lives.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:I have observed that ryan have got a lot of irelevant and insulting replys on this forum.
he always get it when people are not able to come up with valid contra arguments.
the most silly was when jhon.s. said ryan was wrong because he only was 150pounds.[/quote]
What are you talking about, florelius? The right-wingers on this board are true thinkers. They woke up and now see the world as it is. It’s simply a coincidence that the truth happens to be the same thing they’ve heard all their lives.
[/quote]
so are you saying that the american propaganda maschin( read fox news ) is telling the truth? 
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Well myself am a Democrat, however it seems most of my party have left their original platform. And even though the Republicans have come closer in recent times to my parties platform than my actual party, I cannot bring myself to vote Republican (I neither vote Democrat, either).[/quote]
what is the original platform of the democratic party?
[/quote]
Look up Classical Liberalism.[/quote]
dont need to look it up, I am europeen. In europa liberalist meens classical liberalist.
[/quote]
Well then it is about liberty, individualism, private property, Rule of Law, &c.
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:I have observed that ryan have got a lot of irelevant and insulting replys on this forum.
he always get it when people are not able to come up with valid contra arguments.
the most silly was when john.s. said Ryan was wrong because he only was 150pounds.[/quote]
What are you talking about, florelius? The right-wingers on this board are true thinkers. They woke up and now see the world as it is. It’s simply a coincidence that the truth happens to be the same thing they’ve heard all their lives.
[/quote]
so are you saying that the American propaganda machine ( read fox news ) is telling the truth?
[/quote]
We have more than one propaganda machine. And, I, for one, do not pay attention to any of it and never have, so explain my propensity towards liberty, private property, and if need be rule of law?
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]AdamDrew wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
That’s just it–he’s not.
He’s clueless.[/quote]
You’re right Ryan! he is clueless, which is exactly his point. The Fed does whatever they want with your money and answers to nobody. How do you support that? Seeing as you only elaborate upon your POV upon request, please explain to me the pros of the Federal Reserve and how they enhance your quality of life. The Fed is one of the most blatant examples of the constitution being shit on. I don’t know much about Grayson, but I support him on this issue. [/quote]
The simple fact, obvious to anyone who cares to open a history book (precious few Libertarians, it seems) is that the Federal Reserve has for the most part been quite successful in stabilizing the capitalist system. The Libertarians, in their religious devotion to the fantasy of a stable, self-regulating market, presume that markets can make no mistakes, and so the Fed is only an undesirable impurity staining the virtuous system of capitalism, a point of view which is completely ahistorical, and makes the establishment of the Fed quite a mystery indeed. From these mistaken assumptions, they proceed to draw ridiculous conclusions.[/quote]
This response proves your lack of understanding or that you have been reading the wrong books. You make it sound like a regulating entity like the FDA or EPA. The Fed has manipulated the markets and been instrumental in every single downfall since 1913 by means of inflation and deflation. Have you ever seen “Money Masters”? It is over 2 hours long but very informative. What about “Rule by Secracy” by Jim Marrs? It is up to congress to regulate the markets, not a privately owned international bank. Why do we pay interest to a private bank for printing our currency and loaning it to us? It’s not about market regulation, it’s about control over the market (made possible by their ability to print money), debt, inflation, and deflation. Defining it as an “undesirable impurity” is a huge understatement, but at least you are in agreement that it is unacceptable.
[quote]florelius wrote:
so are you saying that the american propaganda maschin( read fox news ) is telling the truth?
[/quote]
You have no idea what the actual propaganda Machine is in the USA. You look very confused my young EU man.
EXAMPLE:
Look at how the AZ law is depicted in the media. 12 negative stories to 1 positive. Guess where Fox reporting is in that mix?
62% of American favor the AZ law. 70% favor the law in AZ, yet 90% of news reports are negative.
Who is the propaganda machine then? It cannot be Fox, and Fox is the only network that keeps the machine from fully taking over.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]AdamDrew wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
That’s just it–he’s not.
He’s clueless.[/quote]
You’re right Ryan! he is clueless, which is exactly his point. The Fed does whatever they want with your money and answers to nobody. How do you support that? Seeing as you only elaborate upon your POV upon request, please explain to me the pros of the Federal Reserve and how they enhance your quality of life. The Fed is one of the most blatant examples of the constitution being shit on. I don’t know much about Grayson, but I support him on this issue. [/quote]
The simple fact, obvious to anyone who cares to open a history book (precious few Libertarians, it seems) is that the Federal Reserve has for the most part been quite successful in stabilizing the capitalist system. The Libertarians, in their religious devotion to the fantasy of a stable, self-regulating market, presume that markets can make no mistakes, and so the Fed is only an undesirable impurity staining the virtuous system of capitalism, a point of view which is completely ahistorical, and makes the establishment of the Fed quite a mystery indeed. From these mistaken assumptions, they proceed to draw ridiculous conclusions.[/quote]
Yes, lets all read those history books that Ryan reads so that the United States may become a great country, such as North korea and Russia; and which ever other communist country is out there, because they are so great of a place to live…no thanks. I prefer to read the truth, not an agenda.
[quote]AdamDrew wrote:This response proves your lack of understanding or that you have been reading the wrong books. You make it sound like a regulating entity like the FDA or EPA. The Fed has manipulated the markets and been instrumental in every single downfall since 1913 by means of inflation and deflation. Have you ever seen “Money Masters”? It is over 2 hours long but very informative. What about “Rule by Secracy” by Jim Marrs? It is up to congress to regulate the markets, not a privately owned international bank. Why do we pay interest to a private bank for printing our currency and loaning it to us? It’s not about market regulation, it’s about control over the market (made possible by their ability to print money), debt, inflation, and deflation. Defining it as an “undesirable impurity” is a huge understatement, but at least you are in agreement that it is unacceptable.
[/quote]
Haha, yes, I’ve been reading the “wrong books,” the ones that don’t condemn the Fed. My point stands: read history, notice that before 1913, you had a recession about every 7 or 8 years, notice that after 1913, recessions get fewer and further between.
No, you prefer the agenda, as shown by the fact that you think Russia and North Korea are/were communist.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:You have no idea what the actual propaganda Machine is in the USA. You look very confused my young EU man.
EXAMPLE:
Look at how the AZ law is depicted in the media. 12 negative stories to 1 positive. Guess where Fox reporting is in that mix?
62% of American favor the AZ law. 70% favor the law in AZ, yet 90% of news reports are negative.
Who is the propaganda machine then? It cannot be Fox, and Fox is the only network that keeps the machine from fully taking over.[/quote]
Haha, the propaganda machine “cannot be Fox,” classic. Besides your obvious deep denial, you completely misunderstand the nature of the media. You’ve bought the whole narrative, hook, line, and sinker. The Republicans and the Democrats are not enemies. They’re not even that far apart. The function of the media is to replicate the dominant ideology. You’re focused on little things like “they reported bad things about Republicans!” while completely missing the big picture.
[quote]AdamDrew wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]AdamDrew wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
That’s just it–he’s not.
He’s clueless.[/quote]
You’re right Ryan! he is clueless, which is exactly his point. The Fed does whatever they want with your money and answers to nobody. How do you support that? Seeing as you only elaborate upon your POV upon request, please explain to me the pros of the Federal Reserve and how they enhance your quality of life. The Fed is one of the most blatant examples of the constitution being shit on. I don’t know much about Grayson, but I support him on this issue. [/quote]
The simple fact, obvious to anyone who cares to open a history book (precious few Libertarians, it seems) is that the Federal Reserve has for the most part been quite successful in stabilizing the capitalist system. The Libertarians, in their religious devotion to the fantasy of a stable, self-regulating market, presume that markets can make no mistakes, and so the Fed is only an undesirable impurity staining the virtuous system of capitalism, a point of view which is completely ahistorical, and makes the establishment of the Fed quite a mystery indeed. From these mistaken assumptions, they proceed to draw ridiculous conclusions.[/quote]
This response proves your lack of understanding or that you have been reading the wrong books. You make it sound like a regulating entity like the FDA or EPA. The Fed has manipulated the markets and been instrumental in every single downfall since 1913 by means of inflation and deflation. Have you ever seen “Money Masters”? It is over 2 hours long but very informative. What about “Rule by Secracy” by Jim Marrs? It is up to congress to regulate the markets, not a privately owned international bank. Why do we pay interest to a private bank for printing our currency and loaning it to us? It’s not about market regulation, it’s about control over the market (made possible by their ability to print money), debt, inflation, and deflation. Defining it as an “undesirable impurity” is a huge understatement, but at least you are in agreement that it is unacceptable.
[/quote]
My apologies Adam. I would not have posted about Ryan’s “history” books if I had seen yours.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
No, you prefer the agenda, as shown by the fact that you think Russia and North Korea are/were communist.
[/quote]
What countries are communist to you?
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]Rockscar wrote:You have no idea what the actual propaganda Machine is in the USA. You look very confused my young EU man.
EXAMPLE:
Look at how the AZ law is depicted in the media. 12 negative stories to 1 positive. Guess where Fox reporting is in that mix?
62% of American favor the AZ law. 70% favor the law in AZ, yet 90% of news reports are negative.
Who is the propaganda machine then? It cannot be Fox, and Fox is the only network that keeps the machine from fully taking over.[/quote]
Haha, the propaganda machine “cannot be Fox,” classic. Besides your obvious deep denial, you completely misunderstand the nature of the media. You’ve bought the whole narrative, hook, line, and sinker. The Republicans and the Democrats are not enemies. They’re not even that far apart. The function of the media is to replicate the dominant ideology. You’re focused on little things like “they reported bad things about Republicans!” while completely missing the big picture.
[/quote]
You are actually completely correct…Repubs and Dems are not that far apart.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Haha, yes, I’ve been reading the “wrong books,” the ones that don’t condemn the Fed. My point stands: read history, notice that before 1913, you had a recession about every 7 or 8 years, notice that after 1913, recessions get fewer and further between.
[/quote]
Oh great! They don’t come as often but when they do they are more severe. Just great.
I’d rather have 5 recessions than 2 great depressions.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
No, you prefer the agenda, as shown by the fact that you think Russia and North Korea are/were communist.
[/quote]
I just have to point out the irony here. You deride someone by saying that their position could be dumbed down to semantics such as: “That’s not real capitalism!”. Then when someone names two of the most (in)famous self-proclaimed communist countries in history, you proclaim “That’s not real communism!”.
[quote]Dabba wrote:
I just have to point out the irony here. You deride someone by saying that their position could be dumbed down to semantics such as: “That’s not real capitalism!”. Then when someone names two of the most (in)famous self-proclaimed communist countries in history, you proclaim “That’s not real communism!”.[/quote]
I was wondering about this…
[quote]Dabba wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
No, you prefer the agenda, as shown by the fact that you think Russia and North Korea are/were communist.
[/quote]
I just have to point out the irony here. You deride someone by saying that their position could be dumbed down to semantics such as: “That’s not real capitalism!”. Then when someone names two of the most (in)famous self-proclaimed communist countries in history, you proclaim “That’s not real communism!”.[/quote]
That’s typical Ryan McCarter.