Ron Paul WRONG

Ron Paul remarks on the death Chris Kyle are his right as granted to him by God and the Constitution.

But it is WRONG, to make those kinds of gasoline throwing remarks, before the honorable man is buried an while his family is morning. This kind of talk is vulgar, boorish and UN-Christian Mr Paul and you should be truly ashamed. 

Mr. Paul follow up apology later too was flaccid and worded as a politician would, rather than a man whom felt remorse for ill-chosen remarks.

I expect better of a man whom I supported for President of the United States.

From Kent McManigal

The US government is NOT America.
   America will survive- and probably thrive- after the US government completes its suicide. Don't bother trying to stop them.
   They wouldn't listen anyway. Just don't let them take you down with them.
   Nothing you can do will change the course the government is on. It doesn't matter who you vote for, the course will not change. You have a better chance of enjoying a bad meal more by flipping your sandwich over than of making a real difference by voting for either of the vetted candidates. That gives you freedom- it is out of your hands. You can stop concerning yourself with trivial matters. Now you are free to focus on the things that actually matter, starting at home.
   Furthermore, the "national debt" is not your debt and it is not my debt. It is the debt of the politicians (or as I call them: "puppeticians") who incurred it. They, and they alone, are the ones who borrowed the money they didn't have, counterfeited even more, and spent like there was no reckoning. I can't borrow money, hand it out willy-nilly, and then claim the debt is yours and you are responsible for paying it back. Neither can congress or the president. They dug the hole; let them suffer the consequences, personally.
   The more frantically oppressive the government becomes, the more people will withdraw consent. The more domestic spying that is done, the more "laws" that are passed, the tighter the grip becomes, and the more "money" that is created out of thin air, the more people who will see beyond the rhetoric.
   When the house of cards falls the US government will not be able to afford to keep meddling around the world, and the supply of committed "terrorists" will dry up. Americans will be safer, once again, like we were in the days before The Empire. There might even be free trade again, boosting the economy beyond what most of us can remember. The future looks bright unless you tie your fortunes to a sinking ship.
   Government needs us; we certainly don't need it. Wean yourself of any dependency now, while you still can. Stop looking for answers from those who are incapable of even understanding the questions, and stop wasting your breath trying to reason with those without reason.
   The experience might be bumpy, but getting untangled from Leviathan now will limit the danger posed by its death throes. It's coming whether you are ready or not.

Published in the State Line Tribune, Farwell TX/Texico NM and at Kent's "Hooligan Libertarian" Blog blog.kentforliberty.com

Koran is Unholy

Mohammed was a prophet whom, even he admitted, had been corrupted and possessed by a Demon.
He became a child rapist, murderer, thief and unjust ruler of the Southern Arabian Peninsula.
He later overcame his possession but died before he could correct most of the corruption he inserted in the Koran 
Therefore the Koran as written is flawed, corrupt and unholy in the sight of God.

NOT HAPPY WITH RNC and Romney

I'm stating this at the beginning that I'm a R Paul supporter and I know that the Elite Republicans hate us. I can live with that, an up until Sunday I had 95% convinced myself to vote for Romney in November.

Then there was the attempted sabotage of the Ron Paul rally at USF.

Then he goes and pulls this Rule change bull$#!t and has the Minority Report Quashed by having members removed and replaced with his compliant DRONES breaking the current rules and denying a floor fight on the issue.

With the rule changes, what is the point of having Primary's and choosing local delegates to represent THE PEOPLE when the Republican National (Politburo) Committee or the Candidate can remove the duly elected or State appointed delegate for ANY REASON OR WHIM.

Now the Tea Party and Freedom Works leaders are before the news cameras, spewing happiness, laying on their backs peeing on themselves like happy puppies, because they got 90% of the stuff they wanted into the Party Plank's.

IDIOTS, the planks only work if the Candidate has the HONOR to follow them.
Romney and the RNC, by this completely unnecessary, (hell, they won already, right?) actions they have proven all they want is power, and the power to dictate their whim's.

Now the DRONES are plastering the news telling us were to stupid to understand. ALL we have to do is just listen to the Romney Story................ Like I'm some infant child to tell a story too.

Informed People

A nation of well informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the region of ignorance that tyranny begins. --Benjamin Franklin

A LESSON IN IRONY

A LESSON IN IRONY

The Food Stamp Program, administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
is proud to be distributing the greatest amount of free
meals and food stamps ever.

Meanwhile, the National Park Service, administered by the U.S.
Department of the Interior, asks us to PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE ANIMALS
Their stated reason for the policy is because the animals will grow
dependent on handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves.

Thus ends today's lesson.

i am sovereign

I am sovereign

"I am sovereign over myself, the gift of free will bestowed upon me by the Creator of all things. Regardless of what laws and regulations of men are about me I will always be Free. When men's rules are Honorable and Just I will follow them. When I find the laws tolerable, I will tolerate them. When I find the rules obnoxious, I will ignore them. When I find evil imposed or codified, I will War against it. My Lord has made it known and understood to me that to accept the gift of freedom  I will alone bear the full responsibility everything I do, or chose not to do." hasiii

VOTE GUN'S

VOTE GUN'S

For over 40 years since I was in my early teens and read the major trysts on Fascism, Communism, Democracy, Republicanism, Libertarianism, and Anarchy, every one of which, sooner or later, came back to the issue of guns and gun-ownership. Naturally, I've thought about the issue a lot, and it has always determined the way I vote.
People accuse me of being a single- issue thinker, and a single- issue voter, but it isn't true. What I've chosen, in a world where there's never enough time and energy, is to focus on the one political issue which most clearly and unmistakably demonstrates what any politician—or political philosophy—is made of, right down to dark side of any government philosophies. Remember that all things politic have a dark side 

Make no mistake: all politicians—even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership—hate the issue and anyone who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine or CAT scan. It's the ultimate test to which any politician—or political philosophy—can be put.

If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash—for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything—without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you. 

If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims. 

What his attitude—toward your ownership and use of weapons—conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of all that is Holy and Good should you trust him? 

If he doesn't want you to have the means of defending your families lives, do you want him in a position to control it? 

If he makes excuses about obeying a law he's sworn to uphold and defend—the highest law of the land, the Bill of Rights—do you want to entrust him with anything?
 
If he ignores you, sneers at you, complains about you, or defames you, if he calls you names only he thinks are evil—like "Constitutionalists"—when you insist that he account for himself, hasn't he betrayed his oath, isn't he unfit to hold office, and doesn't he really belong in jail?
 
Sure, these are all leading questions. They're the questions that led me to the issue of guns and gun ownership as the clearest and most unmistakable demonstration of what any given politician—or political philosophy—is really made of. 

He may lecture you about the dangerous people/groups/crazies out there who shouldn't have a gun—but what does that have to do with you? Why should you be made to suffer for the misdeeds of others? Didn't we lay aside the infantile notion of group punishment after childhood and you left public school—or the military? Isn't group punishment essentially European notion, anyway—Prussian, maybe—and certainly not what America was supposed to be all about, individualism? 

And if there are dangerous  people/groups/crazies out there, does it make sense to deprive you of the means of protecting yourself from them? Forget about those other people, those dangerous, this is about you, and it has been, all along not thoes people/groups/crazies of which they speak.


Try it yourself: if a politician won't trust you, why should you trust him? If he's a man—and you're not—what does his lack of trust tell you about his real attitude toward women? If "he" happens to be a woman, what makes her so perverse that she's eager to render her fellow women helpless on the mean and seedy streets her policies helped create? Should you believe her when she says she wants to help you by imposing some infantile group health care program on you at the point of the kind of gun she doesn't want you to have? 

On the other hand—or the other party—should you believe anything politicians say who claim they stand for freedom, but drag their feet and make excuses about repealing limits on your right to own and carry weapons? What does this tell you about their real motives for ignoring voters and ramming through one infantile group trade agreement after another with other countries? 

Makes voting simpler, doesn't it? You don't have to study every issue—health care, international trade—all you have to do is use this X-ray machine, this Vulcan mind-meld, to get beyond their empty words and find out how politicians really feel. About you. And that, of course, is why they hate it. 

And that's why I'm accused of being a single-issue thinker, and voter. 

But it isn't true, is it?