Dakryn's Batshit Theory of the Week

[V.V.V.V.V.]

yeah because it was engineered by the super death illuminati from their invisible ivory corporate business/news magnate towers of pure evil.

 

[Matt]

the socialist minions had a lot to do with it as well

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Dude, why are you believing what CNN and Fox News say? Here, look at this far less trustworthy site and take it as gospel because the information on it (if we can term it that) is undermining to the pseudo-"political" façade of the MSM.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

The fact is that any of you who buy into the left-right paradigm, are buying into a false dichotemy.

The real argument should be minimum government vs. total government. Or more precisely, liberty(freedom from gov't restriction and control) vs. tyranny(total government; nanny state or police state- take your pick) But with the left/right paradigm, all you're gonna get is big government on both sides.

It is a false dichotemy perpetrated by those who will have us believe that their "side" is vying for your freedom, all whilst stripping it away.

The left/right paradigm is only really about 100 years old. It originated from France as to who was seated where in their legislature; but didn't really concern the US into about 100 years ago. The US first employed the use of left-right as a way to interpret mysticism. Future despots later figured out that this would be a great way to distract people from what they were really doing; and ironically it worked like a mystical spell.

Those of you who still buy into it, sorry. But I say abandon the false left-right paradigm and let's have a real debate and make it about liberty vs tyranny and not left vs. right. If not, then kindly shut the fuck up.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

Btw, since I don't get the Fox Business Network and have to watch his show on youtube, John Stossel should replace neo-con O'Reilly on their main channel's primetime slot.

That guy is what I wish every journalist should be.

 

[Badbird]

The words liberal and conservative have change over the years as well. Libertarian party is what the Republican party used to look before the neo-cons took over most of it.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

The US first employed the use of left-right as a way to interpret mysticism. Future despots later figured out that this would be a great way to distract people from what they were really doing; and ironically it worked like a mystical spell.

who the shit are you?

 

[Badbird]

Wait for Galt to call you part of the UMLM.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

who the shit are you?

I'm a statist's worst nightmare. :Spin:

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

If you say so, Prismatic Sphere.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

The words liberal and conservative have change over the years as well. Libertarian party is what the Republican party used to look before the neo-cons took over most of it.

Yes indeedy. A late 20th Century/21st Century liberal is the exact opposite of a 18th Century/19th Century liberal.

Here's another fun fact,

Corruption existed in the United States before the ink on the Constitution was even dry. The "Federalists", largely Alexander Hamilton, advocated a stronger central government while The Anti-Federalists(Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, Robert Yates) were vehemently opposed to the idea.

The thing is the term "Federalist" and "Anti-Federalist" were all Alex Hamilton's ploy. If you look up the two terms in the Black Law Dictionary, you will see that a Federalist was for a decentralized government and that Hamilton and his flock who advocated a central government were really Nationalists.
So a federalist is really a nationalist and an anti-federalist is really a federalist.

Hamilton created the term "Anti-Federalist" to gain sway and make those who opposed him into semi-pariahs. And in large part he succeeded.

For on reflection the "Anti-Federalists" were right. They were prescient enough to see that Congress would pervert the meaning of the General Welfare clause for its own ends, foster the citizenry with increasing taxation, and manipulate the masses by legislating law upon law.

As Ben Franklin told some tart, "I have given you a republic ma'am. But can you keep it?"

 

[Badbird]

Yes indeedy. A late 20th Century/21st Century liberal is the exact opposite of a 18th Century/19th Century liberal.

Same there too.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

waow br0, politicians and wealthy in-power, well-to-do people created terms to win races and didn't give a shit about anyone, and nowadays the same thing happens? holy mindblowing fuck dude, you just ripped my brain a new asshole.

 

[Einherjar86]

So that's where all your bullshit comes from.

 

[Dak]

@V5: your entire post came across as one giant "NO U". I like you man, and we share tastes in music, but it is pretty difficult to believe you, or anyone else "digs deeper" outside of music, when the "normal suspects" parrot the same tired lines as the Rick Sanchez's of the media.

Just because a website is "poorly designed" doesn't have anything to do with it's content, Arts major. It also doesn't make any sense to bounce back and forth from I am "repeating the obvious" to "I am saying ridiculous shit". It's one or the other. You contradict your self saying "everyone knows the MSM is bought and paid for" and then turning around and saying any other source would be less reputable though.

Bullshit. We both know that enough time hasn't passed to pass judgment.

Yes we do. Obviously you read zero economic data. All signs of recovery were due to spending from recycled tax dollars. That isn't growth. That isn't recovery. Permanent jobs were not created. When you have bullshit like temp Census jobs being counted into the statistics as "Jobs created", any suggestion that the current administration is being honest is laughable.

I do think that Obama prevented the economy from collapsing - however, I would agree that the stimulus isn't working as well as they had hoped.

#1. I agree. They did a temporary injection of money to government projects and banks which was spent/hoarded and gone but delayed the eventual collapse for a short time, in the process creating trillions more debt to stack on top of the previously existing mountain of debt. You can't spend money you don't have forever. The bill collectors come eventually, and they eventually stop loaning you money.

#2. Either that, or on the "conspiracy" side, it's working as badly as they planned. If they had actually wanted to fix the US' problems with a bailout, they could have taken the several trillion dollars spent, and divided it equally amongst all US Taxpayers. But instead they handed to the very people who oversaw/planned the economic mess to start with. Genius.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppBZM88mHvQ&feature=player_embedded#!


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUOsq_45SnQ&feature=player_embedded[/ame]


I salute these guys for taking a stand against these egomaniacal fucktards. But IMO, the crowd in the first video should have helped that old timer out and are cowardly aiders and abetters of these lackeys for not doing so.

http://movieclips.com/watch/fletch-1985/hug-a-cop/

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

waow br0, politicians and wealthy in-power, well-to-do people created terms to win races and didn't give a shit about anyone, and nowadays the same thing happens? holy mindblowing fuck dude, you just ripped my brain a new asshole.

Is that even possible sir?

 

[Cythraul]

I don't think he intended it to mean that kids should take guns to school. I think he was trying to expose the irrelevance of the question.

And I was pointing out that it's not irrelevant and that the existence of public schooling does not make it irrelevant. Learn to read properly.

 

[Dak]

And I was pointing out that it's not irrelevant and that the existence of public schooling does not make it irrelevant. Learn to read properly.

From an idealogical perspective it is, but I already answeed all that in detail.

 

[Cythraul]

As opposed to what other kind of perspective?

edit: Let me put it another way. From what perspective is it relevant and why is it irrelevant from an ideological perspective?