Obamite fam defects to Free Staters (Barack Obama, NH)

[jase3001]

My daughter was born in an NHS Hospital. The standard of healthcare was very good and it cost nothing at the point of delivery. The overall cost is also far less than the privatised system in the US.

As for Ayn Rand - spare me!

[terrafirma91]

She's a prime candidate for cosmetic dentistry.

[freedomman121]

There you go again with them negative waves...

[terrafirma91]

freedomman121: No, no. I was just being sarcastic, which is part of my "negative" nature. It would be nice to see the remaining Obama sycophants to become like this girl. I think the public is slowly "coming around", though.

[freedomman121]

I was just goofing around. And you're right, she could use some cosmetic dentistry.

[terrafirma91]

@freedomman121: None of us are perfect. Yeah, she's a "cute" girl. But, I wonder if she went topless just to garner attention towards herself, and not the principles at hand.

[freedomman121]

Who knows. It's entirely possible.

[freedomman121]

For all we know, she could be a CIA plant to infiltrate the NH freedom movement. And the topless deal was a way to get "unquestionable" street cred. Anything is possible.

/watch?v=XOIUWy_iY80

[terrafirma91]

freedomman121: You could be very well correct. Never put anything past these subversives. They have their plants, and their shills. They have a bottomless pit of available money, too. It appeared that the cops were going "easy" on her. Did you notice something like this?

[freedomman121]

I think the cops were just thinking "oh hell, not this stuff again" and just wanted to get the thing resolved.

They either weren't asshole cops or were mining their Ps and Qs in front of the cameras, knowing they'd be on Youtube the next day.

[terrafirma91]

freedomman121: Cops act entirely different when they know cameras are focused on them. If those cameras hadn't been around, and if there weren't eyewitnesses, you could have bet the farm that their mannerisms would have been 180 degrees.

[freedomman121]

That is probably correct. Some cops don't even seem to care if there are cameras and witnesses. Did you see that one where the cops shot that guy in the back in the subway station. The guy was face down, not fighting, and may have already been in cuffs. That was sick.

[terrafirma91]

@freedomman121: Yes, I saw the man shot in the back in the Oakland station. It was completely unnecessary, and should result in an indictment of murder being handed down, but it won't. The Judiciary is in alliance with police departments, totally unconstitutional, but who follows the constitution anymore? The elevation of police departments across the country smacks more like a totalitarian police state than America. Sad... Very sad.

[kungfuwookie]

@terrafirma91 you know why it wont? because dipshits like the freestaters scream police state and police brutality whenever a police officer sneezes. You ever heard about the bottom feeder that cried wolf?

[terrafirma91]

@kungfuwookie : Your reference to freestaters as being "dipshits" shows what camp you're from. I suppose you also feel that James Madison, Ben Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson would be "dipshits" as well? There is no doubt that the Founders abhorred the establishment of a police state in America. It's the equivalent of a standing army. This is why they gave us the 2nd Amendment, so we could police our own communities.

[kungfuwookie]

@terrafirma91 whoa whoa whoa, so a bunch of people bitching and smoking pot are equivalent to the founding fathers now? The founding fathers actually did something, they didnt just stand around making themselves feel important with platitudes and recycled and outdated Randian ideals.

"I uh...saw reason!"= "I dont know what specifically I'm remotely talking about"

[terrafirma91]

@kungfuwookie : How do you connect the Founders with pot smokers? You're all over the map now. Don't you think the Free Staters have a good reason to complain? We're incrementally becoming a totalitarian state, and I don't see the justification for it. I'll agree on one thing though; we need more of a police presence on the Arizona border. Farmers are being killed by illegal entrants, but don't expect the PC establishment in D.C. to act swiftly about it.

[freedomman121]

She's cute too.

[Infinitespeculator]

I love how she supported socialized medicine until she thought about it. That wraps up your average Obama supporter! They don't think and come 2012 they won't be brandishing their bumper stickers and posters.

[newdarnaccount]

On the other hand, I'm not sure most libertarians know what libertarianism is. I Iike their economic ideas. The only flaw is that they simply have never, and will never, work on the real Earth. (Well, I guess that depends upon what you consider *to work* means.) The thing the average business person works hardest at is getting someone to give him or her something for nothing--that is the whole basis of the insurance industry..

[zdwade]

the insurance reduces your risk to externalities outside your control and protects a business from catastrophic disaster. how is that something for nothing?

[newdarnaccount]

I'm talking about how insurance companies are happy to to take preminums, but don't want to pay claims.

[zdwade]

obviously they pay enough in premiums if people buy their product. do you have homeowners insurance?

[newdarnaccount]

I have renter's insurance. But, of course, insurance companies would like to never pay claims. And all too often they deny claims in bad faith. Gerry Spence once said that insurance companies have come to look upon the courts as a part of their claims departments because they decide who gets paid what. The late Bob Hope had a fire insurance claim that became a nightmare. He said the good hands people gave him the finger.

[bxnyfordham]

i am a big fan of the riddley report...but this woman is the typical obama voter. I wonder if she even understands libertarianism yet (I am a paleo libertarian).

[eachtem]

0:43 that pic, I can see the devil in Mrs. Abortions eyes.

[Mangina9000]

Ron Paul faggots are hilarious.

[ugotpimp]

speaking of voting rights, they should be reserved for individuals who are employed, retired, 18+ in full time school or independently wealthy and unemployed (read: not a burden on society)

the above individuals will vote for mostly libertarian as they are the producers.

this will also encourage other parasites to contribute in order to have voting voice heard.

end parasite suffrage now!

btw, Dave: nice pan out at :45 secs to get the short shorts in view!

[ItalianR13]

Really people?? You're going to call her a stupid cunt because of her beliefs?? So what she voted and supported Obama before she knew he wasn't going to fulfill his promises. Seriously, so what?! And by the way, whoever thinks Libertarianism is a religion can go suck it. I really want to know how its a religion. Does it worship anyone? Does it follow specific rules and if you break one of those rules does something bad happen? NO! All it is is a political belief. NOTHING MORE!!

[fczwartek]

Libertarians believe in the god of the Free Market. The magic divine force of the free market will solve all of our problems if only we would give ourselves over to it completely.

The high priestess Ayn Rand wanted a society that was governed only by the free market. A pure economy with no interference from witless, vile, and depraved human beings.

[ninjabunnyman]

Uh ... no. And Ayn Rand's morality sucks.

I only believe it is wrong to initiate violence against a person who has not harmed you. Do you disagree?

[fczwartek]

I absolutely agree with you.

I guess where we diverge is in your belief (I'm assuming) that freeloading isn't harmful to anyone.

I really have no sympathy for people (especially the rich, and corporate entities) who refuse to pay, or cheat on their taxes.

[ninjabunnyman]

Suppose, as a newspaper boy, I just go ahead and deliver the paper those who specifically have said they don't want it. I then send my enforcer around to collect money. Would you say those who resist paying are "freeloaders"?

I don't want to pay for the aggressive wars, I don't want to pay for bailouts or stimuli for billionaires, and I don't want to pay for the government's pathetic and ineffective excuse for public assistance. I have better charities I support.

[fczwartek]

It is an absolute moral failure that in the richest country the world has ever seen there are something like 15 million children living in poverty.

I have no problem with the government reinvesting money in the American people. Though I agree with you that it should do a better job of it. The government is mandated by the constitution to "promote the general welfare" of its citizens.

Anyway I respect your protest of wars of aggression and empire, and corporate bailouts.

[ninjabunnyman]

I believe I have an obligation to use my own money to help the poor, but that does not mean I have a right to go over to my neighbor's house with a gun, extort money from him, and use that money to help the poor. Theft does not become ok simply because the money is put to a good use.

[fczwartek]

Well if you want to enjoy the benefits of civilized society, don't expect that it will be a free ride.

Our civilization would collapse without government. We are not a tribe of egalitarian hunter gatherer nomads, and we will never be (unfortunately.)

Taxes are not extortion or theft. The government is authorized by the constitution to collect taxes.

You do not recognize the authority of the constitution?

[ninjabunnyman]

I do not think that votes change the definition of morality.

Suppose at the creation of the world I find myself living near two other people. Now, suppose myself, and my first neighbor, wish to steal from the other. My second neighbor simply wishes to live in peace. We could, since we have more guns, and there are two of us, simply overwhelm him and take his stuff. I assume you would call that theft.

cont ....

[ninjabunnyman]

Instead, my first neighbor and I hold a constitutional convention, and determine by two thirds majority, that we will have a democracy. We then vote to steal from our neighbor, and the motion passes by two thirds majority, which of course is binding, since we have already determined that we shall live in a democracy.

cont ...

[ninjabunnyman]

Its now the law that we shall take the property of our neighbor, and since there are two of us and one of him, overwhelm him by force and do so immediately. Or, of course, we could give him a chance to leave, at which point we get his farm anyway.

Do you consider this scenario any different, or more moral, than the first — common theft?

[ninjabunnyman]

Now, after you answer that, consider that of the 3 million people in the country at the time of the drafting of the constitution, about 12,000 were allowed to vote on it. Basically, a small minority of white male landholders. So, even if morality were determined by majority, which it is not, how exactly does the opinion of 12,000 justify the extortion of money from the other 3 million?

[fczwartek]

So, in short you don't accept the legitimacy of the constitution.

Although I agree with you that many people involved with writing the constitution were hypocrites, that doesn't nullify its legality.

It's legitimacy in modern times can be derived from precedent, and the fact that the vast vast majority of the citizens of this country recognize the document as being the ultimate legal authority of the land.

Regardless of the hypocrisy of the original writers.

[ninjabunnyman]

What is your own opinion on the scenario I proposed? Do you think the second case is morally different from the first?

[fczwartek]

You do a nice job at attempting to make the perfect the enemy of the good.

Democracy is not perfect, but for all it's flaws it is practical and much more benign than other system of governance .

Volunteerism is an anarchist fantasy. No society has ever had volunteerism as its core philosophy. For good, reason; because it wouldn't work.

Not at least until human beings evolve into a higher form of life.

[ninjabunnyman]

You appear not to be willing to answer the question directly, but if I infer correctly, you are saying that it is indeed immoral, but that it is necessary to prevent greater immorality. Do I read you correctly?

I myself do not believe in a utilitarian approach to morality -- I would not support evil even if I believed it might lead to something good.

That aside -- how do you believe democracy prevents greater immorality?

[fczwartek]

You're asking a rhetorical question based on several hypothetical "inside a vacuum, all things being equal" type scenarios.

I reject your premise that reality can be so simplistically defined. I also reject your absolutism, your apparent belief that there is no gray area; only black or white.

Your question has no correct answer.

[ninjabunnyman]

No, you just have no well defined moral code.

It's a simple question -- suppose three neighbors were living next to each other, and two really wanted to steal from the other. Would it be moral, or not?

The reason you won't answer is because you recognize that it is immoral, but admitting it would be to admit that the foundation of "democracy" is flawed.

I suggest you open your mind a bit, and think a bit more honestly. Any legitimate moral code should be able to handle that situation.

[fczwartek]

"you just have no well defined moral code."

That may well be true, or not. I'm sure some people would call me a relativist.

Like I said before; your hypothetical scenarios have no real relation to or grounding in the multitude of complexities of human existence.

Trying to justify your own political beliefs with such simplistic analogies is intellectual dishonesty wouldn't you agree?

I could say that your reliance on your analogies is a sign of a poorly defined moral code.

[ninjabunnyman]

You must understand the basics, before you can add complexities. It's not an obscure hypothetical, or unrealistic at all. If you can't decide whether it's ok for two people to steal from a third, you really have no moral code. You want to believe theft is wrong, even by a majority against a minority, but also want to believe in democracy, which often is theft from a minority by a majority.

You hold self contradictory beliefs, that's the problem.

[fczwartek]

The world is an unconventional place. How can you not hold pluralistic and contradictory beliefs?

What you call theft I call the price of a functioning society.

Only an immoral person consumed by greed and avarice would withhold their payment...

[ninjabunnyman]

Not at all. I give a significant percentage of my income to charity, and would love to stop paying taxes, and use that money to give more. I believe in what those charities do, and they are both efficient and effective. I do not believe in blowing people up, bailouts for banks or industry, occupying other countries, counterproductive social and educational programs, funding domestic spying programs, enforcement of victimless crimes, etc.

In fact, I find many of these things morally repugnant.

[OnGuard4Liberty]

"Only an immoral person consumed by greed and avarice would withhold their payment... " -- fczwartek

People never call you greedy for wanting other people's money. Only for wanting to keep your own money.

[ninjabunnyman]

Your logic in 1852, from pro slavery author William Harper: "The institution of domestic slavery exists over far the greater portion of the inhabited earth. Until within a very few centuries, it may be said to have existed over the whole earth —at least in all those portions of it which had made any advances towards civilization. We might safely conclude then, that it is deeply founded in the nature of man and the exigencies of human society."

Well, I give up, I guess slavery can never end ;)

[fczwartek]

It's interesting that you use slavery as "proof" that the constitution and democracy are somehow illegitimate.

Democratic government was successful at abolishing the most shameful and despicable practice in American history.

Actually pro-slavery advocates of the 19th century have a lot in common with modern day libertarians- they just wanted gvmnt out of their lives so they could do as the pleased with their "property."

[ninjabunnyman]

You appear to have missed my point. The logic you used to defend institutionized theft is the same logic used to defend institutionized slavery. It's "inevitable", "innate to human nature", etc. My point was that your logic is flawed. Just as people recognized the immorality of slavery, and abolished the institution of it, people can recognize the immorality of agressive violence, and abolish that institution.

We both know people are not property, don't use dishonest rhetoric.

[fczwartek]

Once again; taxation by the government is authorized by the constitution. To call it institutionalized theft certainly is "dishonest rhetoric."

The constitution authorizes taxation, yet outlaws slavery.

Conflating slavery with taxation is reprehensible because you are essentially attempting to co-opt the horror, terror, and abomination that is slavery into a political movement to abolish taxation.

Ri-fricken-diculous.

[ninjabunnyman]

You are confusing the constitution with morality. If the constitution did allow slavery, would you then consider it moral?

Also, my point with that quote was not that slavery and theft are the same, only that your logic is flawed -- simply because something has been institutionalized throughout history -- as the initiation of violence has, and as slavery was up until recently, does not mean that it is innate to human character, or that it cannot change.

[ninjabunnyman]

Indeed, the constitution did allow slavery up until the 13th amendment. It specifically prohibited congress from outlawing the importation of slaves, and required states to return fugitive slaves. Prior to that point, would you have defended it, on the grounds that it was, "authorized by the constitution"?

[fczwartek]

Obviously some practices are so immoral that they cannot be justified by any law or document.

There's no denying that democracy is a slow process. Nearly 80 years elapsed between the ratification of the constitution and the 13th amendment.

But the constitution gave society enough latitude to reform itself and begin to fix it's shortcomings.

If anything that gives the constitution more moral authority, not less.

Taxation is not a moral issue, certainly not to the magnitude of slavery.

[ninjabunnyman]

I am glad that you would oppose slavery even if it were legal, that's good to hear. I think taxation absolutely is a moral issue, although I agree it's not as bad as slavery. After all, I think most of us would rather be mugged than enslaved.

The fact remains, however, it is quite literally using the threat of violence against peaceful people in order to extort money from them.

This is clearly immoral, just as slavery was, and I oppose it, just as both of us would have opposed slavery.

[DixyHair]

In the two instances where the free market has been given somewhat of a chance in today's world (Hong Kong & Singapore), given the context, it's done pretty damn well. Even if you narrow it down to to the least regulated markets here (Musical Instruments, Opensource, E-Trading & the Net in general, Laser Eye Surgery, Optics, Cosmetic Surgery, etc), it's done remarkably well, especially when compared to the most regulated markets (Banking, most Medical Markets).

(Continued)

[DixyHair]

(...From Above)

So, how is it that economic authoritarians can defend institutions which have been abysmal failures for usually over half a century, & which have been subject to many attempts to reform (Public School, Social Programs), & yet scoff at anyone who proposes that we have a free market (not one of those phony ones, either)?

[fczwartek]

I would agree with you that public school and social programs in the USA have been under performing during the last 30 years, relative to other industrialized countries.

One commonality about industrialized countries that have higher performing public schools and social programs than the USA;

Almost all are more socialist than the USA, not less. Democratic socialism has a proven track record of working, not the free market (which is neither "free" nor a market, but a plunder)

[DixyHair]

First of all, correlation =/= causation. Are you really suggesting that the inferiority of the US education system is due to a lack of socialization in areas totally unrelated to education? Moreover, check out Belgium's system, & private schools. There's a far better explanation, that being culture.

Countries with democratic socialism don't typically have a wealthier middle class than the US, nor do they have less stratification, contrary to the legends of Utopian Europe.

[DixyHair]

.....

Moreover, free markets do have a better track record, as I've already demonstrated. The US is NOT a free market, it's a neo-mercantilist economy, which is every bit as antithetical to a free market as is democratic socialism.

That last claim is simply false, both by definition & from a refined (read: not oversimplified) look at the evidence.

[RonPaulR3VOLUTION]

Most non-libertarians believe in the god of the large and violent monopoly of Big Government. The magic divine force of the large and violent monopoly of Big Government will solve all of our problems if only we would give ourselves over to it completely.

[DixyHair]

Anyone who equivocates Libertarianism with Objectivism is either being deceptive or doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about.

[fczwartek]

The same to anyone who believes that libertarianism and objectivism are not closely related.

[DixyHair]

Libertarianism existed long before Objectivism, & if Ayn Rand had never been born, Libertarianism would have remained unchanged. Objectivism simply promotes a relatively free market (while paradoxically championing corporations), & generally socially liberal policies, but it also promotes a very selfish culture, which is not only unrealistic, but has absolutely nothing to do with Libertarianism.

(Cont. below)

[DixyHair]

(Cont. from above)

Moreover, Objectivism promotes the free market largely based upon a worldview not unlike Gordon Gekko's, so when you dig deep, Libertarianism & Objectivism only share a few conclusions, & superficially at that, but the premises are quite different.

More to the point, Objectivism is an entire belief system, while Libertarianism is not.

And, just so ya know, Ayn Rand herself adamantly denied being a libertarian, so it is you that is mistaken.

[qh4dotcom]

I forgive her even though she and her November vote screwed me for the next 4 years.

[fczwartek]

Cuz we would have been so much better off if Johnny Mac was president now?

[tigercap100]

she's an idiot if she voted for 0bama. She went for the slogans and logos, did no research on her own, and contributed to the crap that's going on.

At least she's starting to come around, but...geez...what an idiot.

[fczwartek]

Yeah how dare she not want a raving geriactric lunatic like John Mccain to become president! Pure stupidity!

Only an idiot would not want a man who is obviously psychologically unstable and probably dying of cancer to not be president!

Libtards unite! Purge the party of all imbeciles who do not mimic the party line.

[tigercap100]

much better than a man who has no experience, was a part of ACORN, and ran the most non-transparent campaign in history.

McCain released his med records. Obama didn't.

[fczwartek]

Johnny Mac was a keynote speaker at an ACORN event only a few years ago. He released his medical records- over 1000 pages unnumbered and shuffled to a few hand picked journalist for a period of 3 hours.

He was so out of touch that he forgot how many houses he owned. He was mentally unstable, has a good chance of dying within the next few years, and picked the worst VP running mate ever only because she was photogenic.

Yeah we would be much better off with them running the show.

[tigercap100]

0bama gave his med. records to ZERO journalists. His career was built on waste and fraud. Pelosi has real accomplishments and fought against waste and fraud. She wasn't created by the press which is why they crucified her. The ignorant, racist and lazy bought that Pelosi was a bad choice.

0bama is fighting against civil rights like no republican ever has from the Employee free choice act (against private votes), Fairness Doctrinie (against first amend.) and against private property rights.

[fczwartek]

I'm not here to defend Obama. He is a pretty typical corporatist democrat. But the guy has his sh*t together much more than John Mccain ever did.

You make the claim that Obama's "career was built on waste and fraud" but fail to cite a single example of that.... please enlighten us.

You statement that Obama is worse on civil rights than even Bush is just not supported by facts, and one of the examples you give is wrong. Obama does not support the fairness doctrine.

Try again.

[fczwartek]

Furthermore I don't buy the premise that either EFCA or the Fairness Doctrine abridge civil rights.

Even in your estimation they cannot possibly match the civil rights infringing USA Patriot Act (which Senator Mccain voted for in 2001 and again in 2006, along with Obama in 2006.)

What about the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (which Mccain voted for and Obama voted against.)

Bush signed both into law.

Your statement that Obama is the worst president ever on civil rights is incorrect.

[tigercap100]

EFCA and Fairness Doctrine absolutely abridge civil rights. And will affect a lot more people than the "Patriot Act" which suffers poor marketing more than anything. Aside from the shameful EFCA and Fairness Doctrine, obama is against schools of choice, for limits of 2nd Amendm. and for limits on private property. A horrible record compared to anyone, especially GWB who expanded freedom. Obama's policies on civil rights are worst ever, plus he is a hypocrite for not being transparent himself

[fczwartek]

The Patriot Act was marketed poorly and GWB expanded our freedumbs!!

Good stuff! You must be on some extreme fringe of right-wing nuttitude that I only rarely encounter.

The worst things that Obama has done so far is to continue policies that were enacted by Bush and Cheney...

EFCA, Fairness Doctrine, 2nd amnd limits , limits on private property (?), and school choice...... none of this stuff you mention has been signed into law by Obama, and probably will never be.

Amazing...

[tigercap100]

EDCA, FD, 2A Limits and Private Property restrictions are liberal ideals. The threat is real and that they haven't been signed into law yet is thanks to "right wing nutjobs" aka those that understand issues and appreciate freedom.

0bama is corrupt and wasteful. 4x the spending of GWB.

[fczwartek]

Well I'm not surprised that a conservative would be opposed to making it easier for employees to create or join unions.

I'm not surprised that you would be against having tv and radio broadcast some programming that is in the public interest instead of the 24-7 cycle of worthless infoganda propatainment that most stations currently broadcast.

Brainwash and neutralize the population with fantasies of everlasting conspicuous consumption- conservative ideals after all.

[fczwartek]

Libertarianism is a religion....not reason

If Michael Chrichton were alive he would explain the difference between reason and religion (but in far more than 500 words.)

It is a myth, a fantasy, and an unshakable belief for anyone desperate enough to hold such convictions. Religious convictions. Free market fundamentalism.

It is also a fraud. Don't believe the hype.

No society anywhere ever (excluding Ayn Rand fantasy-land) has had libertarianism as its core founding philosophy.

[thedeepillusion]

So I'm a stupid cunt, apparently. Wow. Not only that, but a stupid cunt who wasted money to move up here. I would have spent a million dollars if it meant being here. It has been in no way a waste. And I've learned a lot.

And no, at this time last year, I had not heard of Ron Paul. But nonetheless, he wasn't on my ballot in November.

And for the actual cunts in the room, shove it. Be careful where you point that gun, you might shoot yourself in the teeth one day.

Payback's a bitch.

~Cass

[conspiracy777]

They were so good at playing the "anti-Bush" game and getting people on that rally cry. Of course there will always be the brainless followers that swoon at the mention of his name, but a lot of people are waking up to the fact that big government Repubs and Dems are pretty much the same animal.

[alenofbellwood]

Another helot opens her eyes to the potential of freedom. And who says we no longer live in an age of miracles?

[dewbie42]

oh my, you were an Obama lover? I don't think I can speak to you anymore (a total of 5 minutes).

[CurtHowland]

Well, duh.

One wonders if, last year at this time, she'd ever heard of Ron Paul.

[OnGuard4Liberty]

And here I thought we didn't have any cute libertarian women in NH. She is very cute.  :)

[Thereminator101]

Ayn Rand wrote a little known book called "Atlas shruged" and another book "The Fountianhead" was made into a movie years ago.Atlas shruged is supposed to become a movie and may star Angalina Jolie.

[Mangina9000]

What an idiot.

[Lyndehouse]

Hope you enjoy getting paid in worthless currency while watching our empire collapse.

[thesnk1313]

So Obama didn't magically click his heels together and teleport the troops home on his first day in office? OH NOES BUT I VOTED FOR CHAAAANGE!!!!!

What a stupid cunt. Hahaha she fucking wasted all that money to move her entire family because she's an idiot with no grasp on how things work. Even the most tenuous grasp on basic logistics would ...... GAAAH fuck it. She should just be sterilized and not allowed to vote any more even when she makes the right choice she fucks it up.

[askifICare]

Mole.

[cdimmm]

Now just stay clear of the Glenn Beck groupies.

[mackler]

Who is Anne Rand?

[Prometheusforliberty]

It's Ayn Rand not anne:]

She is an author and philosopher Google her.

[voodan]

This is an Obamanation!

[tjhorsluvr5]

What a crock of baloney. This girl boasted about how she liked Obama's idea of hope and change on the very day she arrived in NH. I heard her with my own ears.

[TheFringeCult]

Ron Paul inspired anti-FED man kills Holocaust Museum guard

[ElCapitan1985]

I am a Ron Paul inspired anti-FED man, and I aint killin no one......leave your bigotry at home, thefringecult.

[DixyHair]

Animal rights activists, environmentalists, civil rights activists, Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, & many other people have killed because of their beliefs, but does that invalidate all those ideas?

[ronhelwig]

I like hope and change too. Back when I was in college I thought that government could and should help. It took several years for me to understand that government is not the solution and will not bring real hope and change.

I think Cassidy has shown great intelligence and wisdom to have come around so quickly after finally being introduced to the ideas of self-government, libertarianism, and non-aggression.

[lopinglobo]

"Didn't really think about it" is our problem today. But it sounds like they're thinking now. I don't know of one person who voted for Obama that doesn't regret it. And I have friends of many different philosophies!

[BagOfEyebrows]

I love you, Cassidy! ::: hug :::

[watcher8o]

Lots of people were fooled by Obama just because Bush was so evil. Obama then follows in Bush's footsteps and a lot of people are waking up thanks to him, and that's about all I am grateful to Obama for.

[SimpleDan76]

Cassidy's is cute!

[ElCapitan1985]

welcome to the world of sanity, most Obama fans out here in Cali are so far gone i'm afraid they are lost forever....poor fools.

[oyate1960]

Here you are talking about sanity while Ridley squeaks away in a falsetto. Yeah we got credibility ;)

[fczwartek]

hahaha!

[wait887]

we can't be all seriousness all the time 24/7. It would be very depressing. Have you heard any of Alex Jones lately. That guy just bums me out.

[thinkrevolution]

The guy speaks the truth.

If fighting tyranny and speaking the truth is "depressing" to you, then go find something else to do.

[wait887]

when you listen to his program, he talks about nothing but fear mongering and death. Yes it is true that the elitists are stealing from us. A police state is rising up around us. CPS steals thousands of children and makes a profit. The list goes on. That doesn't me I'm going to see the evil and corruption everywhere I look. There must be some hope and something positive in life. His message overall is negativity. I'm an optimist. We'll beat tyranny. But I won't let it consume my soul.

[wait887]

the revolution is upon us.

[TwiceRecorded]

oh, that would be so sweet!

[rataMacue22]

The problem with mass speech hypnosis is it eventually wears off.

Welcome aboard!

[Synthetikrose]

wonderful