The Big Lie

[kaz]

I think you are one of those libertarians who has little understanding of libertarianism

I'm sure you do.

You're really unusual in that you aren't interested in explaining what you support.

I have to agree with sealy on this one. You seem to realize it makes no sense. Which is why you say you're for small government yet totalitarian leftists love you and you fight with everyone else.

And then you run away when you're asked what you're for. It makes no sense

 

[surada]

I would bet money that there are bumper stickers that say such shit.

BUT, regardless, a confederate flag is not obscene.


You thinking of walking that back some?

No, but you'd think Americans would be revolted by seditionists who fought against the USA. And got their asses kicked, to boot.

They were fighting to leave it, not overthrow it or take it over.

Their reasons and intentions matter not,, they were still fighting against the USA.

It did to the people at the time and was one of the reasons the Southerners who led their bid for independence were not charged with treason and sedition when they were let back into the Union.

It's not like they led an attack on Congress or anything.......They just wanted to be free to enslave the negro race forever.

Yes, that's it. Southerners objective was slavery. They just wanted to own slaves. That's it, that was their end goal. They just wanted to sit in a chair and say damn it, I own slaves. I'm good. It's that simple.

You really don't know history, actually it's not that simple. That's like saying the goal of the Nazis was to kill Jews. Well, that was tied into it, in no way does it make their killing Jews OK, and clearly that was something they wanted. But you really know nothing about history when you say that was their goal, end of sentence.

Being a Democrat is really not conducive to understanding things

You don't know what you are talking about.

 

[kaz]

Exactly, you're an insurrectionist. You supported leftist insurrectionists all last summer. You're a traitor to the United States.

I'm not, I condemned and condemn again ANYONE who went inside the Capital, including any Trump supporter who went into the Capital. I'm not a traitor like you.

LOL

As always, you prove to be utterly brain-dead...

​

Fuck you, ya raving lunatic. I condemned the BLM and Antifa riots.​

I've condemned those.​

Dumbfuck, I condemned the violence committed by Antifa, BLM & Trump's insurgents.​

You're an idiot, Marty. I condemned BLM and Antifa violence.​

And BTW, I have condemned the violence and riots by BLM and Antifa.​

Nope, those are not ok and I've condemned them.​

No, dumbfuck, no riots are good. All should be condemned.​

That's a lie, others also condemned the violence committed by BLM and Antifa, myself included.​

You're such a putz, ShortBus. I was able to show I condemned the riots you idiotically doubted I expressed outrage over.​

I have condemned the looting, rioting send murders.​

"Finally, do you condemn BLM and Antifa or not."​

​

Asked and answered.​

I condemn murders committed by BLM.​

I condemn their violence.​

I condemn such attacks.​

I've denounced Antifa.​

I condemn those murders.​

I condemned the violence of BLM and Antifa and never made excuses based on the fraction who caused it.​

Goes to show what an idiot you are. I've condemned, and continue to condemn, such violence. Lock 'em up.​

Nope, I would sing the same song. I condemn the violence committed by BLM and I condemn storming the Capitol to stop Congress from certifying the election.​

I've done the same REPEATEDLY. So stop lying and then whining about it

 

[kaz]

I would bet money that there are bumper stickers that say such shit.

BUT, regardless, a confederate flag is not obscene.


You thinking of walking that back some?

No, but you'd think Americans would be revolted by seditionists who fought against the USA. And got their asses kicked, to boot.

They were fighting to leave it, not overthrow it or take it over.

Their reasons and intentions matter not,, they were still fighting against the USA.

It did to the people at the time and was one of the reasons the Southerners who led their bid for independence were not charged with treason and sedition when they were let back into the Union.

It's not like they led an attack on Congress or anything.......They just wanted to be free to enslave the negro race forever.

Yes, that's it. Southerners objective was slavery. They just wanted to own slaves. That's it, that was their end goal. They just wanted to sit in a chair and say damn it, I own slaves. I'm good. It's that simple.

You really don't know history, actually it's not that simple. That's like saying the goal of the Nazis was to kill Jews. Well, that was tied into it, in no way does it make their killing Jews OK, and clearly that was something they wanted. But you really know nothing about history when you say that was their goal, end of sentence.

Being a Democrat is really not conducive to understanding things

You don't know what you are talking about.

Well, apparently you know you know nothing with the dearth of information in your response. All you said is No It Isn't!

So what were the Democrat slave owners after then?

 

[BlindBoo]

Yes, that's it. Southerners objective was slavery. They just wanted to own slaves. That's it, that was their end goal.

They already owned slaves. Their goal was independence from the non slave states, not control over them.

That doesn't contradict anything I ever said

Owning slaves was not their end goal. Independence and freedom to expand while holding an entire race as slaves in perpetuity was.

"She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time."

DECLARATION OF CAUSES: February 2, 1861 A declaration of the causes which impel the State of Texas to secede from the Federal Union. | TSLAC

DECLARATION OF CAUSES: February 2, 1861 A declaration of the causes which impel the State of Texas to secede from the Federal Union. Related Links Narrative history of Secession and Readmission | Narrative history of Annexation

www.tsl.texas.gov

 

[kaz]

LOLOL

So a libertarian running as a Libertarian isn't a libertarian??

Yeah. It's gets rather convoluted.

He didn't capitalize right. The point is that Burr and Johnson were not libertarian, not that they were. Obviously they were Libertarians. Faun doesn't know what capitalization means

LOL

But Trump's a libertarian, right?

Um ... no. Trump is not a libertarian.

That number between one and a million. You keep claiming you read minds, so what is it?

All the libertarians I know sure love Trump.

You must not get out much.

Oh contrare

Through twenty polls on this topic spanning thirteen years, Gallup found that voters who identify as libertarians ranged from 17 to 23% of the American electorate. However, a 2014 Pew Poll found that 23% of Americans who identify as libertarians have little understanding of libertarianism.

It's not like there are a lot of you out there.

And are you saying you can name a libertarian on USMB who was vocal about not liking Trump? Name one I will search their history to see if they really disliked Trump and why. I don't recall any Libertarians disliking Trump.

Like I said, you libertarians all think that Republicans are all Deep State RINO's. That's exactly what Trump said about any Republican who challenged him. So his message resonated with you guys.

U.S. Sen. Rand Paul once called President Donald Trump a "fake conservative."

Trump had lobbed his own insults at Paul, saying he "reminds me of a spoiled brat without a properly functioning brain." Later, the Kentucky senator shot back, calling the bellicose New York City business tycoon a "delusional narcissist" on Comedy Central.

Yes, Paul and Trump came out swinging as they fought for the Republican Party's 2016 presidential nomination.

But then, things began to change dramatically — once Trump won the nomination and ultimately the presidency.

Within three years, Paul shifted from calling Trump a bully who was "all blather" to lashing out at the president's political enemies throughout the impeachment saga.

As the impeachment trial unfolded in the Senate, Paul put himself front and center as a chief defender of Trump, downplaying the seriousness of the proceedings by doing a crossword puzzle during early arguments and walking out on the trial after Chief Justice John Roberts rejected one of his questions because it was related to the identity of the whistleblower whose allegations prompted the impeachment inquiry.

Brian Darling, who worked as Paul's senior communications director from late 2012 to early 2015, contends that Paul and Trump align closely on foreign policy and issues like cutting taxes.

I think you are one of those libertarians who has little understanding of libertarianism

I agree that the majority of libertarians are in the Republican party.

The reason for that is because there are two parties, and the Democrat party is the polar opposite of libertarian on every subject. The Republican party has fiscal conservatives even if the party isn't fiscally conservative.

Life sucks in this country when you believe government is too big, parasites are destroying us and no one represents us

In the 2020 presidential election, the Libertarian Party candidate, Jo Jorgensen, gained 1.2 percent of the vote, less than half the party’s 2016 election result. Jeffrey Michels and Olivier Lewis write that despite signs that pointed towards the potential for libertarian voters to be king makers in the 2020 election, their dislike of Donald Trump turned many to Joe Biden and the Democratic Party.

In 2016 you guys got 3.3% of the vote. You are losing popularity.

That also means a lot of libertarians must have voted for Trump. Maybe some even voted for Biden. So seems to me that libertarians don't know what they are doing.

Actually it was about the candidates. Gary Johnson was a lot better known than Jo.

Jo was a better candidate frankly than Gary, but she wasn't very good either. At least she was actually a libertarian

 

[BlindBoo]

I would bet money that there are bumper stickers that say such shit.

BUT, regardless, a confederate flag is not obscene.


You thinking of walking that back some?

No, but you'd think Americans would be revolted by seditionists who fought against the USA. And got their asses kicked, to boot.

They were fighting to leave it, not overthrow it or take it over.

Their reasons and intentions matter not,, they were still fighting against the USA.

It did to the people at the time and was one of the reasons the Southerners who led their bid for independence were not charged with treason and sedition when they were let back into the Union.

It's not like they led an attack on Congress or anything.......They just wanted to be free to enslave the negro race forever.

Yes, that's it. Southerners objective was slavery. They just wanted to own slaves. That's it, that was their end goal. They just wanted to sit in a chair and say damn it, I own slaves. I'm good. It's that simple.

You really don't know history, actually it's not that simple. That's like saying the goal of the Nazis was to kill Jews. Well, that was tied into it, in no way does it make their killing Jews OK, and clearly that was something they wanted. But you really know nothing about history when you say that was their goal, end of sentence.

Being a Democrat is really not conducive to understanding things

You don't know what you are talking about.

Well, apparently you know you know nothing with the dearth of information in your response. All you said is No It Isn't!

So what were the Democrat slave owners after then?

Mint Juleps?

 

[kaz]

Yes, that's it. Southerners objective was slavery. They just wanted to own slaves. That's it, that was their end goal.

They already owned slaves. Their goal was independence from the non slave states, not control over them.

That doesn't contradict anything I ever said

Owning slaves was not their end goal. Independence and freedom to expand while holding an entire race as slaves in perpetuity was.

"She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time."

DECLARATION OF CAUSES: February 2, 1861 A declaration of the causes which impel the State of Texas to secede from the Federal Union. | TSLAC

DECLARATION OF CAUSES: February 2, 1861 A declaration of the causes which impel the State of Texas to secede from the Federal Union. Related Links Narrative history of Secession and Readmission | Narrative history of Annexation

www.tsl.texas.gov

You really know nothing about history. While their solution obviously was evil, they were reasonably worried about living. The south was losing in every way to the North economically, population, military.

You'll do a lot of evil things if you're facing living for yourself and your family.

That does NOT justify it, but your stupid shit that they were sitting there saying they wanted to own slaves and everything was about that isn't true.

And the North didn't invade to end slavery.

You know zero about history. History for Democrats is like everything else. Partisan. Ironic since they were Democrats, huh?

 

[kaz]

I would bet money that there are bumper stickers that say such shit.

BUT, regardless, a confederate flag is not obscene.


You thinking of walking that back some?

No, but you'd think Americans would be revolted by seditionists who fought against the USA. And got their asses kicked, to boot.

They were fighting to leave it, not overthrow it or take it over.

Their reasons and intentions matter not,, they were still fighting against the USA.

It did to the people at the time and was one of the reasons the Southerners who led their bid for independence were not charged with treason and sedition when they were let back into the Union.

It's not like they led an attack on Congress or anything.......They just wanted to be free to enslave the negro race forever.

Yes, that's it. Southerners objective was slavery. They just wanted to own slaves. That's it, that was their end goal. They just wanted to sit in a chair and say damn it, I own slaves. I'm good. It's that simple.

You really don't know history, actually it's not that simple. That's like saying the goal of the Nazis was to kill Jews. Well, that was tied into it, in no way does it make their killing Jews OK, and clearly that was something they wanted. But you really know nothing about history when you say that was their goal, end of sentence.

Being a Democrat is really not conducive to understanding things

You don't know what you are talking about.

Well, apparently you know you know nothing with the dearth of information in your response. All you said is No It Isn't!

So what were the Democrat slave owners after then?

Mint Juleps?

What a stupid racist ass

 

[Seawytch]

How many people do you think voted against Trump because they believed that he was a WS?

How many people didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016 because they thought she was a crook and a liar? (With zero evidence. On the other hand there’s plenty of evidence that Donald Trump gives aid and comfort to white supremacists)

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

So a libertarian running as a Libertarian isn't a libertarian??

Yeah. It's gets rather convoluted.

He didn't capitalize right. The point is that Burr and Johnson were not libertarian, not that they were. Obviously they were Libertarians. Faun doesn't know what capitalization means

LOL

But Trump's a libertarian, right?

Um ... no. Trump is not a libertarian.

That number between one and a million. You keep claiming you read minds, so what is it?

Then I was right when you asked for whom should a libertarian vote -- for the Libertarian.

If you want to discuss this seriously, I'll give you a chance

1) Why would I necessarily do that when the Libertarian isn't a libertarian?

2) So according to your rule, if I were voting in the 20s and 30s in Germany, you're saying I can't vote for Hitler's primary opponent unless I agree with their views? Seriously?

3) What percentage of agreement with a candidate's positions requires me to vote for them? 100%? 50%?

Dumbfuck, why wouldn't a nazi vote for the Social Democrat over the Nazi?

Likewise, why would a libertarian vote for the Republican over the Libertarian?

 

[Faun]

Oh, well there you go then. It's up to you what a libertarian would do. Thanks for settling that, George. There'll be a little extra thank you pay in your Chinese disinformation paycheck. Shhh, the other Chinese disinformation officers will get jealous ...

Moron

It's not really necessary for you to sign your posts. The forum already knows who you are.

Another playground insult! It's the domain you live

Poor baby, do you ever stop crying?

Ever??

Your post does not contradict my point.



You lied about what he said. You lied about what he meant.

LOLOL

I quoted him, kazzer.

No shit, angry little boy. But you said what he was talking about, which wasn't the purpose of the march and wasn't part of his quote. You lied about what he was referring to.

My God you're stupid. No wonder you're constantly just maxing out at playground insults and posting like an eight year old

LOLOL

It was a racist rally, ya kazzer. Who among those racists are "very fine people?"

You see everything as racist, it's because you are one

LOL

I note you don't want to answer that question... who among the Unite the Right is a very fine person?

Your reluctance to answer reveals you're full of shit.

I directly answered that question. You are a liar, Trump never said that.

Why do you hate black people? So?

LOLOL

You're kazzing again.

I didn't ask you what Trump said. I asked you who among the Unite the Right was a very fine person?

I'm asking you again... this makes 4 times I'm asking. Your reluctance to answer reveals you're full of shit.

Were these very fine people...?

View attachment 499166​

Evasion. I asked you why you are a racist. Answer the question I asked

The answer to you're question is I'm not a racist.

5th time... who among the Unite the Right was a very fine person?

No, not according to you. That's the point. God you're stupid.

You said I didn't answer the question when I pointed out your question was a false question.

Therefore, you didn't answer the question when you said my question was a false question.

That was the POINT, my God you're stupid.

So answer the question. Why are you a racist?

Huh? How is my question false?

I've answered that a bunch of times. Trump was talking about the statues. There are good people on both sides. We even discussed that a bunch of times. How did you miss that?

Nope, you're just kazzing again. Kazzing is what you do whenever you're cornered. Again, Trump was talking about those who attended the rally in support of the statue. It was the Unite the Right rally who attended.

So who among them were very nice people?

 

[Faun]

Exactly, you're an insurrectionist. You supported leftist insurrectionists all last summer. You're a traitor to the United States.

I'm not, I condemned and condemn again ANYONE who went inside the Capital, including any Trump supporter who went into the Capital. I'm not a traitor like you.

LOL

As always, you prove to be utterly brain-dead...

​

Fuck you, ya raving lunatic. I condemned the BLM and Antifa riots.​

I've condemned those.​

Dumbfuck, I condemned the violence committed by Antifa, BLM & Trump's insurgents.​

You're an idiot, Marty. I condemned BLM and Antifa violence.​

And BTW, I have condemned the violence and riots by BLM and Antifa.​

Nope, those are not ok and I've condemned them.​

No, dumbfuck, no riots are good. All should be condemned.​

That's a lie, others also condemned the violence committed by BLM and Antifa, myself included.​

You're such a putz, ShortBus. I was able to show I condemned the riots you idiotically doubted I expressed outrage over.​

I have condemned the looting, rioting send murders.​

"Finally, do you condemn BLM and Antifa or not."​

​

Asked and answered.​

I condemn murders committed by BLM.​

I condemn their violence.​

I condemn such attacks.​

I've denounced Antifa.​

I condemn those murders.​

I condemned the violence of BLM and Antifa and never made excuses based on the fraction who caused it.​

Goes to show what an idiot you are. I've condemned, and continue to condemn, such violence. Lock 'em up.​

Nope, I would sing the same song. I condemn the violence committed by BLM and I condemn storming the Capitol to stop Congress from certifying the election.​

I've done the same REPEATEDLY. So stop lying and then whining about it

Do you ever stop kazzing?

Ever???

I never said you didn't.

 

[dblack]

I think you are one of those libertarians who has little understanding of libertarianism

I'm sure you do.

You're really unusual in that you aren't interested in explaining what you support.

I tried kaz, but you're just not smart enough to understand. Plus you're a douche. All in all, not worth the effort. Sorry.

 

[Seawytch]

Oh, well there you go then. It's up to you what a libertarian would do. Thanks for settling that, George. There'll be a little extra thank you pay in your Chinese disinformation paycheck. Shhh, the other Chinese disinformation officers will get jealous ...

Moron

It's not really necessary for you to sign your posts. The forum already knows who you are.

Another playground insult! It's the domain you live

Poor baby, do you ever stop crying?

Ever??

Your post does not contradict my point.



You lied about what he said. You lied about what he meant.

LOLOL

I quoted him, kazzer.

No shit, angry little boy. But you said what he was talking about, which wasn't the purpose of the march and wasn't part of his quote. You lied about what he was referring to.

My God you're stupid. No wonder you're constantly just maxing out at playground insults and posting like an eight year old

LOLOL

It was a racist rally, ya kazzer. Who among those racists are "very fine people?"

You see everything as racist, it's because you are one

LOL

I note you don't want to answer that question... who among the Unite the Right is a very fine person?

Your reluctance to answer reveals you're full of shit.

I directly answered that question. You are a liar, Trump never said that.

Why do you hate black people? So?

LOLOL

You're kazzing again.

I didn't ask you what Trump said. I asked you who among the Unite the Right was a very fine person?

I'm asking you again... this makes 4 times I'm asking. Your reluctance to answer reveals you're full of shit.

Were these very fine people...?

View attachment 499166​

Evasion. I asked you why you are a racist. Answer the question I asked

The answer to you're question is I'm not a racist.

5th time... who among the Unite the Right was a very fine person?

No, not according to you. That's the point. God you're stupid.

You said I didn't answer the question when I pointed out your question was a false question.

Therefore, you didn't answer the question when you said my question was a false question.

That was the POINT, my God you're stupid.

So answer the question. Why are you a racist?

Huh? How is my question false?

I've answered that a bunch of times. Trump was talking about the statues. There are good people on both sides. We even discussed that a bunch of times. How did you miss that?

Nope, you're just kazzing again. Kazzing is what you do whenever you're cornered. Again, Trump was talking about those who attended the rally in support of the statue. It was the Unite the Right rally who attended.

So who among them were very nice people?

Has a single person come forward and said “I was just there for the statues”?

 

[BlindBoo]

Yes, that's it. Southerners objective was slavery. They just wanted to own slaves. That's it, that was their end goal.

They already owned slaves. Their goal was independence from the non slave states, not control over them.

That doesn't contradict anything I ever said

Owning slaves was not their end goal. Independence and freedom to expand while holding an entire race as slaves in perpetuity was.

"She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time."

DECLARATION OF CAUSES: February 2, 1861 A declaration of the causes which impel the State of Texas to secede from the Federal Union. | TSLAC

DECLARATION OF CAUSES: February 2, 1861 A declaration of the causes which impel the State of Texas to secede from the Federal Union. Related Links Narrative history of Secession and Readmission | Narrative history of Annexation

www.tsl.texas.gov

You really know nothing about history. While their solution obviously was evil, they were reasonably worried about living. The south was losing in every way to the North economically, population, military.

You'll do a lot of evil things if you're facing living for yourself and your family.

That does NOT justify it, but your stupid shit that they were sitting there saying they wanted to own slaves and everything was about that isn't true.

And the North didn't invade to end slavery.

You know zero about history. History for Democrats is like everything else. Partisan. Ironic since they were Democrats, huh?

I just find it ironic that they wanted independence so they could continue to enslave an entire race, for all time.

 

[sealybobo]

LOLOL

So a libertarian running as a Libertarian isn't a libertarian??

Yeah. It's gets rather convoluted.

He didn't capitalize right. The point is that Burr and Johnson were not libertarian, not that they were. Obviously they were Libertarians. Faun doesn't know what capitalization means

LOL

But Trump's a libertarian, right?

Um ... no. Trump is not a libertarian.

That number between one and a million. You keep claiming you read minds, so what is it?

All the libertarians I know sure love Trump.

You must not get out much.

Oh contrare

Through twenty polls on this topic spanning thirteen years, Gallup found that voters who identify as libertarians ranged from 17 to 23% of the American electorate. However, a 2014 Pew Poll found that 23% of Americans who identify as libertarians have little understanding of libertarianism.

It's not like there are a lot of you out there.

And are you saying you can name a libertarian on USMB who was vocal about not liking Trump? Name one I will search their history to see if they really disliked Trump and why. I don't recall any Libertarians disliking Trump.

Like I said, you libertarians all think that Republicans are all Deep State RINO's. That's exactly what Trump said about any Republican who challenged him. So his message resonated with you guys.

U.S. Sen. Rand Paul once called President Donald Trump a "fake conservative."

Trump had lobbed his own insults at Paul, saying he "reminds me of a spoiled brat without a properly functioning brain." Later, the Kentucky senator shot back, calling the bellicose New York City business tycoon a "delusional narcissist" on Comedy Central.

Yes, Paul and Trump came out swinging as they fought for the Republican Party's 2016 presidential nomination.

But then, things began to change dramatically — once Trump won the nomination and ultimately the presidency.

Within three years, Paul shifted from calling Trump a bully who was "all blather" to lashing out at the president's political enemies throughout the impeachment saga.

As the impeachment trial unfolded in the Senate, Paul put himself front and center as a chief defender of Trump, downplaying the seriousness of the proceedings by doing a crossword puzzle during early arguments and walking out on the trial after Chief Justice John Roberts rejected one of his questions because it was related to the identity of the whistleblower whose allegations prompted the impeachment inquiry.

Brian Darling, who worked as Paul's senior communications director from late 2012 to early 2015, contends that Paul and Trump align closely on foreign policy and issues like cutting taxes.

I think you are one of those libertarians who has little understanding of libertarianism

I agree that the majority of libertarians are in the Republican party.

The reason for that is because there are two parties, and the Democrat party is the polar opposite of libertarian on every subject. The Republican party has fiscal conservatives even if the party isn't fiscally conservative.

Life sucks in this country when you believe government is too big, parasites are destroying us and no one represents us

In the 2020 presidential election, the Libertarian Party candidate, Jo Jorgensen, gained 1.2 percent of the vote, less than half the party’s 2016 election result. Jeffrey Michels and Olivier Lewis write that despite signs that pointed towards the potential for libertarian voters to be king makers in the 2020 election, their dislike of Donald Trump turned many to Joe Biden and the Democratic Party.

In 2016 you guys got 3.3% of the vote. You are losing popularity.

That also means a lot of libertarians must have voted for Trump. Maybe some even voted for Biden. So seems to me that libertarians don't know what they are doing.

Actually it was about the candidates. Gary Johnson was a lot better known than Jo.

Jo was a better candidate frankly than Gary, but she wasn't very good either. At least she was actually a libertarian

Point is Libertarianism is not catching on. Maybe it's not going to die like the Tea Party but it's going backwards as far as voter turn out. A lot of tea party people ran and won across the country. Why don't libertarians catch on? They have labeled them fringe thinkers. You guys came close to starting a 3rd party with the 3.3% you guys got when Hillary ran but not when Obama or Biden ran. Ron Paul was the closest you came and remember he was involved in that Freedom to Fascism movie where he admits believing that the income tax is unconstitutional. For the record I agree with him. Our country was taken over in 1913 and most people don't realize it. Just like you don't realize the GOP is the party for billionaires, not guys like you. Sure the Democrats are complicit too but if you are labor your an idiot for voting GOP.

 

[sealybobo]

I think you are one of those libertarians who has little understanding of libertarianism

I'm sure you do.

You're really unusual in that you aren't interested in explaining what you support.

I tried kaz, but you're just not smart enough to understand. Plus you're a douche. All in all, not worth the effort. Sorry.

Do you agree with me and Ron Paul that the income tax is unconstitutional?



Most of the Democrats and Republicans will say Ron Paul and I are conspiracy theory nuts.

 

[sealybobo]

The 16th amendment was never legally ratified by the states when it was not. They knew this tax would end up in the bankers pocket. There was now a tax on labor. Then the bankers bribed senators to pass the federal reserve act. During xmas when many senators were at home. They took over the federal reserve. 1913. Rothchild, JP Morgan, etc.

 

[sealybobo]

Who benefits from the massive debt? Bankers.