If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

If I pay my taxes, and vote, and keep to myself, and not make any new laws, will Ralph Nader please GO THE FUCK AWAY?

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Don’t forget to NOT buckle your seat belt!

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

Nader was working to better us all, even bean heads like you, decades before you were born. You are not competent to kiss his backside.

A refeshing alternative to the corporate owned Democrats and Republican parties.

He’s right. This alliance may be our last hope against the corporatists.
Seeing Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders team up to audit the Fed is our ruler’s worst
nightmare.

Thought he was dead!

Thought he was dead!

Thought he was dead!

Thought he was dead!

All individual person rights that corporations have should be totally stripped. But with the SCOTUS we have it won’t happen until those who should be impeached are removed to restore true justice and balance to the court.

All individual person rights that corporations have should be totally stripped. But with the SCOTUS we have it won’t happen until those who should be impeached are removed to restore true justice and balance to the court.

All individual person rights that corporations have should be totally stripped. But with the SCOTUS we have it won’t happen until those who should be impeached are removed to restore true justice and balance to the court.

All individual person rights that corporations have should be totally stripped. But with the SCOTUS we have it won’t happen until those who should be impeached are removed to restore true justice and balance to the court.

Cool. It’s Like Anarchism Lite. Could be useful.

Cool. It’s Like Anarchism Lite. Could be useful.

Cool. It’s Like Anarchism Lite. Could be useful.

Cool. It’s Like Anarchism Lite. Could be useful.

Cool. It’s Like Anarchism Lite. Could be useful.

Stop hating Mexicans, Sarah.

Oh and stop blaming the Journalist Pundant Jews for giving you a moron child, Sarah.

Stop hating Mexicans, Sarah.

Oh and stop blaming the Journalist Pundant Jews for giving you a moron child, Sarah.

Stop hating Mexicans, Sarah.

Oh and stop blaming the Journalist Pundant Jews for giving you a moron child, Sarah.

Stop hating Mexicans, Sarah.

Oh and stop blaming the Journalist Pundant Jews for giving you a moron child, Sarah.

Stop hating Mexicans, Sarah.

Oh and stop blaming the Journalist Pundant Jews for giving you a moron child, Sarah.

Nope.

He keeps sucking.

Air.

Nope.

He keeps sucking.

Air.

Nope.

He keeps sucking.

Air.

Nope.

He keeps sucking.

Air.

Nope.

He keeps sucking.

Air.

Taking forever.

Taking forever.

Taking forever.

Taking forever.

Taking forever.

I predict that this will just be a tiny tiny minority, probably change little to nothing & will be just a blip on the radar.

These two are so opposite on so many much bigger issues that I imagine this alliance may be tested when they passionately disagree.

I predict that this will just be a tiny tiny minority, probably change little to nothing & will be just a blip on the radar.

These two are so opposite on so many much bigger issues that I imagine this alliance may be tested when they passionately disagree.

I predict that this will just be a tiny tiny minority, probably change little to nothing & will be just a blip on the radar.

These two are so opposite on so many much bigger issues that I imagine this alliance may be tested when they passionately disagree.

I predict that this will just be a tiny tiny minority, probably change little to nothing & will be just a blip on the radar.

These two are so opposite on so many much bigger issues that I imagine this alliance may be tested when they passionately disagree.

I predict that this will just be a tiny tiny minority, probably change little to nothing & will be just a blip on the radar.

These two are so opposite on so many much bigger issues that I imagine this alliance may be tested when they passionately disagree.

I predict that this will just be a tiny tiny minority, probably change little to nothing & will be just a blip on the radar.

These two are so opposite on so many much bigger issues that I imagine this alliance may be tested when they passionately disagree.

I predict that this will just be a tiny tiny minority, probably change little to nothing & will be just a blip on the radar.

These two are so opposite on so many much bigger issues that I imagine this alliance may be tested when they passionately disagree.

I predict that this will just be a tiny tiny minority, probably change little to nothing & will be just a blip on the radar.

These two are so opposite on so many much bigger issues that I imagine this alliance may be tested when they passionately disagree.

You need a better grade of drugs dude.

You need a better grade of drugs dude.

There aren’t just Two Ways.

There’s a Third Way!

There aren’t just Two Ways.

There’s a Third Way!

I need the kind of drugs where Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul are gonna have a fucking revolution?

No thanks.

I’ll stick to the mild shit and skip the Acid.

I need the kind of drugs where Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul are gonna have a fucking revolution?

No thanks.

I’ll stick to the mild shit and skip the Acid.

I agree with you. The idea of a Corporation being a person is stupid.

If I’m not mistaken a Corporation became a person before the Native Americans gained the status of personhood. The Amendment that gave Corporations the status of a person was intended for the freed Black Americans, shows how law can be perverted.

All Congress has to do is define a person as one created by nature. Corporations isn’t created by nature, Corporation is a legal paper that is all it is.

I say get rid of this abomination called Corporation is a person. This country will be much better off because there is no Corporation that is a team player in “We the People”.

I agree with you. The idea of a Corporation being a person is stupid.

If I’m not mistaken a Corporation became a person before the Native Americans gained the status of personhood. The Amendment that gave Corporations the status of a person was intended for the freed Black Americans, shows how law can be perverted.

All Congress has to do is define a person as one created by nature. Corporations isn’t created by nature, Corporation is a legal paper that is all it is.

I say get rid of this abomination called Corporation is a person. This country will be much better off because there is no Corporation that is a team player in “We the People”.

I agree with you. The idea of a Corporation being a person is stupid.

If I’m not mistaken a Corporation became a person before the Native Americans gained the status of personhood. The Amendment that gave Corporations the status of a person was intended for the freed Black Americans, shows how law can be perverted.

All Congress has to do is define a person as one created by nature. Corporations isn’t created by nature, Corporation is a legal paper that is all it is.

I say get rid of this abomination called Corporation is a person. This country will be much better off because there is no Corporation that is a team player in “We the People”.

I agree with you. The idea of a Corporation being a person is stupid.

If I’m not mistaken a Corporation became a person before the Native Americans gained the status of personhood. The Amendment that gave Corporations the status of a person was intended for the freed Black Americans, shows how law can be perverted.

All Congress has to do is define a person as one created by nature. Corporations isn’t created by nature, Corporation is a legal paper that is all it is.

I say get rid of this abomination called Corporation is a person. This country will be much better off because there is no Corporation that is a team player in “We the People”.

I agree with you. The idea of a Corporation being a person is stupid.

If I’m not mistaken a Corporation became a person before the Native Americans gained the status of personhood. The Amendment that gave Corporations the status of a person was intended for the freed Black Americans, shows how law can be perverted.

All Congress has to do is define a person as one created by nature. Corporations isn’t created by nature, Corporation is a legal paper that is all it is.

I say get rid of this abomination called Corporation is a person. This country will be much better off because there is no Corporation that is a team player in “We the People”.

I agree with you. The idea of a Corporation being a person is stupid.

If I’m not mistaken a Corporation became a person before the Native Americans gained the status of personhood. The Amendment that gave Corporations the status of a person was intended for the freed Black Americans, shows how law can be perverted.

All Congress has to do is define a person as one created by nature. Corporations isn’t created by nature, Corporation is a legal paper that is all it is.

I say get rid of this abomination called Corporation is a person. This country will be much better off because there is no Corporation that is a team player in “We the People”.

I agree with you. The idea of a Corporation being a person is stupid.

If I’m not mistaken a Corporation became a person before the Native Americans gained the status of personhood. The Amendment that gave Corporations the status of a person was intended for the freed Black Americans, shows how law can be perverted.

All Congress has to do is define a person as one created by nature. Corporations isn’t created by nature, Corporation is a legal paper that is all it is.

I say get rid of this abomination called Corporation is a person. This country will be much better off because there is no Corporation that is a team player in “We the People”.

You’re so awesome.

And, btw, you can actually go and talk to a real person instead of the those “people” in your head.

You’re so awesome.

And, btw, you can actually go and talk to a real person instead of the those “people” in your head.

You’re so awesome.

And, btw, you can actually go and talk to a real person instead of the those “people” in your head.

You’re so awesome.

And, btw, you can actually go and talk to a real person instead of the those “people” in your head.

You’re so awesome.

And, btw, you can actually go and talk to a real person instead of the those “people” in your head.

You’re so awesome.

And, btw, you can actually go and talk to a real person instead of the those “people” in your head.

You’re so awesome.

And, btw, you can actually go and talk to a real person instead of the those “people” in your head.

You’re so awesome.

And, btw, you can actually go and talk to a real person instead of the those “people” in your head.

Still not as exciting as Anarchy though…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hdt87rhgSc

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/g20/image/attachement/jpg/site1/20090329/0013729c04950b398e4815.jpg

Still not as exciting as Anarchy though…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hdt87rhgSc

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/g20/image/attachement/jpg/site1/20090329/0013729c04950b398e4815.jpg

Still not as exciting as Anarchy though…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hdt87rhgSc

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/g20/image/attachement/jpg/site1/20090329/0013729c04950b398e4815.jpg

Still not as exciting as Anarchy though…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hdt87rhgSc

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/g20/image/attachement/jpg/site1/20090329/0013729c04950b398e4815.jpg

Still not as exciting as Anarchy though…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hdt87rhgSc

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/g20/image/attachement/jpg/site1/20090329/0013729c04950b398e4815.jpg

Still not as exciting as Anarchy though…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hdt87rhgSc

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/g20/image/attachement/jpg/site1/20090329/0013729c04950b398e4815.jpg

Still not as exciting as Anarchy though…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hdt87rhgSc

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/g20/image/attachement/jpg/site1/20090329/0013729c04950b398e4815.jpg

Still not as exciting as Anarchy though…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hdt87rhgSc

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/g20/image/attachement/jpg/site1/20090329/0013729c04950b398e4815.jpg

I am reminded of the late, sometimes great Robert Anton Wilson, who wrote in an early 1980s article that “Ideologically, of course, I should have voted for Ed Clark, the Libertarian Party candidate; but I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.” That is certainly the type to be!

I am reminded of the late, sometimes great Robert Anton Wilson, who wrote in an early 1980s article that “Ideologically, of course, I should have voted for Ed Clark, the Libertarian Party candidate; but I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.” That is certainly the type to be!

I am reminded of the late, sometimes great Robert Anton Wilson, who wrote in an early 1980s article that “Ideologically, of course, I should have voted for Ed Clark, the Libertarian Party candidate; but I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.” That is certainly the type to be!

I am reminded of the late, sometimes great Robert Anton Wilson, who wrote in an early 1980s article that “Ideologically, of course, I should have voted for Ed Clark, the Libertarian Party candidate; but I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.” That is certainly the type to be!

I am reminded of the late, sometimes great Robert Anton Wilson, who wrote in an early 1980s article that “Ideologically, of course, I should have voted for Ed Clark, the Libertarian Party candidate; but I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.” That is certainly the type to be!

I am reminded of the late, sometimes great Robert Anton Wilson, who wrote in an early 1980s article that “Ideologically, of course, I should have voted for Ed Clark, the Libertarian Party candidate; but I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.” That is certainly the type to be!

I am reminded of the late, sometimes great Robert Anton Wilson, who wrote in an early 1980s article that “Ideologically, of course, I should have voted for Ed Clark, the Libertarian Party candidate; but I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.” That is certainly the type to be!

I am reminded of the late, sometimes great Robert Anton Wilson, who wrote in an early 1980s article that “Ideologically, of course, I should have voted for Ed Clark, the Libertarian Party candidate; but I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.” That is certainly the type to be!

I am reminded of the late, sometimes great Robert Anton Wilson, who wrote in an early 1980s article that “Ideologically, of course, I should have voted for Ed Clark, the Libertarian Party candidate; but I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.” That is certainly the type to be!

Not sure if alliance is the right word. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

It also could be that no party is as it was 40 years ago. The Democratic Party is closer to what is traditionally know as “Republican” than the Republican Party ever will be again. In other words, if the Democratic Party ever started acting like true Democrats then he wouldn’t be saying that.

Not sure if alliance is the right word. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

It also could be that no party is as it was 40 years ago. The Democratic Party is closer to what is traditionally know as “Republican” than the Republican Party ever will be again. In other words, if the Democratic Party ever started acting like true Democrats then he wouldn’t be saying that.

Not sure if alliance is the right word. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

It also could be that no party is as it was 40 years ago. The Democratic Party is closer to what is traditionally know as “Republican” than the Republican Party ever will be again. In other words, if the Democratic Party ever started acting like true Democrats then he wouldn’t be saying that.

Not sure if alliance is the right word. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

It also could be that no party is as it was 40 years ago. The Democratic Party is closer to what is traditionally know as “Republican” than the Republican Party ever will be again. In other words, if the Democratic Party ever started acting like true Democrats then he wouldn’t be saying that.

Not sure if alliance is the right word. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

It also could be that no party is as it was 40 years ago. The Democratic Party is closer to what is traditionally know as “Republican” than the Republican Party ever will be again. In other words, if the Democratic Party ever started acting like true Democrats then he wouldn’t be saying that.

Not sure if alliance is the right word. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

It also could be that no party is as it was 40 years ago. The Democratic Party is closer to what is traditionally know as “Republican” than the Republican Party ever will be again. In other words, if the Democratic Party ever started acting like true Democrats then he wouldn’t be saying that.

Not sure if alliance is the right word. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

It also could be that no party is as it was 40 years ago. The Democratic Party is closer to what is traditionally know as “Republican” than the Republican Party ever will be again. In other words, if the Democratic Party ever started acting like true Democrats then he wouldn’t be saying that.

Not sure if alliance is the right word. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

It also could be that no party is as it was 40 years ago. The Democratic Party is closer to what is traditionally know as “Republican” than the Republican Party ever will be again. In other words, if the Democratic Party ever started acting like true Democrats then he wouldn’t be saying that.

Not sure if alliance is the right word. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

It also could be that no party is as it was 40 years ago. The Democratic Party is closer to what is traditionally know as “Republican” than the Republican Party ever will be again. In other words, if the Democratic Party ever started acting like true Democrats then he wouldn’t be saying that.

You know…it doesn’t take a complete revolution to start change. What we just need is a few key areas galvanized enough to elect a group of serious progressives that can form a ‘bloc’ that the DNC has to bribe with real change..or at least partial changes on the most serious of issues. That alone would be enough to make a difference. Imagine half a dozen Sanders? Or twelve? Imagine the ‘Pelosi’ machine unable to function without throwing a bone in the direction of real progressives? Or imagine progressives not being entirely ignored for once? Its happened before…we just need the will to make it happen again. After all…the last time it clicked, we damned near had the water, air and soil in this country on the road to recovery, energy source investment underway, the dangerous concept that we’re all equals in a free society was hovering on become a permanent way of life, etc etc. Take some lessons from what went wrong last time…and the future doesn’t absolutely have to be a living nightmare.

You know…it doesn’t take a complete revolution to start change. What we just need is a few key areas galvanized enough to elect a group of serious progressives that can form a ‘bloc’ that the DNC has to bribe with real change..or at least partial changes on the most serious of issues. That alone would be enough to make a difference. Imagine half a dozen Sanders? Or twelve? Imagine the ‘Pelosi’ machine unable to function without throwing a bone in the direction of real progressives? Or imagine progressives not being entirely ignored for once? Its happened before…we just need the will to make it happen again. After all…the last time it clicked, we damned near had the water, air and soil in this country on the road to recovery, energy source investment underway, the dangerous concept that we’re all equals in a free society was hovering on become a permanent way of life, etc etc. Take some lessons from what went wrong last time…and the future doesn’t absolutely have to be a living nightmare.

You know…it doesn’t take a complete revolution to start change. What we just need is a few key areas galvanized enough to elect a group of serious progressives that can form a ‘bloc’ that the DNC has to bribe with real change..or at least partial changes on the most serious of issues. That alone would be enough to make a difference. Imagine half a dozen Sanders? Or twelve? Imagine the ‘Pelosi’ machine unable to function without throwing a bone in the direction of real progressives? Or imagine progressives not being entirely ignored for once? Its happened before…we just need the will to make it happen again. After all…the last time it clicked, we damned near had the water, air and soil in this country on the road to recovery, energy source investment underway, the dangerous concept that we’re all equals in a free society was hovering on become a permanent way of life, etc etc. Take some lessons from what went wrong last time…and the future doesn’t absolutely have to be a living nightmare.

You know…it doesn’t take a complete revolution to start change. What we just need is a few key areas galvanized enough to elect a group of serious progressives that can form a ‘bloc’ that the DNC has to bribe with real change..or at least partial changes on the most serious of issues. That alone would be enough to make a difference. Imagine half a dozen Sanders? Or twelve? Imagine the ‘Pelosi’ machine unable to function without throwing a bone in the direction of real progressives? Or imagine progressives not being entirely ignored for once? Its happened before…we just need the will to make it happen again. After all…the last time it clicked, we damned near had the water, air and soil in this country on the road to recovery, energy source investment underway, the dangerous concept that we’re all equals in a free society was hovering on become a permanent way of life, etc etc. Take some lessons from what went wrong last time…and the future doesn’t absolutely have to be a living nightmare.

You know…it doesn’t take a complete revolution to start change. What we just need is a few key areas galvanized enough to elect a group of serious progressives that can form a ‘bloc’ that the DNC has to bribe with real change..or at least partial changes on the most serious of issues. That alone would be enough to make a difference. Imagine half a dozen Sanders? Or twelve? Imagine the ‘Pelosi’ machine unable to function without throwing a bone in the direction of real progressives? Or imagine progressives not being entirely ignored for once? Its happened before…we just need the will to make it happen again. After all…the last time it clicked, we damned near had the water, air and soil in this country on the road to recovery, energy source investment underway, the dangerous concept that we’re all equals in a free society was hovering on become a permanent way of life, etc etc. Take some lessons from what went wrong last time…and the future doesn’t absolutely have to be a living nightmare.

You know…it doesn’t take a complete revolution to start change. What we just need is a few key areas galvanized enough to elect a group of serious progressives that can form a ‘bloc’ that the DNC has to bribe with real change..or at least partial changes on the most serious of issues. That alone would be enough to make a difference. Imagine half a dozen Sanders? Or twelve? Imagine the ‘Pelosi’ machine unable to function without throwing a bone in the direction of real progressives? Or imagine progressives not being entirely ignored for once? Its happened before…we just need the will to make it happen again. After all…the last time it clicked, we damned near had the water, air and soil in this country on the road to recovery, energy source investment underway, the dangerous concept that we’re all equals in a free society was hovering on become a permanent way of life, etc etc. Take some lessons from what went wrong last time…and the future doesn’t absolutely have to be a living nightmare.

You know…it doesn’t take a complete revolution to start change. What we just need is a few key areas galvanized enough to elect a group of serious progressives that can form a ‘bloc’ that the DNC has to bribe with real change..or at least partial changes on the most serious of issues. That alone would be enough to make a difference. Imagine half a dozen Sanders? Or twelve? Imagine the ‘Pelosi’ machine unable to function without throwing a bone in the direction of real progressives? Or imagine progressives not being entirely ignored for once? Its happened before…we just need the will to make it happen again. After all…the last time it clicked, we damned near had the water, air and soil in this country on the road to recovery, energy source investment underway, the dangerous concept that we’re all equals in a free society was hovering on become a permanent way of life, etc etc. Take some lessons from what went wrong last time…and the future doesn’t absolutely have to be a living nightmare.

You know…it doesn’t take a complete revolution to start change. What we just need is a few key areas galvanized enough to elect a group of serious progressives that can form a ‘bloc’ that the DNC has to bribe with real change..or at least partial changes on the most serious of issues. That alone would be enough to make a difference. Imagine half a dozen Sanders? Or twelve? Imagine the ‘Pelosi’ machine unable to function without throwing a bone in the direction of real progressives? Or imagine progressives not being entirely ignored for once? Its happened before…we just need the will to make it happen again. After all…the last time it clicked, we damned near had the water, air and soil in this country on the road to recovery, energy source investment underway, the dangerous concept that we’re all equals in a free society was hovering on become a permanent way of life, etc etc. Take some lessons from what went wrong last time…and the future doesn’t absolutely have to be a living nightmare.

You know…it doesn’t take a complete revolution to start change. What we just need is a few key areas galvanized enough to elect a group of serious progressives that can form a ‘bloc’ that the DNC has to bribe with real change..or at least partial changes on the most serious of issues. That alone would be enough to make a difference. Imagine half a dozen Sanders? Or twelve? Imagine the ‘Pelosi’ machine unable to function without throwing a bone in the direction of real progressives? Or imagine progressives not being entirely ignored for once? Its happened before…we just need the will to make it happen again. After all…the last time it clicked, we damned near had the water, air and soil in this country on the road to recovery, energy source investment underway, the dangerous concept that we’re all equals in a free society was hovering on become a permanent way of life, etc etc. Take some lessons from what went wrong last time…and the future doesn’t absolutely have to be a living nightmare.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

It will be a tiny number, comparatively, but as we’ve seen over the past couple of years, even 1 or 2 Congressional members can become lynchpins on votes that are held along standard party lines. What’s significant is the possibility of progress on halting defense spending bills and other important progressive issues such as ending the war in AG – which is also building right wing support. These kind of coalitions make the members more powerful at key moments and weaken the power of the corporate centrists that occupy both “official” parties, which certainly have the numbers but depend on compromise to win their issues.

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

Right on, Ralph! http://twitter.com/Ralph_Nader

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

From what Ralph and like minded politicians as Congressman Paul are proposing its quite heartening to read that Americans are becoming more interested and dedicated to being Americans than getting involved in “foreign alliances” and influences.

And about time too. We need it for ourselves, our children and future generations of just plain Americans.

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

I will never ally with anarchists, which is what a libertarian is.

If they want to join under strict guidelines of preventing corporate abuse, punishing criminals, banning guns and religion that’s fine. The heart of libertarianism is sociopathy, selfishness and abuse of others for your own gain. Sorry people (and don’t give me the “first do no harm” crap. No one actually abides by it that is a practicing libertarian)

Until they can act like human beings, they can go suck it

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Progressives and Libertarians? To paraphrase a Clint Eastwood line “The Progressives on one side and the Libertarians on the other and me in the middle…uh no, I don’t think so!”

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

Libertarians? Aren’t those the Teabaggers? If so, them whackjobs are anything but anarchists. They’re more like corporate ass kissers and boot lickers but not anarchists

My comments were restricted to Nader…perhaps I should have been more clear..sorry. To his credit Nader was fighting GM, at the time one of the largest corporations in the world. He had courage when nobody else did. And he is not owned by the corporate power elite.

Bribe being the operative word.

um, no. libertarians are not anarchists. most anarchists today (and historically) are leftists or post leftists with extremely harsh critiques of capitalism and industrialism. for current glimpse of the modern anarchist movement see http://www.infoshop.org.

you probably still won’t want an alliance with such radicals, but that’s ok, we don’t want an alliance with soft, do nothing, keyboard banging, couch potatoes either.

An “exciting new political dynamic” in America? Gots to be better than what we’ve got now. Anything would be better than the Demopublican mess we’re quagmired in.

There are three things that every person from liberal to conservative should be able to agree on.
1. Campaign finance/ corporate personhood.
2. The wars.
3. The bizarre distribution of wealth that has created extreme poverty in this country.

If you support any of these things, you are basically anti-human.

There are three things that every person from liberal to conservative should be able to agree on.
1. Campaign finance/ corporate personhood.
2. The wars.
3. The bizarre distribution of wealth that has created extreme poverty in this country.

If you support any of these things, you are basically anti-human.

Unsafe At Any Speed.

1963?

I was learning about how Lucky Strikes were the coolest marching cigarettes on the planet.

Unsafe At Any Speed.

1963?

I was learning about how Lucky Strikes were the coolest marching cigarettes on the planet.

No, anarchists oppose the government.

That’s all anarchists do.

That’s all anarchy is.

No, anarchists oppose the government.

That’s all anarchists do.

That’s all anarchy is.

He was, once upon a time, awesome. Now he has become the Hugh Hefner of politics.
oldswede

He was, once upon a time, awesome. Now he has become the Hugh Hefner of politics.
oldswede

He was, once upon a time, awesome. Now he has become the Hugh Hefner of politics.
oldswede

If you can’t add to a conversation, pleas stay out of the conversation.

It is anti-social to keep adding glib non-sequitors to serious comments

If you can’t add to a conversation, pleas stay out of the conversation.

It is anti-social to keep adding glib non-sequitors to serious comments

If you can’t add to a conversation, pleas stay out of the conversation.

It is anti-social to keep adding glib non-sequitors to serious comments

I already consider myself a Social Libertarian, and I know there is very little difference between my views and those over at http://www.antiwar.com or frontporchrepublic.com just to name two rarely cited libertarian websites. Noam Chomsky + Bernie Sanders + Ron Paul = I’m f**kin’ down.

I already consider myself a Social Libertarian, and I know there is very little difference between my views and those over at http://www.antiwar.com or frontporchrepublic.com just to name two rarely cited libertarian websites. Noam Chomsky + Bernie Sanders + Ron Paul = I’m f**kin’ down.

I already consider myself a Social Libertarian, and I know there is very little difference between my views and those over at http://www.antiwar.com or frontporchrepublic.com just to name two rarely cited libertarian websites. Noam Chomsky + Bernie Sanders + Ron Paul = I’m f**kin’ down.

You saying it’s NOT TAKING FOREVER?

Or just non sequiter.

You saying it’s NOT TAKING FOREVER?

Or just non sequiter.

You saying it’s NOT TAKING FOREVER?

Or just non sequiter.

sorry, but you don’t seem to know what you are talking about. go to http://www.infoshop.org and see for yourself.

and maybe pick up a book by Emma Goldman, Peter Kropotkin or David Watson, to name a few.

and you are having an internet exchange with a former anarchist. so i know what i am talking about.

sorry, but you don’t seem to know what you are talking about. go to http://www.infoshop.org and see for yourself.

and maybe pick up a book by Emma Goldman, Peter Kropotkin or David Watson, to name a few.

and you are having an internet exchange with a former anarchist. so i know what i am talking about.

sorry, but you don’t seem to know what you are talking about. go to http://www.infoshop.org and see for yourself.

and maybe pick up a book by Emma Goldman, Peter Kropotkin or David Watson, to name a few.

and you are having an internet exchange with a former anarchist. so i know what i am talking about.

sorry, but you don’t seem to know what you are talking about. go to http://www.infoshop.org and see for yourself.

and maybe pick up a book by Emma Goldman, Peter Kropotkin or David Watson, to name a few.

and you are having an internet exchange with a former anarchist. so i know what i am talking about.

sorry, but you don’t seem to know what you are talking about. go to http://www.infoshop.org and see for yourself.

and maybe pick up a book by Emma Goldman, Peter Kropotkin or David Watson, to name a few.

and you are having an internet exchange with a former anarchist. so i know what i am talking about.

Nobody will say it but…its all gone so fr right, its coming ’round to the Left. It has to go there Ralph….right?

Nobody will say it but…its all gone so fr right, its coming ’round to the Left. It has to go there Ralph….right?

Nobody will say it but…its all gone so fr right, its coming ’round to the Left. It has to go there Ralph….right?

Nobody will say it but…its all gone so fr right, its coming ’round to the Left. It has to go there Ralph….right?

No, I just looked on Wikipedia.

I’m right, and you’re not.

“Anarchy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Anarchy (disambiguation).

This article is part of the
Politics series
Forms of government

Anarchy (from Greek: ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, “without ruler”) may refer to any of the following:

* “No rulership or enforced authority.”[1]
* “A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder).”[2]
* “Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder.”[3]
* “Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere.”[4]
* “Acting without waiting for instructions or official permission… The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this.” [5]
* Anarchy is the basic rule of a no rule society.

Greek for “without ruler.”

Whatever you WERE it wasn’t an Anarchist.

No, I just looked on Wikipedia.

I’m right, and you’re not.

“Anarchy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Anarchy (disambiguation).

This article is part of the
Politics series
Forms of government

Anarchy (from Greek: ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, “without ruler”) may refer to any of the following:

* “No rulership or enforced authority.”[1]
* “A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder).”[2]
* “Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder.”[3]
* “Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere.”[4]
* “Acting without waiting for instructions or official permission… The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this.” [5]
* Anarchy is the basic rule of a no rule society.

Greek for “without ruler.”

Whatever you WERE it wasn’t an Anarchist.

No, I just looked on Wikipedia.

I’m right, and you’re not.

“Anarchy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Anarchy (disambiguation).

This article is part of the
Politics series
Forms of government

Anarchy (from Greek: ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, “without ruler”) may refer to any of the following:

* “No rulership or enforced authority.”[1]
* “A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder).”[2]
* “Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder.”[3]
* “Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere.”[4]
* “Acting without waiting for instructions or official permission… The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this.” [5]
* Anarchy is the basic rule of a no rule society.

Greek for “without ruler.”

Whatever you WERE it wasn’t an Anarchist.

No, I just looked on Wikipedia.

I’m right, and you’re not.

“Anarchy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Anarchy (disambiguation).

This article is part of the
Politics series
Forms of government

Anarchy (from Greek: ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, “without ruler”) may refer to any of the following:

* “No rulership or enforced authority.”[1]
* “A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder).”[2]
* “Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder.”[3]
* “Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere.”[4]
* “Acting without waiting for instructions or official permission… The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this.” [5]
* Anarchy is the basic rule of a no rule society.

Greek for “without ruler.”

Whatever you WERE it wasn’t an Anarchist.

No, I just looked on Wikipedia.

I’m right, and you’re not.

“Anarchy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Anarchy (disambiguation).

This article is part of the
Politics series
Forms of government

Anarchy (from Greek: ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, “without ruler”) may refer to any of the following:

* “No rulership or enforced authority.”[1]
* “A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder).”[2]
* “Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder.”[3]
* “Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere.”[4]
* “Acting without waiting for instructions or official permission… The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this.” [5]
* Anarchy is the basic rule of a no rule society.

Greek for “without ruler.”

Whatever you WERE it wasn’t an Anarchist.

While I agree i would rather pure progressives be in charge, this would be better than the Progressives on one side(marginalized), the libertarians on one side(marginalized) and the corporatists in the middle(in charge), which is what we have now.

While I agree i would rather pure progressives be in charge, this would be better than the Progressives on one side(marginalized), the libertarians on one side(marginalized) and the corporatists in the middle(in charge), which is what we have now.

While I agree i would rather pure progressives be in charge, this would be better than the Progressives on one side(marginalized), the libertarians on one side(marginalized) and the corporatists in the middle(in charge), which is what we have now.

While I agree i would rather pure progressives be in charge, this would be better than the Progressives on one side(marginalized), the libertarians on one side(marginalized) and the corporatists in the middle(in charge), which is what we have now.

While I agree i would rather pure progressives be in charge, this would be better than the Progressives on one side(marginalized), the libertarians on one side(marginalized) and the corporatists in the middle(in charge), which is what we have now.

While I agree i would rather pure progressives be in charge, this would be better than the Progressives on one side(marginalized), the libertarians on one side(marginalized) and the corporatists in the middle(in charge), which is what we have now.

While I agree i would rather pure progressives be in charge, this would be better than the Progressives on one side(marginalized), the libertarians on one side(marginalized) and the corporatists in the middle(in charge), which is what we have now.

I love Sanders and have tons of respect for Ron Paul. Count me in!!

The last political slant test I took called me a Liberaltarian anyway.

And I thought I was the only liberaltarian around…

guess what pal, you (or even Wiki) don’t get to define what Anarchists are. Anarchists define what Anarchists are. and you just wasted a bunch of time as I own more books on Anarchy than you own in books period and am well acquainted with the definitions. Historical and modern Anarchists both identify the government as the puppet and enforcer for the corporations. Hence the opposition to the iron fist of the business class represented by the police state AND opposition to the puppet masters of capitalism and industrialism.

your couch potato do nothing ass does not get to define me. At least I have the fucking spine to put my beliefs into action and go to fucking jail for having the temerity to oppose the $ystem. what you have done, pup? oh, you made a comment on a chat board and looked up something on Wikiwhatever. how progressive. when you get off the couch and actually do something to improve things then you maybe can run your little mouth about how people label themselves.

guess what pal, you (or even Wiki) don’t get to define what Anarchists are. Anarchists define what Anarchists are. and you just wasted a bunch of time as I own more books on Anarchy than you own in books period and am well acquainted with the definitions. Historical and modern Anarchists both identify the government as the puppet and enforcer for the corporations. Hence the opposition to the iron fist of the business class represented by the police state AND opposition to the puppet masters of capitalism and industrialism.

your couch potato do nothing ass does not get to define me. At least I have the fucking spine to put my beliefs into action and go to fucking jail for having the temerity to oppose the $ystem. what you have done, pup? oh, you made a comment on a chat board and looked up something on Wikiwhatever. how progressive. when you get off the couch and actually do something to improve things then you maybe can run your little mouth about how people label themselves.

Are you out of your mind? Ron Paul wants to allow any corporation to make money and Bernie wants the government to make money. If you do ANYTHING Ron Paul wants to do for corporations we’re completely fncked. Bernie is the one that wants to save us from corporations – Ron Paul wants to hold us down and ration the lube while corporations fnck us in the A55.

Are you out of your mind? Ron Paul wants to allow any corporation to make money and Bernie wants the government to make money. If you do ANYTHING Ron Paul wants to do for corporations we’re completely fncked. Bernie is the one that wants to save us from corporations – Ron Paul wants to hold us down and ration the lube while corporations fnck us in the A55.

Or, throw the CEO and board of directors in jail, as the human manifestation of the corporation, whenever they something egregious like destroying the Gulf, or electrocuting soldiers. Can’t have it both ways, plutes!

Or, throw the CEO and board of directors in jail, as the human manifestation of the corporation, whenever they something egregious like destroying the Gulf, or electrocuting soldiers. Can’t have it both ways, plutes!

Unfortunately many of the electorate threw away that chance two months ago and O gave it away too much with corporate acquescences on Health Reform and continuing TARP and GM. Should have let them die and free the People of their bonds.. I was just hoping. Just maybe by 2012 people might wake up.

Unfortunately many of the electorate threw away that chance two months ago and O gave it away too much with corporate acquescences on Health Reform and continuing TARP and GM. Should have let them die and free the People of their bonds.. I was just hoping. Just maybe by 2012 people might wake up.

You got it. You don’t look that old…fab airbrushing…haha

You got it. You don’t look that old…fab airbrushing…haha

You got it. You don’t look that old…fab airbrushing…haha

A good third party is a hybrid of the progresssive ideas, less government in personal affairs (Marijuana laws, gay rights/equality, choice) BUT more government involvement for social programs people need and deserve (Healthcare, Social Security, Education, infrastructure, energy.) The Libertarian ideals are just NOT QUITE there and we have too much corporate baggage with the current Dem party platform (big oil, banks/Wall Street). And the GOPTEAdiots, that’s just a bloody lost cause.

A good third party is a hybrid of the progresssive ideas, less government in personal affairs (Marijuana laws, gay rights/equality, choice) BUT more government involvement for social programs people need and deserve (Healthcare, Social Security, Education, infrastructure, energy.) The Libertarian ideals are just NOT QUITE there and we have too much corporate baggage with the current Dem party platform (big oil, banks/Wall Street). And the GOPTEAdiots, that’s just a bloody lost cause.

A good third party is a hybrid of the progresssive ideas, less government in personal affairs (Marijuana laws, gay rights/equality, choice) BUT more government involvement for social programs people need and deserve (Healthcare, Social Security, Education, infrastructure, energy.) The Libertarian ideals are just NOT QUITE there and we have too much corporate baggage with the current Dem party platform (big oil, banks/Wall Street). And the GOPTEAdiots, that’s just a bloody lost cause.

A book defining Anarchy is not Anarchy.

Two people deciding to make a new Anarchy rule is not Anarchy.

In fact, the very fact that you cannot say stupid shit without somebody saying you are a stupid jizzdrip means you cannot live without a ruler.

Every action has a reaction.

You will always be ruled by this fact.

Every paperback fucking alter-zine won’t change that.

So put away the armband fashion statement.

A book defining Anarchy is not Anarchy.

Two people deciding to make a new Anarchy rule is not Anarchy.

In fact, the very fact that you cannot say stupid shit without somebody saying you are a stupid jizzdrip means you cannot live without a ruler.

Every action has a reaction.

You will always be ruled by this fact.

Every paperback fucking alter-zine won’t change that.

So put away the armband fashion statement.

You don’t know who that is in my pic do you?

You don’t know who that is in my pic do you?

You don’t know who that is in my pic do you?

In theory, I agree and find myself siding with the progressives. The problem is that when it comes to actually carrying out their deeds, they’re just spineless jelly fish just like their grandaddies the Democrats.

In theory, I agree and find myself siding with the progressives. The problem is that when it comes to actually carrying out their deeds, they’re just spineless jelly fish just like their grandaddies the Democrats.

In theory, I agree and find myself siding with the progressives. The problem is that when it comes to actually carrying out their deeds, they’re just spineless jelly fish just like their grandaddies the Democrats.

I like the way your hat holds up that pink stuff.

I like the way your hat holds up that pink stuff.

I like the way your hat holds up that pink stuff.

I like the way your hat holds up that pink stuff.

It’s kind of unfortunate that Ralph is the one saying this. It’s all true, as much of what he has said over the years is — but his saying so tends to put the kiss of death on it …

It’s kind of unfortunate that Ralph is the one saying this. It’s all true, as much of what he has said over the years is — but his saying so tends to put the kiss of death on it …

It’s kind of unfortunate that Ralph is the one saying this. It’s all true, as much of what he has said over the years is — but his saying so tends to put the kiss of death on it …

It’s kind of unfortunate that Ralph is the one saying this. It’s all true, as much of what he has said over the years is — but his saying so tends to put the kiss of death on it …

Sorry to say this but I think Ralph Nader is suffering from the beginning stages of dementia. He is here quoting and evidently siding with the CATO Institute, a think tank that is mostly funded by grants from the Koch Brothers: two men whose political ideology is about as progressive as the wheel. The idea that because Ron Paul supports a reduction in the defense budget or because he is against the wars that he has a lot in common with progressives is good political ink for idiots but if anyone doubts how far right he actually is or thinks that he is progressive, read his heroes.

Read Ludwig von Mises whose picture adorns Ron Paul’s House office, or read F. A. Hayek or Milton Friedman or any of the other principle exponents of the Austrian school, whose ideology Paul expounds and supports. Then come back and talk to me about just how close those Austrian school positions and ideas are to those of progressives. I have read them and they are not only not close–they are absolutely diametrically opposed to every idea that progressives have including the very idea of and nearly all taxation. Taxation for Hayek is simply “coercion” and if you’ve read any of his work you know that for him the most diabolical force in the universe is coercion. All of these people believe in absolute economic freedom and anything that restricts absolute economic freedom, that is freedom to as much money as they can accumulate is “coercion” and bad and to be shunned at all costs by government at all levels.

And any progressive here who thinks that income inequality is at the bottom of our current troubles and thinks that there is some strong link between Ron Paul and progressives really needs to get a clue. The Austrian school thinks that income inequality is not only a good thing but that it should be expanded and that no brakes whatsoever should ever be put on it and that if government has a purpose it is to protect and support income inequality.

Like I said any progressive who thinks that they can support the policies and beliefs of Ron Paul just isn’t familiar enough with those beliefs. I dare any progressive or progressive so-called to read any of these writers/propagandists the Austrian school, and then tell me how much of their dogmatism you can support. Austrian school ideology is the dominant ideology behind the Teaparty. Any progressive who thinks they can support these ideas is not a progressive they are a “regressive.” Read and learn.

Sorry to say this but I think Ralph Nader is suffering from the beginning stages of dementia. He is here quoting and evidently siding with the CATO Institute, a think tank that is mostly funded by grants from the Koch Brothers: two men whose political ideology is about as progressive as the wheel. The idea that because Ron Paul supports a reduction in the defense budget or because he is against the wars that he has a lot in common with progressives is good political ink for idiots but if anyone doubts how far right he actually is or thinks that he is progressive, read his heroes.

Read Ludwig von Mises whose picture adorns Ron Paul’s House office, or read F. A. Hayek or Milton Friedman or any of the other principle exponents of the Austrian school, whose ideology Paul expounds and supports. Then come back and talk to me about just how close those Austrian school positions and ideas are to those of progressives. I have read them and they are not only not close–they are absolutely diametrically opposed to every idea that progressives have including the very idea of and nearly all taxation. Taxation for Hayek is simply “coercion” and if you’ve read any of his work you know that for him the most diabolical force in the universe is coercion. All of these people believe in absolute economic freedom and anything that restricts absolute economic freedom, that is freedom to as much money as they can accumulate is “coercion” and bad and to be shunned at all costs by government at all levels.

And any progressive here who thinks that income inequality is at the bottom of our current troubles and thinks that there is some strong link between Ron Paul and progressives really needs to get a clue. The Austrian school thinks that income inequality is not only a good thing but that it should be expanded and that no brakes whatsoever should ever be put on it and that if government has a purpose it is to protect and support income inequality.

Like I said any progressive who thinks that they can support the policies and beliefs of Ron Paul just isn’t familiar enough with those beliefs. I dare any progressive or progressive so-called to read any of these writers/propagandists the Austrian school, and then tell me how much of their dogmatism you can support. Austrian school ideology is the dominant ideology behind the Teaparty. Any progressive who thinks they can support these ideas is not a progressive they are a “regressive.” Read and learn.

Sorry to say this but I think Ralph Nader is suffering from the beginning stages of dementia. He is here quoting and evidently siding with the CATO Institute, a think tank that is mostly funded by grants from the Koch Brothers: two men whose political ideology is about as progressive as the wheel. The idea that because Ron Paul supports a reduction in the defense budget or because he is against the wars that he has a lot in common with progressives is good political ink for idiots but if anyone doubts how far right he actually is or thinks that he is progressive, read his heroes.

Read Ludwig von Mises whose picture adorns Ron Paul’s House office, or read F. A. Hayek or Milton Friedman or any of the other principle exponents of the Austrian school, whose ideology Paul expounds and supports. Then come back and talk to me about just how close those Austrian school positions and ideas are to those of progressives. I have read them and they are not only not close–they are absolutely diametrically opposed to every idea that progressives have including the very idea of and nearly all taxation. Taxation for Hayek is simply “coercion” and if you’ve read any of his work you know that for him the most diabolical force in the universe is coercion. All of these people believe in absolute economic freedom and anything that restricts absolute economic freedom, that is freedom to as much money as they can accumulate is “coercion” and bad and to be shunned at all costs by government at all levels.

And any progressive here who thinks that income inequality is at the bottom of our current troubles and thinks that there is some strong link between Ron Paul and progressives really needs to get a clue. The Austrian school thinks that income inequality is not only a good thing but that it should be expanded and that no brakes whatsoever should ever be put on it and that if government has a purpose it is to protect and support income inequality.

Like I said any progressive who thinks that they can support the policies and beliefs of Ron Paul just isn’t familiar enough with those beliefs. I dare any progressive or progressive so-called to read any of these writers/propagandists the Austrian school, and then tell me how much of their dogmatism you can support. Austrian school ideology is the dominant ideology behind the Teaparty. Any progressive who thinks they can support these ideas is not a progressive they are a “regressive.” Read and learn.

Sorry to say this but I think Ralph Nader is suffering from the beginning stages of dementia. He is here quoting and evidently siding with the CATO Institute, a think tank that is mostly funded by grants from the Koch Brothers: two men whose political ideology is about as progressive as the wheel. The idea that because Ron Paul supports a reduction in the defense budget or because he is against the wars that he has a lot in common with progressives is good political ink for idiots but if anyone doubts how far right he actually is or thinks that he is progressive, read his heroes.

Read Ludwig von Mises whose picture adorns Ron Paul’s House office, or read F. A. Hayek or Milton Friedman or any of the other principle exponents of the Austrian school, whose ideology Paul expounds and supports. Then come back and talk to me about just how close those Austrian school positions and ideas are to those of progressives. I have read them and they are not only not close–they are absolutely diametrically opposed to every idea that progressives have including the very idea of and nearly all taxation. Taxation for Hayek is simply “coercion” and if you’ve read any of his work you know that for him the most diabolical force in the universe is coercion. All of these people believe in absolute economic freedom and anything that restricts absolute economic freedom, that is freedom to as much money as they can accumulate is “coercion” and bad and to be shunned at all costs by government at all levels.

And any progressive here who thinks that income inequality is at the bottom of our current troubles and thinks that there is some strong link between Ron Paul and progressives really needs to get a clue. The Austrian school thinks that income inequality is not only a good thing but that it should be expanded and that no brakes whatsoever should ever be put on it and that if government has a purpose it is to protect and support income inequality.

Like I said any progressive who thinks that they can support the policies and beliefs of Ron Paul just isn’t familiar enough with those beliefs. I dare any progressive or progressive so-called to read any of these writers/propagandists the Austrian school, and then tell me how much of their dogmatism you can support. Austrian school ideology is the dominant ideology behind the Teaparty. Any progressive who thinks they can support these ideas is not a progressive they are a “regressive.” Read and learn.

Sorry to say this but I think Ralph Nader is suffering from the beginning stages of dementia. He is here quoting and evidently siding with the CATO Institute, a think tank that is mostly funded by grants from the Koch Brothers: two men whose political ideology is about as progressive as the wheel. The idea that because Ron Paul supports a reduction in the defense budget or because he is against the wars that he has a lot in common with progressives is good political ink for idiots but if anyone doubts how far right he actually is or thinks that he is progressive, read his heroes.

Read Ludwig von Mises whose picture adorns Ron Paul’s House office, or read F. A. Hayek or Milton Friedman or any of the other principle exponents of the Austrian school, whose ideology Paul expounds and supports. Then come back and talk to me about just how close those Austrian school positions and ideas are to those of progressives. I have read them and they are not only not close–they are absolutely diametrically opposed to every idea that progressives have including the very idea of and nearly all taxation. Taxation for Hayek is simply “coercion” and if you’ve read any of his work you know that for him the most diabolical force in the universe is coercion. All of these people believe in absolute economic freedom and anything that restricts absolute economic freedom, that is freedom to as much money as they can accumulate is “coercion” and bad and to be shunned at all costs by government at all levels.

And any progressive here who thinks that income inequality is at the bottom of our current troubles and thinks that there is some strong link between Ron Paul and progressives really needs to get a clue. The Austrian school thinks that income inequality is not only a good thing but that it should be expanded and that no brakes whatsoever should ever be put on it and that if government has a purpose it is to protect and support income inequality.

Like I said any progressive who thinks that they can support the policies and beliefs of Ron Paul just isn’t familiar enough with those beliefs. I dare any progressive or progressive so-called to read any of these writers/propagandists the Austrian school, and then tell me how much of their dogmatism you can support. Austrian school ideology is the dominant ideology behind the Teaparty. Any progressive who thinks they can support these ideas is not a progressive they are a “regressive.” Read and learn.

hey fucktard, when you can make a sentence that makes sense, you can get back to me.

as for now, you are making as much sense as that Loughner asshole.

take the gibberish somewhere else. and either go back to English class or see a shrink.

jesus fucking christ, what the fuck is coming out of public school these days?

can’t you pups write a goddamned sentence? or do you just string along little anecdotes and one liners and consider that a paragraph?

As a doctor, you don’t have RIGHT to my services. That said, if you were to do away with third party payer systems (insurance) and allow an even playing field for alternative and conventional medicine you’d get abundant and effective health care at a fraction of the cost that they currently are.

Taxation to support most programs is based on kind heartedness, but largely an absence of understanding the bigger picture. Why should i have to pay for any healthcare for somebody who eats refined sugar and ends up with diabtetes and all of the other problems that come along with it? Libertarianism works, and a true free market works in providing for those who provide for themselves.

Is this the only way Nader can think of to get attention?

Really? Here’s Paul addressing the GOP in April of last year:
“…unfortunately we have corporatists inside the Republican party and that means you take care of corporations and corporations take over and run the country.”

You’ve been buying into the mainstream media version of what the tea party is and who it makes up. The tea party was actually started by the 9/11 truth movement, which bled and grew with the Ron Paul revolution, which was hijacked by the neocons and neocon puppets. There is a strong undercurrent of the foundations of what the tea party was that is still there and growing, but you wouldn’t know it by looking at what the mainstream media portrays.

Nader and Celente are both correct in their assessment. The best of both will win out in the end….and the best of both won’t be higher taxes and more government programs.

You’ve been buying into the mainstream media version of what the tea party is and who it makes up. The tea party was actually started by the 9/11 truth movement, which bled and grew with the Ron Paul revolution, which was hijacked by the neocons and neocon puppets. There is a strong undercurrent of the foundations of what the tea party was that is still there and growing, but you wouldn’t know it by looking at what the mainstream media portrays.

Nader and Celente are both correct in their assessment. The best of both will win out in the end….and the best of both won’t be higher taxes and more government programs.

I don’t think that Ralph has hand his finger on the pulse of America for a very long time. I think his legacy will be helping Bush steal the presidency in 2000.

It is sad because at one time he had the consumer’s ear in this country. What if….
when he had the chance he could have formed a consumer union that gained enough power to be able to stand up to corporate America. Seems to me that at one time people really listened to him an be could have organized comsumers. Like “Okay nobody buy Chevron thiw seek until they lower the price of gas. Next week we will go after Shell” . Ralph, you coulda made us proud.

I don’t think that Ralph has hand his finger on the pulse of America for a very long time. I think his legacy will be helping Bush steal the presidency in 2000.

It is sad because at one time he had the consumer’s ear in this country. What if….
when he had the chance he could have formed a consumer union that gained enough power to be able to stand up to corporate America. Seems to me that at one time people really listened to him an be could have organized comsumers. Like “Okay nobody buy Chevron thiw seek until they lower the price of gas. Next week we will go after Shell” . Ralph, you coulda made us proud.

In the words of Stan Marsh,”Really??”

In the words of Stan Marsh,”Really??”

In the words of Stan Marsh,”Really??”

the pink stuff is 7 Sisters rock formation in Valley Of Fire …I was out desert hiking when we snapped this

the pink stuff is 7 Sisters rock formation in Valley Of Fire …I was out desert hiking when we snapped this

the pink stuff is 7 Sisters rock formation in Valley Of Fire …I was out desert hiking when we snapped this

I don’t give a shit about what he has to say.

I don’t give a shit about what he has to say.

I don’t give a shit about what he has to say.

I’m usually put in the position of defending Nader.

But this time, I’ll pass.

I’m usually put in the position of defending Nader.

But this time, I’ll pass.

I’m usually put in the position of defending Nader.

But this time, I’ll pass.

I’m usually put in the position of defending Nader.

But this time, I’ll pass.

I’m usually put in the position of defending Nader.

But this time, I’ll pass.

We would have had a much more ‘exciting new political dynamic” had Nader stayed out of the 2000 race, instead of tipping the Electoral College toward Bush and away from the progressive, ecologically-minded Al Gore (who would have been a much better President than Bush II). So based on Nader’s unwise actions then, I cannot be persuaded that the unity of such unlike philosophies is wise now.

We would have had a much more ‘exciting new political dynamic” had Nader stayed out of the 2000 race, instead of tipping the Electoral College toward Bush and away from the progressive, ecologically-minded Al Gore (who would have been a much better President than Bush II). So based on Nader’s unwise actions then, I cannot be persuaded that the unity of such unlike philosophies is wise now.

We would have had a much more ‘exciting new political dynamic” had Nader stayed out of the 2000 race, instead of tipping the Electoral College toward Bush and away from the progressive, ecologically-minded Al Gore (who would have been a much better President than Bush II). So based on Nader’s unwise actions then, I cannot be persuaded that the unity of such unlike philosophies is wise now.

We would have had a much more ‘exciting new political dynamic” had Nader stayed out of the 2000 race, instead of tipping the Electoral College toward Bush and away from the progressive, ecologically-minded Al Gore (who would have been a much better President than Bush II). So based on Nader’s unwise actions then, I cannot be persuaded that the unity of such unlike philosophies is wise now.

*sigh* arguing about definitions again…

Eric, would you please stop pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions? Haven’t you ever read any Noam Chomsky? Anarchy is synonymous with libertarian-socialism!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDHBvQRyOr0
Your (wrong) concept of anarchism is addressed at the very start of the conversation!

*sigh* arguing about definitions again…

Eric, would you please stop pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions? Haven’t you ever read any Noam Chomsky? Anarchy is synonymous with libertarian-socialism!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDHBvQRyOr0
Your (wrong) concept of anarchism is addressed at the very start of the conversation!

*sigh* arguing about definitions again…

Eric, would you please stop pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions? Haven’t you ever read any Noam Chomsky? Anarchy is synonymous with libertarian-socialism!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDHBvQRyOr0
Your (wrong) concept of anarchism is addressed at the very start of the conversation!

*sigh* arguing about definitions again…

Eric, would you please stop pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions? Haven’t you ever read any Noam Chomsky? Anarchy is synonymous with libertarian-socialism!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDHBvQRyOr0
Your (wrong) concept of anarchism is addressed at the very start of the conversation!

*sigh* arguing about definitions again…

Eric, would you please stop pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions? Haven’t you ever read any Noam Chomsky? Anarchy is synonymous with libertarian-socialism!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDHBvQRyOr0
Your (wrong) concept of anarchism is addressed at the very start of the conversation!

“I think his legacy will be helping Bush steal the presidency in 2000.”

Yet everyone continually complains of being locked into a two-party duopoly. Which is it?

“I think his legacy will be helping Bush steal the presidency in 2000.”

Yet everyone continually complains of being locked into a two-party duopoly. Which is it?

“I think his legacy will be helping Bush steal the presidency in 2000.”

Yet everyone continually complains of being locked into a two-party duopoly. Which is it?

“I think his legacy will be helping Bush steal the presidency in 2000.”

Yet everyone continually complains of being locked into a two-party duopoly. Which is it?

“I think his legacy will be helping Bush steal the presidency in 2000.”

Yet everyone continually complains of being locked into a two-party duopoly. Which is it?

“I think his legacy will be helping Bush steal the presidency in 2000.”

Yet everyone continually complains of being locked into a two-party duopoly. Which is it?

Double post, but…

bickle, STOP pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions! See my response to Eric below (above?).

Double post, but…

bickle, STOP pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions! See my response to Eric below (above?).

Double post, but…

bickle, STOP pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions! See my response to Eric below (above?).

Double post, but…

bickle, STOP pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions! See my response to Eric below (above?).

Double post, but…

bickle, STOP pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions! See my response to Eric below (above?).

Double post, but…

bickle, STOP pigeonholing libertarians and anarchists with your preconceived notions! See my response to Eric below (above?).

“That said, if you were to do away with third party payer systems (insurance) and allow an even playing field for alternative and conventional medicine you’d get abundant and effective health care at a fraction of the cost that they currently are.”

A fraction? 99.99/100ths?

“That said, if you were to do away with third party payer systems (insurance) and allow an even playing field for alternative and conventional medicine you’d get abundant and effective health care at a fraction of the cost that they currently are.”

A fraction? 99.99/100ths?

“That said, if you were to do away with third party payer systems (insurance) and allow an even playing field for alternative and conventional medicine you’d get abundant and effective health care at a fraction of the cost that they currently are.”

A fraction? 99.99/100ths?

“That said, if you were to do away with third party payer systems (insurance) and allow an even playing field for alternative and conventional medicine you’d get abundant and effective health care at a fraction of the cost that they currently are.”

A fraction? 99.99/100ths?

“That said, if you were to do away with third party payer systems (insurance) and allow an even playing field for alternative and conventional medicine you’d get abundant and effective health care at a fraction of the cost that they currently are.”

A fraction? 99.99/100ths?

That is an inevitability. The question is when?

That is an inevitability. The question is when?

That is an inevitability. The question is when?

That is an inevitability. The question is when?

That is an inevitability. The question is when?

That is an inevitability. The question is when?

That is an inevitability. The question is when?

Ralph’s ego is THE reason that America and the world had to duffer 8 years of NEOCON rule and owes the Country and the world an apology!

Ralph’s ego is THE reason that America and the world had to duffer 8 years of NEOCON rule and owes the Country and the world an apology!

Ralph’s ego is THE reason that America and the world had to duffer 8 years of NEOCON rule and owes the Country and the world an apology!

Ralph’s ego is THE reason that America and the world had to duffer 8 years of NEOCON rule and owes the Country and the world an apology!

Ralph’s ego is THE reason that America and the world had to duffer 8 years of NEOCON rule and owes the Country and the world an apology!

Ralph’s ego is THE reason that America and the world had to duffer 8 years of NEOCON rule and owes the Country and the world an apology!

Ralph’s ego is THE reason that America and the world had to duffer 8 years of NEOCON rule and owes the Country and the world an apology!

Yes, there is certainly common ground to be found but the media is doing a fan-fucking-tastic job of keeping the country divided into enemy tribes.

Yes, there is certainly common ground to be found but the media is doing a fan-fucking-tastic job of keeping the country divided into enemy tribes.

Yes, there is certainly common ground to be found but the media is doing a fan-fucking-tastic job of keeping the country divided into enemy tribes.

Yes, there is certainly common ground to be found but the media is doing a fan-fucking-tastic job of keeping the country divided into enemy tribes.

Yes, there is certainly common ground to be found but the media is doing a fan-fucking-tastic job of keeping the country divided into enemy tribes.

Yes, there is certainly common ground to be found but the media is doing a fan-fucking-tastic job of keeping the country divided into enemy tribes.

Yes, there is certainly common ground to be found but the media is doing a fan-fucking-tastic job of keeping the country divided into enemy tribes.

Indeed, a continental-sized crater 75′ deep would be an improvement over the present state of politics in America.

Indeed, a continental-sized crater 75′ deep would be an improvement over the present state of politics in America.

Indeed, a continental-sized crater 75′ deep would be an improvement over the present state of politics in America.

Indeed, a continental-sized crater 75′ deep would be an improvement over the present state of politics in America.

Indeed, a continental-sized crater 75′ deep would be an improvement over the present state of politics in America.

Indeed, a continental-sized crater 75′ deep would be an improvement over the present state of politics in America.

Indeed, a continental-sized crater 75′ deep would be an improvement over the present state of politics in America.

Indeed, a continental-sized crater 75′ deep would be an improvement over the present state of politics in America.

Really? And here’s that psycho Ron Paul wanting to give corporations more power just before Christmas http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/ron-paul-calls-fed-monopoly-seeks-competitor-dollar-standard/

Really? And here’s that psycho Ron Paul wanting to give corporations more power just before Christmas http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/ron-paul-calls-fed-monopoly-seeks-competitor-dollar-standard/

Really? And here’s that psycho Ron Paul wanting to give corporations more power just before Christmas http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/ron-paul-calls-fed-monopoly-seeks-competitor-dollar-standard/

Really? And here’s that psycho Ron Paul wanting to give corporations more power just before Christmas http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/ron-paul-calls-fed-monopoly-seeks-competitor-dollar-standard/

Really? And here’s that psycho Ron Paul wanting to give corporations more power just before Christmas http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/ron-paul-calls-fed-monopoly-seeks-competitor-dollar-standard/

Really? And here’s that psycho Ron Paul wanting to give corporations more power just before Christmas http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/ron-paul-calls-fed-monopoly-seeks-competitor-dollar-standard/

Really? And here’s that psycho Ron Paul wanting to give corporations more power just before Christmas http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/ron-paul-calls-fed-monopoly-seeks-competitor-dollar-standard/

Really? And here’s that psycho Ron Paul wanting to give corporations more power just before Christmas http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/ron-paul-calls-fed-monopoly-seeks-competitor-dollar-standard/

NO S**T well said Pennsylvanianne, That was the first thing that came to my mind when I read Nader. It will take allot more talking from Nader to make me a believer. He has always had his hand in things and opinions to match.

NO S**T well said Pennsylvanianne, That was the first thing that came to my mind when I read Nader. It will take allot more talking from Nader to make me a believer. He has always had his hand in things and opinions to match.

NO S**T well said Pennsylvanianne, That was the first thing that came to my mind when I read Nader. It will take allot more talking from Nader to make me a believer. He has always had his hand in things and opinions to match.

NO S**T well said Pennsylvanianne, That was the first thing that came to my mind when I read Nader. It will take allot more talking from Nader to make me a believer. He has always had his hand in things and opinions to match.

NO S**T well said Pennsylvanianne, That was the first thing that came to my mind when I read Nader. It will take allot more talking from Nader to make me a believer. He has always had his hand in things and opinions to match.

NO S**T well said Pennsylvanianne, That was the first thing that came to my mind when I read Nader. It will take allot more talking from Nader to make me a believer. He has always had his hand in things and opinions to match.

NO S**T well said Pennsylvanianne, That was the first thing that came to my mind when I read Nader. It will take allot more talking from Nader to make me a believer. He has always had his hand in things and opinions to match.

NO S**T well said Pennsylvanianne, That was the first thing that came to my mind when I read Nader. It will take allot more talking from Nader to make me a believer. He has always had his hand in things and opinions to match.

Please repost this information when the topic is appropriate. Most of the Baggers and Libertarians have no clue about the under pinning’s of Dr. Paul’s philosophy!

Please repost this information when the topic is appropriate. Most of the Baggers and Libertarians have no clue about the under pinning’s of Dr. Paul’s philosophy!

Please repost this information when the topic is appropriate. Most of the Baggers and Libertarians have no clue about the under pinning’s of Dr. Paul’s philosophy!

Please repost this information when the topic is appropriate. Most of the Baggers and Libertarians have no clue about the under pinning’s of Dr. Paul’s philosophy!

Please repost this information when the topic is appropriate. Most of the Baggers and Libertarians have no clue about the under pinning’s of Dr. Paul’s philosophy!

Please repost this information when the topic is appropriate. Most of the Baggers and Libertarians have no clue about the under pinning’s of Dr. Paul’s philosophy!

Please repost this information when the topic is appropriate. Most of the Baggers and Libertarians have no clue about the under pinning’s of Dr. Paul’s philosophy!

Please repost this information when the topic is appropriate. Most of the Baggers and Libertarians have no clue about the under pinning’s of Dr. Paul’s philosophy!

yes, its true, but really if we had multiple choice ballots, electing a third party candidate wouldnt be wasting your vote. you pick you choices in order, and a loss defaults to the next preference.

nadar isnt the problem, a two party system is the problen

yes, its true, but really if we had multiple choice ballots, electing a third party candidate wouldnt be wasting your vote. you pick you choices in order, and a loss defaults to the next preference.

nadar isnt the problem, a two party system is the problen

yes, its true, but really if we had multiple choice ballots, electing a third party candidate wouldnt be wasting your vote. you pick you choices in order, and a loss defaults to the next preference.

nadar isnt the problem, a two party system is the problen

yes, its true, but really if we had multiple choice ballots, electing a third party candidate wouldnt be wasting your vote. you pick you choices in order, and a loss defaults to the next preference.

nadar isnt the problem, a two party system is the problen

yes, its true, but really if we had multiple choice ballots, electing a third party candidate wouldnt be wasting your vote. you pick you choices in order, and a loss defaults to the next preference.

nadar isnt the problem, a two party system is the problen

yes, its true, but really if we had multiple choice ballots, electing a third party candidate wouldnt be wasting your vote. you pick you choices in order, and a loss defaults to the next preference.

nadar isnt the problem, a two party system is the problen

yes, its true, but really if we had multiple choice ballots, electing a third party candidate wouldnt be wasting your vote. you pick you choices in order, and a loss defaults to the next preference.

nadar isnt the problem, a two party system is the problen

yes, its true, but really if we had multiple choice ballots, electing a third party candidate wouldnt be wasting your vote. you pick you choices in order, and a loss defaults to the next preference.

nadar isnt the problem, a two party system is the problen

Wikipedia! The most authoritative source of information in the universe this of Dianetics. Clearly the argument is settled then!

Wikipedia! The most authoritative source of information in the