Great post degenerategambler. I think that many people are becoming enlightened as to scam that is the federal reserve. The federal reserve act of 1913, installed by Woodrow Wilson , is one of the most treacherous acts ever committed.
Essentially, in an oversimplistic explanation, what the act did was take the gold standard away, which meant the money was "real" and was backed by something tangible, and they replaced it with "promisarry notes" that are created by foreign bankers. Essentially, the foreign banks create money out of thin air, and then they "lend" it to us, with interest. So what happens is they not only get paid back the loaned money, but they get paid interest, for something that they make . One of the bankers who were given control of the money was the Rothchilds. I'm not going to go off on them in this post, but feel free to look into that family.
If there are people who want to vote for Rep. Paul, be sure to check out his website ( ronpaul2008.com) to see if you need to register by a deadline to be able to vote in the primary of your particular state. I know that New York has a deadline of this friday on Oct. 12th. In some states, if you are not registered as a republican, you will not be alowed to vote in the republican primary.
if there is anyone here that wants to defend the federal reserve act, i would certainly enjoy reading that point of view, as i'm curious as to why anyone could think that was a good thing, but i will respectively read someone's opinion.
As far as a response to Count Zero's critisism of Paul, i wont really get into the Marc Emery thing, although if it was quoted by a spokesman, chances are the details of the situation might have been vague, but i do know that Paul wants to abolish the DEA, so things like that woudn't occur.
As far as the whole pro-life/pro-choice issue, lets not start that debate, but i think you need to realize Zero that Paul, who is a gynecologist and has delivered more than 4,000 babies, has stated that to protect liberty, we must protect life. So even though his personal view is pro-life, from a legal standpoint, all he has maintained, is that abortion should be a state by state legislative policy. He doesn't believe that the Federal Government should impose a federal law on that issue, because it is not stated in the constitution that the Federal Government has that authority, which would be consistent in his strict constitutional adherence.
So while he believes that abortion should not be federally legalized, he also feels that the federal government should not have the authority to make it illegal either, which would give complete legislative power in that area, to the respective states. Hence, it would probably be legal in NY, MA,CA,CT, NJ,IL, and a few others, and be illegal in others. I'm assuming your a pro-choice person Zero, and would still find this distasteful, but i just wanted to clarify the position.  |