"Freedom" thread or something

Well, I still don't have a problem with unions in themselves (after all workers do need their rights) I just think it's wrong to have it mandatory to join, likewise it's wrong to have a company not allow it. Workers should have the choice to form one if they want and join if they want.

Most would not anyway, seems to be quite a strong anti union attitude these days and I understand why, my grandparents and mother were forced to join for their jobs and complained all it did was take their money for the union leaders and didn't actually do sh*t. I think it should be there for honest protection from abuse and rights but it's not as necessary as those late 1800's most liberals seem to think we live in

That's good man. Good to lend any tiny bit you can. We can't just complain all the time!
If I'm feeling insane enough by 2014 (and depending how things are going but I assume still in the sh*tter) I may think about it, at the very least to draw some attention.

I have zero political background or insiders (except my barber) but why the hell not?
My district is actually the only truly competitive one in the state (which keeps them drawn to just favor the incumbents) its a pretty moderate, middle class, ethically diverse and republican leaning district so we'll see. Maybe ripe for the revolution 

Well, that's more proof that this thread is the most useful in the entire forum. After all, which other thread has ever made members re-think things? (just try to have a DT-hater stop hating them and see what happens,,,)

ABC "news" just reported that Paul is now "angling for the VP slot on the ticket."  If true, and just go with it as a hypothetical, what would you guys do with a Romney/Paul or Santorum/Paul ticket? 

Does that make it palatable enough or would you still vote for Johnson?

Ya know Teo, I think its bullsh*t.  I do not believe Paul would take the VP slot from these two.  Not that it wouldn't be beneficial to the movement to have that office, it would, but I don't see Paul as the kind of guy to be #2 at this point.  I think he'd run Indie before taking the VP slot.  

Oh it def could, with Paul as VP because he would insist on not being an ornament.  Are you kidding?  He would be damn sure to make his voice heard and actually influence the Prez and policy, esp foreign policy.  I think he absolutely would.  Plus it brings tons of attention to the L party.  It wouldn't make things perfect to Paulites but it would serve net benefit to L principles. 

But I really don't believe the stroy is true.  Sounds like news hype. 

The T wrote: Well, that's more proof that this thread is the most useful in the entire forum. After all, which other thread has ever made members re-think things? (just try to have a DT-hater stop hating them and see what happens,,,)

Well it requires being active.
To try and force people to change beliefs is ridiculous and will always make em dig in more.
I've been questioning things for a while and the talk here was able to help me sort things out. Someone who has no want to think or question themselves wont   Admittedly at first I was here to be a pain and try to prove why big government liberalism is better, but still  I was open minded enough to actually think about your guys' points.

Also kudos to Paul himself. Just finished reading "The Revolution" and "Liberty Defined" which eliminated a lot of doubt I had.

DT is a different beast. I think you could've gotten Ron Paul and Kim Jong IL to make love before changing opinions on DT Which BTW DT still has like...3 good albums (none are 5 star) and a bunch of alright to bad ones and I'll take that to my grave!





Edited by JJLehto - March 17 2012 at 20:08

If by "DT still has like.. 3 good albums" you actually meant 0 then we can agree on that, as well.

Edited by manofmystery - March 17 2012 at 20:51

A good rule of thumb is that if the band/artist began their career after the mid-70s (unless they are named Anglagard, Beardfish, or Titan) then I probably don't enjoy them.  Figures that now is the one time I need my old, last.FM based, sig.  http://www.last.fm/user/manofmystery  I also dislike Genesis .

manofmystery wrote: A good rule of thumb is that if the band/artist began their career after the mid-70s (unless they are named Anglagard, Beardfish, or Titan) then I probably don't enjoy them.  Figures that now is the one time I need my old, last.FM based, sig.  http://www.last.fm/user/manofmystery  I also dislike Genesis .

Damn, shoulda figured you'd be one of the "old = good new = suck" people.
You don't seem to have much taste for metal? Which would explain why nothing from the 90s on appeals to you

God damn I can't figure out why I don't ever remember you. All I can think of is you never talked about music, while I generally only did, or you did when I was on hiatus from this place.




Edited by JJLehto - March 17 2012 at 23:46

If Paul, after his 30 years of bashing both parties, airing the same grievances and voting NO on like everything sold out I guess the only real option is to truly lose all faith and become 100% apathetic

I guess him running as a VP to "get the message out" to an even wider audience isn't so bad a thing, but still seems like bullsh*t. Also if he agreed to VP with Santorum I may actually bash my face in :(