| ||||
| ||||
| Moderated by: Joe Kelley |
|
||||||||||||||
| Paul/Kucinich | Rating: 
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 11:45 am |
|
1st Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=kucinich+Ron+Paul http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Paul+Kucinich http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Dennis+Paul+Ron+Kucinich&btnG=Search Results 1 - 10 of about 1,250,000 for Dennis Paul Ron Kucinich Examples: http://blog.case.edu/singham/2007/05/17/presidential_candidates_ron_paul_and_dennis_kucinich In the Republican and Democratic primaries, Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) are the only ones who opposed the Iraq war authorization act in 2002 and both have been calling for US troops to be withdrawn and closing of the bases. http://gregplancich.newsvine.com/_news/2007/03/13/611574-america-needs-a-ron-paul-and-dennis-kucinich-unity-ticket
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_jay_esbe_070312_america_needs_a_ron_.htm There is another Congressman, who’s a Democrat, and more importantly, one of the most principled Progressives in Congress; Dennis Kucinich. Although portrayed as the epitome of “the left”, Kucinich embraces virtually the same “America first” old-school nationalism and populist bent that Ron Paul embraces in terms of major issues (like war and unfair trade). Kucinich is obviously more of an internationalist in terms of his view of the U.N., but the core values of both men are remarkably similar in their recognition of the fundamental nature of America as the Founders envisioned. This is only a partial list, but these are what I believe to be key elements that must be addressed to save the Republic. A third party unity ticket between the old-school Republican Ron Paul, and the old-school Progressive/populist Dennis Kucinich, would have the potential to draw tens of millions of voters from both parties: Democrats who’re onto the DLC’s corporate globalist game, and Republicans who’re onto the same thing. I believe that a majority of Americans, either actually know what’s wrong with the country as it exists today, or would recognize the problem through the solutions, that a third party candidacy which committed itself to solving the big problems, and not campaigning on the minor ones, could topple the established order, and actually make this country resemble it’s stated ideals. Time for a quote? http://www.quotedb.com/quotes/1303 "It ain't over till it's over." Last edited on Fri May 25th, 2007 01:59 pm by Joe Kelley |
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 02:08 pm |
|
2nd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://kucinich.us/contact I sent a message: Please consider combining your power with Ron Paul. Example: http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_jay_esbe_070312_america_needs_a_ron_.htm
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 02:10 pm |
|
3rd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/html/Contact_fx.html E-mail sent: Please consider combining your power with Dennis Kucinich. Example: http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_jay_esbe_070312_america_needs_a_ron_.htm
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 03:10 pm |
|
4th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://your-rights.com/permalink/649/yahoo!_conveniently_omits_presidential_candidates!.html
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Jun 25th, 2007 09:06 am |
|
5th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/silber/silber10.html The Empire of Clowns Continues on Its Murderous, Genocidal Path
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Jun 25th, 2007 09:23 am |
|
6th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Two people – two – voted against the House resolution, Kucinich and Ron Paul. Of course, we all know they're just silly people, laughingstocks in fact. They aren't "serious." If you aren't committed to American hegemony, world empire, and the unprovoked murder of possibly millions of people, you aren't "serious." So they should shut up and go away somewhere.
I can write FUCK. Anyway - "We" are many people who have done almost everything right and nothing wrong. "We" have not tortured. "We" are being tortured. "We" have not murdered. "We" are being slowly murdered. The problem is falsehood; the solution is found while finding truth. It is TRUE that Kucinich and Paul are on "Our" side. Two is MUCH BETTER THAN ZERO. The fat lady has not sung yet. "We" the species continues to survive despite the combined actions of the Neo-con men. It is past time to hold them accountable. Why does Ron Paul not support Impeachment? Why does Kucinich support Gun Control? If those two won't slow down the Dooms Day Parade, then, someone else must. Every little bit helps - no? Last edited on Mon Jun 25th, 2007 09:32 am by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jul 14th, 2007 06:58 pm |
|
7th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Why can't these two bridge the gap? If Kucinich can sign onto Paul's bill to end the war and Paul can sign onto Kucinich's bill to impeach the torturing murderers, then, we can all PROFIT no?
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jul 14th, 2007 07:02 pm |
|
8th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/silber/silber11.html
How about some leadership? Seriously now; how about someone stepping up and starting a process that accounts for those monsters who are currently torturing and mass murdering and, at the same time, someone starting the process of bringing the troops home? Are the two incompatible? What is going on here? I got to the part, in the work by Arthur Silber, where he poo poos Paul Craig Roberts's work and I have to step in. I will send a challenge to Arthur if he has an e-mail link. The people need a clear rationality for acting. That rationality is 'profit'. I don't mean, specifically, riches and wealth and/or something for nothing. I mean 'profit' as a simple end or desired result as a result of their actions. The carrot must be visible and it must be attainable. A vague image of something that might be a carrot that is attached to what looks like a stick won't do - ever. What is needed is Energy Currency or, for those who read my work, Power-Independence. A shorter term, meaning the same thing, is LIBERTY. The PLAN: A. Regain control of the NATIONS currency. B. Back the NATIONS currency with the NATIONS ENERGY C. Impeach the criminals from a position of power gained from control of the NATIONS ENERGY CURRENCY D. Stop torture and mass murder (bring the troops home). From a position of powerlessness the people are power less. We are not as stupid as the politicians and talking heads lead us to believe. What we need is power and we must have more power than the crimnal mass murderers. This isn't that tough. The criminal torturing mass murderers get their power by transfering control of our ability to create wealth. They do that by manipulating the National (Global reserve) currency. That is step one. Nothing will happen that isn't in the best "interest" of those who have this power until that power returns to the people and/or the people's representatives. This is not a catch-22 situation. It is a simple matter of defining the carrot and knowing how to get the carrot. Get it? Last edited on Sat Jul 14th, 2007 07:23 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jul 14th, 2007 07:24 pm |
|
9th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I sent an e-mail to Arthur:
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jul 14th, 2007 07:42 pm |
|
10th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I finished reading Arthur's piece. Clearly he feels that 'they' are too dumb to be trusted. "We", on the other hand, can authorize an effective remedy. We need to control the power that we make and we need to invest our power into the creation of more power. We need to create more power than ever before and on a scale never dreamed of before. We need more power than the power held by those who now control the flow of oil and the flow of currency. We need our own Energy Currency and we can compete against the oil backed (and subsidized with our wealth) federal reserve currency. A program to encourage energy (power) production on an individual level (tax breaks like NO INCOME TAX FOR THOSE WHO INVEST IN SOLAR PANELS, WIND MILLS, AND ELECTRIC CARS, or produce, sell, or have anything to do with ENERGY CURRENCY production (including food energy) can begin to turn this thing around where those who produce wealth are those who control wealth. Then people will have power behind thier votes - they have something that means something and something that carries a strong message - a real vote. If you cannot grasp the concept of Energy Currency, then, I can help. Think Petro/Dollar. How does anyone in the world compete against the Petro/Dollar - ask Mosadeh and Chavez. Gain more power or succumb. If the LAW allows taxes to be paid with Energy (kilowats), then, what happens? Do you get it or are you the stupid one?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jul 17th, 2007 03:06 pm |
|
11th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer160.htmlWhy They Won't Impeach In that entire 'piece' I didn't read one mention of Dennis Kucinich. Why? Why was Ron Paul mentioned? "They" must mean "Democrats"? "They" must mean the bad guys. The good guys would do the right thing? What ever happened to Ron Paul having a chat with Dennis Kucinich concerning anthing? Isn't it possible that Dennis Kucunich may have asked Ron Paul if Ron Paul would, in fact, IMPEACH! Why not? The answer appears to be self-evidently a bad case of falsehood.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jul 20th, 2007 03:09 pm |
|
12th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/fisk3.htmlWhy they would want to do such things is explained with hand-wavy responses and hyperbole. Attempting to get a net neutrality proponent to give a concise definition or rational argument to support the fear-mongering is like pulling teeth with a set of rusty pliers. This is another case of the pot calling the kettle black. I'll send the author a challenge. We will see if the rusty pliers work. In this age the 'talking heads' have to open a channel to all challengers because their censorship of challengers will be easily seen for what it is - exactly. Censorship of fact is not ignorance. Claiming to be ignorant when exposed to fact is falsehood, lies, fraud, crime, and stupidity. Net Neutrality is a term used to describe an issue whereby people are combining power to defeat people who are combining power. On side A are the people combining power to gain control of the medium of exchange that is now popularly known as "The Internet". On side B are the people combining power to gain control of the same power. The difference between side A and side B is a principle. Side A wants to use their power to transfer purchasing power (wealth) from those who create it to those who have the power to gain control (and maintain control) of the medium of exchange that is now popularly known as "The Internet". Side B wants to use their power to defend against Side A. Now let's inspect some of the data being injected into the current debate on this issue to see if the data comes from side A or B. NN proponents are quite certain that at any moment AT&T, "Southwestern Bell", AOL, and any number of ISPs and bandwidth providers, are going to suddenly start preventing their customers from visiting sites or accessing services. Why they would want to do such things is explained with hand-wavy responses and hyperbole. The above data is ignorant only if the person creating the above actually doesn't know why Side B is concerned about this issue. If the person above does know why Side B is concerned about this issue, then, the person is lying, misrepresenting, falsifying, and discrediting anyone on side B with the above falsehood. At this moment in time there exists a number of competitors on our planet that focus their time and energy toward gaining greater market share in the business of connecting people through a medium of exchange that is now popularly called: The Internet. The competitor who gains more market share can divide the costs of providing access to The Internet to a larger number of customers. Example: Internet provider A has one customer Internet provider B has 6 billion customers Internet provider A must charge all costs to one customer. Internet provider B divides all costs by 6 billion. If internet provider A wishes to upgrade to fiber optics, then, internet provider A must charge all costs of that upgrade to the one customer. If internet provider B wishes to upgrade to fiber optics, then, internet provider B must charge all costs by 6 billion. My example intends to illustrate three things: Division of labor Specialization Economies of Scale If you are incapable of understanding how those three things work, then, you may be fooled by people on either side of this issue. Currently, at this time, and into the future, The Internet is a battle ground for competition between internet providers seeking a larger portion of Market Share because a larger portion of Market Share is POWERFUL. The costs can be divided by a larger number of customers. The provider with a larger market share has more POWER. The provider with a larger market share can utilize greater power to gain more power over the provider with lower market share (less customers adding to PURCHASING POWER). There are two main investment possibilities available for any competitor in The Internet provider business. A. Reduce costs (for the same or better service) B. Invest in political power Choice A will easily be seen as The internet becomes less expensive, faster, more efficient, and more powerful as a tool used by individuals who have immediate control over their ability to transfer data with anyone, anywhere, on the Planet Earth (without the slightest difficulty). Choice B will easily be seen as The Internet becomes restricted, censored, costly, dumbed down, 'legalized', regulated, infringed upon, choked off, stifled, 'licensed', 'registered', and a host of other obvious changes to The Internet that does not exist or did not exist when The Internet first became The Internet The issue of Net Neutrality is a fight between forces A and forces B. If the future brings a world where Net Neutrality is no longer an issue, then, there are two possible reasons for this to happen. A. The cost of access to communicate with anyone anywhere on the planet has reached a practical zero. Anyone at any time can instantly communicate with anyone anywhere on the planet for practically no cost whatsoever (beyond a simple universal fee). Anyone can transfer any data intact to anyone else on the planet without any interference from anyone anywhere. B. The cost of access to communicate with anyone anywhere on the planet is so high that only those having political power have this power to communicate with anyone anywhere on the planet. Those people who represent side A want no part of political power beyond the power required to defend against side B. If you still do not understand the Net Neutrality Issue after reading the words above, then, you can ask questions and you can Google the Issue in an effort to gain the power of knowledge because, now, The Internet isn't destroyed (yet) by the forces of side B. I'll send the challenge to the author of the link above and see what happens (while I read the rest of his 'article'). http://www.power-independence.com/view_topic.php?id=339&forum_id=6&jump_to=1100 Sent at 12:00 PM my time Friday, July 30, 2007 Back to Fisk: Net Neutrality proponents want us to believe that in spite of market forces dictating that content and destination restrictions are not good for business, they will one day defy all logic and start engaging in the practice. A Straw Man argument can be seen easily. The creator of the Straw Man can't quote from his creation. The creator of the Straw-Man, like a ventriloquist, is the voice of the Straw-Man. The concern is either A or B. A. Political control over the Internet where political power enforces costs upon people who utilize The Internet. B. Political control over the Internet where no one enforces any political control over The Internet - with one exception - no one can enforce political control upon The Internet - no one. My guess is that Robert Fisk has imagined a third choice: C. No political power exists on the Planet Earth. He can explain his perspective at will. I sent him a challenge. I have to agree with the perspective that Net Neutrality is a dead issue because the enforcement of political power upon The Internet is all but impossible; however - it is all but impossible to imagine how political power can become so powerful as change the meaning of the word 'democracy' from 'universality' into 'torture and mass murder'. Example: The United States is spreading democracy in Iraq. This issue comes down to a very basic battle between falsehood and reality. If The Internet allows Iraqi victims of 'democracy spreading' to send data to the rest of the world without censorship, then, reality will win. I think reality will win. I think Robert Fisk is right when his perspective communicates how The Internet will win against politics. I do not share any perspective that apologizes for torturing mass murderers hiding behind "limited liability Corporation" legal extortion. When the Market Share reaches an economy of scale where purchasing power reaches a capacity to utilize political power, then, there is room for concern and that, if I am not mistaken, is the concern raised in the issued called Net Neutrality. Side A does not want any political power forced into The Internet - at all. How can political power be kept out of The Internet? If the answer is "don't worry about it", then, I suspect that the answer is a political falsehood. In America there are plenty of indicators pointing toward an increase in Political Power being injected into The Internet and this can be seen simply. What is the minimum cost in America required to gain access to The Internet? What is the quality of internet access in America (net speed)? If American costs are higher and the quality of connection is lower compared to any other country, then, that measures, easily and precisely, the level of influence exerted by people utilizing political power upon The Internet. Even if the country compared to America is one where people are taxed and The Internet is subsidized, even so, the cost per individual and the quality of the connection will measure total political power forced into The Internet. The higher the level of Political Force the higher will be the individual costs and the lower will be the quality of the connection to The Internet. Net Neutrality is an issue because costs are higher where there is no reason for them to be higher and quality is lower when there is no reason for quality to be lower. The real reason is the influence of political power explaining, causing, affecting, the costs and the quality of The Internet upon each individual utilizing The Internet. When costs and quality reach their universal limits for everyone, then, that current event will signal the elimination of political power. When costs increase to a level where only the politically powerful have access to The Internet, then, that current event will signal domination by political power. Is that not simple? Time Warner/AOL owns the equipment and network they've built. Robert Fisk is spreading falsehood. He may be ignorant of this fact. "Time Warner/AOL" is a political entity known as a 'limited liability' corporation. "Time Warner/AOL" cannot "own" anything. People "own". As a matter of convenience the group of people 'owning' something can be grouped into one group and described as one group and the one group can 'share' ownership of one thing or many things. Does Robert Fisk intend to apologize for all the injuries caused by the people 'owning' "Time Warner/AOL"? How many injuries were caused by the people ‘owning’ “Time Warner/AOL” as those people spread falsehood directly leading to torture and mass murder in Iraq? Last edited on Fri Jul 20th, 2007 04:23 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jul 28th, 2007 10:24 pm |
|
13th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Ron_Paul_teams_up_with_Dem_0724.html
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Current time is 01:38 pm | |
| Power Independence > News > News > Paul/Kucinich | Top |
