This guy couldn’t reason his way out of a wet paper bag. And his subhead quote, intended of course to frighten principled anti-war people away from Dr. Paul, is dead-on;
“Welcome to Dr. Ron Paul’s (R.-Tx) prescription for America. If he ever becomes President, you won’t recognize the place.”
via Andrew Reinbach: President Ron Paul? Ron Paul and the John Birch Society.
@ Google – Hope this means we won’t have to censor ourselves too, LOL;
“RepRap is a free desktop 3D printer capable of printing plastic objects. Since many parts of RepRap are made from plastic and RepRap can print those parts, RepRap is a self-replicating machine – one that anyone can build given time and materials. It also means that – if you’ve got a RepRap – you can print lots of useful stuff, and you can print another RepRap for a friend…
RepRap is about making self-replicating machines, and making them freely available for the benefit of everyone. We are using 3D printing to do this, but if you have other technologies that can copy themselves and that can be made freely available to all, then this is the place for you too.
Reprap.org is a community project, which means you are welcome to edit most pages on this site, or better yet, create new pages of your own. Our community portal and New Development pages have more information on how to get involved. Use the links below and on the left to explore the site contents. You’ll find some content translated into other languages.
RepRap was the first of the low-cost 3D printers, and the RepRap Project started the open-source 3D printer revolution. It is described in the video on the right.”
via RepRapWiki.
“…(“Inside Job”) demonstrates all you need to know about the worldview of the American left, and it is completely barren of sound theory. They weave tales of demons all around, even as they lack the intellectual apparatus to understand events rationally. It really is pathetic. This film is a gigantic missed opportunity. They started to tell a good story and instead ended up chasing around ideological conventions and coming up empty handed.”
“…libertarians have the reputation of being hardhearted. It’s not true, and Ron Paul–in so many ways–shows that. He is the Compassionate Libertarian.” – Lew Rockwell
via Lew Rockwell’s Political Theatre | The Comedy and Tragedy of the Political World.
Just because we tend to be ruled by psychopaths, there is no salvation in somehow, if it were possible, hiring more sane, moral men into government. As Lord Acton famously said, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. This is simple logic. The only ECONOMIC rule, the only MORAL rule, the only PEACEFUL rule, the only SANE rule is SELF-RULE.
Oh NPR, we LOVE it when you take both sides of an issue, especially when both sides are fundamentally WRONG;
“Murdoch’s properties are supposed to provide the conservative half of a worldwide Hegelian dialectic. He’s been funded by Western elites to provide this vision because if one is to move society toward global governance, a conversation is necessary. Thesis, antithesis … synthesis. Murdoch provides the antithesis, with relish.”
via Rupert Murdoch’s Failing Attempts to Control the Internet Reformation by Anthony Wile.
“…the one potential Presidential candidate (Ron Paul) who wishes to stop killing innocent people in foreign wars and stop transferring the wealth of poor and working Americans to the corporate elites happens to be — this time around — a Republican.”
via Robin Koerner: If You Love Peace, Become a “Blue Republican” (Just for a Year).
GEE, do you think THIS has anything to do with why Citizen Rupert had “News of the World” euthanized? Sloppy, Rupert, sloppy;
LONDON — When David Cameron became prime minister in May 2010, one of his first visitors at 10 Downing Street — within 24 hours, and entering by a back door, according to accounts in British newspapers — was Rupert Murdoch.
Fourteen months later, with Mr. Murdoch’s media empire in Britain reeling, Mr. Cameron may feel that his close relationship with Mr. Murdoch, which included a range of social contacts with members of the Murdoch family and the tycoon’s senior executives, has been a costly overreach.
Those concerns will be intensified by the expected arrest on Friday of Andy Coulson, the former editor of The News of the World and, until he resigned in January this year, Mr. Cameron’s media chief at Downing Street.
Mr. Cameron hired Mr. Coulson in 2007 after scandals had rocked the newspaper. And he repeatedly defended him even as signs accumulated that Mr. Coulson had greater awareness of the newspaper’s phone-hacking practices than he had acknowledged.
Some of Mr. Cameron’s political opponents have cast the embrace of Mr. Murdoch as a mistake that could combine with other recent miscues by the Cameron government to seriously weaken the prime minister’s party, the Conservatives.
via Britain’s Conservatives Worry About Ties to Murdoch – NYTimes.com.
Taxing “Those Rich People”
Whenever I hear a proposal to “tax the rich”, they are talking about a couple making over $250,000 in EARNED (salary) income (or ‘S’ corporation business). I point out that in a high-cost area like New York City or Los Angeles, this would include a hypothetical couple consisting of a cop and a nurse, making a good bit of overtime, which is already drained away by high living expenses and local taxation. Peter Schiff explains why these “rich” are already being taxed at historically high levels;
“Today a married couple with a combined income of $250,000 (assuming each spouse earns 125,000) will pay about 40% of their combined incomes in Social Security, Medicare, and federal taxes, if they take the standard deduction. (I have included as part of their incomes and taxes the Social Security and Medicare taxes paid on their behalf by their employers – which in reality are borne by the employee anyway. I then added that figure to their incomes, and divided the total tax paid by that higher income. I did not factor in this year’s one time 2% payroll tax holiday.)
Compare that to a household in 1950 that earned $25,000 per year (the approximate equivalent to $250,000 today). Assuming all the income was earned by the husband, which was the norm at the time, the total tax take using the standard deduction and including both the employee and employer social security taxes, would have been just below 22%. In other words, despite claims that taxes are at their lowest levels in 50 years, today’s high earning couple pays over 80% more in federal taxes than their 1950 counterpart!”
via Don’t be Fooled by Political Posturing | Euro Pacific Capital.