"Divisive" - It must be said.

and basically call a person a thief without any proof whatsoever, is that being an individualist or a divider?

Just curious.

___________

Lisa C.

www.dvds4delegates.com=Ron Paul, the 44th U.S. President

Join us at: www.campaignforliberty.com

Brought to you by: www.women4ronpaul.com

I have one thing to say for this whole entire thread...actually I did not come up with it...but I think it applies:

"I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire

=======
Federal Reserve to the American People:

"Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam."

section of my paper, Gold Does Not Have Intrinsic Value, www.axiomaticeconomics.com/golden_calf.php

I will go live with this at the end of the week but, right now, I would like to share with you my conclusion:

"This [the definition of 'fiat money'] is an on-going debate and readers who wish to weigh in with their thoughts on the subject are invited to do so at the Daily Paul. Here, I would like to thank Michael Nystrom for providing a forum where such discussions are possible and for provoking me to clarify in my own mind the definition of a word that I have used in casual conversation for decades. I was using it in the sense that is compatible with the subjective theory of value and did not realize that I was talking past people who were using it in the other sense.

"In conclusion, I hope that readers will take a minute to send Mr. Nystrom a thank-you note for having helped push economic theory towards greater clarity and substance. It is at forums like the Daily Paul where cutting-edge economics research is introduced and tested against criticism from economists representing a variety of schools – not in the unread pages of dry academic journals."

Seriously, folks, Mr. Nystrom really has done a service for the advancement of economic theory. Let's give him a hand - and let's stop calling people we disagree with "trolls."

each other in very fundamental ways. I can say something that represents one of Ron Paul's positions and be attacked as a "troll" for it, or "divisive," usually because they're unaware that it's one of his positions. This leads me to believe that there's not much holding this "movement" together in the first place. It's especially clear on economic philosophy. When this over, half of this "movement" are going to right back to support socialist candidates, in the mode of Kucinich.

But yeah, instead of calling people names and telling them not to rock the boat, the best policy is just to engage in debate. That's how people learn. Why is someone a "troll" it they say something controversial? It's especially disturbing that among the things that considered controversial here, and that really upset people, are things that are consistent with Dr. Paul's philosophy.

----
Don't blame me if there's no voice for liberty opposing McCain and Obama in the Presidential debates. I donated to Ron Paul Libertarian, Bob Barr's campaign.