Comment: Negative Waves

"Perhaps Liberty can hijack the GOP to fix that AB problem?"

I hear negative waves every time I read "an entity unto itself" in the terms used in the context exemplified above, so I point that out again: the GOP is "ideology" based upon a belief in a God of sorts, an entity unto itself, like a Corporation being a Person, etc.

If you don't mind I will rewrite the sentence so as to remove the negative waves from the sentence for my own sanity, if for no other reason.

Here is your version again:
Perhaps Liberty can hijack the GOP to fix that AB problem?

Here is a rewrite (for my sanity):
Perhaps enough Friends of Liberty (Non-Legal Criminals) can compete with the Legal Criminals controlling the Legal Fiction known as the GOP and those Friends of Liberty having taken control over that Legal Fiction can use that Legal Fiction to limit the National Government in such a way as to return the Nation Government into a Democratic Federated Republic with or without the help of the counterfeit opposition Legal Fiction known as The Democratic Party.

Were enough Friends of Liberty joining in that peaceful battle to regain control over a runaway National Government Power there could be enough power exerted to accomplish very specific goals on a very specific time table such as:

End the FED by July 4th 2012
End the National Income Tax by July 4th 2012
Have all the Troops home by July 4th 2012 (every last one of them, and leave none behind)

How many days are left on that schedule?

Who claims that it is not possible?

Why do "they" make such baseless claims, what is their interest in making sure that no such thing ever does happen?

"My understanding of political entropy: A Republic goes to A Democracy turns to Socialism then to Communism…"

That is an argument happening right in that sentence, it is a self-evident contradiction. The only way that your sentence can work is by convenient redefining of those specific terms to suit exactly what you intend to say, as if you and President Clinton have the semantics arguments in common; both you and him know that it depends upon what is is.

There is no way that a Republic can go anywhere or do anything. If it is a Republic then it is one, what do you mean by a Republic?

In the context of the times when Patrick Henry spoke his speech in opposition to Ratification of the Constitution, in his own words, the example of what was desired was a Confederacy such as the one working in Holland. I've read of examples of a Republic such as the one that was (and may still be) working in Switzerland.

That same time period (Patrick Henry's day) offers an example closer to home in the form of The Articles of Confederation. What is meant, exactly, by the use of the word Republic?

You used the word. I use the word because I've read the word used many times in many of the books concerning that time period that I have read. I think "confederacy" and "republic" are the same thing, so why two words for the same thing? I smell a rat.

Then you use the word: Socialism

Do you actually mean a specific thing from a specific time such as the Communism enforced by the Bolsheviks? If that is what you actually mean then you may want to know that The Communist Manifesto specifically rejects socialism, so you really can't mean socialism if you mean communism because communists, the official officials themselves divorce themselves from socialism in their own recipe book.

Socialism has one very illustrative example if you care to know and that is a corporation. A corporation is an illustrative example of socialism, as is The Military. The Military and a Corporation are very good illustrations of what happens when many people combine or collect their individual powers into one collective of power that is collected specifically for the greater good of each individual involved in the collective unification of all that collected power.

So what do you mean when you use the word socialism?

Then you say that something turns to something and then that something turns to communism and here is where I can point out that the Stalin Regime, if that is what you think is an example of communism, is, in fact, if English conveys accurate meaning: Crime made Legal or Legal Crime.

Why would anyone ever want to call it anything else when it is in fact crime made legal, is the point of covering it up with a false name the same thing as covering up any other Fraud with nicer sounding verbiage, to confuse the victims, to divide them, and to render them defenseless, and incapable of communicating precisely among their own poor, weak, and powerless number?

"My understanding of political entropy: A Republic goes to A Democracy turns to Socialism then to Communism…"

A Republic or Confederation, such as the process of law prescribed and limited by The Articles of Confederation were what they were until they were no more, and when the Regime Change occurred the former Confederation (or Republic) became a Nation State or Consolidated Government as told by Patrick Henry in great detail for anyone who cared to listen then or now.

"Patrick Henry
Against the Federal Constitution"

Who employed that Label? I'm curious. Who said "I am against the Federal Constitution?" Was it Patrick Henry who went along with the charade of calling a Consolidated Government a Republic or was that someone else who placed that False Front on that Speech?

At the time the Nationalists (Hamilton in particular) hid behind a False Front of Federalism; saying one thing and doing the opposite. At the time there were many diverse groups who spoke out against those Nationalists hiding behind the False Front of Federalism, and the most powerful among those who were against the Nation State were labelled "Anti-Federalists" and among them there were those who did not miss the significance of that attempt to miss-label their numbers as they knew that they were for a Federation or Confederation not against a Federation or Confederation (or Republic), so the miss-label or false label of Anti-Federalist was known to be a false label and a dirty trick employed by those same Nationalists hiding behind the False Front of Federalism.

New day, same crap. A Liberal now means a Legal Criminal. A socialist now means a Legal Criminal. A capitalist now means a fascist which is a Legal Criminal. No matter what name is used by any power that competes with Legal Criminals the employment of False Fronts and False Labels is used to Turn Coat or Spin or Divide and Conquer with Deception.

Friends of Liberty were once called insurgents, rebels, rabble, democrats, liberals, etc.

Someone for a Republic might be, reasonably, called a Republican, but someone seeking absolute power of a Legal Money Monopoly may want to hide their motives behind the false label of a Republican, and over time what do people associate with that Label?

Why did the Red Democrats become the Blue Democrats at the same time that the Blue Republicans became the Red Republicans - musical chairs for entertainment?

"Can Rand join the Club and remain a Friend of Liberty?"

Suppose Rand thought that he was doing the right thing by "saving" all those who supported him, "saving" all those supporters from themselves. Suppose that Rand was doing right by all his supporters despite their wishes as to what should be done in their name, with the power sent to Rand by them, each one of them, individually sending to that one Representative all that collective power?

You can't please all the people all the time but advertizing one thing so as to get a lot of people to buy into that one thing advertized and then once all that power is commanded by that one person the power collected is spent on doing the opposite of what was advertized is misunderstanding at best.

Suppose Rand Paul said in the beginning, in all that e-mail, and all those letters through the U.S. Postal "Service" Inc. (LLC), that he, as a representative will, if needed, support Mitt Romney, so send me money, and that is what you will get, you will get, if needed, your power used to support Mitt Romney?

"Can Rand join the Club and remain a Friend of Liberty?"

I don't think so, seriously, because too much power that could have been used in the necessary work required to sever the connection between Victims and Legal Criminals is used to accomplish the exact opposite: to make certain that Legal Crime accelerates at a faster rate of acceleration.

I don't have the "inside" information so I'm just guessing.

My answer is no, it is as impossible as fornicating your way back to virginity.

Double secret agent provocateurs claiming to be on one side while actually being on the other side working for the first side but double crossing the first side to help the second side by torturing and mass murdering a few million so as to save a few billion is the stuff called FALSEHOOD.

Falsehood is the stuff needed to cover Violence.

Truth is the stuff needed to move from lower quality and higher cost life to higher quality and lower cost life.

"Another question that has come to my mind in reading all of this is why even have states? Was that another power grab? Or is a state necessary?"

That is why you are so valuable an asset to the fight for higher quality life and lower cost life, because your questions are highly competitive and vital questions - in my opinion.

An involuntary state is Legal Crime by definition, but there are problems associated in the process of defining meaning into words and actions so a process by which to find agreement is needed.

A. Do you agree that a process is needed to find agreement?

B. What form will that process take, assuming that you agree with the need to agree to a process used in finding agreement - even if the process discovers the need to agree to disagree?

C. Might makes right, so sure, go ahead and chain yourself down with such nonsense while I steal you blind, kidnap your children, abuse them, and turn them against you, while you busy yourself with such nonsense as "finding agreement".

There are those, really, just look around, who choose C, or who are merely born as C, sociopaths, narcissists, psychopaths, and their sycophant minions.

We The Friends of Liberty may want to agree to agree to find a process by which we combine our individual power in the work required to defend against those criminals who will, in fact, band together, find their own agreements, honor among thieves, and use their destructive power to connect to those who earn an honest living, so as to steal that power and use that power to steal more power.

1.
Voluntary association (State) which is an agreeable process to find a way to defend against knowable powers that will destroy the volunteers if nothing is done to defend against such destruction.

2.
Involuntary association (State) which is a False Front of a Voluntary Association used to hide organized crime or Legal Crime which is the destructive power that will cause our species to race toward early extinction.

Why confuse one with the other?

Who benefits from such confusion?

Is it true that "all men are bad" and that the only way to check that evil nature of the human species is for one or a few exceptional human beings gaining absolute power over the evil horde to force them to behave?

We went over this earlier.

The answer is no, that is a trick, and the fact that human beings breed is proof enough that we are not all bad since many of us are charitable enough to actually raise children.

The answer is no, we are not all as bad as the torturing mass murderer class, that is a trick, the people who invent that lie, that Might Making Right Fraud, are the one's that should never get fed with power because the obvious happens when they get fed power, they begin to use that power they are fed to fed themselves more and more power, so sure, sure, sure, some men are very, very, very bad, and they should definitely inspire the rest of us to take a little bit of our power and use some of our power agreeably in defense against those very, very, very bad people, to make sure that those very, very, very, very, bad people do not get fed power, by victims, including all the good people, and including any one of their number, since they are all victims, because that is what they do, they are criminals, we are not.

We, most of us, don't torture.

We, most of us, don't mass murder.

We, most of us, don't have the only Legal Checking account where we can write ourselves a check for as much purchasing power as everyone else combined anytime we want to buy another World War, because we, most of us, see no point in having that much power - that would be wrong, not right, not in our National Interest, at all, for most of us, at least those of us who still have command of our own brains.

A State Constitution, such as Pennsylvania's, during the time when The Articles of Confederation was the Law of the Land can be compared to The Constitution of Virginia, or we can look at the Constitution written by Ben Franklin as Ben Franklin offered a Constitution to be used instead of The Articles of Confederation, if the idea was to understand better, in a comparative, competitive, adaptive way, which Constitution Limited more, or allowed more, one way or the other way, keeping in mind that either agreement is sought after or a Dictatorial Monopoly Power is sought after in any case whatsoever.

"Another question that has come to my mind in reading all of this is why even have states? Was that another power grab? Or is a state necessary?"

A Family has a Constitution of sorts, many may use The Bible as their form of agreeable process of finding agreement.

A City has a Constitution of sorts.

A business has a Constitution.

An insurance policy has a Constitution or State or Legal Fiction or written record of which agreements are agreed upon in case someone were to forget by accident or "forget" by choice.

A contract is a constitution used to help all the evil people remain honest, or for any good people, with bad memories, to help remember what was agreed upon at one time in case of any disputes that may arise in time.

We are not perfect, but why would our imperfections be confused to such an extent that everyone is supposedly as evil as the average torturing mass murderer running a Nation State such as U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) or Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia?

Who benefits most from such confusions?

"I think I need to figure out how to take part in that Product 2 taxi business!"

It was no surprise to me to read that the Chevy Volt will be made in China. While Tesla Motors (Elon Musk) was gearing up to mass produce Electric Luxury Sedans in California the BUST of 2008 hit, as the Legal Criminals were making Capital Flight real flowing to China, for some strange and mysterious reason, and Elon Musk, according the information I managed to find, had to go to Germany and then to Japan to get money to expand his Electric Sports Car Production into the next phase of greater production.

So your tax money is used to subsidize the pollution of China, and the slave labor in China, and the powering up of the Chinese Communist Regime while, at the same time, The Chinese Communist Regime uses the tax dollars they manage to squeeze out of their enslaved masses in financing Aggressive Wars for Profit committed by U.S.A. Inc. (LLC).

You pay taxes to make China more powerful, so you will have to buy Electric cars from China, while Communists in China funnel money to U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) to conduct wars on Iraq, Afghanistan (to keep the drug profits flowing), Syria, Libya, and possibly Iran where China, Russian, Europe, and U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) have drawn the World War III line in the sand.

If you think it is bad to have your earnings used to make you have to pay for a new car made in China, while people around you are unemployed because good, high quality, efficient, and cost effective electric cars made in American can't get the financing here in America to expand their business, then imagine a family in China, if they get access to a computer hooked up to the Internet, working harder to die faster, as their Government continues to loan more money to the Legal Criminals threatening to surround China and start World War III.

How about those Modular Vertical Green House Farming Units along with that Taxi Business run on Solar Power?