Mark Sanford Fires Back At Lindsey Graham In Defense Of Libertarians

the Builderberger meeting?

Ron Paul for POTUS 2012
*****Obama Is A Communist!*****

Of the four that gets the most mention as 2012 GOP candidates, Sanford has BY FAR the most potential. The others, Palin, Jindal and Romney are all severely lacking.

The GOP is largely split between "values/culture" voters, and economic ones. Given the current, and near future, state of the economy, the party needs to run an economy candidate in 2012. That rules out both Palin and Jindal, as they're largely "values" conservatives.

Romney has strong "economy" appeal, but is a classic neo/compassionate/big government conservative. Pro bailouts, pro stimulus, pro pretty much the entire Keynesian spaghetti soup of government sponsored meddling, that has, and is, brought the country to its current sorry state.

Also, it would be one thing if Romney used Massachusetts Care in a campaign to showcase his ability to govern in a bipartisan fashion. But he actually seems to think it is a good model for America at large. Government run health care! By a prospective GOP candidate. So, he's off the table for anyone considering themselves a conservative.

Which leaves Sanford out of the current top 4. And Sanford has potential. Like all somewhat pragmatic politicos, he has in no way nailed down a detailed program yet; as what he will eventually, if at all, campaign on will largely depend on what he perceives to appeal to his target voters come campaign season. But his history shows someone who is at least amendable to shift the GOP clearly in the right direction. Away from the flag waving rah-rah'ism of the recent past, and towards a party of fiscal responsibility and smaller government.

Of course he's no Paul, but then again, unless things change rather drastically over the next three years, no pragmatic politician will want to emulate someone who in the end only got a few percent of the primary vote. For better or worse, the GOP needs to at least make a serious effort to collect enough votes to get rid of the Obamas. Which means some vote whoring at the expense of principles is to be expected.

Gary Johnson seems a more obvious libertarian as well, but he's never really mentioned as a likely frontrunner. If both of them, or all three if Paul runs again, do end up running in the primaries, I hope they will have the sense to agree that whoever of them gets less votes, will, if necessary, throw his delegates behind the one with the most. That way they won't split the small government vote, and people can vote their conscience, instead of playing tactics.

Regardless, Sanford at least tentatively seems good enough to warrant voting for, even if he, compared to Paul, might only be a 'least of evils'. He's far better than either McCain was, or what the other three current 'top contenders' are. And one heck of an improvement over the looters currently holding court in our Capital.

NOT a wishful thinking, but reading his body language suggests that he is at worst conflicted, and at best, seem actually quite oblivious.

Don't know if you've ever watched Murderdoch's Fox' latest TV series, Lie to Me. The film is based on psychologist Paul Ekman's therories on facial signals and body language. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Ekman

While I do NOT believe Paul Ekman's theories should be taught to LEO or military, as they've been erroneously deployed in israel to what can best be described as 'guestimating' terrorists by reading their nervousness as a cue; I don't know any sane human being who'd enjoy being isolated in a room with armed militant thugs wearing badges interrogating you, there are some credence to his theories. Humans have been 'reading' and intuiting each other's body languages for as long as we've been walking the earth. Just ask numerous failed relationships, or successful or unsuccessful entrepreneurs, and business people who routinely deal with a diverse range of personalities, every day. Anyone who's ever worked retail, or sales know what I' talking about.

The problem emerges when it becomes codified as they're beginning to do, with our own TSA, and companies involved in privacy violation technology such as RFID, facial recognition, and any other biometrics.
As you all know, any time you give an inherently tyrannical institution power, they'll ABUSE it, 10000% of the time. It will be invariably used as a tool of oppression, not to mention the fact that reading facial signals and body language is an ART, more than a technical science, which can be taught and repeated over and over again for institutional purposes like govt or law enforcement.

So unless Sanford is a DeNiro caliber actor, which I HIGHLY doubt, I would not dismiss him as a sycophantic minion of the New World Order, just yet.

Granted, just because he speaks highly of our GOOD DOCTOR, does not automatically qualify him as an ally, but in the same token, NOR does it qualify him as an ardent minion of the NWO, even if he did, indeed attend the Bilderberg Conference in Chantilly, VA in 2008, at the request of a friend. I'm sure he's heard of them around conservative circles, and were curious.

Who knows, we may be able to turn him into a true ALLY, instead of an enemy. For one thing, I've never seen ANYONE on Daniel Estulin or Jim Tucker provided list of annual Bilderberg attendees EVER ANSWER ANYONE from the alternative press, the Truth Movement, or the Patriot Movement, for the length that SC C.H.A.N.G.E has been able to. So for that I was actually quite surprised. Whether he's actively trying to maintain some semblance of our support remains to be seen.

But for one thing, his past actions, does put him in the plus column for me. He is by far, next to Dr.Ronald Ernest (really folks, his real middle name means 'sincere & honest,' and he lives up to it, everyday!) Paul, Jesse Ventura, and soon to be Senator Rand Paul, I've yet to see another poliko with more liberty minded voting record, thus far.

I always ask the same internal question when I come upon a anyone working within the NWO's sphere of influence: if I were a freedom fighter in Vichy France during WWII, and I came across a French woman hustling Nazi soldiers, or a bar owner that Nazis frequented to let their douchebagging hair down, would I immediately assume the woman or the bar owner to be enemy-collaborators, or possible allies?

Historical documents tell us that there were numerous double, or even triple agents (an agent of one side 'acting' like a double agent}, on both sides. Such example is best illustrated in a Charlize Theron film, "Head in the Clouds." She plays a double agent, but NO ONE knows until near end of the film. And when she's caught injured with local contact missing, no one is there to vouch for her. Everyone should check it out, if not but to see her and Penelope Cruz on the screen concurrently in the same frame. But, even without the element of intrigue, are we SO certain that Mark Sanford is a shill?

Just being cautious here, that we don't assume anything about anybody without concrete facts. Throwing accusations about people's allegiance is ALWAYS dangerous to individual freedoms and liberty, especially against someone who does have some verifiable public record of doing otherwise, like Sanford. However, if Estulin's source can verify Sanford's real hierarchy to be otherwise in the Bilderbergs, of course that changes things, but until then, I'll keep my guard up, but not concretely assume.

-cheers, my R3VOLutionary brethren and sistaz.

---------------
“A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement” - Thomas Jefferson

So just attending the Bilderberg meeting as a guest disqualifies you? WTF? If you really think the Bilderberg Group is so nefarious, wouldn't you want to attend and see what they are up to?

And Sanford was not one of the first people to endorse McCain. To the contrary, he was one of the last elected Republicans to do so. The McCain people begged him to do so earlier and tried to bribe him by suggesting they'd put him on the VP short list and he reportedly responded by saying, "I'm already on your shortlist". When he finally did endorse McCain, after McCain had mathematically wrapped up the nomination, he did so by just sending out a press release.

Hissy Alert!!

Warning!! This hissy alert could go on all night long!!! Send vodka! :|

***
Freedom is not: doing everything you want to.
Freedom is: not having to do what you don't want to do.
~ Joyce Meyer

I just watched the bilderberg interview with Sanford. Mark Sanford is a shill for the New world Order, don't trust him. He will talk the talk but he is not one of us.

I just can't imagine anyone saying "I love authority" or "I love slavery."

IMissLiberty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNtuFERbbPY

Note that he doesn't talk about what was discussed at Bilderberg.

but he seems reasonable enough.

Dr. Paul talked about the many occasions he was the sole no vote in Congress. He said there was one congressperson that would come to him after the vote and ask him why he had voted the way he did. After a short time, Dr. Paul stated a second person started voting no as well. That representative was Mark Sanford. Take what you will from this bit of information.

I don't trust Mark Sanford. Is he a member of CFR or Trilateral?

Keep your eyes and ears open. Sanford may be a shill.

Lindsay the irrelevent was setting Mark up for the 2012 run...
I might buy it if Ron doesn't run.
Bilderberg plan in the making?

pretty good... but I sort of wish Sanford had called Graham out a little more... I mean, it is a nice change to not see people directly attacking each other, but at the same time, if leaders within the Republican party don't do more to step up and defend us/support us/our ideas, and condemn those who say we're not welcome, then our struggle will only persist.

When I hear anyone say "American experiment", I want to respond, "How dare you imply the USA was an experiement. The UN is the experiment and America is better off without being burdened to a UN experiment.

I feel that the word "experiment", especially coming form Libertarian/GOP is to prepare people to accept the American Experiment has failed.

So how about renewing the American Experiment?

http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=1004

Thomas Jefferson once said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground."

Well, I guess he called that one.

Sorry, this man and many put up as "leaders" in the GOP as well as the DEMS are and have been caught in too much hipocracy. Liberty is the success of innovative ideas, not the same old folks spitting what sounds good to them now.

Sorry all, I know y'all may not agree with me.... But it's time for term limitations on all political leaders from the smallest neighborhood association to the federal government.

Give me Liberty...not the same talking noise from the corporate media (ALL OF IT, FOX INCLUDED).

This is the sort of response that is needed to educate principled conservatives of the true meaning of "libertarian" - simply a lover of liberty.

_________________________________

My liberty-minded home base of thought:

www.ponderthis.net

Lindsey Graham maligns his fellow Republican, Ron Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MT9XXJhFFZE

to remind ourselves about Mark Sanford's shortcomings. I have cataloged him into the suspicious category. Can someone list the reasons why?