Not read. Saw the movie.

For my part it proves that might is not the best way to make things right.

It also shows that power can corrupt.

You will find agreement with me on that issue.

Putin can uncouple all he whats but it will only be his way if the the money changer want it that way.

Where did the money come from to save the world economy.
Oops I guess I should say the worlds banking system.

It was in good old no value US dollars.

Now some where there are people planning What the next step on this issue is going to be.

But no matter what some here & in Russia or China may think I say that those ideas are not on the top of that list.

If we the public in the USA fail to come together with a United Font on these issues we will have little or no control over the out come.

For no matter how much force the USA is using & has used in the past it has an impact less harsh & more of a benefit to other counties than other countries.

Take Germany as an example. The US was a large part of destroying Germany yet lead in the task of putting Germany back together. How hard did the US go to get back what it did to make things right in Germany.

What did Russia do. Put up a wall & ran their part of Germany in to the ground.

Yes I know that most younger people do not think to much about this but rest assure that this has not been forgotten.

I checked the site noted by striker.

I question how well this is working for you & him.
Latest post all most 3yrs old?

I wasn't moved to join in.

I guess you will never see what I see. You chose not to see who really males the rules. It is those that buy the officials.
If you fail to see that connection you will always have the same out look of blaming the weak people that sell out.

There is a never ending supply of people that will sell their souls for a couple of bucks.

The people out there taking the money need to see that we have had it with their actions. If they want our votes they need to clean up there acts.

But what do they care. Why listen to a public that can't get their act together or take the money from some one who knows what they want & will pay for it.

So no matter how pure you are you will never be fit to deal with these people.

Have you ever heard the saying: Good Guys never win.

You will never win against a stacked deck.

Well my dear the deck is stacked by those that don't play fair.

Money is the name of the game & pain is the only gain for those that don't play the game.

Well at lease all of that campaign money gives the economy a shot in the arm.

Now if we can only make those that get the most money the biggest losers.

I say that if your state is getting money from out of state support for candidates those are the ones not to vote for.

Even if it means you leave you vote blank for that office or just write in any name.

Not sure about the numbers but I seem to recall that during Vietnam that only 1 in 9 was in combat the rest we support.

[quote=Hungry Freaks]Libertarian is closer to anarchist thought than liberalism. But anarchy throughout the past few centuries has meant different things to different people.

I think the word anarchy means "without rulers" in Latin or Greek. Government, especially the use of government force is the anathema of the anarchist.

Most anarchists believe that, left to our own devices, humankind will self-govern, form small, autonomous communities among individuals who will live by consensus of the group without forcing anyone to comply with an individual's or any part of the group's will.

Some anarchists claim that hunter-gatherer society was essentially anarchist. In the North American and in Australia, aboriginal tribes often were leaderless in the modern sense of the word. without the use of force in induce any standard of conformity to the tribal norm. Among the American Indians there was a great deal of violence in the form of ritualized warfare between different tribes, but the anarchists, with some degree of validity, claim that in tribal affairs, the consensus of the group usually prevailed. A chief was often an old a wise warrior who commanded during ritualized warfare, but had little real authority in the governance of tribal matters.

Here in New Jersey, there is the legend of Chief Cohanzick, of the Lenni Lenape people. there's even a statue to honor him in Greenwich, Cumberland County, NJ.

Except there never was a Chief Cohanzick. Early European settlers came upon the Cohanzick branch of the Lenni Lenape and in a misunderstanding, kept asking who was chief. The idea of 'chief" being foreign to them, they kept pointing to other men until some poor sap took the bull by the horns and said "OK, I'm Chief Cohanzick." At least that's the way the legend is told by the remaining Lenni-Lenape in the area.

And that's why some anarchists claim hunter-gatherers like the Lenni Lenape were a shinning example of a leaderless society.

In the 1960s, so-called "Hippies" formed communes along the anarchist model without any leader and without the use of force to induce conformity. The diggers in San Francisco modeled themselves on the Diggers of 16th and 17th Century England to bring food and other social services to the waves of leaderless young people who converged on the city in 1967 and 1968.

Most of the communes of the 60s failed eventually, but some managed to survive until rather recently. The Farm in southeastern Tennessee was governed by consensus with communal ownership of all land (although Stephen Gaskin was undoubtedly the spiritual leader of the commune) until the 1990s. I've heard that the Farm is no longer a commune and that the breakup was rather dramatic because teh consensus to split was unanimous.

It gets complicated as there are many forms of anarchist thought. Some claimed communism was an example of self-rule while other anarchists thought the use of force to purge "alienation" among the masses was antithetical to true anarchy.

While anarchy is usually identified with the left, it is the Libertarians who most closely follow true anarchist thought in the US today. Central government is unnecessary because people will govern themselves in smaller units (states?) without imposing their will on anybody without consent.

It's an interesting concept with many favorable ideals, but in today's reality of micro-division of labor, it makes it hard for any one community of people to be completely independent of a larger group. Consensus gets messy the larger the group. And there is the problem of what to do with those so alienated due to centuries of rigid rule usually enforced with a heavy hand. Or those so used to doing as they are told that making hard decisions is virtually impossible.[/quote

Put me down as a like on this post.

No need to look to where our problems are coming from. Just blame the nan behind the desk.

You have this hang up over the government being bad & taking your freedoms away. The freedoms you say you are loosing are being taken by those that put their monied interest before your & my personal interests.

It is the use of the government by those not wanting government control over what they can do that take our freedoms away.

Control the money control the people. Control the government control the money. Total control.

That is where our freedoms are going.

We just need a way to lessen the impact the Fed has on us.
This is the strangle hold on us that we all feel.

I feel that it may not help much but more people need to be aware of what the impact of the Fed has on every one.

Any improvements that can be made in easing the impact of the Fed will be an improvement in our day to ay life's.

I put it as we give the money changers Wall street & Banks our money to handle & they look at as a big piggy bank. One that they can take & use for their own best interests.

We need some thing we can trust in to have a steady value that is not under control of the greedy few.

We don't need a debt backed system of money & banking.

We will never win a head on victory with the money changers.
They are just using our money against us. On top of which they want us to pay them to handle our money.

Looking to give our money to any one any where to protect our money is not the answer.

We need to be smarter how we handle our money & not waste it.

Yes our government can print the money & then we need not pay others for the sake of having money.

Yes there is an underlining common ground between most of us.
We need to bring it to the forefront.

Just who is going to show us the way towards a life with less conflict.

I say that if we wish to have things run smoother we needed to have our voices heard clearly. As it is now we are just making noise.

The USA has been the voice of much of what has been good.

But the voices of most have been over shadowed by the few.

If left as it is our voices will soon be but a whisper.

I strongly feel that the path we as a nation are on needs to be changed.

We as being of what I like to say as being the middle of it all need to come together & have our voices & action heard to preserve what it is that we feel is needed.

We need to find that middle ground that is being taken from us. For bottom line much of what we hold dear need not be changed to make things better.

For if we are to leave any thing to those that follow us we do need to leave us United as one. With the view of what is best for most as a whole. Not what is best for us as individuals.

For it can only be good for us as individuals if it is good for most of us.

So much of getting things done is about planting & giving tender loving care.

I am not looking to change any thing about your thoughts or views. I will read what you have to say & if I like the way you say it I will say so.

If you would do the same with me & others that is all I ask of any one.