NH: New sovereignty bill – New Hampshire state’s rights
Posted on March 30th, 2010 by admin
Sponsor: http://NHLiberty.org – How to buy an ad on the Ridley Report…..
http://RidleyReport.com/Ad
Details on new bill
http://forum.nhliberty.org/index.php?topic=2824.msg21788#msg21788
Details on homeschool situation:
http://forum.nhliberty.org/index.php?topic=2534.0
Many images from: http://commons.wikimedia.org –
please donate to them at:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:GeoLite?lang=en&&utm_medium=sitenotice&utm_campaign=fundraiser2009&utm_source=2009_Jimmy_Appeal3&target=Appeal2
Images and/or info from http://YouTube.com/BikerBillNH
tea party ron paul parties coalition ridleyreport states’ rights civil war opponents new hampshire sate house staters democrats republicans hearing free state project legislature nh legislative process dave ridley report nullification secession liberty live free or die second american revolution Michelle Obama on Sarah Palin john edwards CSI: NY, Blackwater
live free or die libertarian constitution u.s. federal government reserve gun rights firearms
Duration : 0:5:13
[youtube qjEFQikizwg]
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
i was laughing at …
i was laughing at the spelling of new hampshire in the title
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
@pete5668 I live in …
@pete5668 I live in NH and it sucks balls. Thank god for being so close to Mass!
On the same note, I think it’s so funny that these people move to NH to avoid income tax (as they hate the fed) yet they work in Mass because there’s no jobs in NH, and thus end up paying Mass income tax plus the high NH property tax.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
much support from …
much support from California! State Sovereignty! the centralization of power in this country must be reversed
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
@TheTrueJBV3737 To …
@TheTrueJBV3737 To what? What’s the conspiracy this time?
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
@Craydon
HA stupid …
@Craydon
HA stupid lamb, wake the up.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
@TheTrueJBV3737 …
@TheTrueJBV3737 Actually I meant out of the union, I like most of the guys in the white house right now, and even if I didn’t only morons think they’d be better off without government institutions working to protect them, think the military.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
@Craydon
yes we …
@Craydon
yes we must try to kick everyone in the white house out for what they have done, too bad it will never happen, only way is to burn it down with them trapped in it.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
new hamsphire lol
new hamsphire lol
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
We should kick …
We should kick these nuts out before they crash more planes into federal offices.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
No that is not true …
No that is not true. Interventionism which is crony capitalism is what you speak of and that is exactly opposite of Classical econ. That is in fact some offshoot of socialism as we have the German pattern. Perhaps people like you should consider not being controlled by an idea, an idea that is not true. Why not read Mises and then approach to find what is true and not what pushes someone’s agenda? Gov only steals property from those who can’t defend it, and that is not the rich it is the poor
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
@LibertyJedi …
@LibertyJedi Correction, “classical liberal economics” are about protecting the private property of the rich from the needs of the poor.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
* But they weren’t …
* But they weren’t married to the concept of laissez fair for all every minute of the day.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
“the fascists …
“the fascists employed socialist intervention.”
The classical liberal american industrialists also intervened in the economy. Does that mean they were socialists?
No. They hated socialism. That weren’t married to the concept of laissez faire for all every minute of the day.
I find it difficult to believe that fascism in europe would have ever taken hold if not for the support of american industrialists (the main proponents of classical liberalism.)
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
“Interesting the …
“Interesting the left (Gore and Clinton) went along….”
Your conception of the political spectrum is seriously flawed if you think Gore and Clinton represent “the left.”
There is one party in this country; the Business Party. It is split into two factions we call democrats and republicans.
The Business Party represents the center right to the extreme right. Only a handful of politicians can be classified as “left” (Kucinich).
Clinton, Gore and Obama are moderate versions of Bush.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
Yeah, you might …
Yeah, you might want to actually read history sometime and see what came of an armed society.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
No they employed …
No they employed socialist interventionism. Like today’s the 19,000 pages of NAFTA: are not free trade they are 19,000 pages of political pays off for interventionists that ‘hide’ under slogans of free trade, as there is nothing free about those agreements interesting the left (Gore and Clinton) went right along with selling those little people out with selling their jobs to other countries. Today’s intellectuals are the toilet paper for the elite.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
“They employed …
“They employed anti-classical liberal economic policies.”
That’s true. Also true is my statement that they employed plenty of policies that can be classified as classical liberal- privatization, “free” trade, reduction of taxes, elements of laissez faire schemes, ect ect. to appeal to American and other western investors.
American industrialists were not about to invest capital in a socialist country.
But fascism was something the classical liberals could feel good about investing in.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
“employing …
“employing classical liberal economic policies (not socialism.)” this is simply not true, they employed the anti- classical liberal economics. As all classical liberal economics are anti- tyranny in ALL forms, including the many you mentioned in order to confuse the free:-) Truth is very interesting, funny how those who deny it are then controlled by it, but in other forms, usually in ways they can not see, and even if they do it is usually too late…, their life is gone, wasted…
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
Thank you very much …
What you are really asking is is keeping the current prison system worth the next crime to humanity stage of man? With only 15% of the crimes being violent I say no the prisons on average are hurting man more than helping him. Beside if everyone was armed then surely the violent crimes would be closer to 0 and there would be no need for prisons at all.
Thank you very much for the correction, it is true and perhaps their is hope for even you, as you must have some consciousness to see that
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
There is no such …
There is no such word as “un conscience.”
You still didn’t answer my question. If we closed every prison, would society function perfectly well? There would be no murders at all?
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
What 85%+ are non …
What 85%+ are non violent crimes. So by definition it is you who live un conscience aware of what is, is. You’d rather not see the tyranny around you and live a callous life as it is easier for such to do so, but there is no return as well. Criminals are played up for the purpose of the state’s agenda. It works very well with minds like yours. You are an easy slave to control. The state gives you the idea and the idea itself enslaves you without you even knowing or ever being self aware of
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
“There is no such …
“There is no such thing as a voluntary society” maybe, maybe not, so why don’t we find out? The earth was flat, man would never go the moon, and on and on it goes. Surely you would not object to explore? In the end one is ultimately controlled by his own ideas regardless if he choose to be or not. So in that case I rather be open to new ideas and skeptical as well. I am not concerned what others will welcome, freedom has never been welcomed by the powers that be… We are free to disagree:-)
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
As you as you live …
As you as you live in a society, you have to pay taxes and not murder people. That’s how it goes, fuckface.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
Really? So there …
Really? So there are no murderers in the United States? So if we closed every prison, society would be completely functional?
You’re completely up.
March 30th, 2010 at 12:18 am
The “capitalism …
The “capitalism aspect” is the essence of the argument here.
You claim that fascism is socialism re-branded. That is incorrect.
Fascism is much more closely related to classic liberalism (and because this was the pre-dominant ideology of american industrialists they adored Mussolini, and supported Franco and Hitler) than it is related to socialism.
Classical liberalism (what we today call conservatism) gave birth to fascism and also happens to be closely related to libertarianism….