"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Sums up america.

Whatever happened to real news? Oh yeah, it never really existed in the first place!
We need more pentagon papers kinna folks-Not so much reporters as participants...people who see the big picture and risk imprisonment in the name of information distribution. People who realize that a non-disclosure statement signed will at at some point, mean your own mental and spiritual demise.

Real history would record that Lyndon B. Johnson was a complete piece of human garbage. Buildings should be renamed that carry his name, the man was a fucking monster. His administration fucked us to stone age in the grand schemata....

Assange fucked up. He wasn't choosy enough with what he released, eh?

>> ^vaire2ube:

murray rothbard wrote those parts of the newsletters, or someone who thought like him.
In a 1963 article, Rothbard wrote that "the Negro Revolution has some elements that a libertarian must favor, others that he must oppose. Thus, the libertarian opposes compulsory segregation and police brutality, but also opposes compulsory integration and such absurdities as ethnic quota systems in jobs. According to Rothbard biographer Justin Raimondo, Rothbard considered Malcolm X to be a "great black leader” and Martin Luther King to be favored by whites because he “was the major restraining force on the developing Negro revolution." Rothbard also compared Lyndon B. Johnson's use of troops to crush urban rioters in 1968 after King's assassination to Johnson's use of American troops in the Vietnam War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard

now, who does that sound like? The newsletter or ron paul? and was murray convinced enough of his own rightness that he used paul to get his true feelings out...
and rothbard dies in 1995, just in time for ron paul to be harassed non-stop about these things with no real recourse...


If I understand you--you are saying the Dr. Paul didn't know that these things were being said in a newsletter that had his name on it.
Okay.
Then he wasn't paying attention to something that he really should have been paying attention to. Not a glowing endorsement of his leadership abilities.

murray rothbard wrote those parts of the newsletters, or someone who thought like him.

In a 1963 article, Rothbard wrote that "the Negro Revolution has some elements that a libertarian must favor, others that he must oppose. Thus, the libertarian opposes compulsory segregation and police brutality, but also opposes compulsory integration and such absurdities as ethnic quota systems in jobs. According to Rothbard biographer Justin Raimondo, Rothbard considered Malcolm X to be a "great black leader” and Martin Luther King to be favored by whites because he “was the major restraining force on the developing Negro revolution." Rothbard also compared Lyndon B. Johnson's use of troops to crush urban rioters in 1968 after King's assassination to Johnson's use of American troops in the Vietnam War.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard


now, who does that sound like? The newsletter or ron paul? and was murray convinced enough of his own rightness that he used paul to get his true feelings out...

and rothbard dies in 1995, just in time for ron paul to be harassed non-stop about these things with no real recourse...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'pants, animation, lyndon b johnson, lbj, president, slacks' to 'pants, animation, lyndon b johnson, lbj, president, slacks, bunghole' - edited by dystopianfuturetoday

Tags for this video have been changed from 'pants, animation' to 'pants, animation, lyndon b johnson, lbj, president, slacks' - edited by blankfist

I grew up watching Dr. Who on the good ol Public Broadcasting Service. Before the interwebs, PBS was the place to be (in America) if you wanted entertainment and education. Thank you Lyndon B. Johnson!

“I’ll have them nggrs voting Democrat for the next two hundred years.”

---Circa 1964, President Lyndon Baines Johnson’s vow after he signed into law civil rights legislation.
Inside the White House, Ronald Kessler, Simon & Schuster, p. 33.


Conversely MLK was not a "staunch Republican". Had he lived he likely would've ended up a shakedown race-hustler like Je$$e $harpton.

wow, who the hell pays 350 bucks a month for car insurance????
ron paul is an idiot. isnt nasa in texas? lyndon b johnson space center, hey texans,give it back.
fort hood is also in texas,largest post in the usa. wonder if that stimulates their economy??
how about fema?? next time a hurricane wipes out huoston, dont call uncle sam. just secede !! and republicans suddenly wanting to fiscally responsible is ..just..i cant describe it. omg these people are hysterical if only they were'nt running the country.
ron paul is not principled,hes old and confused.
if i give the consumer a 4000 dollar tax break,hes buys a new car or house, then i get my payroll taxes from all the employed people. but if no one works or buys cars,or houses, i get nothing, but have to fork out unemployment. see? its simple. so simple even dr paul SHOULD get it. these programs are vital to pull us out of the tailspin caused by dr paul and his republican friends. obama is just cleaning up their mess.

turn off fox news. seriously.

Neocons, which is what the Republican base is now, are interventionists just like Woodrow Wilson, FDR and Clinton. And I'm not making it up when I say they are left.

[addendum] From wikipedia:
Left-wing past of neoconservatives
Author Michael Lind argues that "the organization as well as the ideology of the neoconservative movement has left-liberal origins".
The neoconservative desire to spread democracy abroad has been likened to the Trotskyist theory of permanent revolution. Lind argues that the neoconservatives are influenced by the thought of former Trotskyists such as James Burnham and Max Shachtman, who argued that "the United States and similar societies are dominated by a decadent, postbourgeois 'new class.'" He sees the neoconservative concept of "global democratic revolution" as deriving from the Trotskyist Fourth International's "vision of permanent revolution." He also points to what he sees as the Marxist origin of "the economic determinist idea that liberal democracy is an epiphenomenon of capitalism," which he describes as "Marxism with entrepreneurs substituted for proletarians as the heroic subjects of history."



From Liberal Hawk on Wikipedia:
The term liberal hawk refers to an individual generally described as politically liberal who supports a hawkish foreign policy, as opposed to a foreign policy of not using force to intervene with conflicts around the world. Past U.S. presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson have been described as liberal hawks for their roles in bringing about America's status as the world's premier military power. The Clinton Doctrine can also be considered as consistent with this vision. Modernly the term is most frequently used to describe liberals and leftists who supported or still support the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, which was authorized by the United States Congress and ordered by a conservative president, George W. Bush.

Pinky's post does not deserve the surprising criticism and rebuke it seems to be getting here. No no no, it deserves outright decimation. It's quite clear pinky that you haven't given the arguments countering yours, which have appeared here and in other threads, even the most cursory perusal. The irony that you would accuse your detractors of delusion then, is simply hilarious when it is you, who is sadly and deeply deluded. In this latest post of yours, which is thoroughly saturated with the most risibly sanctimonious and patronizing piety, you trot out one ludicrous nonexistent myth after another and expect us to somehow in spite of it, take you seriously. Your blithe dismissal of the near third of non-heterosexual-male consumers of porn (women and gay men most notably) suggests these groups present a major quandry for your irrational beliefs and that your inability to explain the for example exceedingly low instance of sexual violence among gay males (who are indisputably prolific porn consumers) underscores the downright antiquated invalidity of your silly convictions.

It is your beliefs madam, about porn being a promoter of rape and other forms of sexual violence and supposed "objectification" that are myths. You purport to want to "play the science game" (a ridiculous statement which in and of itself reveals a gross misunderstanding of how science actually works) in your post yet provide nary a single shred of empirically derived evidence to support your case, only endless Andrea Dworkinesque, misandristic babble. Well here's a few actual scientific studies for you.

1.) Commission appointed by U. S. President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1970 in attempt to prove a correlation between porn and rape or other sexual assault finds NO CORRELATION

2.) A study in Japan http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/BIB/DIAM/japan.htm entitled "Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan" finds a strong INVERSE correlation between sexual violence rates and the availability of pornographic materials. That is to say, after porn was legalized, rape etc. rates plummeted.

3.) A highly controlled study by Todd Kendall at Clemson U "pornography, rape and the internet" found that "liberalization of porn access may lead to a DECLINE in sexual victimization" http://www.law.stanford.edu/display/images/dynamic/events_media/Kendall%20cover%20+%20paper.pdf

In another post on here you told us that you were raped (an unspeakably awful crime to which you are rightly owed an abundance of sympathy for having suffered as a victim) and that afterward during psychiatric treatment, you were told of the supposed "connection" between porn and rape and then you presumably ran with that as a nice neat little explanation that put everything into place. I submit that you were twice gravely wronged, the second time by your pseudoscientific psychologist eager to give you simple explanations and demons to slay no matter the veracity of the claim.

It is not the porn that is dangerous, rather, ironically, it is falsely moralizing people like you who are causing harm. I freely admit that I love porn. In fact, it may have saved my life. When I was in my late teens about a decade ago, I was struggling with the realization that I was gay and felt ashamed and suicidally depressed about it. Going online and seeing gay porn changed all of that. Seeing that sex between males was perfectly natural and indeed in many cases affectionate and loving and yes, harmlessly fun, allowed me to discard the shame and self-pity I once felt and leave my depression behind. Your implicit dismissal of experiences like mine and others which undoubtedly must similarly occur among lesbians and perhaps even the rare heterosexual woman are contemptible, and your eagerness to portray women in particular as brainless dolts incapable of making reasonable decisions for themselves about whether or not to participate in the sex industry is downright demeaning and misogynistic. Shame on you madam.

Let's impeach Bush for the war and killing soldiers. Hell lets go back in time into our impeachment time traveling devices and impeach Lyndon B Johnson, and John Kennedy for Vietnam. Or lets impeach Clinton for what happen in Mogadishu. Even though that all the presidents I mentioned before were acting on the ideal to make it a better place for that country. Vietnam was tearing itself apart. Iraq had a dictator killing millions. And in Mogadishu we had people starving. You know those presidents that even though it wasn't our war we were trying to make a difference because we were the only ones who could. We should stand back and let a country tear itself apart. We should never help those in need. Let's listen to all the actors especially the genius of Sean Penn to tell us what to believe and follow. Because and I quote from Team America World Police, Sean Penn said "Last year I went to Iraq. Before Team America showed up, it was a happy place. They had flowery meadows and rainbow skies, and rivers made of chocolate, where the children danced and laughed and played with gumdrop smiles."

Yeah that is all. Here is how you make an angry American, by showing bullshit. This happened in the 30s,40s,50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, and now, and guess what, it's probably going to keep happening as long as war exist. America is full of idealist and was founded by idealist. But whatever I guess we all forgot about American History. I mean QM did mention hippies. The hippies did say and act the same way against Johnson because of the Vietnam war. Just saying is all.

A classic! "Daisy, sometimes known as Daisy Girl or Peace Little Girl, is an infamous campaign television advertisement. Though aired only once (by the campaign), during a September 7, 1964 telecast of David and Bathsheba on The NBC Monday Movie, it was a factor in Lyndon B. Johnson's defeat of Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential election and an important turning point in political and advertising history. Its creator was Tony Schwartz of Doyle Dane Bernbach. It remains one of the most controversial political advertisements ever made." from wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_%28television_commercial%29

The Gulf of Tonkin Incident was an alleged pair of attacks (the second of which did not occur) by naval forces of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam against two American destroyers, the USS Maddox and the USS Turner Joy. The attacks occurred on 2 and 4 August 1964 in the Gulf of Tonkin. Later research, including a report released in 2005 by the National Security Agency, indicated that the second attack did not occur, but also attempted to dispel the long-standing assumption that members of the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson had knowingly lied about the nature of the incident.

The outcome of the incident was the passage of the Southeast Asia Resolution (better known as the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which granted the Johnson authority to assist any Southeast Asian country whose governments were jeopardized by communist aggression and which served as Johnson's legal justification escalating American involvement in the Vietnam Conflict.

- More @ Wikipedia

Though aired only once during the Movie of the Week on September 7, 1964, "Daisy" was a factor in Lyndon B. Johnson's defeat of Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential election and an important turning point in political and advertising history. [link]

...and now the Rebulicans have thier own version. Some things just stay the same.