For those with a brain, the Mmm, Hmm nonsense response is clearly a way of (Hillary) sitting in on a (likely) staged interaction w/ the dumbie crowd and 'listening' if ya know what I mean. This bitch is so far removed from the cunts that fawn over her because of her gender and believe she's the next coming of Christ, that it makes me sick as hell. This and the neocon charade against Rand is why we all should pump up our chests and make our prints in this next election.

Oh fuck that bullshit^, she knows damn well that the progressive scam is screwing small business owners and middle and lower class families from having a chance at getting ahead in life. She combines progressive bullshit and neocon fascism overseas as she reigned in mass money to the Clinton Foundation over the last decade while she dealt out favors to those across the pond just like Bill did during his reign back in the 90s. This charade is a ruse and is disgusting, all should know about it. Get with it you prog/feminist drones!

“It’s Time”—For Affirmative-Action Currency To Symbolize Affirmative-Action Post-America

“It’s time”–for a woman on American currency, and why not? America is no longer a nation of heroes, but a collection of victims. Now even the currency of the Affirmative Action Nation is catching up with the reality that today’s hollow empire is nothing the Founding Fathers would recognize.

A campaign to put a woman, any woman, on the $20 bill received new traction when Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) [who kicked <Scott Brown - Neocon> in the nuts last election] filed legislation for a “citizen’s panel” to recommend a replacement for the current bill’s celebration of President Andrew Jackson.

...

But neither Jordan nor Sanger made the final cut. The four candidates to replace Jackson on the $20 bill:

Eleanor Roosevelt

Roosevelt, like future President Hillary Clinton, is important chiefly because she married a powerful man and overlooked his infidelities. Her naïve (at best) globalism aside, her domestic policies would today be regarded as retrograde or perhaps even offensive because her old-fashioned liberalism would have little room for critical theory.

Rosa Parks

Rosa Parks, far from being the “tired old lady” of public school mythology, was a Leftist activist who served as the front person for a radical political agenda. The substantive results of this agenda can be seen in the shattered ruins of once-proud American cities like Birmingham, Selma, or Parks’ native Montgomery, where the Southern Poverty Law Center, housed in the notorious “Poverty Palace,” is one of the few thriving businesses. Parks herself moved to Detroit, another destroyed city–where she herself would eventually be robbed and beaten by a black man [Rosa Parks robbed and beaten, New York Times, August 30, 1994].

Wilma Mankiller

Like most people, you are probably wondering, “Who the heck is Wilma Mankiller?” Although she was no doubt really nominated because of her last name, Mankiller was the first female chief of the Cherokee Nation. Like most great minority leaders, she was half-white. Aside from creating some “programs” and being a woman, she was chiefly noted for expelling the black “Cherokee freedmen” from the tribe because they lacked Indian blood. [The Cherokee nation must be free to expel black freedmen, by James MacKay, The Guardian, September 17, 2011]

Harriet Tubman

Harriet Tubman was an escaped slave who guided other blacks north on the Underground Railroad. She was also an enthusiastic conspirator with John Brown, who referred to her as “General Tubman,” assisted in his plot to raid and murder Southern families, and referred to him as a martyr after his execution. [Harriet Tubman, Biography, Accessed April 19, 2015]

More...http://www.vdare.com/articles/its-time-for-affirmative-action-currency-to-symbolize-affirmative-action-post-america

Let's face it, very few have any idea about what Jackson was well known for back when at this point. He was a huge fighter against the US having a central bank. Tho, those that know any mainstream revisionist history about him knows only that he was an Indian fighter to some extent. Thus, the former is why the jerkoffs on top want to severe him from our culture w/o most knowing anything about him. It's not like I detest any of these women for their roles in history but this just doesn't sit well - as none of them deserve to be the face of our currency...or do they at this point?

Lindsey Graham Takes Shot at Paul: ‘I’m Not Focusing on Kids Who Smoke Dope’
  Nobody that wants to chill would want anything to do with this war hawk.


Senator Lindsey Graham agrees with his colleague Rand Paul on outreach, but said today he’s doing more than just reaching out to “kids who smoke dope in their parents’ basement.”

Graham has been incredibly critical of Paul in the past, and recently he said he’s on the same side as his libertarian brethren, he just wants to do more than “yell.”

And in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, out today, Graham said it’s healthy for Republicans like him and Paul to fight it out over foreign policy. He asked, “Is it going to be the party of Ron Paul’s son or Ronald Reagan? At the end of the day that’s a fight worth having.”

But he also couldn’t help but take a bit of a shot at who Paul’s appealing to:

“I think he’s right to try to connect with young people. I’m not focusing on kids who smoke dope in their parents’ basement. I’m focused on young farmers, young lawyers, young real estate agents, young subway shop owners. He’s a libertarian. I’m not selling libertarianism to young people. I’m selling conservativism to young people.”

http://www.mediaite.com/online/lindsey-graham-takes-shot-at-paul-im-not-focusing-on-kids-who-smoke-dope/

Call it the anti-Rand primary.

There are at least three Republicans who seem likely to run for president in part so they can attack Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul’s libertarian-leaning foreign policy stances on the campaign trail.

These anti-Rand candidates — South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton and New York Rep. Peter King — are ramping up their criticism especially now that Paul has officially entered the race for the White House.

All three are the longest of long shots when it comes to actually winning their party’s nomination. But each of them — national security hawks who dismissively label Paul an “isolationist” — could cause issues for the senator by attacking his more restrained foreign policy views during nationally televised debates.

Asked about these attacks, one Paul adviser said in an email: “These politicians do a disservice to the American people when they mischaracterize Sen. Paul’s foreign policy views. Unsurprisingly, facts are not the strong suit of politicians to whom war is the only answer for every challenge.”

“These are the same politicians who claimed before the Iraq war that Saddam Hussein supported al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks,” the Paul aide added. “Despite a worsening insurgency, these are the politicians who proclaimed in 2005 that in Iraq ‘things are changing for the better.’”

...

More...http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/20/the-anti-rand-paul-primary/

Kochs Signal Support for Scott Walker

"Charles G. and David H. Koch, the influential and big-spending conservative donors, have a favorite in the race for the Republican nomination: Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin."

“We will support whoever the candidate is,” said Mr. Koch, according to two people who attended the event. “But it should be Scott Walker.”

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/04/20/koch-brothers-signal-support-for-scott-walker/?_r=0

So much for these Koch bros being libertarians of any sort, thos this is about what I expected after all was said and done.

Carly Fiorina to Announce She's Joining the Presidential Race (late April / early May)

Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina is likely running for president and she will make an announcement in coming weeks, she confirmed Saturday morning to Fox & Friends. The comfy-couch-ridden hosts asked the one-time Republican U.S. Senate candidate about the now-infamous claims of a CEO that a woman simply cannot be president.

The presidency is best “left to a man, a good, strong, honorable man,” Texas marketing executive Cheryl Rios asserted last week to much media coverage. “The hormones we have make us not qualified to be president according to this woman?” Fox host Anna Kooiman asked Fiorina this morning.

“She’s obviously entitled to her opinion, but I think American history is littered with examples of men whose judgment was clouded by their hormones including in the Oval Office,” Fiorina responded, with a thinly-veiled jab at President Bill Clinton‘s White House infidelity. “If we want to talk about hormones, I think men’s hormones sometimes get the better of them.”

Asked to address Hillary Clinton‘s claims that women are naturally better leaders, Fiorina agreed, but took the opportunity to swipe at her potential opponent.

“Good leadership requires transparency and candor, which Hillary Clinton has not displayed,” the California former exec said. “I think it requires collaboration, which I don’t think she has particularly displayed. I think it also requires a track record of accomplishment — honestly she doesn’t have much.”

“I will probably be running for president in a few short weeks,” she quickly revealed, “and I also think that gender shouldn’t be the basis upon which we make that decision. That’s why if Hillary Clinton faces me on a general debate stage she won’t be able to talk about being the first woman president. She won’t be able to talk about the war on women. The only thing she’ll be able to talk about is her track record, her accomplishments, or lack thereof.”

Fiorina later added that she will probably make an announcement in late April or early May.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-friends-asks-carly-fiorina-about-hormones-she-says-shes-going-to-announce-soon/

Campaign 2016: Hillary Clinton's Fake Populism Is a Hit

Hillary Clinton ran onto the playing field this week, Rock and Roll Part 2 blaring in the background, and started lying within minutes of announcing her entry into the presidential election campaign.

"There's something wrong," she told a crowd of Iowans, "when hedge fund managers pay lower taxes than nurses or the truckers I saw on I-80 when I was driving here over the last two days."

Oh, right, that. The infamous carried interest tax break, the one that allows private equity vampires like Mitt Romney and Stephen Schwartzman to pay a top tax rate of 15 percent while all of the rest of us (including the truckers Hillary "saw" – note she didn't say "hung out with Bill and me over chilled shrimp at the Water Club") pay income taxes.

The carried interest loophole is an absurd, completely unjustifiable handout to the not merely well-off but filthy rich, and it's been law in this country for about three decades.

Raise your hand if you really think that Hillary Clinton is going to repeal the carried interest tax break.

We'll come back to that in a minute. In the meantime, the reaction to Hillary's campaign announcement went exactly according to script. Newspapers and news sites ever-so-slightly raised figurative eyebrows at the tone of Hillary's announcement, remarking upon its "populist" flair.

More...http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/campaign-2016-hillary-clintons-fake-populism-is-a-hit-20150416?page=2

That and you can't have someone running that would actually get any time in the debates that is only there to be an advocate for a single issue. People can't handle in depth topics nor would the speaker have anymore than a minute to make their point. Remember what happened to Ron Paul in the debates - very little time. AA is good when he's allowed to go off on his presentation of Bitcoin and security stuff, not short little spurts on random topics.

Rand Paul to Barack Obama: Do you support civil asset forfeiture?

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), in a Facebook post on Saturday, responded to President Barack Obama's sharp criticism of Senate Republicans for the delay of a final confirmation vote for his Attorney General nominee, Loretta Lynch.

"I have to say, that there are times where the dysfunction in the Senate just goes too far. This is an example of it," Obama said at a press conference on Friday. "It’s gone too far. Enough. Enough. Call Loretta Lynch for a vote, get her confirmed. Put her in place. Let her do her job. This is embarrassing, a process like this."

President Obama nominated Lynch in November to replace Attorney General Eric Holder. The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), held confirmation hearings on Lynch's nomination in late January, but confirmation has been delayed as Senate leaders from both parties wrestle over a human trafficking bill.

Still, though, many Republicans in the upper chamber oppose Lynch's confirmation due to her positions on a variety of policy issues, including apparent deference to virtually unchecked executive power. In addition to other problematic positions she has taken, Paul has staked his opposition Lynch over her support of controversial federal civil asset forfeiture laws, which, during her confirmation hearing, she called "a wonderful tool."

"I have a question for Barack Obama. Do you support civil asset forfeiture and Lynch's unconstitutional theft: because THAT is what's embarrassing," Paul wrote on Saturday. "In our country, you should be presumed innocent until found guilty. Civil asset forfeiture doesn't allow for the presumption of innocence. The government can take your stuff without being convicted of a crime."

More...http://www.freedomworks.org/content/rand-paul-barack-obama-do-you-support-civil-asset-forfeiture-and-loretta-lynchs

Dude, if you don't know by now who the character is you're quoting then you need to get up to speed. All stupid names of newbs are this same troll.

Some people just don't know when they're adding nothing of value to a thread besides sharting on and on. I'm sure scientists will be interested in taking a peak inside someone's brain to see what went so wrong.

I don't see where this 4-9% interest per day is coming from when the swap rates are hovering around the .04% level. I'd love to have that higher interest on the coins I'm lending.

Government by its very nature is coercive force and special interests get their hands involved in it for a reason. Govt tends to keep growing and spend more money in order to keep more people dependent on it and thus wanting more of it year on year. So, instead of paying the yearly tab in full, the central banks monetize the debt or counterfeit it in order to keep spending w/o it becoming so obvious how upside down the finances are to the public. You can't create extra bitcoin out of nothing and you can't hide documents on the blockchain so this sort of set up is undesirable to most central planners and bureaucrats.

To cash out you'd have to check localbitcoins and see if there's people near you that want to buy what you're willing to offload. The only downside to this is getting robbed or the police stinging and charging you with money laundering or some crap like that.

If you want to have a historical perspective on the present middle eastern situation and where it grew from, check out "The Power of Nightmares" on youtube. It seems bland at first but you'll get plenty of perspective as it goes on.

These agents that committed this fraudulent forensic activities and the prosecutors that had a hand in this should face life in prison and whatever finances they have, including future pensions and current 401ks, need to be pooled to help the family members of those who were wrongly imprisoned or put to death. That said, each case should be looked at on an individual basis because in many of these instances, the accused was most likely guilty but they needed extra or rigged evidence to lock their case down. It was probably rationalized in this manner and while I want the guilty to get what they had coming to them, I'm not for fudging things. They should've just let the case go cold until they can figure out what they needed to close the case. That said, the police and the prosecutors that push them around, are really making themselves look terrible.

Holy crap, I consider myself more informed than most but this is the first I've heard of this. This political hunting has to stop and those responsible (rogue prosecutor or whomever) need to face significant prison terms and have their finances wiped out. Furthermore, I think they need to get their asses kicked in a public square. Scott Walker should be getting the state police to arrest those involved in this matter.

The broad^ is a complete authoritarian and has every interaction with the peasants staged. She's afraid that someone will audio record their conversations but you'd have to wonder why she's so insecure about actual campaigning. I hope these liberal feminist drones start to wonder why all of this is so scripted and see it for what it is w/o their blinders on.

Rand Paul: Republicans Criticizing Obama, Hillary Over Libya "Would Have Done The Same Thing"

SEN. RAND PAUL: Time after time after time, the soldiers were told not to wear their military style boots because they did not want to offend the Libyans. They didn't want a show of weapons because it is politically incorrect to show weapons -- they're in the middle of a war zone -- which gets me even farther back, why the hell did we ever go into Libya in the first place?

[applause]

And this is something, if you watch closely, will separate me from many other Republicans. The other Republicans will criticize the president, and Hillary Clinton for their foreign-policy, but they would have just done the same thing, just 10 times over. Everyone of the ones who were criticizing me wanted troops on the ground, our troops on the group in Libya. I think it was a mistake to be in Libya. We are less safe. Jihadists swim in our swimming pool now. It's a disaster; we should have never been there.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/04/18/rand_paul_republicans_criticizing_obama_hillary_over_libya_would_have_done_the_same_thing_just_10_times_over.html