The Passing of the Libertarian Moment. (The Atlantic)

Typical Gatlin - using left-leaning websites to bolster his non-existent claims.

At least you aren't posting links to Commie rags like you have done a few times in the past.

The Trump Administration Is a Libertarian’s Worst Nightmare

Although The Daily Beast maintains that they are “Independent,” their reporting has grown increasingly partisan. During the 2016 presidential election, AllSides started to note the shift, but waited to see if it was just a momentary phase. However, a year after the election of President Trump, the Daily Beast's articles are still heavily biased.

The results of a May 2017 AllSides blind bias survey placed The Daily Beast's media bias as Far Left. We followed up on these results by conducting an Editorial Review. Our team found that the media bias of The Daily Beast's articles, headlines and images all fall under the Far Left rating.

It’s unexpected to see a source's media bias jump so far in one update and in such a short period — this marks the first time this has happened with any of our media bias ratings.

Former Rep. Ron Paul tells CNN why a libertarian cannot endorse Trump's authoritarian approach.

"My biggest beef is, from a libertarian viewpoint, there is absolutely no difference, meaningful difference, between Hillary and Trump. They both support the military industrial complex, the Federal Reserve, deficits, entitlements, invasion of our privacy. And it's super nationalistic populism versus socialism. That is so removed from what we need to be doing. We need to remove ourselves from tyranny," Paul said Monday on CNN.

"From a libertarian viewpoint of limited government there is nothing they are offering that reduces the size and scope of the intrusion of government. Who offers any cuts in spending? Who offers protection of our liberty? Some of the top candidates want to carpet-bomb the world," Paul said.

[…]

ROTFLMAO ...

"From a libertarian viewpoint of limited government there is nothing they are offering that reduces the size and scope of the intrusion of government. Who offers any cuts in spending? Who offers protection of our liberty? Some of the top candidates want to carpet-bomb the world," Paul said.

Ron Paul: still speaking "truth to power".

Glad you are learning ...

Then he is correct in assessment of Trump and Trump is NOT fulfilling the libertarians' wishes and hopes.

Not completely, but even a die-hard statist like you can admit that Trumps HAS embraced some libertarian ideas and policies.

Is The Train - joy ride

To The concenTraTion camps

Udopians

Love
boris

... you can admit that Trumps HAS embraced some libertarian ideas and policies.

I can admit reading about the paltry hopes of the libertarian Moment.

Here are the carefully documented false hopes some libertarians originally had about Trump.

You’d expect more from those in the libertarian wing of the GOP, representing, as they claim to do, an unchanging body of principled beliefs about strictly limited government, the universal efficacy of markets, and the holiness of economic and (for some, at least) personal freedom. But after reading a meditation by Lucy Steigerwald about the greater meaning of Congressman Justin Amash’s libertarianish defection from Trump’s party, I can’t help but wonder about the future of any ideological tradition that depends for its vitality on a single House member in a single very unrepresentative district in Michigan.

At least you aren't posting links to Commie rags like you have done a few times in the past.

C'mon, don't spoil this.

I like it when Gatlin is approvingly quoting the Daily Worker just so he can post one more thread to bash Ron Paul.

I keep hoping he'll unearth the story about the POW pilot in Vietnam who hated Ron Paul with every fiber of his being but who died at the hands of the Viet Cong but who managed to get his buddy to smuggle his watch out by keeping it concealed internally on his person for years until his eventual release from a POW camp and then finally giving the watch to the dead hero's young son back in America with a stirring patriotic lecture about duty and sacrifice. Kind of like a scene from the movie Pulp Fiction.

The libertarian ideological tradition has never had any future.

Aren't you like 90 years old? How can you write something like that?

Obviously, Ron Paul has had a far more successful life than you have and he is, even in retirement as a House member, beloved to millions of Americans.

Face it, Ron Paul is America's sweetheart. And they've never heard of you.

Aren't you like 90 years old?

How can you write something like that?

Obviously, Ron Paul has had a far more successful life than you have …

Some folks have a tendency to measure success using a comparison to others. But in doing that, their social comparison bias is a cognitive bias that skews their judgment. And some folks say that success should be measured in a way that informs you how to spend your time and effort. For if you measure success in any other way than in terms of what’s truly important to you – then you can’t work towards getting there. And remember to always focus on things that are within your control.

… and he is, even in retirement as a House member, beloved to millions of Americans …

Face it, Ron Paul is America's sweetheart -

Your “baiting” post was not so subtle. With that in mind, you must remember that in dealing with me – you are not dealing with Deckard. Since I had spare time – you gave me something to do.

Catch you later …

They (libertarians) sure as hell think they are (smarter than anyone else?)

We don't "hang-out" on chit-chat channels as you (gatlin) demonstrate on a daily basis. Instead, we form business(es) around the planet making money to ensure our well being into the future.

You’re America’s sweetheart’s political career was a failure measured by having succeed in passing on one bill during all his many years in Congress and culminating with his2012 presidential campaign [being] a Disaster.

He did get Rand interested in politics and retired after Rand got much more power in the Senate than Ron had ever had in the House.

Keep in mind, Ron Paul never wanted to run for prez in 2008 or in 2012. Everyone just kept nudging him to do it (except his wife) until he did. Ron Paul and his good buddy, Murray Rothbard, had always expected that success in electing libertarians to public office widely could only occur in the mid-2020s when the Millennial generation started to become more decisive in election outcomes. A lot of people pledged a considerable amount of money just to get RP to announce he was running. And RP pioneered the use of online money bombs where RP would just get a fresh $5 million or $7 million for his campaign in the early primary states.

Yes, Ron Paul is definitely a beloved politician even in retirement. A lot more so than losers like Dick Cheney or Bush Junior.

They (libertarians) sure as hell think they are (smarter than anyone else?) We don't "hang-out" on chit-chat channels as you (gatlin) demonstrate on a daily basis. Instead, we form business(es) around the planet making money to ensure our well being into the future.

But the discussions I have been involved in had nothing to do with “forming businesses or making money” – it had everything to do with discussing libertarian politics.

Therefore, while staying on topic – tell me, please, has there ever been a successful libertarian government? And why not?

He did get Rand interested in politics and retired after Rand got much more power in the Senate than Ron had ever had in the House.

Yes, Ron Paul is definitely a beloved politician even in retirement. A lot more so than losers like Dick Cheney or Bush Junior.

Ron Paul Knew All About His “Beloved” Racist Newsletters.

And how has that worked out?

Rand is relatively young with a national name. It isn't that hard to imagine him running for prez in 2024 or 2028 or 2032. So we don't know if Ron Paul will finally conquer America via his progeny for many years yet.

Ron Paul Knew All About His “Beloved” Racist Newsletters.

Yes, he did know all about them since he wrote them and distributed them for free without any copyright claim as a service to constituents. Lots of those tiny town papers didn't have much content available so a free regular article from the congressman was good for them, good for him. Later on, various websites and a few antisemitic took advantage of the copyright disclaimer found on RP's newsletters and they published his articles as well.

I recall that there was a stink over some antisemite newsletter that used to use his columns. I can't recall if RP denounced them or not. But he did refuse to stop them or anyone else from publishing his free newsletters just as he had always allowed any publisher to do.

Ron Paul, like Donald Trump, may have gone on Alex Jones a time or two but he did not willingly associate with antisemitic publishers. And it was never for their benefit that he started issuing his congressional newsletters to the public copyright-free.

After Trump reitres in 2029 Rand should be President. Rand 2028

Stranger things have happened. Like Donald Trump getting elected.

Never say never.

Ron Paul Knew All About His “Beloved” Racist Newsletters.

Yes, he did know all about them since he wrote them and distributed them for free without any copyright claim as a service to constituents.

Some of Gatlin's posts lately seem to coming from a leftist, self-hating-white SJW.

His attempts to diaparage those he hates with the "racist" moniker are getting more obvious.

Some of Gatlin's posts lately seem to coming from a leftist, self-hating-white SJW.

George F. Will, a conservative American political columnist, wrote: "[White guilt is] a form of self-congratulation, where whites initiate 'compassionate policies' toward people of color, to showcase their innocence to racism."

And – White guilt has been described as one of the psychosocial costs of racism for white individuals along with empathy (sadness and anger) for victims of racism and fear of non-whites.

For you to say that I as a white person have guilt for harm resulting from racist treatment of ethnic minorities by other white people is a ridiculous fabrication. You have seen no such thing in my posts. This is just a term you read someplace that you now maliciously, carelessly and inappropriately try to apply it against me. That will not work – it never will.

The information for my posts is coming from sources, none of which can be classified by white guilt.

As an example – The article from July last year posted below was published in Jewish Telegraphic Agency. And oh, these articles and my posts seem to greatly bother you as a libertarian. Why is that?

The article -

(JTA) — Former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul tweeted and then deleted a racist and anti-Semitic cartoon that he said was meant to explain “cultural Marxism.”

The cartoon shows four caricatures of different ethnicities – including a Jewish man with a hooked nose, a black man with exaggerated lips, an Asian man with slanted eyes and a man who looks like a Neanderthal – punching a cartoon of Uncle Sam with a shared red fist emblazoned with a hammer and sickle. The four men are shouting “Cultural Marxism.”

 

The beginning of the tweet reads “Are you stunned by what has become of American culture?

“Are you confused as to how every moral principle could be turned on its head so quickly?

“Well, it’s not an accident.

“You’ve probably heard of ‘Cultural Marxism,’ but do you know what it means?”

Though Paul deleted the image, it had already been saved by several social media users as a screenshot.

Paul, a former congressman from Texas, later tweeted and posted on Facebook the same rant against cultural Marxism but replaced the cartoon with the words “Political Correctness” overlaid with the “no” symbol, a red circle with a line through it.

The term Cultural Marxism has become a racist dog whistle claiming that the flood of nonwhite immigrants into America and Europe is causing a cultural decline.

The racist cartoon was created by doctoring an anti-imperialism, pro- communism cartoon by superimposing the racist and anti-Semitic images.

Paul was roundly criticized on social media for the image. Some draw parallels between the image and Nazi propaganda, according to The Hill.

In 2011, reporters exposed racist newsletters that had been sent out in Ron Paul’s name in the late 1980s and early 1990s, such as Ron Paul’s Political Report, Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, the Ron Paul Survival Report and the Ron Paul Investment Letter. The newsletters also had come to light during the 2008 campaign, when Paul said that he didn’t actually write the newsletters and they did not represent his views, but because they carried his name he was morally responsible for their content.

Source: https://www.jta.org/2018/07/02/united-states/ron-paul-former-presidential- candidate-tweets-racist-anti-semitic-cartoon

I Told him on The fr

TwenTy years ago

GlibTarians

Trivia freaks

RealiTy losers

Love
boris

I've heard about these "racist" newsletters before. What did he write that was deemed "racist"?

Maybe this will shed some light on what you asked ...

Ron Paul’s Racist, Homophobic Newsletters Gain New Life On Twitter"

It is but one source. There are many others if you care to look them up.

I like Ron Pauls graphic you posted.

It isn't racist.

And obviously Ron Paul also thought it was wrong since: Ron Paul Blames Shockingly Racist, Anti-Semitic Tweet On Staffer

Ron Paul replaced the post with the same attack on “cultural Marxism” but dropped the offensive cartoon.

Exactly whqt it It you like about seeing “images of a black man, a Latino, an Asian and a Jew punching Uncle Sam?”

Well, it does sound like a remarkably accurate depiction of Facebook, Google and Twitter.

If these organizations and other want to band blacks, Latinos, Asians and Jews to beat up white people, then isn't that just another flavor of racism, just not the white flavor?

This is why that cartoon offends the Lefties and Silicon Valley so much. It is because it is accurate, not because it is racist.

BTW, that cartoon was something drawn by a Latino cartoonist but someone on 4chan (I think) edited it up with the minorities' faces. You can see the Uncle Sam is a more modern style and the four minorities are caricatures from mid-20th century. It looks wrong because it's a provocative 4chan/8chan fake meme.

"Many theorists, from Rand to Rothbard"

I am not sure if they are smarter, but they take bath less frequently. My sense of smell tells me that.

I am not sure if they are smarter, but they take bath less frequently. My sense of smell tells me that.

You sniff a lot of libertarians?

Rand died in 1982, Rothbard in the mid-Nineties. So you haven't sniffed those two in quite some time.

You sniff a lot of libertarians?

I worked with two (in IT, they were quite competent), and I had a neighbor next flat (he was a biochemist). They all smelled from a distance.

Also I read that Ayn Rand was not so great about her personal hygiene.

Perhaps as greater and smarter individuals, they were above petty customs and rules. ;)

"Objectivism taught that intellectual parity is the sole legitimate basis for romantic or sexual attraction. Coincidentally enough, this doctrine cleared the way for Rand—a woman possessed of looks that could be charitably described as unusual, along with abysmal personal hygiene and grooming habits—to seduce young men in her orbit."

newrepublic.com/article/69239/wealthcare-0

I worked with two (in IT, they were quite competent), and I had a neighbor next flat (he was a biochemist). They all smelled from a distance.

Maybe you just have a sensitive nose. Or they were single or lived with someone who had gone nose-blind to their body odor or they themselves had a poor sense of smell.

I recall reading articles about the Hollyweird elite, that many of them are accused of non-bathing. One of the more notorious is Johnny Depp and his wife. Supposedly they can go weeks without bathing, co-stars begging him to take a shower because he stand so much on those Pirates movies. This info was found on a lot of websites. If it was libel, it was major libel. They also included his wife in the stinker category.

I'm not sure why everyone always seems to believe that we all have exactly the same identical abilities to hear, see, smell, sense, etc. I know that I, for instance, don't have a strong sense of smell but I have exceptional hearing and always did. My skin is very sensitive to infrared heat. I know everyone is but my heat sensitivity is almost like a radar. I know that most people don't have that.

I have a friend who has an almost frightening sense of smell. He knows when women are menstruating, up to a block away if there's a breeze. He has a super nose. To me, it doesn't sound like much fun. I always thought being a dog would suck because then you'd know just how bad the world smells.

There is also a thing in recent years where some people are abandoning soaps and antiperspirants altogether. Including some doctors and science types.

I Stopped Using Soap & Shampoo Six Months ago. Why you Should too.

And it isn't unheard of here among LFers. Vicomte told us he gave up using these products years ago (unless he gets really dirty, like car grease kind of dirty). Maybe he wants to chime in. He was very early on this trend which is now becoming almost a movement. The No-Poo people who avoid shampoo has been around for a while now but the No-Soap and No-Antiperspirant movement are still growing. You'd be surprised how many videos you can find on this at YouBoob, how to transition to bathing with water only, how long until your body adjusts. It's familiar material for anyone who recalls Vic's posts on the subject, going back to several years before LP closed up. He's never gone back to using soaps or shampoos, thinks they're bad for his skin. Some people say their skin gets more oily and subject to blemishes using soap because it scrubs away natural oils which makes the skin go nuts trying to produce more oil, making the skin more oily than ever and subject to blemishes or even real acne. Supposedly it takes a little longer to get your hair to adjust to no-poo than it takes for your skin to adjust to no-soap. Apparently it does take weeks to get your body to adjust to no-antiperspirant but they claim their body odor is less once they get away from antiperspirant. They don't claim to 100% odor-free but they think they smell less without antiperspirant than they do if they use it, especially on a daily basis.

I know that I have curtailed my own use. I will use a little antiperspirant if I'm going out, especially in summer. Otherwise, I really try to avoid it. I try to avoid really soaping up my body and have a very lightweight liquid soap with tiny abrasive particles (Men's Dove) which I use a half-dozen drops on a loofah to scrub with. I am a lot more gentle about scrubbing my face and try to avoid using soap since I think it does make my skin more dry which then makes my skin more oily as a result of my skin trying to cope. And your skin producing more oil means more chances for blocked pores, leading to blemishing (even tiny blemishes you can barely even see).

Most of the no-soap/no-poo/no-antiperspirant types are very rigorous about daily showers with water. They claim that, other than sweating in warm weather, they have no problems and feel and look better. They say they like their hair and skin better or that they've solved some longstanding problems caused by using these products or at least overusing them. Look at YouTube, you'll find a lot of videos on this topic. And it is a lot harder to make money on YouTube selling people on the idea of using no products than it is to monetize videos by recommending the latest and greatest brand-name products. Yet the no-soaps movement just keeps growing.

Maybe these stinky libertarians that you know just aren't diligent enough with their daily shower routines. Or they're trying to get away from soaps and haven't mastered their routine yet.

I notice you don't mention liberals or conservatives or communists or fascists who smell bad to you. Are you saying that only libertarians smell bad? Are you saying that every libertarian you have known smells bad?

BTW, how do you know that you don't stink to (some) other people? Are you that sure that you don't?

You sniff a lot of libertarians?
I worked with two (in IT, they were quite competent), and I had a neighbor next flat (he was a biochemist). They all smelled from a distance.
Also I read that Ayn Rand was not so great about her personal hygiene.

The problem of libertarians having strong body odor [“stinking”] appears to be a fairly common one.

So much so that libertarian Lee McKitrick felt the problem with libertarians’ body odor needed to be addressed.

Christopher did that when he addressed the problem of their body odor to fellow libertarians in his article: Libertarians Just Aren’t Cool, Deal With It..

Here is an excerpt from the article where he is instructs fellow libertarians to “please bathe.”

“As libertarians we must realize that our message is not mainstream yet, and therefore each of us is an ambassador when marketing it. Being an ambassador comes with a certain amount of personal responsibility to be self aware so that you do not completely disenfranchise someone you are engaging with. No one wants to be around a person who causes them discomfort, whether that is because they are a socially awkward basement dweller, a loud obnoxious internet troll, lack personal hygiene, or just generally unaware of normal human behavior.”

[…]

“Your personal hygiene matters as well. If I can smell your body odor when you are talking to me, it’s an issue. Please bathe. Dousing yourself with half a can of Axe body spray does not count as bathing."

Exactly whqt it It you like about seeing “images of a black man, a Latino, an Asian and a Jew punching Uncle Sam?”

Because it accurately shows what foreigners are doing to our country.

Ron Paul’s Racist, Homophobic Newsletters Gain New Life On Twitter"

Homophobe is a word faggots use to put down people who know right from wrong.

Why do you use faggot terms. I mean you're not gay. Why are you siding with the degenerate weirdos using a made up term to go after Ron Paul.

[The title of an article] - Ron Paul’s Racist, Homophobic Newsletters Gain New Life On Twitter.

Homophobe is a word faggots use to put down people who know right from wrong.

Why do you use faggot terms.

Here, let me help straighten this out.

All I was did was give a direct answer to you when you asked:

I've heard about these "racist" newsletters before. What did he write that was deemed "racist"?

And I answered:

Maybe this will shed some light on what you asked - then supplied you a link titled: “Ron Paul’s Racist, Homophobic Newsletters Gain New Life On Twitter."

I merely supplied you with “a link containing the word” as an answer to your question.

Are we now clear on this?

I notice you don't mention liberals or conservatives or communists or fascists who smell bad to you

Indeed, I do not. All I knew did not stink. Only other group that often stinks, are the French, but not all of them ;)

Why are you siding with the degenerate weirdos using a made up term to go after Ron Paul.

But since you asked – and thank you for doing so – I will list my many reasons one at a time starting with this one first.

ABORTION: He claims to be pro-life, and says Right to Life is the foundation for all rights in the Constitution. He even says “life does begin at conception.” The truth is that he is really pro-choice on the state level. That is the purpose of his Sanctity of Life Bill.

He is essentially saying it is fine to kill a baby if a state agrees. During the 2008 campaign every GOP candidate had a zero rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America, except Ron Paul. He received a 65% score in 2006, 75% in 2005 and 65% in 2004.

Here you have a organization that wants to kill unborn babies – and engages in political action and advocacy efforts to oppose restrictions on abortion and expand access to abortion – that strongly supports Ron Paul.

Why do you think that is, Stone?

And it isn't unheard of here among LFers. Vicomte told us he gave up using these products years ago (unless he gets really dirty, like car grease kind of dirty). Maybe he wants to chime in. He was very early on this trend which is now becoming almost a movement. The No-Poo people who avoid shampoo has been around for a while now but the No-Soap and No-Antiperspirant movement are still growing. You'd be surprised how many videos you can find on this at YouBoob, how to transition to bathing with water only, how long until your body adjusts. It's familiar material for anyone who recalls Vic's posts on the subject, going back to several years before LP closed up. He's never gone back to using soaps or shampoos, thinks they're bad for his skin.

It is true. It must be 5 or 6 years ago now that I did the first of two 40 day water fasts. One was in the summer. the other, the following Lent.

At some point in the first fast, when I had had no food in me for quite awhile, and nothing but water in my system to dilute the impact of things, I noticed that the tap water tasted very strongly of the chlorine they put in it, and it started to disgree with me, so I switched to bottled water, and gradually found myself only able to drink Poland Spring, Evian and Distilled water, because everything else had an aftertaste or too much of some mineral or chemical to bear.

About the same time, I noticed that toothpaste was just overwhelming - made me sick to use it, and that shampoo and soap would hit me like a bad drug, so I stopped using those, and just took longer showers, scraping all of my skin and my scalp with my fingernails. My hair got really greasy for a few weeks, as the oils were no longer being stripped off daily by the shampoo, but eventually my scalp adjusted and stopped pouring out the oil, and the dandruff stopped, and I found myself just pulling the oil through my hair.

It stopped smelling, and my hair became noticeably softer and nicer.

The lady barber who always cuts my hair asked me what the new products I was using, because my hair was so much softer and healthier looking. I told her "nothing". Just a long daily shower and running my fingernails through my hair and all along my scalp, sort of scratching it (it doesn't itch).

I never went back to any hygeine products at all, except for toothpaste. Once I was eating food again I needed that. But no shampoo, no soap - though I'll wash with soap if I get greasy somehow, and I do wash my hands with soap if they get into nasty things - no deodorant or anti-perspirant - no powders or gels or anything.

There is one standby medicine when I don't feel good: aspirin (not tylenol, not acetominophin, not ibuprofen: aspirin), water and go to bed. Sleep seems to fix everything.

I generally do not smell at all, except in four circumstances:

(1) If I've been sweating a lot and am wearing polyester. Polyester really stinks after being moist with human sweat. Other clothes sweated in get a funky, mushroomy smell.

(2) If I wear the same clothes a couple of days in a row.

(3) If I don't eat enough carbohydrates and go into ketosis. Then I smell like acetone (printer toner).

(4) If I eat garlic, I smell like strong; if I eat a lot of dairy I smell sour and pass a lot of gas; if I eat a lot of meat, I get an acidic smell.

Oh, and I never did floss - and never have had a cavity either.

During the 2008 campaign every GOP candidate had a zero rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America, except Ron Paul.

I like Ron Paul very much. I hope that he takes bath ;)

There is a strong odor in France on public transport on hot summer days, but it's obvious why.

I noticed that the tap water tasted very strongly of the chlorine they put in it, and it started to disgree with me, so I switched to bottled water, and gradually found myself only able to drink Poland Spring, Evian and Distilled water, because everything else had an aftertaste or too much of some mineral or chemical to bear.

I recommend you a filter with activated charcoal. Should trap every active substance, not minerals.

Bottled water often is just filtered, you can do it better at home, just remember to change filters as in the instruction.

There is a strong odor in France on public transport on hot summer days, but it's obvious why.

They are libertarians? Or is it garlic?

Obviously, people who are plumbing or auto mechanics or laborers are in a different category and may need more soap to get clean because of oil and dirt. But your average office worker or retail worker really doesn't get sweaty enough to actually have B.O. if they shower with water daily.

I see some of the no-soap-shampoo-deodorant people are now also recommending cold showers year-round. I think that is a fad that is going to be slow to take off. Most people don't like cold showers, maybe cool showers in the heat of summer so you don't get out of the shower sweating. I try to shower cooler but it is hard to avoid turning up the temperature. I think some people can take cool or cold showers and be more comfortable with it than most others; having a layer of fat would help insulate your body core. And cold water does help to close up pores which is probably a positive because then your pores aren't just hanging there open and your skin will have a smoother look. A hot shower will open pores, a cold shower will close them. Possibly it might be worth trying a hot shower but ending with a rinse of a minute or two with cool or cold water.

Some people say cold showers promotes weight loss but I think you'd have to use a lot of water to induce fat cell dislocation in subcutaneous fat under the skin so it can be eliminated by the liver. For that to work, you also have to control your diet. Some people say the spot reduction with cold helps them shed extra pounds in the problem area of belly/buttocks/thighs. They have salon treatments for this and people also use cheap cold packs for 20-30 minutes. But you'd have to take very long cold showers for it to really get your skin and outer tissue cold enough to induce fat loss. If you used enough cold water running over your body to drop, say, your belly's temperature to 40-45°F and kept it that cold for 20 minutes, then you would definitely induce some fat cell conversion due to cold. Over the next week or so, your liver would be eliminating those fat cells from your body as long as you were careful with diet. NASA did comprehensive studies verifying weight loss in astronauts due to chilling the body back in the Sixties. So maybe cold showers could help you lose some extra pounds. But I think you'd have to take showers with very cold water for 20-30 minutes. And you'd still have to restrict your diet to avoid packing pounds back on.

Maybe no-soap-shampoo-deodorant and cold showers is just the latest fad for people to make themselves miserable with crap that they read on teh interwebs.     : )

Exactly whqt it It you like about seeing “images of a black man, a Latino, an Asian and a Jew punching Uncle Sam?”

Because it accurately shows what foreigners are doing to our country.

Yet you automatically and instantly look upon the images of a black man, a Latino, an Asian and a Jew as being “foreigners.”

Tell me – please – why did you do that, make such an assumption?

Think about it for a minute or so …

Now, tell me – please – do you look upon everyone of different ethnicity than yours and classify them as being a “foreigner?”

Then give me – please – your definition of “racism.”

Most of the no-soap/no-poo/no-antiperspirant types are very rigorous about daily showers with water.

Aren't all normal people "rigorous" about taking daily showers with water, at least? Who can even wake up in the morning without showering?

Wake up, drag self to bathroom. Sit down. Pee. Poo. Turn on shower, brush teeth while it gets hot, get into shower, and wash from nose to tail with water, hands and nails. Shave under the running water (no gels or shaving creams, just a disposable razor and the running water to wash the shaved hair away. No need for a mirror. Just feel your face with your hand, and shave anything you missed. Keep going until it's smooth as a baby's behind. Turn off water, dry.

Iron shirt and put on. Iron pants and put on. (Underwear is useless.) Put on belt and cinch it. Put on socks. Slip on loafers (shoes one must tie are a waste of time), go get eggs (with black pepper) and rye toast (with butter) and steamed spinach (with butter), and drink water (with a couple of slices of lemon in it). That is how the day begins for everybody, isn't it?

Who out there DOESN'T shower ever day?

(4) If I eat garlic, I smell like strong; if I eat a lot of dairy I smell sour and pass a lot of gas; if I eat a lot of meat, I get an acidic smell.

Something I hadn't mentioned in that previous post to A Pole. These stinky libertarians might be eating certain foods that can affect body odor and the composition of body fluids, affecting their smell and taste.

Our bodies are, after all, just chemical factories.

At some point in the first fast, when I had had no food in me for quite awhile, and nothing but water in my system to dilute the impact of things, I noticed that the tap water tasted very strongly of the chlorine they put in it, and it started to disgree with me, so I switched to bottled water, and gradually found myself only able to drink Poland Spring, Evian and Distilled water, because everything else had an aftertaste or too much of some mineral or chemical to bear.

I fasted (or near-fasted) for over a month a while back. And I have never been a faster at all. I did force myself to eat at least a small meal every several days. I kind of worry about allowing my digestive tract to empty out and stay empty for a long period. I mostly worry about getting a normal digestion to start again afterward. I don't know much about it other than reading some recommendations to restart eating with some olive oil, then after some hours a very easy to digest light meal. Like yogurt. I'm not sure if you ever mentioned exactly how you restarted eating after these (very long) fasts.

Who out there DOESN'T shower ever day?

I know. Especially during warm weather. The funk builds up so much faster in summer. In hot weather, two showers a day isn't a bad idea. And some people need it more than others do.

I've read a few articles by doctors who say they don't shower every day in the colder months. It sounds like they do shower every day during hot weather, any time they've perspired.

As for deodorant, do you think the product actually produces armpit stains on clothing from sweat or are those stains left by deodorant use as it is carried out of the armpit by perspiration. Some people say that they don't get sweat stains on their clothing nearly as much if they don't use deodorant. Deodorants - modern aluminum-based ones - essentially try to plug the pores in your underarms so you can't sweat as much so you are blocking your body's attempt to cool itself and to give that part of your skin proper respiration. So do you get sweat stains on the armpits of your summer shirts or has stopping deodorant use left your shirts with fewer sweat stains on them? How long did it take for you to transition from using deodorant before you noticed a reduction in the ranker kind of perspiration that most people seem to get if they stop using modern deodorants. Anyway, I get the impression that many people think they perspire more and stink a little more for 2-3 weeks after they give up deodorant. And most people are now saying that the natural non-aluminum deodorants you can buy in the yuppie boutiques or make for yourself don't work and actually makes them stink of the natural deodorant mixture they use.

I know I'm being nosy but I have the feeling you're not shy on the subject.

You didn't comment on the cold-showers people yet. So are you gung-ho for cold or cool or warm or hot showers? Do you think there are health benefits to cool or cold showers?

Geopstrategically, those were - and still are - the two most important policies in the world, because Russia doesn't have to be an enemy, and China has to be stopped (and to stop China, you need Russia).

This is obvious, and these interests supersede every other concern. Trump was the only politicians saying anything like this, and still is. I didn't hold my nose to vote for Trump - he has the clearest strategic vision on both geopolitics and trade as any President since Nixon.