12/15/09 10:16PM
-
Mr. Reaves....where are you sir?
07/01/09 9:38AM
-
Congrats!!! -
Great pictures Jake! I was just at the pool with Lisa and she was telling me how wonderful both weddings were. What beautiful scenery! -
I saw some from Lisa, but her camera died just before the ceremony. I'm very excited for you two! -
I love the sweeping vista shot!
-
Oh wow, absolutely gorgeous background in those pictures!!! Congratulations on getting married:)!!! -
You need to update your family portrait over there to the right!!
-
oh my stars that is BEAUTIFUL!!!! :) I'm so happy for you. -
i love the location! and everything looks just gorgeous! so great! veryhappy for you! -
I would have sent you a gift had I known when it was...O wait, I didn't get an invite! -
congrats! the pictures look great! -
We wish you the most wonderful life together in His service! -
Love the family pic, but wait... shouldn't Kristen be holding the briefcase? oooo! lol! Love you both! -
I know - I thought about it for a minute but then remembered that time you called me fat and made me cry, or the time you said we should all post our worst picture and I was the only one who did, or the time..... (you have broad shoulders Jake :)
-
Jake, what's in the briefcase? Tom's gold bullion? Ha!!! -
Kid, I found this amazing midget Mexican wrestler on Youtube I thought of your awesome mask when I was watching it. I will try to post it now
Barry Soetoro or Barack Obama is not elligible to be president
http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/acrobat/2008-12/43669993.pdf
www.obamacrimes.com
www.obamacrimes.com
-
Jacob, not enought people are interested in gold to produce a true "run on comex" in my humble opinion. And those that have bought gold that they don't possess are not the types to freak like the Ron Paulistas who probably go to a gold shop to have it physically. Jacob, Give me some articles that aren't written on a doomsday website and I'll give it a bit more creedence. Sorry, I see where alot of your gold mania is coming from though, since you probably read alot of the RP propoganda. -
its alright Jake, I understand where you are coming from & some of your mockers will wish they had listened someday -
I will keep track. But I honestly don't think gold or silver would jump to an insane level if COMEX had a run and couldn't meet obligations. Demand would increase prices, possibly even doubling gold value, but a few years later there will be a correction in that market as well. I don't like to speculate, people do that full time and I bet the owner of this website is pushing a run because he has phsycial gold on hand and wants to artificially drive up gold prices, so that he can sell and when people sell (which they invariably will do when AND IF gold reaches that $2000 mark, then the increased supply will deflate the price. This is what is occurring on the market now. I like to have gold on hand (preferably buying it cheap) for that rainy day. But I don't buy gold with the intent of selling it as soon as the $2000 mark hits, but to hold just in case. That's my approach anyway.
-
coulterwickerham@yahoo.com
-
Equal the dow? You mean in the 7000 range?
-
I've been reading up on Austrian economics-- esp. Murray N. Rothbard. Heard of him?
Make sure your bank is stable!!!
You should find a coin shop and go buy Gold or Silver before its toooo late.
Lehman Failed
Wamu is going to Fail
AIG Failed
Bear Stearns Failed
Fannie and Freddie Failed
Morgan Stanley down 40%
Goldman Sachs down 24%
Gold was up 11% today
Silver was up 14% today
Move your 401(k)s to a Natural Resources or Commodities fund.
Everything I have been saying is happening right now.....
love
Jacob
Lehman Failed
Wamu is going to Fail
AIG Failed
Bear Stearns Failed
Fannie and Freddie Failed
Morgan Stanley down 40%
Goldman Sachs down 24%
Gold was up 11% today
Silver was up 14% today
Move your 401(k)s to a Natural Resources or Commodities fund.
Everything I have been saying is happening right now.....
love
Jacob
Ron Paul- Says Don't vote for the lesser of 2 evils.
Vote for Constitutional Candidate-Chuck Baldwin!!
Both candidates support the war
Both support the federal reserve
Both support BailOuts of needy companies.
basically both are socialist
RonPaul
"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy."
Carroll Quigley – Author of Tragedy & Hope
"The coverage of the presidential election is designed to be a grand distraction. This is not new, but this year, it’s more so than ever.
Pretending that a true difference exists between the two major candidates is a charade of great proportion. Many who help to perpetuate this myth are frequently unaware of what they are doing and believe that significant differences actually do exist. Indeed, on small points there is the appearance of a difference. The real issues, however, are buried in a barrage of miscellaneous nonsense and endless pontifications by robotic pundits hired to perpetuate the myth of a campaign of substance.
The truth is that our two-party system offers no real choice. The real goal of the campaign is to distract people from considering the real issues.
Influential forces, the media, the government, the privileged corporations and moneyed interests see to it that both party’s candidates are acceptable, regardless of the outcome, since they will still be in charge. It’s been that way for a long time. George Wallace was not the first to recognize that there’s “not a dime’s worth of difference” between the two parties. There is, though, a difference between the two major candidates and the candidates on third-party tickets and those running as independents.
The two parties and their candidates have no real disagreements on foreign policy, monetary policy, privacy issues, or the welfare state. They both are willing to abuse the Rule of Law and ignore constitutional restraint on Executive Powers. Neither major party champions free markets and private-property ownership.
Those candidates who represent actual change or disagreement with the status quo are held in check by the two major parties in power, making it very difficult to compete in the pretend democratic process. This is done by making it difficult for third-party candidates to get on the ballots, enter into the debates, raise money, avoid being marginalized, or get fair or actual coverage. A rare celebrity or a wealthy individual can, to a degree, overcome these difficulties.
The system we have today allows a President to be elected by as little as 32% of the American people, with half of those merely voting for the “lesser of two evils”. Therefore, as little as 16% actually vote for a president. No wonder when things go wrong, anger explodes. A recent poll shows that 60% of the American people are not happy with the two major candidates this year.
This system is driven by the conviction that only a major party candidate can win. Voters become convinced that any other vote is a “wasted” vote. It’s time for that conclusion to be challenged and to recognize that the only way not to waste one’s vote is to reject the two establishment candidates and join the majority, once called silent, and allow the voices of the people to be heard.
We cannot expect withdrawal of troops from Iraq or the Middle East with either of the two major candidates. Expect continued involvement in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Georgia. Neither hints of a non-interventionist foreign policy. Do not expect to hear the rejection of the policy of supporting the American world empire. There will be no emphasis in protecting privacy and civil liberties and the constant surveillance of the American people. Do not expect any serious attempt to curtail the rapidly expanding national debt. And certainly, there will be no hint of addressing the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationship with big banks and international corporations and the politicians.
There is only one way that these issues can get the attention they deserve: the silent majority must become the vocal majority.
This message can be sent to our leaders by not participating in the Great Distraction—the quadrennial campaign and election of an American President without a choice. Just think of how much of an edge a Vice President has in this process, and he or she is picked by a single person—the party’s nominee. This was never intended by the Constitution.
Since a principled non-voter sends a message, we must count them and recognize the message they are sending as well. The non-voters need to hold their own “election” by starting a “League of Non-voters” and explain their principled reasons for opting out of this charade of the presidential elective process. They just might get a bigger membership than anyone would guess.
Write-in votes should not be discouraged, but the electoral officials must be held accountable and make sure the votes are counted. But one must not be naïve and believe that under today’s circumstances one has a chance of accomplishing much by a write-in campaign.
The strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two-party system, which in reality is a one-party system with no possible chance for the changes to occur which are necessary to solve our economic and foreign policy problems. This can be accomplished by voting for one of the non-establishment principled candidates—Baldwin, Barr, McKinney, Nader, and possibly others. (listed alphabetically)
Yes, these individuals do have strong philosophic disagreements on various issues, but they all stand for challenging the status quo—those special interest who control our federal government. And because of this, on the big issues of war, civil liberties, deficits, and the Federal Reserve they have much in common. People will waste their vote in voting for the lesser of two evils. That can’t be stopped overnight, but for us to have an impact we must maximize the total votes of those rejecting the two major candidates.
For me, though, my advice—for what it’s worth—is to vote! Reject the two candidates who demand perpetuation of the status quo and pick one of the alternatives that you have the greatest affinity to, based on the other issues.
A huge vote for those running on principle will be a lot more valuable by sending a message that we’ve had enough and want real change than wasting one’s vote on a supposed lesser of two evils."
Both candidates support the war
Both support the federal reserve
Both support BailOuts of needy companies.
basically both are socialist
RonPaul
"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy."
Carroll Quigley – Author of Tragedy & Hope
"The coverage of the presidential election is designed to be a grand distraction. This is not new, but this year, it’s more so than ever.
Pretending that a true difference exists between the two major candidates is a charade of great proportion. Many who help to perpetuate this myth are frequently unaware of what they are doing and believe that significant differences actually do exist. Indeed, on small points there is the appearance of a difference. The real issues, however, are buried in a barrage of miscellaneous nonsense and endless pontifications by robotic pundits hired to perpetuate the myth of a campaign of substance.
The truth is that our two-party system offers no real choice. The real goal of the campaign is to distract people from considering the real issues.
Influential forces, the media, the government, the privileged corporations and moneyed interests see to it that both party’s candidates are acceptable, regardless of the outcome, since they will still be in charge. It’s been that way for a long time. George Wallace was not the first to recognize that there’s “not a dime’s worth of difference” between the two parties. There is, though, a difference between the two major candidates and the candidates on third-party tickets and those running as independents.
The two parties and their candidates have no real disagreements on foreign policy, monetary policy, privacy issues, or the welfare state. They both are willing to abuse the Rule of Law and ignore constitutional restraint on Executive Powers. Neither major party champions free markets and private-property ownership.
Those candidates who represent actual change or disagreement with the status quo are held in check by the two major parties in power, making it very difficult to compete in the pretend democratic process. This is done by making it difficult for third-party candidates to get on the ballots, enter into the debates, raise money, avoid being marginalized, or get fair or actual coverage. A rare celebrity or a wealthy individual can, to a degree, overcome these difficulties.
The system we have today allows a President to be elected by as little as 32% of the American people, with half of those merely voting for the “lesser of two evils”. Therefore, as little as 16% actually vote for a president. No wonder when things go wrong, anger explodes. A recent poll shows that 60% of the American people are not happy with the two major candidates this year.
This system is driven by the conviction that only a major party candidate can win. Voters become convinced that any other vote is a “wasted” vote. It’s time for that conclusion to be challenged and to recognize that the only way not to waste one’s vote is to reject the two establishment candidates and join the majority, once called silent, and allow the voices of the people to be heard.
We cannot expect withdrawal of troops from Iraq or the Middle East with either of the two major candidates. Expect continued involvement in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Georgia. Neither hints of a non-interventionist foreign policy. Do not expect to hear the rejection of the policy of supporting the American world empire. There will be no emphasis in protecting privacy and civil liberties and the constant surveillance of the American people. Do not expect any serious attempt to curtail the rapidly expanding national debt. And certainly, there will be no hint of addressing the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationship with big banks and international corporations and the politicians.
There is only one way that these issues can get the attention they deserve: the silent majority must become the vocal majority.
This message can be sent to our leaders by not participating in the Great Distraction—the quadrennial campaign and election of an American President without a choice. Just think of how much of an edge a Vice President has in this process, and he or she is picked by a single person—the party’s nominee. This was never intended by the Constitution.
Since a principled non-voter sends a message, we must count them and recognize the message they are sending as well. The non-voters need to hold their own “election” by starting a “League of Non-voters” and explain their principled reasons for opting out of this charade of the presidential elective process. They just might get a bigger membership than anyone would guess.
Write-in votes should not be discouraged, but the electoral officials must be held accountable and make sure the votes are counted. But one must not be naïve and believe that under today’s circumstances one has a chance of accomplishing much by a write-in campaign.
The strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two-party system, which in reality is a one-party system with no possible chance for the changes to occur which are necessary to solve our economic and foreign policy problems. This can be accomplished by voting for one of the non-establishment principled candidates—Baldwin, Barr, McKinney, Nader, and possibly others. (listed alphabetically)
Yes, these individuals do have strong philosophic disagreements on various issues, but they all stand for challenging the status quo—those special interest who control our federal government. And because of this, on the big issues of war, civil liberties, deficits, and the Federal Reserve they have much in common. People will waste their vote in voting for the lesser of two evils. That can’t be stopped overnight, but for us to have an impact we must maximize the total votes of those rejecting the two major candidates.
For me, though, my advice—for what it’s worth—is to vote! Reject the two candidates who demand perpetuation of the status quo and pick one of the alternatives that you have the greatest affinity to, based on the other issues.
A huge vote for those running on principle will be a lot more valuable by sending a message that we’ve had enough and want real change than wasting one’s vote on a supposed lesser of two evils."
-
I like Palin and from that utube video you should be encouraged that she is running for VP!! :) I think she may actually have the opportunity to shake things up. This is an interesting election.
-
I like Palin as well, she's gotten rid of corrupt politicians and I also believe she will shake things up so to speak. I will definitely be voting for McCain/Palin.
-
You remember the Rothschild quote "give me control over a nation's currency and I care not who makes their laws". As long as we are in the United Nations, have a corrupt Federal Reserve, and have a government that does not care about national sovereignty, it doesnt make a significant difference which party is in office. That being said, for the small difference it makes, McCain is a better choice. Jake, look at it this way--once we get national health care THERE IS NO GETTING RID OF IT.
-
National health care may not work for you guys, but I've enjoyed it here! The perspective of the Rothschild quote "give me control over a nation's currency and I care not who makes their laws" is a very sobering one and I believe a very true statement. And so, with the Federal Reserve intact, I say, "good luck - you'll need it!" And having said that, we may not have the Federal Reserve, but the same powers are doubtless pulling the strings here north of the border as well.
-
Jake, stop and think about it--what will you accomplish by voting for Chuck Baldwin? Jake, the real question is what are you doing locally to change this country? Its easy to talk a big game but where true change will be made in is our own town. Point is--none of these guys compare to Ron Paul, the consistency of his message, the way he resonated with independents and anti-media, but none of the other candidates have any financial backing and media attention. Do you really think the system is going to change because you vote for Baldwin? Please! Get off your ox and out in your own hometown and spread the message of liberty!!! (against two party system, UN, the FED, etc). I, for one, don't want to see Obama and higher taxes on everything and national health care.
-
Jake, Its interesting to me that you and your brother don't focus on what is really important; that is, which of the two candidates would do the best job of protecting our spiritual values? Whether you like him or not for any other reason, it has to be Senator McCain, who is against same sex marriage, and abortion. Think about it. Granddaddy
blueturtle
jk
megan
derekphipps
dixiechick
lp
rica5219
andylyn
thecharlie
jannagrace
coulter
jmoney
bharris007
meg
sarai
janjan
ladyfire
bw
sarahsmile
shannon
melmibelle
iamjane
tramellite
loveofjebs
lw
sweetmelissa
sarahbee
icantbreathe
simon_says
kristiegore
flychic
fredgore
lisareaves
joshreaves
mexicananimal
tandielq
nomes
eminksa
jaredreaves
daddythornton
co_chad
jeans
hogfan216
iran487