I'm voting Republican
I'm voting Republican because I believe oil is worth more than the blood of American soldiers.
I'm voting Republican because freedom of speech is fine as long as it is in a free speech zone 2 miles away from where anyone will hear it.
I'm voting Republican because some books are just plain evil and they should be banned and burned.
I'm voting Republican because the Constitution isn't very important to me.
I'm voting Republican because even though we're in a war that we never should have started and which violates the Constitution, gosh darn it...we can win!
I'm voting Republican because I believe all Muslims are bad guys intent on killing Americans simply because they hate our freedom.
I'm voting Republican because even though a chunk of ice larger than Manhattan just broke off the polar ice shelf, global warming is just a ploy by liberals to get me to stop driving my SUV.
I'm voting Republican because I believe it's up to government to tell people whom they can marry, what medicines they can take, or what medical procedures they can have.
I'm voting Republican because employees should be loyal to businesses, but businesses should only be loyal to stockholders.
I'm voting Republican because thinking is over-rated.
I'm voting Republican because the more brown people we have in jails, the more room I'll have on the freeway for my hummer.
I'm voting Republican because I believe life is sacred... unless you're a Muslim....or an abortion doctor.
I'm voting Republican because being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a popular conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.
I'm voting Republican because the United States should get out of the United Nations, and our highest national priority is enforcing U.N. resolutions against Iraq.
I'm voting Republican because government should relax regulation of Big Business and Big Money but crack down on individuals who use marijuana to relieve the pain of illness.
I'm voting Republican because "Standing Tall for America" means firing your workers and moving their jobs overseas.
I'm voting Republican because the flag stands for freedom ... unless you want the freedom to burn flags.
I'm voting Republican because a woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multinational corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.
I'm voting Republican because Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Barack Obama.
I'm voting Republican because the best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.
I'm voting Republican because group sex and drug use are degenerate sins unless you someday run for governor of California as a Republican.
I'm voting Republican because if condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.
I'm voting Republican because a good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our long-time allies, then demand their cooperation and money.
I'm voting Republican because HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.
I'm voting Republican because providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is evil socialism.
I'm voting Republican because global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.
I'm voting Republican because Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.
I'm voting Republican because a president lying about an extramarital affair is a impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.
I'm voting Republican because government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.
I'm voting Republican because the public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's driving record is none of our business.
I'm voting Republican because I support states' rights, which means Attorney General Michael Mukasey can tell states what local voter initiatives they have the right to adopt.
I'm voting Republican because what Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80s is irrelevant.
I'm voting Republican because trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.
I'm beginning to think I may not vote at all. :o(
I don't care what anyone says...amen, Radar!
I'm beginning to think I may not vote at all. :o(
Can I have your vote if you're not using it?
I'm glad you finally came to your senses, Radar.
There's so much spin there, you're makin' me dizzy.
There's so much spin there, you're makin' me dizzy.
Understatement of the year award right there..... :p
delivers what? more partisan bullshit? yep.
Don't forget the hyperbole.
delivers what? more partisan bullshit? yep.
The Dems should easily take this election, given the current state of affairs. But as we've seen, it's pretty damn close. And I don't think racism is the issue, though I think some will stay away because of it.
Obama is being too easy on the GOP...and I think he still comes across as too mysterious. His campaign needs to figure out how to rub McCain the wrong way. Because if Johnny gets too riled up, people are going to be concerned about his temper...and it's already been a concern before.
some people like his "eff you" firey side.
The Dems should easily take this election, given the current state of affairs. But as we've seen, it's pretty damn close. And I don't think racism is the issue, though I think some will stay away because of it.
Obama is being too easy on the GOP...and I think he still comes across as too mysterious. His campaign needs to figure out how to rub McCain the wrong way. Because if Johnny gets too riled up, people are going to be concerned about his temper...and it's already been a concern before.
I keep telling people, don't discount the "Deer Hunting for Jesus" crowd. People were shocked in 04 when Bush won a second time. It can and may happen again with McCain.
Radar has, it appears, no senses to come to, not even of taste.
What he has instead is a complex of the most violent, irrational, moronic anti-Republican prejudices that ever disgraced a poster, and which go far to show he is not a man of intelligence, being extra-special irrational in this election year. He has from time to time alleged he has a first-class intellect, apparently unaware that first-class intellects do not entertain violent prejudices. Kind of undercuts his argument.
If he wants to be a libertarian, he should model himself more after Larry Elder, whose thinking is widely available around these parts.
He has from time to time alleged he has a first-class intellect, apparently unaware that first-class intellects do not entertain violent prejudices.
*laughs so hard she chokes on coffee*
Why?
You're probably thinking, "Need you ask?" Well, I've never understood your political motivations nor tastes, nor am I likely to approve of them even if I did. I have an idea of what is good; Radar on examination does not fit it.
There really wasn't a shock to GWB's reelection -- after all, he got 3.5M more popular votes. It was also manifest that the Dem standardbearer Kerry hadn't the leadership or the vision to guide the country to a successful conclusion of a war started by other people, who desire to be Americans' enemies above all else and don't mind saying so.
The senior Democratic Party leadership is useless in prosecuting this war, and in time of war we need a war fighter in the Oval Office, not a war loser. South Vietnam, after all, did fall specifically because the Democrats in Congress said let it drop, no? Cut off all support in 1973, did they not? The domino fell in mid 1975. And the Dems continue belying their very name a generation later, never squashing tyranny to replace it with democracy and more liberal sociopolitical forms. Only the Republicans have shown that kind of vision; the Libertarian Party one day may do so, even if I have to found a school of LP policy thought myself. The Republicans are actively trying to shrink the world's Non-Integrating Gap region, while the Democrats have never even attempted it. One group here has a strategy and a long view, the other doesn't.
The Dem Party reluctance to win this war leaves me thinking there are just two kinds of Democrats worth more than a pitcher of warm spit. One is those registered Democratic voters in their country's uniform; the other is Senator Joe Lieberman, whose party has so thoroughly abandoned him that he's now identified as "Independent" in news captions.
What I'm saying is if you've got a war, particularly against a tyranny, you might as well be a hawk if you want to be on the side of the angels.
South Vietnam, after all, did fall specifically because the Democrats in Congress said let it drop, no? Cut off all support in 1973, did they not?
They did not.
...never squashing tyranny to replace it with democracy and more liberal sociopolitical forms. Only the Republicans have shown that kind of vision; the Libertarian Party one day may do so,...
The main opposition to the Kosovo campaign came from libertarians and conservatives.
he's now identified as "Independent" in news captions
Self-declared Independent; ran as Ind. in the last election.
Finally, I agree with Radar! Write down the date! Make a national holiday!
some people like his "eff you" firey side.
Others wonder if it could lead to a nuclear exchange.
Radar has, it appears, no senses to come to, not even of taste.
What he has instead is a complex of the most violent, irrational, moronic anti-Republican prejudices that ever disgraced a poster, and which go far to show he is not a man of intelligence, being extra-special irrational in this election year. He has from time to time alleged he has a first-class intellect, apparently unaware that first-class intellects do not entertain violent prejudices. Kind of undercuts his argument.
If he wants to be a libertarian, he should model himself more after Larry Elder, whose thinking is widely available around these parts.
Larry Elder isn't a libertarian, and neither are you. And you're not in a position to discuss the intellect of a flea, let alone your intellectual, social, and moral superior...me.
The main opposition to the Kosovo campaign came from libertarians and conservatives.
Libertarians aren't conservatives, and true libertarians are never in favor of war unless it is to defend our own country.
Others wonder if it could lead to a nuclear exchange.
And that's kinda what I'm getting at. We like emotion...we don't like too much, though. Remember Edmund Muskie? Howard Dean?
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican because I believe oil is important to America, and the Liberals would rather talk about being “green” without doing anything substantial about it. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I’m voting Republican because I am a war veteran and am humbled by the sacrifice and blood lost by my brothers and sisters in-arms. The Democrats only want to shrink the Armed Forces and force us into drastic shortages that make it difficult to defend our Constitution and freedom.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican because freedom of speech is part of the Constitution, period.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican to vote against every wayward Liberal author, movie director, and reporter, because I am not buying the agenda they are trying to shove down the throat of every American.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican because even though we're in a war that most Americans, and both parties agreed to getting into, we will do everything we can to support the democracy for the people of Iraq. These are the same people that have suffered in a way that most Americans could never even imagine.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because I believe in freedom from government oppression and control.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because no matter what we do, nature has a way of defeating our stupid blundering. And if in fact we screw up so badly it cannot sustain life any longer, well, we deserve it. I guess we Republicans will be lucky since we are the only ones that believe in the God of the Bible. [/COLOR][/FONT]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I’m voting Republican because I love my SUV.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because I believe that the immoral few should not dictate the moral majority. I believe my taxes should not go to provide health care for illegal immigrants, or for people that live risky life styles. I don’t live a risky life style and think it’s ridiculous to pay for someone else that could care less for the consequences of their actions, or for others. [/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because employees should take pride in their work and should endeavor to do their best for the pay they get. I am also voting Republican because I believe in democracy and enterprise. [/COLOR][/FONT]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican because I am well educated, well read, and above average intelligence. With a Master’s degree in Engineering (4.0), and an IQ of 152, I am in the top 5%. Thinking can be fun! [/FONT][/COLOR]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because there should be justice for anyone that suffers at the hands of criminals.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because I believe life is sacred, period. Only fanatics hate others.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican because drug addiction that leads to criminal behavior is wrong. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because the United States is not best served by the United Nations which has never shown itself to be effective at anything but corruption. Read “What's Wrong with the United Nations and How to Fix it” byThomas G. Weiss, or the ‘[/COLOR][/FONT][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Controversy and criticism section in Wikipedia for the United Nations.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican because government should allow businesses to bring more jobs and make more money without being overly controlled by the Democrats.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican because marijuana is not specifically used to relieve the pain of illness, but is mostly abused and leads to criminal conduct.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because "Standing Tall for America" has been misused and misrepresented by Liberals to make fun of people of values. Sorry, the jokes on you.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because the flag stands for freedom. Burning the flag is unpatriotic. I believe it is possible for people with IQs over 70 to come up with other ways to protest. Of course that’s not the case if they are Anti-American, in which case I say there are many planes, trains, boats, and automobiles leaving our borders every day. Why don’t you board one?[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because abortion of an unborn child is murder. A child is not a choice; however the majority of bad decisions leading up to the pregnancy are a choice. Take some responsibility for crying out loud. And before we go down that road, the willful killing of an innocent and helpless victim is murder, but it is not murder for the state to put to death someone who is guilty of heinous crimes. If it were, I’d rather a criminal live than an innocent child be murdered.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican which has nothing to do with religion, sexual preference, or any individual personality. If it did, it wouldn’t be my choice, but an influence or peer pressure…much like what the Democratic Party does. In my city, Democrats load up buses, hand out boxes of cigarettes and take people to the polls to vote for their party. Other than a weekly government check, these people never receive anything positive or reinforcing from their party. How sad. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican because the best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while the Democrats slash veterans' benefits and combat pay. Don’t tell me they don’t, I served during the horrid Clinton era. I was on food stamps and had to suffer annual raises below COLA.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because I am not a prude in my own bed. I just happen to make wise decisions regarding whom I have sex with, and how.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because condoms in schools condone sex amongst adolescents who are usually not mentally or emotionally prepared for such intimate relationships, nor the consequences.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because fighting terrorism benefits our allies as much as it does us. [/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because the Democrats haven’t come up with a good solution to replace our existing HMO and insurance situation without me having to pay for free-loaders and those with risky life styles that cause a drain on the healthcare system.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because global warming is not a fact, that tobacco's does cause cancer, and creationism is being kept out of schools.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because the world is a complex place and only the Republicans are willing to change to meet the challenges of the world at any given time. A Saddam today is a Maddas tomorrow. All I ever saw was the Democrats sitting on their hands.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because a president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. To accept this behavior as okay is shameful and embarrassing for our entire nation.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I'm voting Republican because our president didn’t have to try hard to enlist support from all Americans for a war to fight terrorism. Maybe the next evil ruler won’t lie about WMDs to keep people from waging war on them. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because I support marriage between a man and woman only, and because I want our government to protect our nation by keeping dangerous and harmful material out of the hands of the deranged, perverts, and the innocent children by censoring the Internet.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because the public has a right to know about financial dealings of political candidates because it shows a history of fair dealing, or not. I also believe in focusing on what really matters, not silly things like driving records.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because I support states' rights due to the strict interpretation of the Constitution, by which all rights not delegated by the Constitution to the federal government belong to the states.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because it gives both Democrats and Republicans the opportunity to work together for the better of our country, regardless of what happened in the ‘60s or the ‘80s. You’ll NEVER get bi-partisan cooperation or acknowledgement with the Democrats in charge.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]I'm voting Republican because trade with Cuba, China and Vietnam is much more complicated that a witty comment could ever portray. The Republicans are willing to address these foreign policy issues. By the way, since [/COLOR][/FONT][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]1961 the United States Government has initiated various policy measures against Cuba's government, not all of which were Republican lead. Get a book and read for a change, instead of getting your news from the Liberal media and other corrupt sources.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I am voting Republican because it’s the best choice for our country. It also gives me a little satisfaction that it pisses off a Liberal. :p [/FONT][/COLOR]
Wow! There are enough self-contradictory statements in that previous post for a thesis.
Way to put it out there Yznhymr, I may not agree with all of it, but I'm impressed nonetheless.
Especially when its so popular to vote for "[COLOR="Silver"]Change[/COLOR]" no matter how empty the promises of it.
Interesting post Yznhymr, although I don't see how being pushed around by the moral majority (the use of majority depends on how loose the definition of 'moral') is any better than being pushed around by 'godless liberals'.
Maybe I want my kid to have real sex education and don't want the government to discriminate in it's funding.
Maybe I like science based on actual science.
Maybe I like choice.
The 'immoral few' aren't forcing women to have abortions, but giving them the choice. The correct term is really the 'amoral majority'.
I still remember that many of today's 'moral majority' thought segregation and miscegenation laws were just fine back in the day, and confused intolerance with morality.
Freedom is usually messy, and authoritarians always promise order and calm. Personally, I think any person who measures his or her morality by how effectively he or she can interfere with my life is an asshole.
From the tip mug quote right now:
Patriotism is the willingness to kill and be killed for trivial reasons.
- Bertrand Russell
Wow! There are enough self-contradictory statements in that previous post for a thesis.
You beat me to that. So much for the high IQ and world-class education. Assuming he wasn't lying about his IQ, I've still got him beat. :)
What the fuck is this thread about?
About 3 pages.
...of nothingness but partisan crap.
Only Yznhymr's post, you pathetic, ignorant, Bush apolgist, piece of shit.
Wow - now I'm a pathetic, ignorant, piece of shit?
That's really mature of you - NOT.
Why can't we all just get along?
Why can't we all just get along?
Where's the fun in that? Somebody has to kill those darn immigration law enforcers when they come a knockin......
Only Yznhymr's post, you pathetic, ignorant, Bush apolgist, piece of shit.
I love you too, Radar! :joylove:
I love this thread. It started with a diatribe of biased, ignorant, and inflammatory comments. I came back with equally, if not more, inflammatory and ignorant comments, and that got quite a few people up in arms. Yippie! The democratic process may not be perfect, but at least we have people willing to stick to their guns (no pun intended) and take a stand for what they think is best for them and OUR country.
If I regret any comment, it's the IQ one. I'm really full of shit and just wanted to make it clear to everyone that I am. If you can't make an ass of yourself from time to time, and get a chuckle out of it, you are taking life WAY too seriously.
xoxo
Yznhymr
I love you too, Radar! :joylove:
I was talking about him not you. You're only brainwashed, he's just plain stupid.
I was talking about him not you. You're only brainwashed, he's just plain stupid.
LOL
:p
Wow - now I'm a pathetic, ignorant, piece of shit? That's really mature of you.
Mature. Piece of shit. classicman. All synonymous.
These are the type of dicussions classicman understands. Just making him happy.
Way to be the bandwagon jumper there big guy - nice to see you outta the basement again.
I love how those of you who have differing beliefs just attack the poster who MAY disagree with you. No wonder America has the reputation it has abroad.
Shawnee, don't just sit by and watch.
Do something :stickpoke:stickpoke:stickpoke.
Heehee...and let on that I'm on the tw/Radar side? Never!
Crap, did I type that out loud?
Besides, this popcorn is goooooood.
disclaimer: this post in no way means that I am questioning anyone's base intelligence. ;)
You have classicman's quote in your sig line. You must defend him. That's the rule.
HA! I laugh in the face of your rules.
Well then you are all a bunch of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _!
:)
Can I buy a vowel?
No. You have irritable vowel syndrome.
No. You have irritable vowel syndrome.
That's because Clinton sent them all to
Bosnia.
sure - payable to the mug at the bottom of the page.
Larry Elder isn't a libertarian, and neither are you. And you're not in a position to discuss the intellect of a flea, let alone your intellectual, social, and moral superior...me.
Let's see: you'd rather leave tyranny unmolested than spread libertarianism where tyranny reigned. Thus, for all of you, the oppressions and unfreedom all continue.
No, that's not a libertarian idea -- it's kowtowing to fascists and saying yes to genocides. There are a lot of nasty words for that, but I'll just say it's immorality. Not to liberate the oppressed is not to combat evil, but to support it. I do not believe one can be libertarian without being liberationist as well -- not and count for anything but a tacit supporter of fascists and such.
The man who claims social superiority cannot attract an American woman -- and he imports a woman. Oh, very good. Maaarvelous.
You can't get foreign policy right; indeed I understand that your ideas of how to conduct foreign policy will work only in the absence of any foreign country or any foreigners period. My intellect is much clearer than yours, which leaves me in a way you'll never be.
Larry Elder is many times, I am sure, the libertarian you'll ever be -- he takes action in that direction over the air, and of course there are the books he's written. He's not your sort of libertarian, Paul, because he's independent of your thought. This is a good thing, I think based on three years of reading what you post. The least of your sillinesses is your attachment to the idea that nothing short of perfection will avail. This is the perfect recipe for paralysis, not for making libertarianism the order of the day. You'd like me to believe this paralysis is virtue. No way, José... or Pablo.
It seems you have adopted libertarianism as a philosophical bolster to your being a schmuck, having started from a schmuck viewpoint rather than a liberationist one, and you come full circle back to being a schmuck once again. No, the immeasurably better man here is not you, Paul. I wish you'd have both the presence of mind and the graceful self-respect to get better. The self-parody in "me" is not a substitute for self improvement. From time to time it may constitute a symptom, though.
I've been dipping into Winston Churchill's writing a little. My, I want more. Churchill thought quite a bit about conflict, about international relations, and about liberty and just governance. The gulf between Churchill's thought and Paul Ireland's thought is well-nigh immeasurable. Churchill strikes me as far the wiser. Thus my thoughts remain more intelligent than yours, friend. Yours might come to resemble Churchill's were you to crack the books and do some study.
I love this thread. . . Yippie! The democratic process may not be perfect, but at least we have people willing to stick to their guns (no pun intended) and take a stand for what they think is best for them and OUR country.
We cling to them, without bitterness. (Your shot groups are better that way.)
Let's see: you'd rather leave tyranny unmolested than spread libertarianism where tyranny reigned. Thus, for all of you, the oppressions and unfreedom all continue.
Wrong. I want to spread libertarianism, and it can not be spread by force, unless that force is by those who are winning freedom for themselves. Libertarians do not support the initiation of force for any reason, especially for political gain or social engineering. All pre-emptive wars are a direct violation of libertarian principles. All non-defensive wars are a direct violation of libertarian principles. Anything you say to the contrary of these sentences proves your ignorance of libertarianism.
No, that's not a libertarian idea -- it's kowtowing to fascists and saying yes to genocides.
You know nothing about libertarian principles. If you condone the war in Iraq or any pre-emptive wars, or any wars other than those in your own defense, you are not a libertarian... PERIOD.
The man who claims social superiority cannot attract an American woman -- and he imports a woman. Oh, very good. Maaarvelous.
I've had plenty of American women. It's not a matter of me being able to attract American women. They generally don't attract me. My wife is better looking, classier, more intelligent, and a better person than you will ever be.
You can't get foreign policy right; indeed I understand that your ideas of how to conduct foreign policy will work only in the absence of any foreign country or any foreigners period. My intellect is much clearer than yours, which leaves me in a way you'll never be.
You couldn't be more clueless with foreign policy. Your so-called ideas have been tried by plenty of petty tyrants. Your foreign policy is shared by the same people you want to attack...Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Fidel Castro, etc. You are no more or less libertarian than these people.
Larry Elder is many times, I am sure, the libertarian you'll ever be -- he takes action in that direction over the air, and of course there are the books he's written. He's not your sort of libertarian, Paul, because he's independent of your thought. This is a good thing, I think based on three years of reading what you post. The least of your sillinesses is your attachment to the idea that nothing short of perfection will avail. This is the perfect recipe for paralysis, not for making libertarianism the order of the day. You'd like me to believe this paralysis is virtue. No way, José... or Pablo.
Larry Elder isn't my sort of libertarian in the same way Shaquille O'Neal isn't my sort of midget. He isn't one. Nobody who supports the war in Iraq is a libertarian, PERIOD. End of story. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar. This especially includes you because you constantly lie. Not only are you not a libertarian, you prove that you don't even know the meaning of the word. Larry Elder refers to himself as a "Republitarian". Because he is a Republican who happens to agree with libertarians on a few issues. Larry Elder is independent of thought, but this doesn't make him a libertarian. You on the other hand are devoid of thought.
I've been dipping into Winston Churchill's writing a little. I want more. Churchill thought quite a bit about conflict, about international relations, and about liberty and just governance. The gulf between Churchill's thought and Paul Ireland's thought is well-nigh immeasurable. Churchill strikes me as far the wiser. Thus my thoughts remain more intelligent than yours, friend.
You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. Winston Churchill wasn't a libertarian. It makes a lot of sense that you would agree with him. If it is your opinion that Winston Churchill was more wise than me, you may be right. But he wasn't more libertarian than me. He wasn't a libertarian at all. Nor is Larry Elder. Nor is Bob Barr. But most of all, YOU are not anywhere close to being a libertarian and you're too thickheaded and stupid to probably ever be.
Bosh, top to bottom. A schmuck you began, and a schmuck you remain. I say again you can't really be a libertarian unless you are also a determined liberationist. You can't present a convincing argument otherwise. Dead fascists don't amount, after all, to an obstacle to creating a more libertarian social order, do they?
Attract women? So you say -- on the 'net.
You remove obstacles to libertarianism by force, for the obstacles will act to oppose libertarianism by force, and unless there is countervailing force, they will invariably succeed in quashing it. Hence, no libertarianism. This is where your idea prevents libertarianism's spread, and ought therefore not to be taken for action. Your regrettable intellect avoids understanding this, as you so often avoid understanding in general.
Nondemocracies are the places that would benefit most greatly from going libertarian or in a libertarian direction -- the likelier occurrence, as societies change their political orders only gradually in any circumstance other than badly losing a war.
Most of the human obstacles to libertarianism will become obstacles through warfare and thuggery. I am prepared to neutralize these strategies; you can't do that. I recommend you get the hell out of the way of those who can.
You will note, now that you go back and check, that I did not claim libertarian thinking for Churchill: just wisdom. You shouldn't try having your very own facts yourself.
Bosh, top to bottom. A schmuck you began, and a schmuck you remain. I say again you can't really be a libertarian unless you are also a determined liberationists.
I consider it a badge of honor to be called a schmuck from such a dishonest, idiotic, douche bag like you. Of course you repeat the same tired lie that you always do..."can't really be a libertarian unless you are also a determined liberationists". I've proven you wrong so many times, I can do it while I'm sleeping. Your claims violate every single libertarian principle ever documented or espoused by those who created the libertarian party, and who first created libertarian philosophy. They also violate the Constitution and the wishes of our America's founders.
You can't present a convincing argument otherwise. Dead fascists don't amount, after all, to an obstacle to creating a more libertarian social order, do they?
Every argument I've ever made on the subject is truthful, factual, well-documented, and convincing to any honest person that has an education above that of a 2nd grader. This is why I've failed to convince you. Or perhaps you can't hear my arguments with your head buried so far up your own ass?
Attract women? So you say -- on the 'net.
Well, unlike you I don't have a credit card statement to prove who I went on "dates" with. Unlike you, my word is valuable. I've been with plenty of American women, but that isn't my preference. If you like them, great. All you've got to do is grow a brain, get a job, erase everything about your vile personality, go to charm school, try not to be such a dickhead, and maybe you can convince a desperate, old, used-up biker chick to take you.
You remove obstacles to libertarianism by force, for the obstacles will act to oppose libertarianism by force, and unless there is countervailing force, they will invariably succeed in quashing it. Hence, no libertarianism. This is where your idea prevents libertarianism's spread, and ought therefore not to be taken for action. Your regrettable intellect avoids understanding this, as you so often avoid understanding in general.
Libertarianism is the philosophy that you don't initiate force. Libertarians believe the only justifiable use of force is in your own defense. You don't use force to spread libertarianism. Using force to spread libertarianism is like using rape to spread chastity. Your lack of intellect would be an embarrassment for a 4 year old retarded kid who was hit in the head with a sledge hammer. But this is nothing compared to your lack of character or integrity.
Nondemocracies are the places that would benefit most greatly from going libertarian or in a libertarian direction -- the likelier occurrence, as societies change their political orders only gradually in any circumstance other than badly losing a war.
Democracy is not freedom and is not libertarianism and libertarianism is not spread by force. You fail to grasp even the most basic component of libertarianism. This is why you regurgitate lies and make absurd statements so consistently. It's why you will always be laughed at by real libertarians.
Most of the human obstacles to libertarianism will become obstacles through warfare and thuggery.
Correct. And you are one of those obstacles. You are exactly the kind of cheap, petty, brainless little thug you are talking about.
I am prepared to neutralize these strategies; you can't do that. I recommend you get the hell out of the way of those who can.
I recommend you go fuck yourself and don't every try to use
MY military to pull off your stupidity and stop trying to label your brand of tyranny as libertarianism, because it's not. If you want to go on your own to help people win freedom for themselves, more power to you. If you try to use the U.S. Military to do it, I will stand in your way, and I'm a lot tougher than you are.
You will note, now that you go back and check, that I did not claim libertarian thinking for Churchill: just wisdom. You shouldn't try having your very own facts yourself.
I didn't accuse you of lying about Churchill being a libertarian. You've only lied about yourself being one. I merely said that Churchill isn't a libertarian and if you are trying to use his words to suggest that you are one, you're barking up the wrong tree....as usual.
:jagoff: :dedhorse: :repuke: :brikwall: :magnum: :vomitblu:
eta: I couldn't find one that seemed to say, 'My dick is bigger than yours'
It's not a bigger dick contest. The guy is a lying piece of shit and an asshole. He is upset because I constantly point out his lies and and prove that he's not a libertarian.
He just keeps it up because he's a worthless, scumbag without an ounce of honor and he thinks repeating the same lie will lend him some credibility.
Yes Radar. Obviously we should all believe you because you're the only one who knows everything.
Can you say God Complex?
I'd say my credentials as a libertarian speak for themselves. I'm a 4 time "lights of liberty" award winner for libertarian activism. I was chairman of largest county libertarian organization in the United States. I was on the executive committee of the Libertarian Party of California (the largest state libertarian organization in America). I personally know the man who started the Libertarian Party; David Nolan. I've met with several libertarian party candidates for president including Ron Paul (I actually sat with him and had dinner), Harry Browne, and Michael Badnarik. I've registered thousands of young people to vote as libertarians. I've donated thousands and thousands of dollars and thousands of hours to further libertarianism. I've run for 3 offices as a libertarian candidate. I've read hundreds of books on libertarian philosophy. Within the libertarian community, I was known as a purist because my standards are higher than most.
I'd say that makes me a pretty damned good judge as to who is or is not a libertarian.
I don't believe I know everything, but I do know everything about a few things, and libertarianism is one of them. The U.S. Constitution is another. I also know more about computer networking than any average 5 network administrators combined.
I don't have a god complex or a narcissistic personality disorder. I've got a firm grasp on reality and I know where I'm strong and where I'm not. I'm confident and I've got a lot to back up my confidence.
I have a libertarian resume just as long as yours, and you're full of shit.
I recommend you go fuck yourself and don't every try to use MY military to pull off your stupidity and stop trying to label your brand of tyranny as libertarianism, because it's not. If you want to go on your own to help people win freedom for themselves, more power to you. If you try to use the U.S. Military to do it, I will stand in your way, and I'm a lot tougher than you are.
"It's MY island!"
On a serious note, how do you make the claim that it is your army, when if I'm not mistaken you don't pay any taxes to support/equip said army? Honest question not trying to be facetious and add to the heat of this "discussion" in progress...
:lol2: very, VERY good Bullitt!
"It's MY island!"
On a serious note, how do you make the claim that it is your army, when if I'm not mistaken you don't pay any taxes to support/equip said army? Honest question not trying to be facetious and add to the heat of this "discussion" in progress...
I do pay income taxes. I always have. I only do so because it is extortion. I don't pay them because I actually owe them. I pay them so I don't have to get into shootout with people coming to my house to
TRY to take my shit.
I have a libertarian resume just as long as yours, and you're full of shit.
No you don't, and no I'm not. I've seen your so-called libertarian resume. You were one of the half-hearted libertarians who gave up on the party because you didn't think they were getting people elected into high enough positions.
I didn't leave the party until it was no longer being run by libertarians.
I do pay income taxes. I always have. I only do so because it is extortion. I don't pay them because I actually owe them. I pay them so I don't have to get into shootout with people coming to my house to TRY to take my shit.
I think you've missed the point here, but your explanation only reinforces what we already know anyway.
I've asked you this before and you've never answered, but let's try again just for the record.
If you're against paying taxes, how do you expect the military (even the mystical one that lives in your head) to be funded?I do pay income taxes. I always have. I only do so because it is extortion. I don't pay them because I actually owe them. I pay them so I don't have to get into shootout with people coming to my house to TRY to take my shit.
I was under the impression that you declined to pay income taxes, thought I read you saying that in the past. Hence my question.
I think you've missed the point here, but your explanation only reinforces what we already know anyway.
I've asked you this before and you've never answered, but let's try again just for the record.
If you're against paying taxes, how do you expect the military (even the mystical one that lives in your head) to be funded?
I didn't say I was against paying taxes; just income taxes. Did you know that before we had an income tax, we had roads, a military, a judiciary, a legislature, and all of the other Constitutional parts of government.
Right now income taxes don't even pay for our military or any part of our government. They go just to pay the interest on all of the money the government has borrowed in our names.
If income taxes were removed entirely, we could fund 100% of the Constitutional parts of government with only the tariffs and excise taxes we already collect without raising them a single penny.
We would have to reduce the size of our military so it was large enough to carry out the common defense of our own country and not stick our noses into every dispute on earth between other nations, we'd have to eliminate all parts of the federal government not enumerated in the Constitution like Homeland security, FBI, CIA, NSA, DEA, BATF, BLM, FCC, Foreign aid, welfare, medicare, social security, federally funded education, etc.
I was under the impression that you declined to pay income taxes, thought I read you saying that in the past. Hence my question.
I believe I said I don't have to pay taxes. I don't believe I said I wasn't paying them. For a time I was working for a law school that teaches about the illegality of the income tax, and they paid me in cash without taxes taken out. That was a long time ago though.
Whatever you say Radar. I'm sure you've written a federal budget to cover all the expenses that are important to you.
I guess if anyone else has an opinion on where money should be spent they should go suck an egg right?
We would have to reduce the size of our military so it was large enough to carry out the common defense of our own country and not stick our noses into every dispute on earth between other nations, we'd have to eliminate all parts of the federal government not enumerated in the Constitution like Homeland security, FBI, CIA, NSA, DEA, BATF, BLM, FCC, Foreign aid, welfare, medicare, social security, federally funded education, etc.
Hmmm, that's sounds like a great idea and when other imperialist or (insert your choice of negative term here) nations take over every other square inch of the planet we'll be in great shape to defend ourselves won't we? Maybe that theory worked when the only weapons were guns, knives and arrows, but as technology has enabled others to attack us from half way around the world, that pathetic outdated view just doesn't work anymore. :headshake
Whatever you say Radar. I'm sure you've written a federal budget to cover all the expenses that are important to you.
I guess if anyone else has an opinion on where money should be spent they should go suck an egg right?
Their opinion matters as long as what they want money spent on is enumerated in the Constitution. Otherwise, it does not.
Some people might believe your interpretation (which is obviously in the minority and you live in a democracy, so bad luck for you) of the constitution is outdated and even if your interpretation happens to be factual, that it should be ammended to suit the current economic and social circumstances of your nation.
My opinion is that any constitution, whether it be that of a country or a company even, is not a stagnant document. It is simply a foundation to begin from. It's up to the people to modify and update such documents throughout time.
eta: So if their opinion doesn't matter because according to you it's wrong according to the constitution, what should be the recourse? Should these people who have the same rights as American citizens as you do just bugger off and find some other country to live in?
I don't "interpret" the Constitution. It doesn't require interpretation. But I agree with you that the Constitution can be amended. It may not be amended, however, to grant any powers to the federal government that we, as individuals, don't have as a right without government.
The legitimate powers of government are derived from the consent of the governed. This means that government may only have the powers that we grant to it, AND which we have in the first place to grant to government. Government may not have any powers above the rights of a single person.
I don't have the right to take money from your wallet by force, to spend it to educate my kids, or to feed hungry people, or to provide healthcare, etc. therefore I can't grant this power to government. Nor can a million of me, or a billion of me.
I think you're wrong Radar.
Take the contrarian perspective of your argument.
Are you saying that every power granted to the federal government is a right that I already have as an individual? The power to declare and wage war? The power to tax, to regulate interstate trade? These are rights I have as an individual? Rights I ever had as an individual? Please.
Rework your post. As it stands, it's wrong on its face.
Yes, I am saying that. You as an individual have a right to defend yourself. So do others. You may grant this power to government...basically you hire government to perform this function for you.
The power to regulate interstate trade is simply the power for the federal government to settle economic disputes among the states. In essence we are hiring the government as a mediator. The reason we have a federal government at all is to provide common defense, and to settle disputes among the sovereign states.
As my post stands, it is 100% factual and accurate.
All legitimate powers of government are derived from the rights that individuals have granted to it. Government may have no powers above those of a single individual. You have no right to reach into my wallet to pay for your child's education, or your retirement, or your medical costs. How then can you grant this power to government? How can 350 million people who have no such right, grant this power to government?
The federal government may now exercise any powers that are not specifically enumerated, and even if they are enumerated, if they violate the rights of people they are illegitimate. The 16th & 18th amendments are illegitimate. Luckily the 18th was repealed.
Hey Radar - you must have missed this -
Link
I'm still waiting for you to respond.
Oh and thanks for again repeating your opinions - They are certainly refreshing to read even though I totally disagree with you.
Hey Radar - you must have missed this - Link
I'm still waiting for you to respond.
I didn't miss the link. I don't take parlay bets.
You made the claim I just asked you to back it up. Your reluctance speaks volumes.
I don't believe its a parlay anyway.
It's a bet that Obama will win...and a bet that he will get end the war and get the troops out within 18 months.
Fair enough - But you were/are sooooo confident - seems like I'm virtually giving you the money based upon all you've been posting here.
I've already got $3,000 action on it. Your $1,000 isn't that attractive especially since it's a parlay bet. Remember man, I grew up in Vegas. I can be confident without being a sucker. :)
It would seem that I am the sucker here offering you $1000 based on your vast, uh, dare I say, experience? You all but guaranteed an Obama victory and then assured us all that the troops would be gone 18 months afterward. I don't see the problem, unless you are getting nervous about the election or Obama's word.
I firmly believe that Obama will win, and he will win handily. I also believe that unlike the Republicans, he will have the desire and ability to come through on his promise to remove all troops from Iraq within his first year and a half in office. He will have a Democratic Congress behind him.
If he's elected, there is no question that every American troop will be out of Iraq within a year and a half of his inauguration...assuming he lives that long.
If he's elected, there is no question that every American troop will be out of Iraq within a year and a half of his inauguration...assuming he lives that long.
Then put up your $1000. I got mine right here ready and waiting. I'm sure there will be troops in Iraq whenever the next president leaves office. So I am supremely confident that you are completely wrong and are blowing smoke out your ass with that prediction.
Oh and if he "doesn't live that long I'll give you the "out" We each get our money back, but UT still gets the interest.
Then put up your $1000. I got mine right here ready and waiting. I'm sure there will be troops in Iraq whenever the next president leaves office. So I am supremely confident that you are completely wrong and are blowing smoke out your ass with that prediction.
I see smoke.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm?&page=1Then put up your $1000. I got mine right here ready and waiting. I'm sure there will be troops in Iraq whenever the next president leaves office. So I am supremely confident that you are completely wrong and are blowing smoke out your ass with that prediction.
After Obama is elected, we'll talk about making a $1,000 bet that the troops will be gone from Iraq within 18 months. Mention it the 2nd week of November.
no thanks - the deal is on the table now - either recant your statements, in writing, or put up. Whats the big deal? You stated that this would happen as a matter of fact. I bet you on it. Call & put up your money or fold and recant in writing.
Nope. I won't recant anything and I won't accept your best until Obama is first elected. When Obama is elected, you can talk to me about a bet where he brings the troops back within a year and a half. If you don't want the bet after he's elected, it proves that you lack the courage of your convictions.
lol - If you weren't so pathetic you'd be funny.
I want to know what the difference is between Classics money and the other people you've made bets with.
The differences are A) I know the people I've made bets with and they can and will pay me when I win. and B) They are making a straight bet while classic wants to make a parlay bet. He wants me to make 2 bets for the price of one. He wants me to bet that Obama will win, and then bet that after he wins he'll bring the troops home from Iraq within 18 months.
I am betting that Obama will win the election with my friends and family. Classic is neither of those. He's not even a decent person. In fact nobody who supports the Bush administration or the war in Iraq is a decent person or worthy of using the term "American" to describe themselves.
I've offered to consider making a bet with him after the election, but he isn't interested because he wants me to make a parlay bet with a single bet odds and payout. As a rule, I don't make parlay bets. I make regular bets and only when I know the person has enough honor, integrity, and ability to pay me when I win.
I grew up in Vegas and I consider a bet to be a big deal and welshers to be criminals.
Hyperbole by example:
In fact nobody who supports the Bush administration or the war in Iraq is a decent person or worthy of using the term "American" to describe themselves.
The differences are A) I know the people I've made bets with and they can and will pay me when I win.
UT is going to hold the money - objection overruled.
and B) They are making a straight bet while classic wants to make a parlay bet.
True and False - I am betting that you are WRONG in statements you have repeatedly posted here - I am asking you to back up what YOU said. Nothing more, That should be no problem for you if you are so confident. Yet, you are not - Thats fine. We all know the truth now.
He's not even a decent person. I make regular bets and only when I know the person has enough honor, integrity, and ability to pay me when I win.
Foul! Cheap shot. Ahh, your ignorance is showing, again. You are completely incorrect.
I am willing to let a 3rd party hold the money, you are not. I also have more honor and integrity than you will ever know. At least I am willing to back up what I say, my word means something. Yours apparently does not.
It's fine radar - you have young kids and I don't want to take your money anyway. I'd make a gentleman's bet with you, but that would be an impossible bet as you sir are no gentleman.
UT is going to hold the money - objection overruled.
In order for the objection to be overruled, the person holding the money must be trustworthy in the opinion of the parties making the bet. I don't trust UT any more than I trust you or any of the other people who constantly flood the board with lies like TheMercenary, Urbane Guerrilla, Lookout123, etc.
True and False - I am betting that you are WRONG in statements you have repeatedly posted here - I am asking you to back up what YOU said. Nothing more, That should be no problem for you if you are so confident. Yet, you are not - Thats fine. We all know the truth now.
Yes, we do know the truth. And the truth is I'm willing to stand behind what I say. I've already done it to the tune of $3,000. I will not allow an ignorant little twerp like you to push me into making a sucker's bet though. As I've said, if I thought you were good for the money, and he were already elected, we can consider a bet. Let's take it one step at a time. I'm in no rush sparky. If you're so anxious to make a bet with me, and make sure I stand behind what I say, talk to me after election day. I'll probably have an extra $3,000 to bet with.
Foul! Cheap shot. Ahh, your ignorance is showing, again. You are completely incorrect.
I'm entitled to my opinion.
I am willing to let a 3rd party hold the money, you are not.
I haven't said anything that would indicate that I'm unwilling for someone to hold the money in escrow if we both can agree on a bet after election day.
I also have more honor and integrity than you will ever know. At least I am willing to back up what I say, my word means something. Yours apparently does not.
My word means far more than anyone in the Bush administration, the McCain campaign, or anyone who supports those people combined. I'm willing to make a bet with you on the troop withdrawal after Obama is elected. I'm willing to have someone we both trust hold the money in escrow. I'd be willing to trust Lumberjim.
It's fine radar - you have young kids and I don't want to take your money anyway. I'd make a gentleman's bet with you, but that would be an impossible bet as you sir are no gentleman.
You are entitled to your opinion.
In order for the objection to be overruled, the person holding the money must be trustworthy in the opinion of the parties making the bet. I don't trust UT any more than I trust you
Rather telling.
Yes, we do know the truth. And the truth is I'm willing to stand behind what I say. I will not allow an ignorant little twerp like you to push me into making a sucker's bet though.
No you aren't - remember you are the one that said something like Obama would have to get caught with a girl scout or something for him to lose the election? If that is such a foregone conclusion then the only bet is that all the troops will be out in 18 months.
Little twerp - lol - quite mature of you. There goes what little respect anyone might have had for you.
I'm entitled to my opinion.
Like an asshole - everyone has one.
I'm willing to make a bet with you on the troop withdrawal after Obama is elected. I'm willing to have someone we both trust hold the money in escrow. I'd be willing to trust Lumberjim.
Whatever, I've grown tired of your constant backpedaling. Put up or shut up.
Okay, so radar is going to try pettifogging with technicalities to make excuse after excuse never to pay up if and when called for. That is known to normal people as "cheating." He's declared an intention to cheat even before placing the wager. Integrity? Not on your tintype, radar, you who are in thrall to your basest emotional drives, and only the basest. Base emotional drives are evinced in a great readiness to call everyone else an asshole. It will instruct you to look up the phrase "spherical asshole." The less I am influenced or dominated by you, the shittier your language and the more poo-flinging you do: evidence of a third-rate intellect and an incapacity for grace. You've lost when you no longer argue the merits of your case in matters of policy but resort to the adhominem.
Why Lumberjim over Undertoad I have no idea -- seems an altogether unmerited disparaging of UT, and what's up with that one? Radar ain't tellin' any more than he's proven anything on which he disagrees with me. Well, bullshit artists have no business being anywhere near a picture of the Madonna anyway.
Well, anyway, it all suggests he's not successful enough to afford risking his thousand or his three thousand, whichever. Yeah, he has the dishonor of being a blowhard and a schmuck, and classicman has neatly bent him over a picket fence and is porking him until he looks like a unicorn and sounds like a gargle commercial.
Once again, I'll remark that his reasons for disliking the Republicans -- all the way back to that distinctly libertarianoid Reagan -- would suit the tastes of a crazy or a bigot. Unhappily for his kind of thinking, I am neither.
You're your own worst enemy/a, Paul. After all, you can't recognize any libertarians who aren't you, which makes you less than libertarian, pointlessly hostile to freedom of thought, and more than foutu. Sounds like your departure from the LP was attended with no regret at all from any quarter. Politics is a team effort, and narcissistic personalities can't adapt. If they can't oppress or domineer, they must flee. Bye bye.
Bump - ready for that bet radar? I'm still waiting...
Today, I am thankful I have unequivocally shut Radar the hell up. He has nothing to say; I've got his number.
Tenth of December. Still do.
Today, I am thankful I have unequivocally shut Radar the hell up. He has nothing to say; I've got his number.
Now, if only we can shut
you up, our lives will be complete.
:p
No! No don't shut UG up!
I can't get the Colbert Report so UG is the perfect substitute.
OMG. Thats funny, you certainly could confuse the two!
I can't get the Colbert Report so UG is the perfect substitute.
You know they do show it in the UK now, right? I don't know channel information or anything, but I think it's on right after the Daily Show (International Version) just like it is here.
Not on More4 which is how I watch Daily Show. I don't know if one of the cable channels carries it. I don't have any subscription channels.
Today, I am thankful I have unequivocally shut Radar the hell up. He has nothing to say; I've got his number.
:lol2:
Now, if only we can shut you up, our lives will be complete.
:p
Pie, you'll have to drop back to a Plan B, what with UT being a sporting and tolerant sort. Try turning the :p around and tongue-kissing it. :p
Colbert's funnier than I am anyway. I'm just witty. Some of the opposition is halfway there.
what are you implying? that Democrats are against everything Republicans stand for? what's the real point of this post?
[B]what are you implying? that Democrats are against everything Republicans stand for?
Who'd a thunk it?