Obama Signs Westminster Abbey Guest Book…

[songsmith]

I know. You also know I don't really pay any attention to Keith Olbermann. I don't follow much sports, so I had to look up who he even was. I do view a lot of media in the middle and on the right, but I haven't put a half-hour into MSNBC since it began. I don't have a need for propaganda, and I'd rather keep an eye on the dangerous stuff on the right. It's far more important to me to know wants to hurt me than to listen to left-wing cheerleading. Newt Gingrich was only ever right about one thing in his miserable life: Extremism helps nobody, whether it comes from the right or left. I just don't accept anyone's definition of anything anymore, and I've always stuck my middle-finger under the nose of anyone who claims authority.

[Banned]

You guys are hilarious. I can and will take on all of you, and you can call me all the names you want. I'll even use little words, so you can understand. Do you think I'm going to get frustrated and walk away? Fat Chance. This is easy-peasy, kids. Want to impress? Go an entire paragraph without using a talking-point, catch-phrase, or something else you heard on talkshows. Jason did it. Larry did it. So try that.
Can anyone understand that? Is it too much? How can I dumb it down any further?

Thats hysterical? I absolutely OWNED you on our last debate and have yet to see a response other than "poker will save the world" I took your OWN words.... your OWN "logic".... and eventually your OWN research and numbers, and used them against you. You got frustrated. You walked away. So take your best shot at dissecting my logic the way I obliterated yours. And do your best to stick to the actual topic at hand. I'll be right here anxiously awaiting your best efforts.

Johnny is the smartest person he knows. He does not like it when named are being called, but he insults everyone all the time.

He will never answer a direct question. He "reads" all kinds of things into your posts that you never said, and then he insults you about things not posted.

He makes up sources for your information, and then insults you for your sources, even thought he was the one who made it up.

He wears out his hand patting himself on the back because in his own strange world, he always thinks he is winning.

His posts reek with conceited, insulting, condescending and arrogant attitudes.

I am just the one to post this, many, many on here think it. You should hear what is said about him.

[Banned]

Well, you had to go to a dictionary site to get that definition, I'm supposing, unless the Cato Institute has their own dictionary, which wouldn't surprise me... the Libertarians don't want us looking at all those socialist, totalitarian dictionaries they didn't pre-approve. We couldn't function as a society if people didn't come to you for approval. Incidentally, do I get to define the tone of what I wrote, or do you always call the tune?

Definition of SNARKY per Merriam-Webster:
1: crotchety, snappish
2: sarcastic, impertinent, or irreverent in tone or manner <snarky lyrics>

--->Mr Snark

PS-- I love it when you call me "runt." Especially when we're canoodling.

I did not have to go to a dictionary. I chose to.

I have no idea of what the Cato Institute has, go and find out yourself, since you are already making assumptions about them.

I have never seen a list of approved or non approved libertarian dictionaries. Again something you totally made up, and pass on as fact.

I never want YOU to come to me for approval. The less I have to do with the likes of you, the better.

I can define your tone. You can define your tone.

I will still go with smarmy, snarky can work, but smarmy is a better fit.

The canoodling remark was way over the top.[/quote]




-------------------------------

Here I dissected your post, one rambling idea at a time where that is possible. I gave you a direct answer to each one.

Then you go and post that no one deconstructs your points.

Are you trying your best to prove your are an idiot even though we already ascertain that it is so?

[onegunguitar]

Ahhhh,good to see some excitement on RP,it's been too long....hahahahahaha!!!

[Banned]

Ahhhh,good to see some excitement on RP,it's been too long....hahahahahaha!!!

You started it all Bushy!!!!

[shredder138]

I wanna know where bassist_25 has been with his seal of deliverance.

[Hawk]

Which is more racist, to constantly categorize and assign collective thought values to a people based upon their typology or to assess each person as an individual? The problem Bill, is that your subconscious thought process seems racist to begin with. You seem to "see" people automatically in "groups" rather than "see" them as individuals. This leads to the false assumption that there is some kind of singular teleological answer to what is really a quite diverse subject (where there really may not even be a problem). The automatic arbiter of said teleology is, of course, the government. The subject of said thought processes then rationalizes that there is a need to secure some type of peace and we turn to the arbiter for a solution. The rationalization is that we can secure collective peace (safety) by limiting some individual freedoms. This is a pretty dicey situation and the extreme end result often looks a lot like iron curtains and death camps. I'm not into that shit.

Denial that racism exists will not make it go away. Abolishing the Civil Rights Act, which benefits "groups", and trusting that everybody will do the right thing would be disastrous. I do wish it worked that way though.

+1

[Hawk]

Which is more racist, to constantly categorize and assign collective thought values to a people based upon their typology or to assess each person as an individual? The problem Bill, is that your subconscious thought process seems racist to begin with. You seem to "see" people automatically in "groups" rather than "see" them as individuals. This leads to the false assumption that there is some kind of singular teleological answer to what is really a quite diverse subject (where there really may not even be a problem). The automatic arbiter of said teleology is, of course, the government. The subject of said thought processes then rationalizes that there is a need to secure some type of peace and we turn to the arbiter for a solution. The rationalization is that we can secure collective peace (safety) by limiting some individual freedoms. This is a pretty dicey situation and the extreme end result often looks a lot like iron curtains and death camps. I'm not into that shit.

You don't need to make something so simple, complicated.

It's this simple:

1.The civil rights act allows for anyone of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

2. Libertarianism says the owner of any establishment(s) has the right to ban any race he chooses from his establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. That Libertarian principle supports the implementing of race discrimination. The conclusion is therefore that Libertarianism supports race discrimination or supports the action of race discrimination of racists !

I support the privilege of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. How in hell you draw a bizarre conclusion of "iron curtain and death camps" from that is bizarre in itself !

You support the racist based on HIS liberty, enabling him to act on his racist thoughts and discriminate against minorities.

How you can even to begin to think that a minority would be okay with that is beyond me. Let's say Denney's Restaurant did not allow Latinos or blacks. A black family is on vacation and Denney's is the only place opened. You tell the guy's little kids why they have to go hungry. Yeah, that's only a little scenario. Now think of your own kids. Try telling one of them why he can't go into a private hospital for the best treatment because of his skin color. Tell him...

[Hawk]

Bill, your definition of liberty is that anyone can go wherever they want to on private property. We think that the owner of private property has the right to say who can or cannot go on his or her property.

Joe, come on, quit making things up. You know I'm not talking about private property like your house. I'm talking about the same thing the civil rights act says. Establishments open to the general public. They cannot do what ever they want or go wherever they want regardless of their race. Every race has to follow the rules of the establishment that is open to the general public, as in a restaurant, a hospital, a school etc..

[Hawk]

You always think the governmental solution, now matter how oppressive of personal, private rights is always the answer. We strongly disagree. An approach of forcing governmental oppression over personal freedoms happens to be fascist. Think the Jews agreed with the governmental oppression of the Nazis in the 1930's and 40's?

Joe your logic is incomprehensible. I think the Jews would have loved an equal rights act in Germany !

[Banned]

You don't need to make something so simple, complicated.

It's this simple:

1.The civil rights act allows for anyone of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

2. Libertarianism says the owner of any establishment(s) has the right to ban any race he chooses from his establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. That Libertarian principle supports the implementing of race discrimination. The conclusion is therefore that Libertarianism supports race discrimination or supports the action of race discrimination of racists !

I support the privilege of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. How in hell you draw a bizarre conclusion of "iron curtain and death camps" from that is bizarre in itself !

You support the racist based on HIS liberty, enabling him to act on his racist thoughts and discriminate against minorities.

How you can even to begin to think that a minority would be okay with that is beyond me. Let's say Denney's Restaurant did not allow Latinos or blacks. A black family is on vacation and Denney's is the only place opened. You tell the guy's little kids why they have to go hungry. Yeah, that's only a little scenario. Now think of your own kids. Try telling one of them why he can't go into a private hospital for the best treatment because of his skin color. Tell him...

Replace the word race in that sentence with one and it would read correctly. You are the one making race about everything.

Change that word to any ONE, and you then have no need to post anything more about race . Why do you see us as all potential racists?

Do you see us as all potential rapists, and only because of laws we are not out raping?

Do you see us as murderers, only not murdering because of laws?

Do you have some inside knowledge about Dennys franchise owners, a secret society of racists? or rapists? or murderers?

You have already posted that if drugs were decriminalized we would all be heroine addicts.

Did you get this dark view of humanity from watching Walter Croncrite with your father? I too watched Walter every evening with my family. I do not see us as all potential criminals.

[Banned]

You always think the governmental solution, now matter how oppressive of personal, private rights is always the answer. We strongly disagree. An approach of forcing governmental oppression over personal freedoms happens to be fascist. Think the Jews agreed with the governmental oppression of the Nazis in the 1930's and 40's?

Joe your logic is incomprehensible. I think the Jews would have loved an equal rights act in Germany !

Bill, point----some governmental laws are not for the good. Ask the Jews.

Your last sentence shows a very sad fact. Even though the German government killed 6 million Jews, you still think that they could have been saved by more government.

HOPELESS!

No matter how fascist the government, you think more of it is always the answer.

SCARY!

[Hawk]

1. Government is not always right. Governmental solutions do not always work.

2. You say you are for whatever is best for all. You have yet to answer who decided what is best for all.

3. I believe oppression of the majority for the privilege of a few is tyranny.

4. You love to associate libertarianism with racism in this thread.

1. I have never believed the government is always right. It would take me all night to finish that statement.

2. Come on Joe, that's why we have ELECTED officials in every form of local, state and federal governments. The key word is "elected" and they are there to represent that which is best...

3. tyranny - noun, plural -nies.
1. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.
2. the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler.
3. a state ruled by a tyrant or absolute ruler.

The civil rights act is not arbitrary, it is the restrained exercise of representatives of the American people. There was never one absolute ruler that made the civil rights act a law. It was by the authority of representatives WE elected. In case you don't know it, that's how government in America works !

I care about the few...

4. I have repeatedly said (probably 100 times by now) Libertarianism ENABLES the racist to implement race discrimination. If the shoe fits...

[Hawk]

You don't need to make something so simple, complicated.

It's this simple:

1.The civil rights act allows for anyone of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

2. Libertarianism says the owner of any establishment(s) has the right to ban any race he chooses from his establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. That Libertarian principle supports the implementing of race discrimination. The conclusion is therefore that Libertarianism supports race discrimination or supports the action of race discrimination of racists !

I support the privilege of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. How in hell you draw a bizarre conclusion of "iron curtain and death camps" from that is bizarre in itself !

You support the racist based on HIS liberty, enabling him to act on his racist thoughts and discriminate against minorities.

How you can even to begin to think that a minority would be okay with that is beyond me. Let's say Denney's Restaurant did not allow Latinos or blacks. A black family is on vacation and Denney's is the only place opened. You tell the guy's little kids why they have to go hungry. Yeah, that's only a little scenario. Now think of your own kids. Try telling one of them why he can't go into a private hospital for the best treatment because of his skin color. Tell him...

Replace the word race in that sentence with one and it would read correctly. You are the one making race about everything.

Change that word to any ONE, and you then have no need to post anything more about race . Why do you see us as all potential racists?

Do you see us as all potential rapists, and only because of laws we are not out raping?

Do you see us as murderers, only not murdering because of laws?

Do you have some inside knowledge about Dennys franchise owners, a secret society of racists? or rapists? or murderers?

You have already posted that if drugs were decriminalized we would all be heroine addicts.

Did you get this dark view of humanity from watching Walter Croncrite with your father? I too watched Walter every evening with my family. I do not see us as all potential criminals.

Joe, they would be raced based bannings. Get it in your head.

[Banned]

So just because someone is elected they all of a sudden know what "is best" for all of us?????

Do they get God-like powers when they get sworn in?

Did you think George W Bush always knew what was best for us? Ronald Reagan? They got elected. They represented us.

[Banned]

You don't need to make something so simple, complicated.

It's this simple:

1.The civil rights act allows for anyone of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

2. Libertarianism says the owner of any establishment(s) has the right to ban any race he chooses from his establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. That Libertarian principle supports the implementing of race discrimination. The conclusion is therefore that Libertarianism supports race discrimination or supports the action of race discrimination of racists !

I support the privilege of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. How in hell you draw a bizarre conclusion of "iron curtain and death camps" from that is bizarre in itself !

You support the racist based on HIS liberty, enabling him to act on his racist thoughts and discriminate against minorities.

How you can even to begin to think that a minority would be okay with that is beyond me. Let's say Denney's Restaurant did not allow Latinos or blacks. A black family is on vacation and Denney's is the only place opened. You tell the guy's little kids why they have to go hungry. Yeah, that's only a little scenario. Now think of your own kids. Try telling one of them why he can't go into a private hospital for the best treatment because of his skin color. Tell him...

Replace the word race in that sentence with one and it would read correctly. You are the one making race about everything.

Change that word to any ONE, and you then have no need to post anything more about race . Why do you see us as all potential racists?

Do you see us as all potential rapists, and only because of laws we are not out raping?

Do you see us as murderers, only not murdering because of laws?

Do you have some inside knowledge about Dennys franchise owners, a secret society of racists? or rapists? or murderers?

You have already posted that if drugs were decriminalized we would all be heroine addicts.

Did you get this dark view of humanity from watching Walter Croncrite with your father? I too watched Walter every evening with my family. I do not see us as all potential criminals.

Joe, they would be raced based bannings. Get it in your head.

Bill, I can't get it in my head. I do not see everything in terms of race. I do not see everyone out there as potential racists.

How do you know someone would be banned because of race?

How many of these potential racists do you estimate are out there Bill?

[Hawk]

You don't need to make something so simple, complicated.

It's this simple:

1.The civil rights act allows for anyone of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

2. Libertarianism says the owner of any establishment(s) has the right to ban any race he chooses from his establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. That Libertarian principle supports the implementing of race discrimination. The conclusion is therefore that Libertarianism supports race discrimination or supports the action of race discrimination of racists !

I support the privilege of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. How in hell you draw a bizarre conclusion of "iron curtain and death camps" from that is bizarre in itself !

You support the racist based on HIS liberty, enabling him to act on his racist thoughts and discriminate against minorities.

How you can even to begin to think that a minority would be okay with that is beyond me. Let's say Denney's Restaurant did not allow Latinos or blacks. A black family is on vacation and Denney's is the only place opened. You tell the guy's little kids why they have to go hungry. Yeah, that's only a little scenario. Now think of your own kids. Try telling one of them why he can't go into a private hospital for the best treatment because of his skin color. Tell him...

Replace the word race in that sentence with one and it would read correctly. You are the one making race about everything.

Change that word to any ONE, and you then have no need to post anything more about race . Why do you see us as all potential racists?

Do you see us as all potential rapists, and only because of laws we are not out raping?

Do you see us as murderers, only not murdering because of laws?

Do you have some inside knowledge about Dennys franchise owners, a secret society of racists? or rapists? or murderers?

You have already posted that if drugs were decriminalized we would all be heroine addicts.

Did you get this dark view of humanity from watching Walter Croncrite with your father? I too watched Walter every evening with my family. I do not see us as all potential criminals.

I never said we'd all be heroine addicts. Can you show me the quote or can I say you lie ?

I've tried to respond to each of your points and questions even though you rarely do the same for me. Answer me this:

If every establishment in America, open to the general public, had the ability discriminate based on race, do you think it would happen at some of them ? You want to make that change, so you have to follow an idea to a conclusion.

[f.sciarrillo]

I lost track with where this thread is at. Can someone fill me in? I don't feel like reading all the posts, they are too long.

[Banned]

I never said we'd all be heroine addicts. Can you show me the quote or can I say you lie ?

I've tried to respond to each of your points and questions even though you rarely do the same for me. Answer me this:

If every establishment in America, open to the general public, had the ability discriminate based on race, do you think it would happen at some of them ? You want to make that change, so you have to follow an idea to a conclusion.

You did not post all, I exaggerate. You did say there would be a lot more. I totally disagree with that.

In other words, are there some racists who would discriminate? Yes. Of course. They are discriminating all the time. Even with all the laws, do you really think a racist is going to hire someone from a race he does not like? Think Jesse Jackson hires a lot of libertarian white guys?

I want private property owners to be able to discriminate however they want on their property. I also want them to be as generous as they can be with their property. Why don't we change this conversation to how generous Americans are with their property. But I think you only like to dwell on the dark side.

Do you feel laws have ended racism?

[Hawk]

Joe, the civil rights laws have prevented many racists form implementing whites only establishments. YES Damn it, it is working ! It is accomplishing what it is intended to do !

Libertarianism WILL ENABLE implementing race discrimination and you agree it would happen.

No Joe, I do not think everyone is a racist. But while you were writing your last post I was searching "white power" . They are out there Joe, and I'm glad that Legally they cannot open a place Open to the general public and discriminate based on RACE because of the civil rights act ?

[Gallowglass]

...You don't need to make something so simple, complicated.

It's this simple:

1.The civil rights act allows for anyone of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

2. Libertarianism says the owner of any establishment(s) has the right to ban any race he chooses from his establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. That Libertarian principle supports the implementing of race discrimination. The conclusion is therefore that Libertarianism supports race discrimination or supports the action of race discrimination of racists !

I support the privilege of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. How in hell you draw a bizarre conclusion of "iron curtain and death camps" from that is bizarre in itself !

You support the racist based on HIS liberty, enabling him to act on his racist thoughts and discriminate against minorities.

How you can even to begin to think that a minority would be okay with that is beyond me. Let's say Denney's Restaurant did not allow Latinos or blacks. A black family is on vacation and Denney's is the only place opened. You tell the guy's little kids why they have to go hungry. Yeah, that's only a little scenario. Now think of your own kids. Try telling one of them why he can't go into a private hospital for the best treatment because of his skin color. Tell him...

No Bill, it's actually a quite complicated subject that cuts to the core of democratic civic values and ethics. It's also a phenomenological problem concerning the nature of human thinking and reasoning. The fact that you insist on simplifying it for the sake of your own argument does not negate that.

Libertarianism does not "support" racism or the implementation of such. That is a logical fallacy and is akin to saying that gun owners support murder because guns can murder people. Libertarianism does support the rights of the individual, and in general it conceives and evaluates people on the basis of their individuality rather than conceiving of them in the collectivist sense. I find most forms of collectivist thinking to be racist from the get go because it does the very opposite.

Continued repetition and paraphrasing of the statement that I "support the racist based on HIS liberty" assigns a false motivation to my support of libertarian principles. I support all individuals in the defense of their liberty, not just because he is or is not a racist.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

My death camps allusion was admittedly an extreme extension of logic. I believe I stated such, however there is a relationship and historical precedent between what happens when the rights of the individual are suppressed at the expense of the collective. It's called Authoritarianism despite disagreement over the particular flavor, this country has been on a downward spiral toward it for quite a long time. I refuse to facilitate it.

Those last examples are harsh indeed, but I know I wouldn't want to patronize any place that felt that way. Perhaps bringing racist establishment owners out into the light is the best way to deal with racism. I never said we couldn't take social action against such people.

and yes, I still love you...

[Hawk]

I lost track with where this thread is at. Can someone fill me in? I don't feel like reading all the posts, they are too long.

I'm still for the civil rights act and Joe is still against it. He wants to change the word "race" so as not to be associated with the fact that he is against the civil rights act.

You are now up to speed...

[Banned]

Joe, the civil rights laws have prevented many racists form implementing whites only establishments. YES Damn it, it is working ! It is accomplishing what it is intended to do !

Libertarianism WILL ENABLE implementing race discrimination and you agree it would happen.

No Joe, I do not think everyone is a racist. But while you were writing your last post I was searching "white power" . They are out there Joe, and I'm glad that Legally they cannot open a place Open to the general public and discriminate based on RACE because of the civil rights act ?

I know you don't think everyone is a racist. But you want to treat us all as if we were with blanket laws that takes away property rights. When you take away property rights from one, you hurt us all. When you back a government that takes away property rights and freedoms, hello fascism.

How many racists do think there are? How many more laws will be needed to eradicate them all?

The Nazi party started blaming the Jews for various problems. It ended with a mass eradication. Maybe you big government proponents ought to be reminded of that.

[Hawk]

...You don't need to make something so simple, complicated.

It's this simple:

1.The civil rights act allows for anyone of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

2. Libertarianism says the owner of any establishment(s) has the right to ban any race he chooses from his establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. That Libertarian principle supports the implementing of race discrimination. The conclusion is therefore that Libertarianism supports race discrimination or supports the action of race discrimination of racists !

I support the privilege of any race to enter any establishment OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. How in hell you draw a bizarre conclusion of "iron curtain and death camps" from that is bizarre in itself !

You support the racist based on HIS liberty, enabling him to act on his racist thoughts and discriminate against minorities.

How you can even to begin to think that a minority would be okay with that is beyond me. Let's say Denney's Restaurant did not allow Latinos or blacks. A black family is on vacation and Denney's is the only place opened. You tell the guy's little kids why they have to go hungry. Yeah, that's only a little scenario. Now think of your own kids. Try telling one of them why he can't go into a private hospital for the best treatment because of his skin color. Tell him...

No Bill, it's actually a quite complicated subject that cuts to the core of democratic civic values and ethics. It's also a phenomenological problem concerning the nature of human thinking and reasoning. The fact that you insist on simplifying it for the sake of your own argument does not negate that.

Libertarianism does not "support" racism or the implementation of such. That is a logical fallacy and is akin to saying that gun owners support murder because guns can murder people. Libertarianism does support the rights of the individual, and in general it conceives and evaluates people on the basis of their individuality rather than conceiving of them in the collectivist sense. I find most forms of collectivist thinking to be racist from the get go because it does the very opposite.

Continued repetition and paraphrasing of the statement that I "support the racist based on HIS liberty" assigns a false motivation to my support of libertarian principles. I support all individuals in the defense of their liberty, not just because he is or is not a racist.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

My death camps allusion was admittedly an extreme extension of logic. I believe I stated such, however there is a relationship and historical precedent between what happens when the rights of the individual are suppressed at the expense of the collective. It's called Authoritarianism despite disagreement over the particular flavor, this country has been on a downward spiral toward it for quite a long time. I refuse to facilitate it.

Those last examples are harsh indeed, but I know I wouldn't want to patronize any place that felt that way. Perhaps bringing racist establishment owners out into the light is the best way to deal with racism. I never said we couldn't take social action against such people.

and yes, I still love you...

I'll repeat for the 1000 time. Liberteriasm ENABLES race discrimination !

Gallowglass:
"Continued repetition and paraphrasing of the statement that I "support the racist based on HIS liberty" assigns a false motivation to my support of libertarian principles. I support all individuals in the defense of their liberty, not just because he is or is not a racist."

The fact that you DO support the racist based on HIS liberty does NOT assign a false motivation to your support of libertarian principles. It IS a side affect of your support ! You cannot deny that. Of course you don't support him because he is racist, you support that racist because of the simple fact that he is an owner.

[Banned]

I lost track with where this thread is at. Can someone fill me in? I don't feel like reading all the posts, they are too long.

I'm still for the civil rights act and Joe is still against it. He wants to change the word "race" so as not to be associated with the fact that he is against the civil rights act.

You are now up to speed...

I am for individual freedom and liberty and Bill is for an authoritarian, totalitarian government.

Because Bill rants on about something 100,000,000 times does not make it true.