Obama Signs Westminster Abbey Guest Book…

[Banned]

I have a question.

Can a person's inalienable rights be taken away from them without due process of law?

Jeff, good question. Jason and I were just discussing this. Are they really inalienable if someone can take them away from you with force?

Inalienable sounds too passive, as if you will always have those rights. You better protect what rights you still have, or the authoritarians will take those away from you in a heartbeat.

[Gallowglass]

I have a question.

Can a person's inalienable rights be taken away from them without due process of law?

Certainly. I don't believe in "inalienable rights". If something is "inalienable", it would be technically impossible to alienate or violate it. Seeing as how this happens all the time, I don't see how the concept of an inalienable right still stands.

I also don't believe that rights are granted by government (he who giveth shall taketh away). I believe in the rights you are willing to stand up for. Governments must be forced to recognize our liberties. Most constitutional democracies have had the wisdom to at least enumerate or encode some of the rights that it is foundationally willing to recognize for it's citizenry. That's a good start, but any right that is not upheld becomes a privilege.

[f.sciarrillo]

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.

Why don't you two just agree to disagree and have a beer?

[songsmith]

Johnny is the smartest person he knows.

No, I'm just smarter than a Libertarian. I don't feel the need to defer to your self-assumed "authority."

In a pig's eye. (a very big songsmith lie) I like Lonewolf's response.


What does this even mean? You call all the shots, always. You say I post too long, and I simply shut you down with a sentence or two. I post something that you disagree with, and you relentlessly attack me personally. Go back and read any thread. Note who starts all the whacked-out paranoid bull. I react to your stupidity and lack of an internal editor. You are a Birther. If people don't take your insanity seriously, that's not their fault. I reject your definition of everything, and it frustrates you, as it should. What is the very big songsmith lie, that you're not in charge? You're not in charge of anyone right now, least of all your own mental faculties.

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.

I answer every question you ever ask, and I read between your lines because you're shallow, and it's easy to do. It's easy, because I monitor the same whacko media you quote directly from in nearly every post.

You never answer questions, (another lie) and I write my own posts. When I quote, I footnote it or provide the link, something you rarely do.

Who gives a tinker's damn about your extremist website links? How do they relate to reality? I can and will provide corroboration of any point I ever make, and it won't be from some radical website catering to validating your whacked-out views. We get it, your life sucks, and you have to blame someone, so it's obviously the gov't. God knows it can't be you, based on what you spew here.

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

I've never had to "make up" anything. You post completely insane rants, punctuated with links to fringe websites, and call it "proof." You get proven wrong on a daily basis, because while you can have your own opinion, you can't have your own FACTS. Somehow, though, that's not important to you.

I totally stand on that one. You're crackers, man.


You said I used a Libertarian dictionary. Could you first find one and than show me where I used it? NO. This is just one example of many. Another songsmith lie.


That was figure of speech, dimwit. Nuance is completely wasted on neocons, they hear a phrase like "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink," and they say," I'll force that sonofabitch to drink at gunpoint! Where's this horse? I bet he's a Liberal." Also, what lie are you referring to now?

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

I don't often pat myself on the back, except in jest, at taking on a handful of you at a time (like this thread). If I think I'm winning, it's because you're easy to beat. I could make it more challenging, perhaps. Maybe write in rhymes, or another language.

Okay, in limerick form:
Ol' Joe wants is our site Libertarian
He's a blathering fool, and a hairy'n
He voted for Bush, and when shove comes to push
He's just an attack-dog contrarian
(pat-pat-pat)

It either patting yourself on the back or eating someone's lunch. Your post reek of that smug attitude. We all know it and laugh at you.

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

I just LOVE that one. My posts reek of moderate thought, research and flowery alliteration. Yours just reek.

Your insane rants in support of racism, conspiracy, and corporate corruption are legendary. You attack, attack, attack, then cry foul when the tables are turned. Typical right-wing crap, but we all know where you learned it.

You never provide any proof of your research, just your opinion, and this might come as a shock, your opinion does not make something true. Moderate???? You are left of Michael Moore.


Show me where I'm left of Michael Moore, and if I was, SO WHAT? Is it not my right? Do I not have a say equal to your own? Can I not answer the constant din of your rapidly-unraveling psyche? And where is your example of me not providing proof. Again, I do not accept wingnut websites as proof of anything, so if you're angling to get me to filter everything through your delusions first, you're dreaming.

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

Sorry, Joey, your paranoia isn't catchy. My inbox tells me otherwise, and I have too much integrity to post what people who claim to be your friends say about you in private, let alone those who you've alienated.
Today seems to be the day I address personal attacks. I rather enjoy it, because it's proof that you have no other recourse. You've spent days defending your right to discriminate, after being embarrassed by a dimwitted link you posted. I've spent the last few days keeping Rockpage from turning into one of your extremist websites.

I think the best example of your smarmy, snarky, its all about me posts was when JP was losing his job at his former radio show. Most RPers were commiserating with Jim about losing his job, keep your chin up kind of posts until you chimed in. You had to make the thread about how great your are. You went on to say how you got Jim his job in the first place. How arrogant. Who cares if that happened or not? That was not the time to shine your own apple.


Okay, here's where The Whacko-Joe Express jumps the fucking tracks, and pisses me off to boot. This is all totally fabricated, and it's an attempt to smear me to one of my oldest friends. I never said I got him his job, or intimated that he owes me a fucking thing, you freak. I once had a chance to speak with Ed Sherlock, then-owner of Q-94. He was complaining that his air talent had some big holes in it, and asked me who I thought would make a good fit. I immediately said that Jim Price is the perfect fit for the then-new classic rock format, because he knows so much about that kind of music, and is very professional. A very short time later, he was hired. THEN, the douchebag crybaby who runs WRTA bought the station, and slowly screwed it into the ground. I suggested that he not cry too long about getting screwed by the douchebag, and that the classic rock radio format was dying anyway. While you all were bumming about him losing his job, I knew he's a talented guy with a following, and he'd be just fine. How did that turn out Joe? What happened then? Was it curtains for JP? NO, HE GOT NOT ONE, BUT TWO BETTER JOBS. Once again, you twist a non-story into something horrible, and I won't let it slide.

Many people noticed how callow that post was, and said, yep, that is just johnny, little prick with the huge ego, getting all the attention back to him.

"Callow" means young and inexperienced, perhaps you meant "callous." I'm hardly young or inexperienced. There's a pattern of improper word usage here, based on a lack of understanding of their meanings. I may be egotistical, but as dim as you are, how would you know?

Most of your posts read like that. You always belittle everyone else and then post what a know it all you are. Except you never give an source of where your "facts" are from. Just belittle, ridicule and insult everyone else's facts and sources. Only you have the true answer, we just need to take your word for it.[/color]

Post some actual facts, and not your world-famous Birther-type crap, and maybe I'll respect it. Or maybe only you have the true answer, and it's on libertarded.com. I'm happy to give a link, if someone asks. You post yours, whether anyone wants them or not.
I'm content to do this all day long.
NEXT!

edited for colors

[Banned]

One question. Please find me a libertarian dictionary. You said I use one. Please show me where I quoted from this mysterious dictionary.

If you can do this one thing some would be impressed.

Just because you call something wacko does not mean the whole topic is finished and its time for your arm to reach around and pat yourself.

My life is fine thank you, at least I am not on government welfare. No wonder you are such a government fascist, you need that ride in the cart and need others to pull it.

When Lonewolf asks you why are you such a government fascist, that is my proof you are left of Micheal Moore. I do not care where you are, but quit making us throw up a little bit when you post you are a moderate.

You don't like the websites I provide, that's your problem. At least I show where a quote is from, something you do not do.

So why did you bring the spotlight back to you on a thread about JP losing his job? How self centered and smarmy, so typically you. Many people you know thought the same thing. A new low, even for you.

[nakedtwister]

Let me throw a fucking wrench in the gearbox. Everyone is pissing and moaning about racism and government and civil rights, but if I recall from a history book I once read, that the native people of this land received a royal knob job. What about their rights, granted there were no Civil Right laws then, but according to our Constitution : " All men are created equal". Never mind the fact that African people sold their own people into slavery, loaded them up on British ships and transported a proud people to a land to be whipped and forced to work for nothing more than scraps. A terrible injustice to say the least, but to rape a nation of native people from their own land and then graciously give them a few small plots to call their own: of course governed by the fucks that stole from them. Seems fair to me. Here is the way I view it boys. Govt. is what it is. Our Fore Fathers set up a form of Government that would always have sides disputing the others views, ideas,notions, laws, etc. That way it's not all one sided. It's what they called Democracy. It's not always right but at least we don't have a King. I could go on and on but it seems senseless.


Oh like MJB said, music is love: Sat. Pellies Blues Night

Be there or be a Nazi JK

[Banned]

Bill, some in the world agree with libertarians:

"The global war on drugs has "failed" according to a new report by a group of politicians and former world leaders.

The Global Commission on Drug Policy report calls for the legalisation of some drugs and an end to the criminalisation of drug users.

The panel includes former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, the former leaders of Mexico, Colombia and Brazil, and the entrepreneur Sir Richard Branson.

The US and Mexican governments have rejected the findings as misguided.

The Global Commission's 24-page report argues that anti-drug policy has failed by fuelling organised crime, costing taxpayers millions of dollars and causing thousands of deaths.

It cites UN estimates that opiate use increased 35% worldwide from 1998 to 2008, cocaine by 27%, and cannabis by 8.5%.

...

The authors criticise governments who claim the current war on drugs is effective.

"Political leaders and public figures should have the courage to articulate publicly what many of them acknowledge privately: that the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that repressive strategies will not solve the drug problem, and that the war on drugs has not, and cannot, be won," the report said.

Instead of punishing users who the report says "do no harm to others," the commission argues that governments should end criminalisation of drug use, experiment with legal models that would undermine organised crime syndicates and offer health and treatment services for drug-users.

It calls for drug policies based on methods empirically proven to reduce crime and promote economic and social development.

The commission is especially critical of the US, saying it must abandon anti-crime approaches to drug policy and adopt strategies rooted in healthcare and human rights.

"We hope this country (the US) at least starts to think there are alternatives," said former Colombian President Cesar Gaviria.

"We don't see the US evolving in a way that is compatible with our (countries') long-term interests."


http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/

[Hawk]

Once I found out what the Patriot Act really was, as opposed to what they originally said it would be, then I was against it. There was a time when I actually took the government at its word. How naive.

It was sold as just a little tool against the "fight on terror", and now it helps this authoritarian government oppress its citizens.

Bill, you were against so many things that Bush did. Now when Obama is doing the same things, your keyboard remains silent. ??

No Joe, I expressed by disappointment many times that Obama has not repealed the Patriot Act.

[Hawk]

Once I found out what the Patriot Act really was, as opposed to what they originally said it would be, then I was against it. There was a time when I actually took the government at its word.

So, you're a flip-flopper. And the only time you took the govt at it's word was, oddly enough, when the people YOU supported were in power, but now those same principles you fought for then are suddenly bad. You get to complain then, and now.

Only our Joe...

[Hawk]

Alright Joe.

Let's make it simple and then move on to other Libertarian principles.

Liberterians will support any racist who owns an establishment, or chain of establishments that are open to the general public If the racist chooses to discriminate against (or ban) any minority.

Is that correct or incorrect ? Try to answer the question rather than throwing insults. Thanks...

[Hawk]

Liberterians and the war on drugs.

Liberterians want all drugs to be legal. I believe there would be more drug addicts if addictive drugs become legal. Joe doesn't.

Kids under 21 find it very easy to get alcohol, very easy because someone over 21 will get it for them. I could see the same thing happening with heroin and crack and many other destructive drugs. Joe, is there an age limit or can anyone take heroin ? Are pregnant women allowed to shoot up heroin ? Where does libertarianism stand on that ?

Joe, you can point out all you want how much the war on drugs costs, but I feel it's worth it to protect our youth.

Do you think these addicts can hold a job ?

Liberterians will support any racist who owns an establishment, or chain of establishments that are open to the general public If the racist chooses to discriminate against (or ban) any minority.

[Banned]

Alright Joe.

Let's make it simple and then move on to other Libertarian principles.

Liberterians will support any racist who owns an establishment, or chain of establishments that are open to the general public If the racist chooses to discriminate against (or ban) any minority.

Is that correct or incorrect ? Try to answer the question rather than throwing insults. Thanks...

Libertarians support a property owner enjoying his property the way he chooses.

Bill, I have stated many times I have changed political viewpoints over my lifetime. I have matured, and my political view changes and matures. If you still have the same political view as an immature child, well what does that say about your politics and say about you?

[Banned]

Bill, libertarians are for gun ownership. Guns are involved in murders. Do libertarians support murder?

[lonewolf]

Alright Joe.

Let's make it simple and then move on to other Libertarian principles.

Liberterians will support any racist who owns an establishment, or chain of establishments that are open to the general public If the racist chooses to discriminate against (or ban) any minority.

Is that correct or incorrect ? Try to answer the question rather than throwing insults. Thanks...

Here Bill, you and Ed "Fred Flintstone" Schultz need to read and understand this or you both might end up with libel suits:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction

[Banned]

Liberterians and the war on drugs.

Liberterians want all drugs to be legal. I believe there would be more drug addicts if addictive drugs become legal. Joe doesn't.

Kids under 21 find it very easy to get alcohol, very easy because someone over 21 will get it for them. I could see the same thing happening with heroin and crack and many other destructive drugs. Joe, is there an age limit or can anyone take heroin ? Are pregnant women allowed to shoot up heroin ? Where does libertarianism stand on that ?

Joe, you can point out all you want how much the war on drugs costs, but I feel it's worth it to protect our youth.

Do you think these addicts can hold a job ?

Tonight on MSNBC, a very liberal and democrat party supporting media outlet, ran a story about the failed war on drugs.

It stated that in Denmark, after they legalized drugs, drug usage went down. Should I say that again?

Can't trust that liberal media can ya?

Lets legalize drugs and watch drug usage go down, and save BILLIONS of dollars while it happens.

Just think of all those 100's of thousands drug "criminals" released from jail, able to lead productive lives in society, instead of a drain on the taxpayer. Sounds like something you would like. They might even vote for your Obama.

Oh, you last question, and I will add one. Can an alcoholic hold a job? Answer to both is yes.

[Banned]

Bill, here is Walter Cronkrite questioning the war on drugs. You should watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfZgzTpZFac

[Hawk]

Alright Joe.

Let's make it simple and then move on to other Libertarian principles.

Liberterians will support any racist who owns an establishment, or chain of establishments that are open to the general public If the racist chooses to discriminate against (or ban) any minority.

Is that correct or incorrect ? Try to answer the question rather than throwing insults. Thanks...

Libertarians support a property owner enjoying his property the way he chooses.

Bill, I have stated many times I have changed political viewpoints over my lifetime. I have matured, and my political view changes and matures. If you still have the same political view as an immature child, well what does that say about your politics and say about you?

Joe says, "Libertarians support a property owner enjoying his property the way he chooses. This means Yes, Liberterians will support any racist who owns an establishment, or chain of establishments that are open to the general public If the racist chooses to discriminate against (or ban) any minority.


I don't get your last paragraph, perhaps you have no answers so you are trying insults again ? Why don't you mature and converse instead of attempting to hide behind mundane insults.

[Hawk]

Bill, here is Walter Cronkrite questioning the war on drugs. You should watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfZgzTpZFac

I don't give a damn about anyone else's opinion on the war on drugs, I have my own opinion...

[Banned]

No insult intended. If you have not changed your viewpoint about something since you were an immature child, maybe you should.

Walter Cronkrite is not a libertarian, MSNBC are not libertarians, yet they see the futility of the war on drugs and see the benefits of legalized drugs.

What about this Bill? Are they as whacked out as you think libertarians?

I will stop answering questions about property rights until you read and understand Lonewolf's link.

[Larry]

I guess the simplest question is: If elected, would the Libertarian Party work to repeal the Civil Rights Act?

I still don't know if the Libertarian Party would work to repeal the Civil Rights Act if it were in power.

[Hawk]

Bill, libertarians are for gun ownership. Guns are involved in murders. Do libertarians support murder?

That if the most stupid remark you ever made ! Liberterians will not stand behind nor support a murderer because he own a gun, but you will support a racist who discriminates because he owns a restaurant . You make it way too easy. Want to try again ?

[Banned]

When I was a child, my parents were democrats, mostly because we were Catholic and Kennedy was running for presidnet, I remember staying up that night listening to the radio for the election retruns. I was 6.

I was still a democrat when Jimmy Carter was running and I was in college. I voted for him because he was supposedly going to decriminalize or legalize the herb. He smoked it in the Georgia state hours with the Allman Brothers and other Southern musicians.

Then I started to realize how bloated the government was becoming, and I became a conservative republican. I soon realized the republicans were just as loving of big government as the democrats. I want to impeach Bush for acting like a democrat.

Thank God for finding out about the Libertarian movement and Ron Paul.

I took a political journey, based on my interests at the time, and my level of understanding of the corruption of our government.

Kinda of funny how my votes for Jimmy Carter in 76 and 80, were really for a libertarian viewpoint that I did not find out about until 30 some years later.

[Hawk]

No insult intended. If you have not changed your viewpoint about something since you were an immature child, maybe you should.

Walter Cronkrite is not a libertarian, MSNBC are not libertarians, yet they see the futility of the war on drugs and see the benefits of legalized drugs.

What about this Bill? Are they as whacked out as you think libertarians?

I will stop answering questions about property rights until you read and understand Lonewolf's link.

Am I not allowed a differing opinion than other people ? I can think for myself.

[Banned]

Bill, libertarians are for gun ownership. Guns are involved in murders. Do libertarians support murder?

That if the most stupid remark you ever made ! Liberterians will not stand behind nor support a murderer because he own a gun, but you will support a racist who discriminates because he owns a restaurant . You make it way too easy. Want to try again ?

I am using your logic. You used the stupid word.

[Hawk]

Liberterians and the war on drugs.

Liberterians want all drugs to be legal. I believe there would be more drug addicts if addictive drugs become legal. Joe doesn't.

Kids under 21 find it very easy to get alcohol, very easy because someone over 21 will get it for them. I could see the same thing happening with heroin and crack and many other destructive drugs. Joe, is there an age limit or can anyone take heroin ? Are pregnant women allowed to shoot up heroin ? Where does libertarianism stand on that ?

Joe, you can point out all you want how much the war on drugs costs, but I feel it's worth it to protect our youth.

Do you think these addicts can hold a job ?

Tonight on MSNBC, a very liberal and democrat party supporting media outlet, ran a story about the failed war on drugs.

It stated that in Denmark, after they legalized drugs, drug usage went down. Should I say that again?

Can't trust that liberal media can ya?

Lets legalize drugs and watch drug usage go down, and save BILLIONS of dollars while it happens.

Just think of all those 100's of thousands drug "criminals" released from jail, able to lead productive lives in society, instead of a drain on the taxpayer. Sounds like something you would like. They might even vote for your Obama.

Oh, you last question, and I will add one. Can an alcoholic hold a job? Answer to both is yes.

I can't find anything about legalized drugs in Denmark. I did find this travel advisory if you're going to Denmark:

Local laws and customs
You should not become involved with drugs of any kind. Although Denmark is generally a liberal society, drug use is illegal and laws are enforced. You will not be treated more leniently than residents and drug dealers in particular can receive heavy sentences. Anyone found in possession of illegal drugs, deemed to be for personal consumption, will receive a police fine of DKK 500.