Posted on 10/08/2004 8:36:12 PM PDT by diabolicNYC
What kind of debate is it where only two people get up on stage, using tax payer money, and talk past each other for an hour and a half?
Mr. Badassick was in a debate with all the minor and flakey candidates on October 6th, such as the Greens, the Constiution, etc., using tax-supported facilities, and yet has anyone heard of him ranting about the exclusions of Mr. Bush and Kerry? I guess his underlying 'principle' is that Me-ocrats should rule.
Just when I thought you were making progress...
A burglar is already initiating force against the homeowner by being in his house without permission. The homeowner would have every right to kill the burglar. The burglar adding the offense of shooting the homeowner on top of his initial offense is no defense.
The precious third party candidates can have their own silly debate if they want. All of them can agree to a forum and CSpan will gleefully cover it.
So you have no problem with the Big Two candidates using public airtime and tax payer money for what is essentially a two party info-mercial?
By definition, a burglar has initiated no force against the homeowner. Check your law.
It doesn't help your argument when you use "always". Too easy to find exceptions.
If the "public" cannot own property, how can they own airtime? I thought the media was privately owned.
I live in Texas. If you are on my property at night, not even necessarily in my house, uninvited... I am within my rights to shoot you. If you invade my property without my consent, you have initiated force against me. Period.
To say that a burglar can just come into your house and as long as he doesn't do you any violence physically, that you can't touch him. That sounds like British stupidity to me.
Try operating without an FCC license and see how far you get with your "private" broadcasts.
The RNC has more delegates than any third party has members.
So they have gotten arrested and still can't get press, shucks.
I'd be ok with only allowing Candidates meeting ballot access requirements in all 50 States as a cut-off for inclusion in the debates. The campaigns for each candidate attending should also be footing the bill for the venue, security, and the airtime. No tax money.
That's be a bunch more fair than the current system.
Uh, wrong. Burglary is an entering done without authority of the property owner. It is presumed that, without such authority, the burglar is present against the implied wishes of the property owner. In other words, the burglar's presence is forced upon an unwilling property owner.
But I'm sure you knew that; you were just flinging crap.
Who's going to bell the cat? Badnarik? Harry Browne? Without a significant presence in Congress, or even in the State houses, it all amounts to pie-in-the-sky what ifs. Cato can propose programs all day long, but if there is no implementation all that they are doing is generating reams of landfill.
>This election is too close for people making protest votes...
So this is a free country only if you vote for Republicans or Democrats, eh?
"Be a good monarchist. Vote for King George in 1774."
So you would prefer we didn't even TRY to stem the tide? I agree, it will be a job and a half to effect real change. What we know for sure is that the way things are currently going certainly isn't going to get us there.
LOL! Now, if Mr. Badnarik would be so good as to tell us why he was actually arrested.....
>If fact, it would be legal for a minor daughter to marry her
>adult father.
And this is more offensive than two sodomites marrying each other, how? Bush and Cheney both support civil unions. Kerry and Edwards both support gay marriage. Civil unions are better than gay marriage, how?
If the law were written according to libertarian theory, you would be correct. But the law isn't.
The law distinguishes between burglary and robbery by using force or threat of force as the distinguisher. If I were to sneak into your house and steal, that would be burglary. If I were to hold you at gunpoint and steal, that would be robbery.
In many places, the law does not allow you employ deadly force in defense of your property, but only in defense of a life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.