Posted on 12/15/2001 11:36:38 AM PST by jackbob
I totally misread your original post and now I realize why. I read the word "tyranny" as "anarchy". I have no idea why my minds eye read it that way. It was inexcusable mistake.
I apologise.
How 'bout let's remove a week old or a month old baby from whoever is caring for IT.
Throw a five year old on the street and see if he can feed himself. Or maybe dump him in the country or in the desert.
I could feed myself, but I am old and remember about what you can and can't eat. I know how to get water. My Daddy taught me.
I have no idea how old you are. Could you eat and find water and shelter anywhere?
Ofcorse babies need their mother's womb.
After that they can be on their own.
Lot's of people like me would pick them out of the dumpster, take them home and tend to them.
Tell us and we will do it.
I would never vote for Gore and I didn't vote for President Bush.
But if Gore were President what would everyone be saying now?
Someone has to bring forth an idea that is so far outside the possibility that for a member of one of the two major parties to bring it up would be political suicide. The LP, and libertarians in general, are the ones to mention, say, drug legalization. 30 years ago, it would be unheard of in most places in the "civilized" world to even mention it. Now we have elected polititians saying it, and several "civilized" countries in Europe headed in that direction. It was the libertarians, paleo-conservatives, and such who first broached the idea.
We are beginning to see some other things moving in the direction of freedom, as well. Slowly, oh so painfully slowly, we are seeing movement on the 2nd Amendment. Just the idea that taxes are truly the taxpayers money was espoused during the presidential campaign, that had not been heard in quite a while.
I think we may be headed in the right direction, but we need to keep pushing. We keep seeing some setbacks, such as the so-called "Patriot Bill," but even that can be overcome. The GOP, as a force for change, is almost laughable. They will go which ever way the wind is blowing. We just need to keep the political winds blowing toward more freedom.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
More and more AMERICANS are coming to realize this,
The REPOs are coming to be nothing more than DEMOs in Conservative clothing.
I still can not FORGET OR FORGIVE that Mr. Bush's first official act upon becoming President
was to appoint an admitted Happy to be liason to the AIDS/GAY/ COMMUNEity and show to all our children
that The Happys have the official approval of our President by this act.
Even Xlintoon would never have dared this.
Anyway BS on this blantant, in your face showing of official support for this crap.
On well, things could be worse right????????????????????
It might have been a Libertarian President to plow this New Ground as we careen into the 21st Century. LOL!
NAWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Libertarians don't support special rights for anyone.
CATO
You take care and have a Merry Christmas.
Are you constipated, experiencing PMS or just a troll?
He may have brought it up other novels as well, but those are two that I remember.
What's your problem? I would say we libertarians could handle your elementary volcabulary...so why not explain what problems you find with the people calling themselves libertarians on this forum...we'll try to sort it out for you.
Now there has been a lot of chatter about what Harry Browne said concerning 911. Sometimes the truth of the matter is hard to swallow. But those terrorist bombers didn't just bomb us because we were just sitting here lil ole innocent folk minding our own business. Anyone who would deny that denies the factual reality. It's an ugly truth and Harry had the balls to speak it. Our influence brought them here. That's a fact. Were they wrong? Of course. Did we deserve it? Of course not.
They hate us because we support Israel. And we support Israel because if you will recall, these are the folks Hitler tried to exterminate. We helped settle them there amongst their Arab cousins and helped them re-form their lost nation...continuing to do so...In a place they had been scattered from by other conquerors in the past. Nonetheless, a place their God, and our God too if you are Christian, had promised them.
But wait, there is a catch. You know the story of, was it Issac and Ishmael? Whoever they were, this war continues and we are smack dab in the middle of it at this juncture a few thousand years later. There is no end to this conflict...as it seems to be eternal. Heck, it probably will take the return of God to finalize.
So here we are, victims of this ancient conflict brought to our shores. Whether or not we believe we are at fault is not relevent. These muslim terrorists obviously believe we are and that is all that is relevent at this juncture. And I believe that was Harry's point.
Now I don't know if Harry said we owe Bin Laden an apology as has been postulated here by some. But I know that Roscoe can bring it here if he did because that is what Roscoe is most excellent at. How bout it Roscoe?
And before you ask, yes I am in favor of the actions being taken. We have been attacked. However, it would be in line with our Constitution if Congress declared war against the nations providing haven to the terrorists who attacked us rather than just giving the President a limited power to conduct some undeclared war.
This may be libertarian, but what does it mean? What does it mean to own your own body and mind? If it means anything, it means that we are responsible for ourselves. If it means that we can do with ourselves as we wish, I would reconsider. However much we may desire freedom from the constraint as in "no external power has the right to force you into the service of "society" or "mankind" or any other individual or group for any purpose, however noble" we should remember that first of all, the only way we reach maturity is to begin in life under the contraint of our parents, and if we mature, we are resposible enough to place those constraints on ourselves, apart from the constraint of others. In short, ourselves belong to the strictures of human life. There is no planet of pure freedom.
Others are not obligated to feed you, clothe you, or provide you with health care.
And then again, of course we are obligated to each other. Perhaps not under a political law, but certainly under a moral law, freely chosen. Again, parents are obligated. And the highest moral law is to love your enemy.
I get several e-mails from Find-Law, every day.
I have posted a few of the articles.
The only thing I worry about Alan Keyes is how he stands on the 4th amendment.
I truly don't care about illegal drugs.
But police or BATF busting in someone's house, I really do have a problem.
People have been killed, innocent people. They busted in the wrong house.
Kids were killed, old men were killed, dogs were killed.
Never mind that.
Do we have the death penalty for dealing or using illegal drugs?
Well let's see, the fed prints the money....then fed sets the allowable interest rate. Is there or is there not more money in print than there is to back it up in gold and silver?
If there is more in print than there is to back it up, are we or are we not reliant upon the fed to back it up?
Perhaps "insurance" is a more appropriate analogy than "rent."
If there is more in print than there is to back it up, are we or are we not reliant upon the fed to back it up?
I thought about what you just said.
Get rid of the Federal Reserve. Get rid of the Income Tax.
Fight for HR2525.
How much money would it save the taxpayers if there were no IRS?
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.