Copeland is also a Druid.
Posted on 09/08/2002 9:22:43 PM PDT by doug from upland
The evening started innocently enough for Brian Whitman, Sunday evening talk show host on KABC in Los Angeles.
He had on his show four minor candidates running for governor of California. Three were on the phone and the fourth, Libertarian candidate Gary Copeland, was in studio.
The conversation eventually turned to illegal immigration. Copeland did not like Whitman's position and called him a racist. Although Whitman kept trying to answer, Copeland kept talking over him and would not let him speak.
Just as Whitman puts callers in "timeout" on his show when they won't let him have his say, he told the engineer to cut off Copeland's microphone. Copeland became incensed and started packing his things to leave the studio.
Then, in great FReeper tradition, Whitman told Copeland not to let the door hit his ass on the way out. He also called Copeland a lunatic.
Then the rain came. Copeland walked over to Whitman and spit in his face. Whitman couldn't believe it. Two others on the KABC staff couldn't believe it.
Whitman had the station call the police and is considering filing assault charges.
Poor Copeland. He may no longer be the Libertarian candidate for governor. An official high ranking representative of the party called in to Whitman and told him that Copeland would be receiving no more backing and they were going to see what they could do to take him off the ballot.
Now that was classic talk radio. The unbelievable happened. A candidate for governor actually showed himself to be a bigger jackass than Gray Davis. Davis has spit on the law but never on Whitman, at least not yet. Brian, get him in studio.
Hitler youth??? ...
Well gosh golly gee .. wake up on the wrong side of the bed or have you always been so cheery??
Don't put words in my mouth, please. You libertoonians are supposed to be against such things.
What, exactly, did Rick do that was so bad?
Rick Stanley has acted like a wild-eyed idiot throughout his campaign. He comes across as a lunatic -- even in his own press releases. As a result, anything that Rick Stanley is for, is automatically tainted by the fact that it's supported by an idiot.
And for an issue like guns, where a lot of people are either agnostic or predisposed against RKBA, people like Rick Stanley simply push them farther away. After all, who wants whackjobs like that carrying guns?
As for Dr. Paul: he runs as a Republican. Enough said.
Yep, advocating for personal responsibility and freedom is just such an incredibly childish thing to do.
The way you guys do it, it is childish.
Hope you have your spit filter udpated on your computer
Nah -- TJ used up his spit supply on the drive to work. (He's the only guy I know with windshield wipers on the inside.)
!!!!
Copeland is also a Druid.
The misfits I was refering to are the group drawn to this thread like flies to s-it. Sick people whose hatred for freedom and it's proponants is the only thing that binds them together.
Oh, right - we're all supposed to realize the Libertarians are right by osmosis. You guys have no obligation to sell your ideas and concepts to the voting public - everybody is just supposed to come to you naturally.....
What kind of tripe is that? I would be happy to, and constantly attempt to keep the object on ideas and concepts. I'm prefectly able to "sell" my ideas. The problem is threads like this, which are designed precisely to avoid such debate. It focuses on trying instead to childishly paint all libertarians as being exactly like the loser who spit on someone. If that ain't childish BS, you ain't an attorney.
And God knows that having the LP candidate for Governor of California spit on a radio host will accomplish a lot in terms of salemanship.
And now you join the "broad brush" crowd too? Sad if it is so.
I noticed you failed to answer the RKBA question, so I'll ask it again: What did Rick do that was bad enough to arrest him? If the BOR does not apply to the States, then those same States could re-institute Slavery. If the BOR does apply to the States, then why was Rick arrested for holstering a pistol? Or is this one of those things where a Right only goes as far as the reigning political party says it does?
Rick Stanley has acted like a wild-eyed idiot throughout his campaign. He comes across as a lunatic -- even in his own press releases. As a result, anything that Rick Stanley is for, is automatically tainted by the fact that it's supported by an idiot.
Once again, I see you completely failed to provide a direct reference, but only give "one persons opinion". Which, it has been pointed out to me in the past, is worth it weight in the electrons it is being displayed with.
And for an issue like guns, where a lot of people are either agnostic or predisposed against RKBA, people like Rick Stanley simply push them farther away. After all, who wants whackjobs like that carrying guns?
Yes. And Republicans have done ever so much to change that trend haven't they? Bush doesn't seem to know which side of the issue to come down on. On one hand, he has Ashcroft send a well-meaning letter to the NRA, on the other... he was against arming pilots. Consistant you guys are not.
As for Dr. Paul: he runs as a Republican. Enough said.
To get elected, he needed the backing of a major political party. His votes are consistant with libertarian philosophy. "By their works, shall ye know them."
The way you guys do it, it is childish.
The way you guys do it, in another forty years, we'll be little better off than Soviet Russia.
Actually, I'm quite cheery. Which of course doesn't mean I give a free pass to liars.
If you have followed the threads over the years and observed the tactics of these morons and still align yourself with them, you are no better than anyone who is a libertarian defending the boorish antics of some deranged goof who spits on people. To try and connect all libertarians to a few goofs is precisely the same thing as trying to connect David Duke to all Republicans. Which is why I did that, to demonstrate the idiocy of it. Get it?
Uh, that's the 13th Amendment, not the Bill of Rights.
Read a book.
Funny, a lot of us advocated the same thing for Clinton and his violations of the Constitution. The difference here is...??? It sounds like it was much ado about nothing, for the most part. Stemming mostly from opinions expressed on his mailing list. BFD.
That is why I made the inane comparison of David Duke with all Republicans. But they didn't get it. And most don't care, your buddies CJ, Kevvie Boy, Roscoe and the rest of the taliban are already off this thread merrily looking for other threads to pollute with their hatred and lies.
It really raises this whole process, to a farce.
OK. Let me re-state that for those who can't figure it out, does the Federal Constitution, and the Amendments made to it, apply restrictions to the actions of the States? If it does, then the prohibitions placed on the Federal government concerning our Rights applies to the States as well. If not, then any State could re-institute slavery.
Is that better? Or do I need to break it down in to even smaller words for you Roscoe? I know your comprehension is a little iffy at times.
Hey give him a break, his last post was thirteen words, a personal high water mark for him.
Takiban huh??? .. haven't been called that yet
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.