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.
And at least he isn't a "sex care provider" like the prostitute they once ran for Lieutenant Governor of California.
Until Simon began running for governor last year, he was actively involved in the business.
But he didn't spit on anybody.
CUT IT OUT! YOU WANT TO BE FAIR? I THINK YOU MAY FIND YOURSELF AT CROSS PURPOSES TO THE GUY YOU ARE ADDRESSING AND HIS ILK.
and there are a number of them, not all LP members are kooks...but for some reason the third parties in general seem find many loose screw types among their ranks.
Generalities are how these people operate. It's what this whole thread is about.
If all the so called kooks are totaled up, the two major parties have the large lead.
BUT, -- as per the new CA 'law' prohibiting 'assault weapons'; -- when states violate basic individual rights, they can be stopped by the force of the constitution. GET IT? - 278
Why, yes I do. One thing I "get" is that you apparently answered the question by saying that Rick Stanley's arrest and conviction was appropriate.
No, I did not 'apparently' say that. He, in effect, was denied a proper trial.
But then we get down to this one: "when states violate basic individual rights, they can be stopped by the force of the constitution."
Stopped by the force of the Constitution? Well, I suppose an appeal to a piece of paper would work for people who are predisposed to adhere to the Constitution on its own merits. But this is precisely where your theoreticals run afoul of your practicals. When people disagree about something like gun control, "the force of the Constitution" is nothing more or less than a group of people with guns. If the Supreme Court rules that the CA law passes muster, then Californians must follow the law or suffer the consequences We could put it another way and say that California must repeal the law or face an armed revolt. We know that the former will probably happen; and that the revolt will not occur because most people a) don't care; or b) agree with the law; or c) don't want to fight a war. Any way you slice it, the consent of the governed lies on the side of the gun controllers.
Quite the little soap box speech. -- In which, you in affect say give up, - because majority rules, -- "the consent of the governed lies on the side of the gun controllers" -- Nope, I don't think you 'get it' at all, poor devil.
This brings us back to the original question of what the LP would do about laws it doesn't like, but which have the support of those who live under them.
You choose to think this is strictly a 'libertarian' problem, in the face of all rationality. Get a grip on reality.
If you think that repeating the sourceless, citeless nonsense endlessly will make it true, then you're spitting in the wind.
You realize the drug war was started by a socialist and that Bill Clinton spent more money on the drug war by far than any other president. Besides the 'conservatives' drug of choice-alcohol and tobacco-- kill more people than all illicit drugs by far and cause FAR more economic costs to society than all illicit drugs. As for 'anarchy', it would be basically what we had ~1800 in terms of laws. I dont think our FF considered their world anarchy.
Back when sodomy, prostitution and even blasphemy were violations of the Common Law?
Wrong again.
"But it is universally understood, it is a part of the history of the day, that the great revolution which established the constitution of the United States, was not effected without immense opposition. Serious fears were extensively entertained that those powers which the patriot statesmen, who then watched over the interests of our country, deemed essential to union, and to the attainment of those invaluable objects for which union was sought, might be exercised in a manner dangerous to liberty. In almost every convention by which the constitution was adopted, amendments to guard against the abuse of power were recommended. These amendments demanded security against the apprehended encroachments of the general government--not against those of the local governments." -- Barron v. Baltimore 7 Pet. 243 (1833)"The Second Amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress." -- US Supreme Court, U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875), Presser v. State of Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886)
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.