Posted on 01/12/2003 9:15:48 PM PST by Sparta
I've been reading posts by people who use the term Conservative and others who use the term Libertarian. I have a question for all FReepers, is there a difference between the two?
Hey that's right! And that's why we have the supremos. And they have decided that drug trafficking crosses state lines .. gee they must be real wizards to figure that out... smuggling anyone.
Even when it doesn't. Only took 'em about 150 years to find that. Maybe they'll find a right to drugs tomorrow. No point in us looking for it, though. It ain't there until they say it is.
You’re absolutely right. They also found that alcohol, tobacco and oil cross state lines. And they are the last word. You can however change the constitution if you can rally all the libertarians who never use dope in one mass movement for the good of the children.
Why would we want to do that. It's much easier to coerce the USSC into say it means something different. Thank God for FDR, or what's growing in a flower pot on your window sill, or what's living in a mudpuddle in your back yard wouldn't be a federal matter, and thousands of bureaucrats would be out of a job.
Do accidents and vehicular killings still happen ? Of course they do. There are laws against rape, murder, and stealing too, dear ; yet, no law has ever stopped such things. Tell us all that you think that there should be NO laws at all and just be done with it.
Since I was talking about FEDERAL LAWS , which have NOTHING to do with state driver's licenses, perhaps you need some lessons in logical thinking; heck, just thinking, would do, dear. :-)
Well we all have our cross to bear. As for me I like it like it is. I love going to the DEA auctions and bidding on all of those dope cars only driven by a libertarian once a week on the way to his dealers grandmas street corner.
Then I look forward to seeing you on property rights threads defending the ESA, the EPA, and the New Deal Commerce Clause in general.
By " open market ", I meant over the counter; no perscription needed, no anything needed, but the demand for same, paid with hard, cold cash. All you're doing is splitting hairs, Oh blind, deaf, and dumb ( as in S-T-U-P-I-D ! ) ONE.
It was the time of Anarchists, Socialists, and Communists ? That age had been well and truely started 40 + years earlier, dear, in the streets of major cities around the world. Are you talking in the halls of the Fed Gov, perchance ? If so, who were the " Anarchists / Socialists/ Communists " in 1906 , in Washington, D.C. ? Name names and you'd best back up your position with facts !
You want to know who REALLY slings around the slogans of the anarchists and Marxists of old ? The Libertarians do; that's WHO ! So do Dems and GREENIES.
You are implying, if not outright saying that I am a Socialist/ Commie. That's libel and spurious. Those who resort to that tactic, do so out of frustration and pique, because they're losing ; which you are. :-)
And I sir will look forward to seeing you on the right to life threads. But not to worry before long the courts will be full of libertarian judges. You just keep those guys wasting their vote on those nuckleheads and it will be all right. You guys really know what you are doing, for sure. Keep those repubs out of office!
I am not a mind reader, "sweetheart". The plural form of the word does not preclude state governments. Besides, as I said, if licenses were about safety, the tests would be more frequent than ONCE in your lifetime. It's about revenue and control.
Question: Are you always rude when someone disagrees with you?
You didn't disagree; your post was superfluous and I don't suffer fools lightly, dear. :-)
Language is thought. If you have no control over your language, you have none over your thinking. I now see the problem, as you more or less said, that is that you don't know what you are saying, although you say a lot of it. Not that something piled higher and deeper is anything but a stinking pile. Your statement of "splinting hairs" tells me that precision is not your forte. I suppose if you had a tumor, you'd like the surgeon to split the hair of wither it is begin or malignant. Or maybe not in your case as they are just two different words and you don't seem to care about using language as a precision tool at the word level. And hence every sentence is imprecise, and thus every paragraph.
The Marxist, Greens, Socialist, and the Democrats by and large did take over through expert use, and misuse of language and other symbols. That is why many of the leadership came out of the law or arts. Conservatives dismissed, as you do, this battlefield, although you do it out of admitted incompetence.
Your constant advocating of progressively evermore government is the same as the left. As I said, you are what you do, not what you say you are. So, go to the government, as you always do, and sue me.
Wrong document slacker American.
Rights are in the adeptly named "Bill of Rights". The preamble of which doesn't limit it, or us, to enumerated rights. No need getting into Monroe, Jefferson vs. the Federalist arguments with you. Too over your head/knowledge base.
You may indeed. If you do, I will be there arguing for your right to live in a society under state and local laws that reflect your beliefs, and not dictated to by a federal government that has exceeded it's Constitutional authority to do so.
I'll leave you with a quote from someone you must surely consider one of the most dangerous men on the court today. Perhaps you can use it to rally your fellow "conservatives" and insure that men of such radical ideas are never appointed to the court again.
"I write separately only to express my view that the very notion of a ‘substantial effects’ test under the Commerce Clause is inconsistent with the original understanding of Congress’ powers and with this Court’s early Commerce Clause cases. By continuing to apply this rootless and malleable standard, however circumscribed, the Court has encouraged the Federal Government to persist in its view that the Commerce Clause has virtually no limits. Until this Court replaces its existing Commerce Clause jurisprudence with a standard more consistent with the original understanding, we will continue to see Congress appropriating state police powers under the guise of regulating commerce." - Justice Clarence Thomas
How true. They don't show up in my area either.
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.