Democrats: The Anti-Liberty Party

[PoliticalChic]

Boil down, and 'Liberty' can be reduced to
a. Private Propery
b. Freedom of speech

Both are anathema to Progressives, Liberals, Democrasts.



1. Some know that before it became “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” in our Declaration of Independence,John Locke wrote that man has a right to “life, liberty, and property.”
Property Rights Have Personal Parallels - Forbes

The word "property" was replaced with the term "pursuit of happiness". If the founding fathers wanted to insert your opinion, theory, concept or idea that is needed to build on the rest of theory, they would have kept the quote the way the slave owner Locke wrote it and would not have replaced it with "pursuit of happiness".

Liberty, free markets, private property.....inseparable.
There is no liberty without the right to private property.

1. A fundamental principle of our society is property rights. In nations were property rights have not been formally established, the costs of legally validating ownership of a home, a farm, or a business may be prohibitively expensive relative to the average income level, a crippling handicap for those seeking to rise from poverty to prosperity. Without property rights, one with entrepreneurial talents loses the access to other people’s money: homes or other assets not recognized by a legal system cannot be used as collateral. Sowell, “Economic Facts & Fallacies,” chapter seven.
   1. There is no faster way to create a nation of serfs than to remove property rights.

Your response does not change the fact that you have begun your OP with a misleading interpretation or misleading evaluation of a a quote which has been changed to create the foundation of your thesis. You further bastardize the term and concept of property rights by interpreting the meaning of property rights to fit your definition. That definition is of course shaped to fit your concept or thesis. Sentence by sentence, quote by quote, paragraph by paragraph and conclusion by conclusion you are using manipulated skewed bits of fraudulent data to attempt to make your point. Lots of little misrepresentations add up to one big one.

So....your response isn't support for liberty....but simply "is not, is not!!!!"


Another brilliant Liberal post.


I have the sense that you'd sell your car to buy gas.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your attempt to obfuscate is noted....as is the correctness of my analysis of same.


So......gonna change your avi to 'Fascist'?

Liar.

I was very clear or do you have trouble understanding simple, declarative sentences?

Here is what I wrote:

I posted a list of the freedoms, rights and liberties the Repubs work so hard at taking away from American citizens.

Those would be the very same freedoms, rights and liberties I support and believe in.

Now its your turn:


I dare you to answer those same questions. Which of those rights, freedoms and liberties do you support?

And I still bet you won't answer.

I never lie.

Anyone reading the thread will see that you've tried smoke and mirrors rather than admit that you favor restricting private property ownership and freedom of speech.

And, I believe, they will see how that perspective is clearly one identified as 'fascistic.'


You are living proof that cow pies can sprout legs and walk.

IOW, you do not support or believe in any of the freedoms, rights and liberties I listed. Which, BTW, includes freedom of speech and property ownership.

In point of fact, even though you don't have the integrity and honesty to admit it, you believe government should control every single thing I listed:

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

Now, go look up the definition of fascism and look in the mirror.

I'm curious....did you become a fascist knowingly...i.e., are you 'a true believer,'....

....or simply out of ignorance?

Instead of hiding behind childish name calling and lies, stay on topic:

Why don't you have the courage of your convictions? Why don't you just admit you do not believe in or support the rights I listed?

Why don't you have the honesty and integrity to admit you believe government should control every single thing I listed:

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

Quit lying.

".....stay on topic..."


Here's the topic:
"Boil down, and 'Liberty' can be reduced to
a. Private Propery
b. Freedom of speech"


Did you miss it, fascist-boy.....it was the first part of the OP.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Equal treatment under the law is the most important right.

I should add that the only way to protect that right is the right of the People to vote on who represents them.

The right to property, btw, is not protected from economic realities. Your right to own a home for example is meaningless if you cannot afford one.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Equal treatment under the law is the most important right.

I should add that the only way to protect that right is the right of the People to vote on who represents them.

The right to property, btw, is not protected from economic realities. Your right to own a home for example is meaningless if you cannot afford one.

1. The Spotted Owl(Strix occidentalis) is a species of true owl. It is a resident species of old-growth forests in western North America, where it nests in tree holes, oldbird of preynests, or rock crevices….TheInternational Union for Conservation of Nature(IUCN) Red list status for the Spotted Owl is Near Threatened with a decreasing population trend…..In February 2008, a federal judge reinforced aU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decision to designate 8,600,000 acres (35,000 km2) in Arizona, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico as critical habitat for the owl.Spotted owl - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
   1. Ten years of research and more than 1,000 published studies detail the threats to its survival, but there's still no sure way to stop its decline. Saving the Spotted Owl NPR
2. The Spotted Owl campaign, as is so very many other environmental campaigns, a deceit. It is a way of advancing the real agenda, confiscating property.
3. "One of the people instrumental in shutting down the forests told me that ‘if the spotted owl hadn’t existed, we would have had to invent it.’ The goal was to stop logging….It is totally questionable whether owls were endangered by logging. Was it good for the overall health of the forest? Probably not. Was it good for the spotted owl? It probably didn’t make a difference. Did it hurt the overall economies of the West? Yes.” Nickson, “Eco-Fascists,” p.129.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Liar.

I was very clear or do you have trouble understanding simple, declarative sentences?

Here is what I wrote:

I posted a list of the freedoms, rights and liberties the Repubs work so hard at taking away from American citizens.

Those would be the very same freedoms, rights and liberties I support and believe in.

Now its your turn:


I dare you to answer those same questions. Which of those rights, freedoms and liberties do you support?

And I still bet you won't answer.

I never lie.

Anyone reading the thread will see that you've tried smoke and mirrors rather than admit that you favor restricting private property ownership and freedom of speech.

And, I believe, they will see how that perspective is clearly one identified as 'fascistic.'


You are living proof that cow pies can sprout legs and walk.

IOW, you do not support or believe in any of the freedoms, rights and liberties I listed. Which, BTW, includes freedom of speech and property ownership.

In point of fact, even though you don't have the integrity and honesty to admit it, you believe government should control every single thing I listed:

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

Now, go look up the definition of fascism and look in the mirror.

I'm curious....did you become a fascist knowingly...i.e., are you 'a true believer,'....

....or simply out of ignorance?

Instead of hiding behind childish name calling and lies, stay on topic:

Why don't you have the courage of your convictions? Why don't you just admit you do not believe in or support the rights I listed?

Why don't you have the honesty and integrity to admit you believe government should control every single thing I listed:

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

Quit lying.

".....stay on topic..."


Here's the topic:
"Boil down, and 'Liberty' can be reduced to
a. Private Propery
b. Freedom of speech"


Did you miss it, fascist-boy.....it was the first part of the OP.

I answered very clearly and more than once.

You, OTOH, refuse to answer.

Why is that?

Just answer, yes or no

Do you believe government should control every single thing I listed?

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

 

[PredFan]

Glad you brought this up. As always, your links are worth nothing but the question of which party favors individual freedoms, rights and liberties is worth a discussion.

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

There are many more examples but I'm sure you get the idea.

The problem for you is that each and every point you made has been already debunked and shown to be bull shit. I'd say nice try but you already knew it was bull shit so no, you just lose.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Equal treatment under the law is the most important right.

I should add that the only way to protect that right is the right of the People to vote on who represents them.

The right to property, btw, is not protected from economic realities. Your right to own a home for example is meaningless if you cannot afford one.

1. The Spotted Owl(Strix occidentalis) is a species of true owl. It is a resident species of old-growth forests in western North America, where it nests in tree holes, oldbird of preynests, or rock crevices….TheInternational Union for Conservation of Nature(IUCN) Red list status for the Spotted Owl is Near Threatened with a decreasing population trend…..In February 2008, a federal judge reinforced aU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decision to designate 8,600,000 acres (35,000 km2) in Arizona, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico as critical habitat for the owl.Spotted owl - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
   1. Ten years of research and more than 1,000 published studies detail the threats to its survival, but there's still no sure way to stop its decline. Saving the Spotted Owl NPR
2. The Spotted Owl campaign, as is so very many other environmental campaigns, a deceit. It is a way of advancing the real agenda, confiscating property.
3. "One of the people instrumental in shutting down the forests told me that ‘if the spotted owl hadn’t existed, we would have had to invent it.’ The goal was to stop logging….It is totally questionable whether owls were endangered by logging. Was it good for the overall health of the forest? Probably not. Was it good for the spotted owl? It probably didn’t make a difference. Did it hurt the overall economies of the West? Yes.” Nickson, “Eco-Fascists,” p.129.

Okay, so you seem to be saying you believe government should have control of property.

Now, what about the other points?

Do you believe government should have control of

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

Just answer yes or no.

Alternatively you could just keep

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Glad you brought this up. As always, your links are worth nothing but the question of which party favors individual freedoms, rights and liberties is worth a discussion.

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

There are many more examples but I'm sure you get the idea.

The problem for you is that each and every point you made has been already debunked and shown to be bull shit. I'd say nice try but you already knew it was bull shit so no, you just lose.

So you believe that government should have control of the issues I listed?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Equal treatment under the law is the most important right.

I should add that the only way to protect that right is the right of the People to vote on who represents them.

The right to property, btw, is not protected from economic realities. Your right to own a home for example is meaningless if you cannot afford one.

1. The Spotted Owl(Strix occidentalis) is a species of true owl. It is a resident species of old-growth forests in western North America, where it nests in tree holes, oldbird of preynests, or rock crevices….TheInternational Union for Conservation of Nature(IUCN) Red list status for the Spotted Owl is Near Threatened with a decreasing population trend…..In February 2008, a federal judge reinforced aU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decision to designate 8,600,000 acres (35,000 km2) in Arizona, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico as critical habitat for the owl.Spotted owl - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
   1. Ten years of research and more than 1,000 published studies detail the threats to its survival, but there's still no sure way to stop its decline. Saving the Spotted Owl NPR
2. The Spotted Owl campaign, as is so very many other environmental campaigns, a deceit. It is a way of advancing the real agenda, confiscating property.
3. "One of the people instrumental in shutting down the forests told me that ‘if the spotted owl hadn’t existed, we would have had to invent it.’ The goal was to stop logging….It is totally questionable whether owls were endangered by logging. Was it good for the overall health of the forest? Probably not. Was it good for the spotted owl? It probably didn’t make a difference. Did it hurt the overall economies of the West? Yes.” Nickson, “Eco-Fascists,” p.129.

Okay, so you seem to be saying you believe government should have control of property.

Now, what about the other points?

Do you believe government should have control of

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

Just answer yes or no.

Alternatively you could just keep

"Okay, so you seem to be saying you believe government should have control of property."



WHAT?????


OK...you've explained how you fell into being a fascist....you're actually that stupid.

 

[PredFan]

Glad you brought this up. As always, your links are worth nothing but the question of which party favors individual freedoms, rights and liberties is worth a discussion.

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

There are many more examples but I'm sure you get the idea.

The problem for you is that each and every point you made has been already debunked and shown to be bull shit. I'd say nice try but you already knew it was bull shit so no, you just lose.

So you believe that government should have control of the issues I listed?

No you illiterate idiot, those things you listed aren't true.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Equal treatment under the law is the most important right.

I should add that the only way to protect that right is the right of the People to vote on who represents them.

The right to property, btw, is not protected from economic realities. Your right to own a home for example is meaningless if you cannot afford one.

1. The Spotted Owl(Strix occidentalis) is a species of true owl. It is a resident species of old-growth forests in western North America, where it nests in tree holes, oldbird of preynests, or rock crevices….TheInternational Union for Conservation of Nature(IUCN) Red list status for the Spotted Owl is Near Threatened with a decreasing population trend…..In February 2008, a federal judge reinforced aU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decision to designate 8,600,000 acres (35,000 km2) in Arizona, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico as critical habitat for the owl.Spotted owl - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
   1. Ten years of research and more than 1,000 published studies detail the threats to its survival, but there's still no sure way to stop its decline. Saving the Spotted Owl NPR
2. The Spotted Owl campaign, as is so very many other environmental campaigns, a deceit. It is a way of advancing the real agenda, confiscating property.
3. "One of the people instrumental in shutting down the forests told me that ‘if the spotted owl hadn’t existed, we would have had to invent it.’ The goal was to stop logging….It is totally questionable whether owls were endangered by logging. Was it good for the overall health of the forest? Probably not. Was it good for the spotted owl? It probably didn’t make a difference. Did it hurt the overall economies of the West? Yes.” Nickson, “Eco-Fascists,” p.129.

Okay, so you seem to be saying you believe government should have control of property.

Now, what about the other points?

Do you believe government should have control of

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

Just answer yes or no.

Alternatively you could just keep

"Okay, so you seem to be saying you believe government should have control of property."



WHAT?????


OK...you've explained how you fell into being a fascist....you're actually that stupid.

I have very clearly said I do not believe government should have control of the issues I listed, including property and freedom of speech.

Why won't you answer the question?

Do you believe government should control individual's rights on these issues?

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Glad you brought this up. As always, your links are worth nothing but the question of which party favors individual freedoms, rights and liberties is worth a discussion.

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

There are many more examples but I'm sure you get the idea.

The problem for you is that each and every point you made has been already debunked and shown to be bull shit. I'd say nice try but you already knew it was bull shit so no, you just lose.

So you believe that government should have control of the issues I listed?

No you illiterate idiot, those things you listed aren't rights.

Obviously, I disagree on that point but, why won't either you or PC just answer the questions? What are you afraid of?

Are you saying government should have control of deciding those issues?

Just answer YES or NO.

Which ones? Or all of them?

Just answer YES or NO.

Thanks.

 

[PredFan]

Glad you brought this up. As always, your links are worth nothing but the question of which party favors individual freedoms, rights and liberties is worth a discussion.

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

There are many more examples but I'm sure you get the idea.

The problem for you is that each and every point you made has been already debunked and shown to be bull shit. I'd say nice try but you already knew it was bull shit so no, you just lose.

So you believe that government should have control of the issues I listed?

No you illiterate idiot, those things you listed aren't rights.

Obviously, I disagree on that point but, answer the questions:

Are you saying government should have control of deciding those issues?

Just answer YES or NO.

Which ones? Or all of them?

Just answer YES or NO.

Thanks.

Jesus Christ! How fucking stupid are you anyway? Of course I don't think the government should control them, but I never said it should, did I moron? But that is irrelevant because most of your points are lies anyway.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. In the Liberal- mob milieu such as the one in which we live, folks lose their livelihood, and are open to ridicule, and worse.... addresses are often made public....if they have any beliefs that don't conform to the mass media's.



A devious attempt to dry up support for any view outside of the authorized one, is the demand that every donor be named.


" Some of us are old enough to remember when this kind of game was played by Southern [Democrat] segregationist politicians trying to hamstring civil rights organizations like the NAACP by pressuring them to reveal who was contributing money to them. Such revelations would of course then subject NAACP supporters to all sorts of retaliations, and dry up contributions."
The New Inquisition - Thomas Sowell - Page full




And, the current Democrat reprise of that attempt:


"Ron Paul's nonprofit Campaign for Liberty will fight the Internal Revenue Service's demand that it reveal its donor list to the agency, despite having already been fined for refusing to do so.

"There is no legitimate reason for the IRS to know who donates to Campaign for Liberty...."We believe the First Amendment is on our side as evidenced by cases such as NAACP v. Alabama and International Union UAW v. National Right to Work. Many 501(c)(4) organizations protect the privacy of their donors in the very same way as Campaign for Liberty. For some reason the IRS has now chosen to single out Campaign for Liberty for special attention. We plan to fight this all the way."

"Paying this outrageous extortionist fine — just to exercise our rights as American citizens to petition our government — may even be cheaper in the short run," he wrote. "But it’ll just embolden an alphabet soup of other federal agencies to come after us."

Stiles accused the IRS of trying to silence her organization.

"The IRS technically requires donor information from 501(c)(4) organizations and is forbidden by law from releasing it to the public, yet despite this they have 'mistakenly' released the information repeatedly over the years," she wrote. "Often these leaks have been made to political opponents of the conservative groups whose information was leaked. Leaking the donor information is intended to harass and to intimidate those donors from donating to political causes."
Ron Paul group to defy IRS WashingtonExaminer.com

"....leaks have been made to political opponents of the conservative groups..."




Barack Obama....the first President who has used the IRS against political opponents....
Anyone notice that the DoJ refused to follow the trail of corruption that led to Lois Lerner's door?

 

[Camp]

Boil down, and 'Liberty' can be reduced to
a. Private Propery
b. Freedom of speech

Both are anathema to Progressives, Liberals, Democrasts.



1. Some know that before it became “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” in our Declaration of Independence,John Locke wrote that man has a right to “life, liberty, and property.”
Property Rights Have Personal Parallels - Forbes

The word "property" was replaced with the term "pursuit of happiness". If the founding fathers wanted to insert your opinion, theory, concept or idea that is needed to build on the rest of theory, they would have kept the quote the way the slave owner Locke wrote it and would not have replaced it with "pursuit of happiness".

Liberty, free markets, private property.....inseparable.
There is no liberty without the right to private property.

1. A fundamental principle of our society is property rights. In nations were property rights have not been formally established, the costs of legally validating ownership of a home, a farm, or a business may be prohibitively expensive relative to the average income level, a crippling handicap for those seeking to rise from poverty to prosperity. Without property rights, one with entrepreneurial talents loses the access to other people’s money: homes or other assets not recognized by a legal system cannot be used as collateral. Sowell, “Economic Facts & Fallacies,” chapter seven.
   1. There is no faster way to create a nation of serfs than to remove property rights.

Your response does not change the fact that you have begun your OP with a misleading interpretation or misleading evaluation of a a quote which has been changed to create the foundation of your thesis. You further bastardize the term and concept of property rights by interpreting the meaning of property rights to fit your definition. That definition is of course shaped to fit your concept or thesis. Sentence by sentence, quote by quote, paragraph by paragraph and conclusion by conclusion you are using manipulated skewed bits of fraudulent data to attempt to make your point. Lots of little misrepresentations add up to one big one.

So....your response isn't support for liberty....but simply "is not, is not!!!!"


Another brilliant Liberal post.


I have the sense that you'd sell your car to buy gas.

My response has been that your idea is based from the very beginning of the OP on a fraudulent concept. The very foundation of your argument is a false and erroneous concept. Pointing that out has not brought forward an intellectual response, it has, as usual from you, brought about a deflection from answering and simple charge that because I dare challenge your distorted concept, I must be against liberty and followed by some kind on nonsense about "is not, is not". The thing that "is not" is the opening of the OP where you attempt to confuse the issue by supplanting and misrepresenting a quote by the founders.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Glad you brought this up. As always, your links are worth nothing but the question of which party favors individual freedoms, rights and liberties is worth a discussion.

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

There are many more examples but I'm sure you get the idea.

The problem for you is that each and every point you made has been already debunked and shown to be bull shit. I'd say nice try but you already knew it was bull shit so no, you just lose.

So you believe that government should have control of the issues I listed?

No you illiterate idiot, those things you listed aren't rights.

Obviously, I disagree on that point but, answer the questions:

Are you saying government should have control of deciding those issues?

Just answer YES or NO.

Which ones? Or all of them?

Just answer YES or NO.

Thanks.

Jesus Christ! How fucking stupid are you anyway? Of course I don't think the government should control them, but I never said it should, did I moron? But that is irrelevant because most of your points are lies anyway.

Okay so you don't believe in individual rights to property, freedom of speech,
Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

You don't believe government should have control of any of those things.

And you believe those issues are "lies".

Yeah, right.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Is this thread meant to infer that Republicans are the pro-liberty party, because that's a joke.

 

[-S-]

Boil down, and 'Liberty' can be reduced to
a. Private Propery
b. Freedom of speech

Both are anathema to Progressives, Liberals, Democrasts.



1. Some know that before it became “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” in our Declaration of Independence,John Locke wrote that man has a right to “life, liberty, and property.”
Property Rights Have Personal Parallels - Forbes

2. " Karl Marx describes in his communist manifesto, the ten steps necessary to destroy a free enterprise system and replace it with a system of omnipotent government power, so as to effect a communist socialist state. Those ten steps are known as theTen Planksof The Communist Manifesto…

a. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.

b. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

c. Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State."
Communist Manifesto 10 Planks



3. Without admitting obeisance to Marx, this government obviates the 'private' part via taxation and regulation.
Remember the "The Anti-Capitalist Brigade..." Occupy Wall Street? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/magazine/oakland-occupy-movement.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

The current Marxists reveal same with its war cry..... 'income inequality' and support for exta-legal demands with it's creation Occupy Wall Street.
And Obama and Pelosi were right there with them from the start.





4. In order to muzzle dissent, the radicals, early on, took aim at the media, and at academia. But controlling these outlets of information was not enough.

Silencing opposition voices, as any fascist program would do, became the corollary.


a. "....attempts to shut down people whose free speech interferes with other people's political agendas go on, with remarkably little notice, much less outrage. The Internal Revenue Service's targeting the tax-exempt status of conservative groups is just one of these attempts to fight political battles by shutting up the opposition, rather than answering them." The New Inquisition - Thomas Sowell - Page 1

I love how you were kind enough to 'boil' everything that is American down to a simple a) b) format and, in typical conservative Dixiecrat fashion, 'property rights' gets the top slot. How unoriginal.

I'm an American.
I'm a progressive.
I own property.
I own a couple guns, and love to shoot them.
I am pro military spending.
I'm seriously considering joining the military, and would consider it an honor.
I'm pro business.
I am pro labor union.
I support Social Security and other social safety nets.
I believe healthcare for all Americans should be a right.

I vote Democrat today, because I believe civil rights and the opportunity of happiness are of greater importance than unbridled property rights. I would have voted Republican in 1860 for the exact same reasons.

You vote Republican today, because you believe in the unmatched importance of property rights. You would have voted Democrat in 1860 for the exact same reason.

Point is, don't put so much importance on party affiliation. What a party stands for today may very well change years from now. 'Republican' and 'Democrat' are just words. It's the beliefs behind a person with each label that matters.

 

[Camp]

Is this thread meant to infer that Republicans are the pro-liberty party, because that's a joke.

This thread is a typical PoliticalChic thread where she reads a political commentary and cuts and paste from the article and some of the sources used by the author to make it appear to be her own thesis. Problem is always the same. She doesn't really know the topic and is restricted to the cut and paste. Hence she ends up guessing at a lot. That and using insults to deflect.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

8. In the Liberal- mob milieu such as the one in which we live, folks lose their livelihood, and are open to ridicule, and worse.... addresses are often made public....if they have any beliefs that don't conform to the mass media's.



A devious attempt to dry up support for any view outside of the authorized one, is the demand that every donor be named.


" Some of us are old enough to remember when this kind of game was played by Southern [Democrat] segregationist politicians trying to hamstring civil rights organizations like the NAACP by pressuring them to reveal who was contributing money to them. Such revelations would of course then subject NAACP supporters to all sorts of retaliations, and dry up contributions."
The New Inquisition - Thomas Sowell - Page full




And, the current Democrat reprise of that attempt:


"Ron Paul's nonprofit Campaign for Liberty will fight the Internal Revenue Service's demand that it reveal its donor list to the agency, despite having already been fined for refusing to do so.

"There is no legitimate reason for the IRS to know who donates to Campaign for Liberty...."We believe the First Amendment is on our side as evidenced by cases such as NAACP v. Alabama and International Union UAW v. National Right to Work. Many 501(c)(4) organizations protect the privacy of their donors in the very same way as Campaign for Liberty. For some reason the IRS has now chosen to single out Campaign for Liberty for special attention. We plan to fight this all the way."

"Paying this outrageous extortionist fine — just to exercise our rights as American citizens to petition our government — may even be cheaper in the short run," he wrote. "But it’ll just embolden an alphabet soup of other federal agencies to come after us."

Stiles accused the IRS of trying to silence her organization.

"The IRS technically requires donor information from 501(c)(4) organizations and is forbidden by law from releasing it to the public, yet despite this they have 'mistakenly' released the information repeatedly over the years," she wrote. "Often these leaks have been made to political opponents of the conservative groups whose information was leaked. Leaking the donor information is intended to harass and to intimidate those donors from donating to political causes."
Ron Paul group to defy IRS WashingtonExaminer.com

"....leaks have been made to political opponents of the conservative groups..."




Barack Obama....the first President who has used the IRS against political opponents....
Anyone notice that the DoJ refused to follow the trail of corruption that led to Lois Lerner's door?

PoliticalChic

That ^^^ is a pretty desperate attempt to derail your own thread. Not going the way you thought it would?


I have very clearly said I do not believe government should have control of the issues I listed, including property and freedom of speech.

Why won't you answer the question?

Do you believe government should control individual's rights on these issues?

Abortion
Marriage equality
Sharia law to control the populace
Forcing people to give up their property for a pipeline that does not benefit the US
Taking from the poor to give to the rich
Believing one criminal rancher should be able to steal millions from Americans

Or