POLICE STATE: U.S. Prison System Larger Than Soviet Gulags...

[frigidweirdo]

"I do not and never have believed that Liberty is (or should be) an Inalienable Right." A #274

And you retain the First Amendment right to harbor that anti-American position.

"I have never and will never believe that there is ANY Right to act in an Immoral or Improper manner." A

Me too.
I suspect most persons agree with us on that.

But Liberty doesn't, and never has.
It seems you're conflating Liberty with freedom.

And while you're fully entitled to your religious views;
that does not empower you to impose them on others.

The irony is, you would have the State exercise your preference in right of Liberty to infringe or usurp the Liberty of others.

Fortunately, you are not the sovereign here.
Our sovereign is the United States Constitution. And it protects your Liberty right, just as it protects mine.

Like with most things, people aren't interested in the mechanics of rights, liberty and freedom.

All they care about is what it gives them.

 

[Anathema]

Actually, without alcohol and tobacco, the country would implode overnight...because taxes on them bring in TENS OF BILLIONS of dollars every year!

That's fine. I can cut TRILLIONS of dollars our of the US Budget simply by removing every unConstitutional program from the budget. Hell, we could lower the tax rate dramatically as well with the sort of savings I'm talking about.

 

[Anathema]

I'll chip in for your ticket, psycho boy!

It's not the plane ticket that's the issue. It's that you folks have so severely screwed this country up that the average American is not welcome in those places. Definitely not in terms of citizenship requests

 

[Anathema]

And you retain the First Amendment right to harbor that anti-American position

Unfortunately the founders of this nation were incredibly gullible and naive individuals who thought that Morals and Values would remain a part of society indefinitely. They listed the Rights of a Citizen while failing to include the Duties and Responsibilities of such in the same document..

Me too. I suspect most persons agree with us on that.

But Liberty doesn't, and never has.It seems you're conflating Liberty with freedom.

And while you're fully entitled to your religious views; that does not empower you to impose them on others.

.
Liberty, Freedom, whatever. I don't believe in either of them to any significant degree. My views are not based on religion. I have no more use for organized religion than I do for Liberty or Freedom. I believe in Universal Morality and the ideal that no individual who cannot and/or will not live a Moral life should be allowed to continue to exist in Society, lest Society be permanently infected (as ours has become) with Immorality on a greater level.

The irony is, you would have the State exercise your preference in right of Liberty to infringe or usurp the Liberty of others.

Fortunately, you are not the sovereign here. Our sovereign is the United States Constitution. And it protects your Liberty right, just as it protects mine.

YOUR Sovereign is a seriously flawed document that your own Government has not followed in a century and a half. MY Sovereign is Universal Morality, which is Eternal and unchanging. You answer to your Sovereign on this side of Eternity while EVERYONE will answer to mine on the other side of Eternity.

 

[kaz]

Only fascist Republican government like Bush's hires government employees to pad employment numbers

That's a pretty ridiculous statement. Both parties just love government and want more

Republicans have cutting spending.

Reducing the rate of growth of spending is not "cutting spending"

If you are going to spend less then it is.

Right, but the point is the Republicans don't "spend less"

 

[Iceweasel]

Only fascist Republican government like Bush's hires government employees to pad employment numbers

That's a pretty ridiculous statement. Both parties just love government and want more

Republicans have cutting spending.

Reducing the rate of growth of spending is not "cutting spending"

If you are going to spend less then it is.

Right, but the point is the Republicans don't "spend less"

Yes they do if they did not increase spending.

 

[kaz]

That's a pretty ridiculous statement. Both parties just love government and want more

Republicans have cutting spending.

Reducing the rate of growth of spending is not "cutting spending"

If you are going to spend less then it is.

Right, but the point is the Republicans don't "spend less"

Yes they do if they did not increase spending.

Maybe you could translate that into English?

 

[Iceweasel]

Republicans have cutting spending.

Reducing the rate of growth of spending is not "cutting spending"

If you are going to spend less then it is.

Right, but the point is the Republicans don't "spend less"

Yes they do if they did not increase spending.

Maybe you could translate that into English?

It's in simple English as it is.

 

[kaz]

Reducing the rate of growth of spending is not "cutting spending"

If you are going to spend less then it is.

Right, but the point is the Republicans don't "spend less"

Yes they do if they did not increase spending.

Maybe you could translate that into English?

It's in simple English as it is.

No, somehow you are processing unending government spending increases with both parties arm in arm as spending cuts. That isn't English, it's doublespeak

 

[Iceweasel]

If you are going to spend less then it is.

Right, but the point is the Republicans don't "spend less"

Yes they do if they did not increase spending.

Maybe you could translate that into English?

It's in simple English as it is.

No, somehow you are processing unending government spending increases with both parties arm in arm as spending cuts. That isn't English, it's doublespeak

No, you can't see the words since it doesn't fit your beliefs. If they reduce the amount of growth then we will be spending less. This is why Losertarians can't hold high office, it's a cult of some sort.

 

[sear]

"it's a cult of some sort." Iw #290

If a cult, of precisely the sort that Founded the United States of America.

With "cult" members like:
- Thomas Paine
- John Adams
- James Madison
- Thomas Jefferson
- Benjamin Franklin

Thank god we retain such noble, principled persons in our 3rd millennium culture!

 

[kaz]

Right, but the point is the Republicans don't "spend less"

Yes they do if they did not increase spending.

Maybe you could translate that into English?

It's in simple English as it is.

No, somehow you are processing unending government spending increases with both parties arm in arm as spending cuts. That isn't English, it's doublespeak

No, you can't see the words since it doesn't fit your beliefs. If they reduce the amount of growth then we will be spending less. This is why Losertarians can't hold high office, it's a cult of some sort.

That we think increasing spending more slowly isn't cutting spending means we are a cult? The evidence would seem to suggest the reverse

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes they do if they did not increase spending.

Maybe you could translate that into English?

It's in simple English as it is.

No, somehow you are processing unending government spending increases with both parties arm in arm as spending cuts. That isn't English, it's doublespeak

No, you can't see the words since it doesn't fit your beliefs. If they reduce the amount of growth then we will be spending less. This is why Losertarians can't hold high office, it's a cult of some sort.

That we think increasing spending more slowly isn't cutting spending means we are a cult? The evidence would seem to suggest the reverse

Well no, you got it. Decreasing spending is cutting spending. The cults are the guys that can't grasp it because they can't have a libertarian country.

 

[kaz]

Maybe you could translate that into English?

It's in simple English as it is.

No, somehow you are processing unending government spending increases with both parties arm in arm as spending cuts. That isn't English, it's doublespeak

No, you can't see the words since it doesn't fit your beliefs. If they reduce the amount of growth then we will be spending less. This is why Losertarians can't hold high office, it's a cult of some sort.

That we think increasing spending more slowly isn't cutting spending means we are a cult? The evidence would seem to suggest the reverse

Well no, you got it. Decreasing spending is cutting spending. The cults are the guys that can't grasp it because they can't have a libertarian country.

Dude, cutting spending means reducing spending, it does not mean increasing spending