"Freedom" thread or something

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Anton's the Steelers fan. I'm Eagles all the way. Steelers fans are jerks.

Hey, screw you!
At least we don't cheer concussions, boo Santa Claus, or need a jail in our stadium.

manofmystery wrote: Also, did I see a biblical argument break out in god damned () libertarian thread?

"To take the scriptures seriously is not to take them literally. Literalism is invariably the lowest and least level of meaning. Most Biblical authors understood this, which is why they felt totally free to take so many obvious liberties with what we would call "facts." Then the text is true on many levels, instead of trying to prove it is true on just the one simple, factual level. Sacred texts always maximize your possibilities for life and love, which is why we call them sacred."
—Richard Rohr

Pathetic, pathetic human being

You do realize that everything you accuse us of here is exactly what you do every time you enter this thread, right? You simply aren't worth debating because once someone provides you with a serious response you either dig deeper into the partisan nonsense dogma you accept without question or move on to post the next pathetic hatchet job article you found written by some other partisan hack. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to see that slavery flies directly in the face of everything libertarians believe in and that only government can ok something so ghastly. If you want to talk about Obama and a war on race you can discuss his continued drone slaughter of middle easterners.


By all means keep digging in deeper in the face of everything you believe collapsing the world around us, though.

Here's a question: do you think there is more "islamaphobia" on the right or on the left?  Is it more socially acceptable to say nice things about muslims on the right or the left?  And if there were any pressure on Obama to do things that were morally wrong to muslims, do you think more of that pressure would be coming from the right or the left?

How exciting!

I won a literary anthology from a raffle!  It uses literature to get students thinking about individualism, self-reliance, and what it means to be an American.

It includes three speeches by Calvin Coolidge. 


Edited by Epignosis - July 26 2013 at 12:37

Ambient Hurricanes wrote: ^What other authors are included?

It runs the gamut of American authors- philosophers, poets, singers, fiction writers...even Johnny Cash is in it! 

Here's the full list:

http://www.whatsoproudlywehail.org/authors

Big Boi is a Libertarian.

"Well, I was leaving to go out of town and it was a lady -- a Caucasian lady -- and she was like 'oh yeah, congratulations on y'all win last night, you know, with like and attitude.  And, you know, just to let her know I was on my P's and Q's, I was like, 'I don't know what you talkin' bout, I voted for Gary Johnson.' And she looked shocked to even know that I knew there were other candidates on the ballot ... So, you can't judge a book by its cover."

Another reason to like Outkast. 

dtguitarfan wrote: Ah, so "because there is racism over here, that means there isn't racism over there."  That's your argument, eh? Made no argument regarding race, just thought it'd be nice to point out that Obama is killing an awful lot of non-white people. Did ya even read the article?  Probably not.  Yeah, I got the gist of the idiocy behind the article when I scrolled down to the picture used to begin the article. Would've been completely worthless to go beyond that. You're too stuck in your idealism to give it a serious thought.  You really don't see the irony in that statement? Seriously? And you call me pathetic.  Yep Your side is losing, and has been for a long, long time.  Your idealistic values are on the way to extinction.  It is awfully hard to battle against people so invested in power and controlling other's lives, especially when people like you are more than happy to eat their bullsh*t and regurgitate it onto everyone else. I'd rather fight an uphill battle than be a mindless lemming. You're on the wrong side of history. HAHAHAHA. Got your idealist head buried deep in the sand on how we got to where we are today. Don't bother taking a serious look into what got us here, just lap up more Krugman. Poor you. Well, I don't make an awful lot of money and the government steals a good portion of it so, yeah, poor I suppose. Until you wake up and realize how much benefit comes from giving up your so called values. Do I get to live in the house with master?  But until then, it's going to suck being you.

Whether or not my life improves beyond this point at least I can look upon your posts and feel good about myself. You've no desire to learn or grow and certainly have never shown any serious interest in an open exchange of information here. Clearly, your only desire is to continue looking for little angles to attack our ideals, while yours destroy the world around us. Have a lovely day.

“Special interests win special benefits for themselves because those benefits are concentrated and significant. The costs, dispersed among the general public, are so insignificant to any particular person, that the general public has no vested interest in organizing against it. An extra 25 cents per gallon of orange juice is hardly worth devoting one’s life to opposing, but an extra $100 million per year in profits for the companies involved sure is worth the time to lobby for."

-Tom Woods

Star Parker on DC and its battle against Wal-Mart:

http://townhall.com/columnists/starparker/2013/07/22/dc-politicos-block-walmart-help-special-interests-hurt-the-poor-n1644615/page/full

That's what's so beautiful about the free market.  Until DC can start forcing Wal-Mart to open stores there, Wal-Mart doesn't have to abide by their silly (protectionist) mandate, so obviously advocated by special interest groups.

Kevin Roose's reaction to this news gave me a chuckle:

"D.C. didn't prohibit Walmart from setting up stores in the district (and there will still be three, even after the abandoned ones), but it did put in place what amounted to a fairly expensive penalty for doing so."

I quote this because Roose uses a word that I think is telling: "Penalty."  This implies that the purpose of the act is not to help low-wage workers (which it won't anyway), but to penalize Wal-Mart, and specifically Wal-Mart.

Even Franklin Garcia, founder and President of the DC Latino Caucus, called this a bad idea:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/franklin-garcia/the-large-retailer-accoun_b_3655607.html