Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Calm before the storm.....
38 views
Skip to first unread message
Gunner Asch
Jul 2, 2012, 5:45:16 PM7/2/12
to
smalline
By Scott Bach.
This article is copyright Scott Bach 2012, reprinted with permission.
My friend Scott Bach wrote the enclosed article for the News & Briefs of
the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs. In addition to
being the Executive Director of the ANJRPC, Scott is a practicing
attorney, the founding Chairman of the NRA Right to Carry Committee, a
certified instructor in rifle, pistol, and shotgun, and a former
auxiliary Police Captain. Scott captured the mood and spirit of so many
JPFO members in this brief piece that I asked his permission to
republish it.
Rabbi Dovid Bendory
Rabbinic Director, JPFO.
Calm Before the Storm
By Scott Bach
As we pause to celebrate the Fourth of July and enjoy the glory of
summer, it’s a good time to reflect on the true meaning of Freedom, and
the crucial role we all have in protecting it.
There's a storm on the horizon, and it’s the most ominous one of our
lives. Something has happened to our nation. It’s been happening little
by little, and we haven’t even seen it coming. But now it’s here, and
it’s big, and it seems to have unstoppable momentum. I’m speaking of the
brutal and deliberate destruction of Freedom itself, in all its aspects.
There’s more to Freedom than just owning guns and setting off fireworks
on the Fourth of July. Freedom means independence, the ability to
peaceably live as one chooses without restriction. The opposite of
Freedom is limitation, confinement, and servitude. Beyond Second
Amendment issues, look around and ask yourself, “Are we really free to
peaceably live as we choose without restriction, or are we limited,
confined, and in servitude? Are we moving toward more liberty, or less?”
Think hard before you answer; the conclusions you reach might be
troubling.
Freedom is our birthright. It comes from God, not from government. And
what government does not give, it cannot take away, no matter how hard
it might try.
If the spirit of Freedom burns deep in your heart -- and I know it does
or you wouldn't have read this far -- know that we are part of a
fellowship of millions of people dedicated to protecting Freedom from
its enemies, and know that our time is coming. Freedom in America may be
under the worst attack in its history, but Freedom is eternal and can
never be destroyed. It is as poignant as it is ironic that ordinary folk
like us are the ones who have been appointed to defend it at this
critical time in history. And defend it we will.
Rest well this summer, and recharge. It's the calm before the storm now.
Use the time wisely.
By Scott Bach.
This article is copyright Scott Bach 2012, reprinted with permission.
My friend Scott Bach wrote the enclosed article for the News & Briefs of
the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs. In addition to
being the Executive Director of the ANJRPC, Scott is a practicing
attorney, the founding Chairman of the NRA Right to Carry Committee, a
certified instructor in rifle, pistol, and shotgun, and a former
auxiliary Police Captain. Scott captured the mood and spirit of so many
JPFO members in this brief piece that I asked his permission to
republish it.
Rabbi Dovid Bendory
Rabbinic Director, JPFO.
Calm Before the Storm
By Scott Bach
As we pause to celebrate the Fourth of July and enjoy the glory of
summer, it’s a good time to reflect on the true meaning of Freedom, and
the crucial role we all have in protecting it.
There's a storm on the horizon, and it’s the most ominous one of our
lives. Something has happened to our nation. It’s been happening little
by little, and we haven’t even seen it coming. But now it’s here, and
it’s big, and it seems to have unstoppable momentum. I’m speaking of the
brutal and deliberate destruction of Freedom itself, in all its aspects.
There’s more to Freedom than just owning guns and setting off fireworks
on the Fourth of July. Freedom means independence, the ability to
peaceably live as one chooses without restriction. The opposite of
Freedom is limitation, confinement, and servitude. Beyond Second
Amendment issues, look around and ask yourself, “Are we really free to
peaceably live as we choose without restriction, or are we limited,
confined, and in servitude? Are we moving toward more liberty, or less?”
Think hard before you answer; the conclusions you reach might be
troubling.
Freedom is our birthright. It comes from God, not from government. And
what government does not give, it cannot take away, no matter how hard
it might try.
If the spirit of Freedom burns deep in your heart -- and I know it does
or you wouldn't have read this far -- know that we are part of a
fellowship of millions of people dedicated to protecting Freedom from
its enemies, and know that our time is coming. Freedom in America may be
under the worst attack in its history, but Freedom is eternal and can
never be destroyed. It is as poignant as it is ironic that ordinary folk
like us are the ones who have been appointed to defend it at this
critical time in history. And defend it we will.
Rest well this summer, and recharge. It's the calm before the storm now.
Use the time wisely.
de...@dudu.org
Jul 2, 2012, 6:10:30 PM7/2/12
to
Message has been deleted
Mighty Wannabe
Jul 2, 2012, 6:34:27 PM7/2/12
to
On Jul 2, 6:20 pm, sittingduck <d...@spamherelots.com> wrote:
> wrote:
>
> Hurray for willful ignorance!
The freedom from God is to worship Him and abide by his whim, or go to
hell.
Only repugnican retards think that is "freedom".
> wrote:
> >>Freedom is our birthright. It comes from God, not from government.
> > BSSSST !!!!! WRONG !!!!
>
> God is santa claus for adults.
> > BSSSST !!!!! WRONG !!!!
>
>
> Hurray for willful ignorance!
The freedom from God is to worship Him and abide by his whim, or go to
hell.
Only repugnican retards think that is "freedom".
George Plimpton
Jul 2, 2012, 6:39:47 PM7/2/12
to
Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
ATP
Jul 2, 2012, 6:51:43 PM7/2/12
to
"George Plimpton" <geo...@si.not> wrote in message
news:ypKdncDO6vulvm_S...@giganews.com...
consequences, either from the government or fellow citizens.
Frank
Jul 2, 2012, 7:03:32 PM7/2/12
to
de...@dudu.org
Jul 2, 2012, 7:29:13 PM7/2/12
to
On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 15:39:47 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:
You have nothing unless it's recognized by other humans, therefore
rights are only yours if granted by others.
wrote:
rights are only yours if granted by others.
de...@dudu.org
Jul 2, 2012, 7:30:00 PM7/2/12
to
jim
Jul 2, 2012, 7:53:08 PM7/2/12
to
George Plimpton wrote:
>
> On 7/2/2012 3:34 PM, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> > On Jul 2, 6:20 pm, sittingduck <d...@spamherelots.com> wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >>>> Freedom is our birthright. It comes from God, not from government.
> >>> BSSSST !!!!! WRONG !!!!
> >>
> >> God is santa claus for adults.
> >>
> >> Hurray for willful ignorance!
> >
> > The freedom from God is to worship Him and abide by his whim, or go to
> > hell.
> >
> > Only repugnican retards think that is "freedom".
>
> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
that govt is a necessary condition to securing rights
"That to secure these rights,
Governments are instituted among Men"
whoyakidding
Jul 2, 2012, 8:12:05 PM7/2/12
to
>There's a storm on the horizon,
Yeah the clock is ticking down... to August when your next 10 year
lien extensions will be filed. It appears there will be two more
totaling about $2000. Have you been saving up by forgoing soda and
potato chips in order to finally pay those bills from 1992 and 2002?
Will you be MIA because you grew up and got a job? Or will you be too
busy here with your usual moronic contributions to the windbag
arsehole crew yammering about the cost of government as if you
contribute anything toward it? Or are you planning to cull the county
clerk in the next month? Arf arf.
terryc
Jul 2, 2012, 8:30:01 PM7/2/12
to
On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
And thse rights are?
> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
that give you those "rights"
terryc
Jul 2, 2012, 8:31:22 PM7/2/12
to
On 03/07/12 09:03, Frank wrote:
> On 7/2/2012 6:51 PM, ATP wrote:
>> "George Plimpton" <geo...@si.not> wrote in message
> On 7/2/2012 6:51 PM, ATP wrote:
>> "George Plimpton" <geo...@si.not> wrote in message
>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>> Rights
>>> are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>>> outside
>>> the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>
>> The question is whether you can exercise those rights without harsh
>> consequences, either from the government or fellow citizens.
>>
>>
>
> You lose freedom when you submit to collectivism.
But we all do it. It is just to what degree we trade off
>>> Rights
>>> are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>>> outside
>>> the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>
>> The question is whether you can exercise those rights without harsh
>> consequences, either from the government or fellow citizens.
>>
>>
>
> You lose freedom when you submit to collectivism.
'freedom" for comfort.
PrecisionmachinisT
Jul 2, 2012, 8:55:22 PM7/2/12
to
<de...@dudu.org> wrote in message news:t174v71ti5scn29r3...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 14:45:16 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>There's a storm on the horizon, and it's the most ominous one of our
>>lives. Something has happened to our nation. It's been happening little
>>by little, and we haven't even seen it coming. But now it's here, and
>>it's big, and it seems to have unstoppable momentum. I'm speaking of the
>>brutal and deliberate destruction of Freedom itself, in all its aspects.
>>
Name even a single freedom you used to have that's been "brutally and deliberately destroyed"....
> wrote:
>>
>>There's a storm on the horizon, and it's the most ominous one of our
>>lives. Something has happened to our nation. It's been happening little
>>by little, and we haven't even seen it coming. But now it's here, and
>>it's big, and it seems to have unstoppable momentum. I'm speaking of the
>>brutal and deliberate destruction of Freedom itself, in all its aspects.
>>
Just one...
de...@dudu.org
Jul 2, 2012, 9:01:07 PM7/2/12
to
jon_banquer
Jul 2, 2012, 9:33:06 PM7/2/12
to
the one way "Free Trade" agreements we keep signing. That's because
Gummer can't comprehend that both Democrats and Republicans / Liberals
and Conservatives are equally at fault.
That's the kind of reality that Gummer can't handle.
terryc
Jul 2, 2012, 10:16:19 PM7/2/12
to
frogs in the pot. Every so often one starts screaming "they are trying
to cook us alive", but none of us have the full picture.
PrecisionmachinisT
Jul 2, 2012, 11:38:44 PM7/2/12
to
"terryc" <newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:jstklk$1va$2...@dont-email.me...
> On 03/07/12 10:55, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>>
>> <de...@dudu.org> wrote in message
>> news:t174v71ti5scn29r3...@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 14:45:16 -0700, Gunner Asch<gunne...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There's a storm on the horizon, and it's the most ominous one of our
>>>> lives. Something has happened to our nation. It's been happening little
>>>> by little, and we haven't even seen it coming. But now it's here, and
>>>> it's big, and it seems to have unstoppable momentum. I'm speaking of
>>>> the
>>>> brutal and deliberate destruction of Freedom itself, in all its
>>>> aspects.
>>>>
>>
>> Name even a single freedom you used to have that's been "brutally and
>> deliberately destroyed"....
>>
>> Just one...
>
> That is the problem, they
And who exactly would "they" be ?
>>
>> <de...@dudu.org> wrote in message
>> news:t174v71ti5scn29r3...@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 14:45:16 -0700, Gunner Asch<gunne...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There's a storm on the horizon, and it's the most ominous one of our
>>>> lives. Something has happened to our nation. It's been happening little
>>>> by little, and we haven't even seen it coming. But now it's here, and
>>>> it's big, and it seems to have unstoppable momentum. I'm speaking of
>>>> the
>>>> brutal and deliberate destruction of Freedom itself, in all its
>>>> aspects.
>>>>
>>
>> Name even a single freedom you used to have that's been "brutally and
>> deliberately destroyed"....
>>
>> Just one...
>
> That is the problem, they
> are a bit more subtle about it and
> we are all
(Speak for yourself , asshole)
> frogs in the pot. Every so often
> one starts screaming "they are trying to cook us alive", but none of us
> have the full picture.
Gunner Asch
Jul 3, 2012, 5:24:35 AM7/3/12
to
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 10:30:01 +1000, terryc
<newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>
>And thse rights are?
We arent British..so it would take more than 10 minutes to discuss what
<newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>
>And thse rights are?
our freedoms are.
>While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>that give you those "rights"
Gunner
Gunner Asch
Jul 3, 2012, 6:05:43 AM7/3/12
to
the steps of the California capital house.
Gunner Asch
Jul 3, 2012, 6:18:54 AM7/3/12
to
significant about CAD/CAM, and keeps getting his ignorance and
buffoonery slapped across his face?
Btw..there are many many many people working on the Fee Trade issue.
Im one of the ones working on that pesky 2nd Amendment issue
Dont like it? Feel free to kiss my ass.
Gunner
--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".
Stormin Mormon
Jul 3, 2012, 7:44:19 AM7/3/12
to
As we go out to celebrate our freedom this 4th
of July, let's go over a few things to make your
celebration a success.
First, the holiday is called the 4th of July, not
Independance Day. We don't want you to think
that we are independant, much less free.
Before leaving home make sure you check the
color coded Homeland Security alert status.
Be especially careful if it is orange or red.
Don't worry about yellow. It's always yellow.
Be aware of your surroundings at all times.
New Yorkers, in particular, watch out for those
pesky mushroom clouds.
Don't use any illegal fireworks in your 4th
Celebration. It is for your own safety. And
the founding father's implemented a government
to protect you from yourselves. Didn't they?
Besides, fireworks are explosive devices and
you might be considered a terrorist with weapons
of mass destruction. And although the government
can't find any in Iraq, you can rest assured they
will find them in your car trunk. But don't worry,
getting arrested, imprisoned indefinitely without
formal charges, and a 5 year wait before the
secret tribunal trial per the Patriot Act is a
breeze. It's that secret summary execution that
should make you nervous.
Make sure you are buckled up in your seat belts,
there will be roadblocks and checkpoints to make
sure you comply. It is for the children. Smile at
the officers, when they ask you probing questions,
designed to make you admit to guilt.
If you are an airline employee, lighten up for the
holiday, you can always look for a job tomorrow.
Maybe you could transfer over to a TSA job.
Big demand for those jobs and you don't have to
be smart.
If you are a Haliburton employee, celebrate, you
probably have a raise coming from the Iraqi
contract windfall.
If celebrating on any public property, make no
mention or relgious ideals. Government is god,
there. You will be apprehended.
Have your papers ready as you approach the
holiday police checkpoints.
Don't criticize the President or other government
officials, you might be in violation of the
Patriot Act and considered a possible terrorist.
Be grateful that President Obama has taken over
the banks. After all, you wouldn't want another
Great Depression. Be sure to write your Nations
Leaders, and thank them for the stimulus spending.
It doesn't matter that you're unemployed. It could
be much worse.
Don't mention the Constitution in any district
court or you could be held in contempt.
If your children get out of line this holiday,
do not discipline them, or they may be kidnapped
by the Dept. of Social Services and held hostage
until you receive approved psychological therapy
and are deemed acceptable.
Show compassion this Independence Day by
inviting an illegal immigrant, I mean, undocumented
worker, to your celebration or by hugging a tree.
If an election is occurring in your locality
within the next 90 days, do not talk about or
publicly support any candidate, as that is no
longer lawful. Keep your mouth shut.
If an officer asks to search your vehicle at the
"seat belt" checks, do not be belligerent and
demand a search warrant. Standing up for your
fourth amendment rights is anti-social and not
in tune with the new American way. Are you
with Al Quada or something?
Do not get upset when the searching officer will
not help you pick up your belongings that he has
strewn all over the highway as he searched your
vehicle. It is not in his job description and
complaining will get you charged with obstructing
justice.
Keep your guns at home. You are not going hunting
and besides, What on earth do guns have to do with
American Independence? Better yet, turn your guns
into the authorities to let them know that you are
a true patriotic American.
Better yet, just STAY at home. BUT do not assume
that you are safe, because you are at home. If a
government bureaucrat shows up at your home, he
will probably be flashing a badge at you. This makes
him look like a constitutional law enforcement officer.
He may even be armed. Do not ask to see a warrant,
and then tell him to leave if he does not have one.
They will put a siege around your house. If you do
not come out soon enough, they may invade, with
guns drawn, or even set your house on fire. It's for
the common good, you realize?
For more information, do a search using keywords
like "Symbionese Liberation Army", "Philadelphia
MOVE group", "Gordon Kahl", "The Order", "Robert
Matthews", "Covenant of the Sword and Arm of the
Lord", "Randy Weaver" , "Branch Davidian", or
"Elian Gonzalez".
If you are counting on you congressman to protect
you, understand that the average congressman is
ALSO afraid to resist. For more information, do a
search using keywords like "George Hanson" ,
"James Trafficant" or "Larry McDonald".
If celebrating at the mall in Washington DC. you
are probably safe as the mall is now monitored by
hundreds of surveillance cameras, watched by
federal security forces. Don't do anything that
you wouldn't want them to see. If you are mugged,
just call 911, and they will have a police officer
there in 45 minutes to an hour. Allow the officer
to search you and all your bags for evidence of the
crime, that will help them to find the muggers.
Bring lots of cash with you, there will be many
taxes, fines, and fees to pay as you celebrate
your freedoms this day.
Do not leave home without your driver's license,
social security card, birth certificate, welfare
card, medicare card, medical records, W-2 Form,
and two others forms of ID. You may be asked for
them at the police checkpoints. Better yet, get
micro-chipped, and avoid the hassle of carrying
around your papers.
Bring your library card, the FBI may ask you for it.
Do not put any "anti-government" bumper stickers
on your car. Especially not anything about the right
to keep and bear arms. Police have been trained by
the FBI in "bumper sticker profiling". This attracts
their attention at the check points, and makes you
look like a terrorist.
With regard to "bumper sticker profiling" you should
be especially aware of the fact that "They will get my
gun, when they pry it from my cold dead fingers" is
no longer mere semantics. At WACO, and at RUBY
RIDGE, we learned that they WILL kill you to take
your guns
Be extra thankful for the government bailout of
General Motors. We wouldn't want the nation's auto
manufacturers to go out of business. Even if
unemployment is at record highs, at least President
Obama cares. Change you can believe in.
ALSO, be careful not to have any unauthorized
THOUGHTS. There are now serious penalties for
"thought crime". Be aware that "civil forfeiture"
laws make it possible to take anything that you
own, by alleging that it was "intended" to be used
for the commission of a crime. This could include
transporting or storing a gun. If "civil forfeiture"
proceedings are initiated against you, then you will
have the burden of proof, to show that your thoughts
were in compliance with government standards.
If traveling by air this Independence Day, I mean
4th of July, do not give the airport screeners a hard
time. They are feeling you up and molesting your
daughter and wife for the security of America.
If you complain you could be arrested. You
don't support Bin Laden do you?
Keep an eye on your fellow Americans as you
celebrate this 4th of July. If you see any thing
supicious, take notes so that when you get home
you can call and report them to the Homeland
Security Office. And remember you are not a
nosey snitch, you are a great American Patriot.
Do not mention the signers of the Declaration
of Independence this 4th of July. Mentioning
these white subversive terrorists is not
popular and could get you in big trouble.
Besides what do these guys have to do with
the 4th of July anyway?
Do not leave home without one or more little
plastic American flags made by political slaves
in Communist China. Make sure you have one
flying from the antennae of your vehicle. You
don't want to seem un-American do you?
Do not take a copy of the Declaration of Inde-
pendence with you as it advocates the over-
throw of tyrannical government. It is a
terrorist document and will be confiscated
at the holiday police checkpoints. Same
advice for the Constitution.
And remember, as you leave home for your 4th
of July outing, that the second you stepped out
of your door that you probably broke hundreds
of federal, state, and local laws that you are
probably unaware of. However, if you toe the
line, you will not be charged.
Don't even think about taxes on this great day.
The 50 per cent government confiscation of your
income at the threat of imprisonment or at the
point of a gun should not even cross your mind
as you revel in your freedom. After all, April
15th is a long way off.
And whatever you do, do not let on that you
really know that true freedom died a long time
ago in America, just have fun for the day and
then go home and stick your head back in the
sand and pretend America is not becoming a
socialist police state.
Now go out there and celebrate your freedom
and liberty and have a great sanitized,
politically correct, and government approved
and authorized Independence Day!
If you have a few decades with nothing better
to do, study up on "administrative law". Laws
are now made by the unelected bureaucrats, in
hundreds of "administrative agencies". If you
are charged with violating one of these "laws"
you will not get a trial by a jury of your
peers. You will be tried by the agency that
made the charge.
I hope this message gets past the Department
of Homeland security approved internet filter.
How else can they protect us from unauthorized
thought?
Now go out and celebrate your independence and
have a great 4th of July!
=====
HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY
This transmission screened prior to receipt by
addressee pursuant to applicable sections of
the USA PATRIOT Act.
of July, let's go over a few things to make your
celebration a success.
First, the holiday is called the 4th of July, not
Independance Day. We don't want you to think
that we are independant, much less free.
Before leaving home make sure you check the
color coded Homeland Security alert status.
Be especially careful if it is orange or red.
Don't worry about yellow. It's always yellow.
Be aware of your surroundings at all times.
New Yorkers, in particular, watch out for those
pesky mushroom clouds.
Don't use any illegal fireworks in your 4th
Celebration. It is for your own safety. And
the founding father's implemented a government
to protect you from yourselves. Didn't they?
Besides, fireworks are explosive devices and
you might be considered a terrorist with weapons
of mass destruction. And although the government
can't find any in Iraq, you can rest assured they
will find them in your car trunk. But don't worry,
getting arrested, imprisoned indefinitely without
formal charges, and a 5 year wait before the
secret tribunal trial per the Patriot Act is a
breeze. It's that secret summary execution that
should make you nervous.
Make sure you are buckled up in your seat belts,
there will be roadblocks and checkpoints to make
sure you comply. It is for the children. Smile at
the officers, when they ask you probing questions,
designed to make you admit to guilt.
If you are an airline employee, lighten up for the
holiday, you can always look for a job tomorrow.
Maybe you could transfer over to a TSA job.
Big demand for those jobs and you don't have to
be smart.
If you are a Haliburton employee, celebrate, you
probably have a raise coming from the Iraqi
contract windfall.
If celebrating on any public property, make no
mention or relgious ideals. Government is god,
there. You will be apprehended.
Have your papers ready as you approach the
holiday police checkpoints.
Don't criticize the President or other government
officials, you might be in violation of the
Patriot Act and considered a possible terrorist.
Be grateful that President Obama has taken over
the banks. After all, you wouldn't want another
Great Depression. Be sure to write your Nations
Leaders, and thank them for the stimulus spending.
It doesn't matter that you're unemployed. It could
be much worse.
Don't mention the Constitution in any district
court or you could be held in contempt.
If your children get out of line this holiday,
do not discipline them, or they may be kidnapped
by the Dept. of Social Services and held hostage
until you receive approved psychological therapy
and are deemed acceptable.
Show compassion this Independence Day by
inviting an illegal immigrant, I mean, undocumented
worker, to your celebration or by hugging a tree.
If an election is occurring in your locality
within the next 90 days, do not talk about or
publicly support any candidate, as that is no
longer lawful. Keep your mouth shut.
If an officer asks to search your vehicle at the
"seat belt" checks, do not be belligerent and
demand a search warrant. Standing up for your
fourth amendment rights is anti-social and not
in tune with the new American way. Are you
with Al Quada or something?
Do not get upset when the searching officer will
not help you pick up your belongings that he has
strewn all over the highway as he searched your
vehicle. It is not in his job description and
complaining will get you charged with obstructing
justice.
Keep your guns at home. You are not going hunting
and besides, What on earth do guns have to do with
American Independence? Better yet, turn your guns
into the authorities to let them know that you are
a true patriotic American.
Better yet, just STAY at home. BUT do not assume
that you are safe, because you are at home. If a
government bureaucrat shows up at your home, he
will probably be flashing a badge at you. This makes
him look like a constitutional law enforcement officer.
He may even be armed. Do not ask to see a warrant,
and then tell him to leave if he does not have one.
They will put a siege around your house. If you do
not come out soon enough, they may invade, with
guns drawn, or even set your house on fire. It's for
the common good, you realize?
For more information, do a search using keywords
like "Symbionese Liberation Army", "Philadelphia
MOVE group", "Gordon Kahl", "The Order", "Robert
Matthews", "Covenant of the Sword and Arm of the
Lord", "Randy Weaver" , "Branch Davidian", or
"Elian Gonzalez".
If you are counting on you congressman to protect
you, understand that the average congressman is
ALSO afraid to resist. For more information, do a
search using keywords like "George Hanson" ,
"James Trafficant" or "Larry McDonald".
If celebrating at the mall in Washington DC. you
are probably safe as the mall is now monitored by
hundreds of surveillance cameras, watched by
federal security forces. Don't do anything that
you wouldn't want them to see. If you are mugged,
just call 911, and they will have a police officer
there in 45 minutes to an hour. Allow the officer
to search you and all your bags for evidence of the
crime, that will help them to find the muggers.
Bring lots of cash with you, there will be many
taxes, fines, and fees to pay as you celebrate
your freedoms this day.
Do not leave home without your driver's license,
social security card, birth certificate, welfare
card, medicare card, medical records, W-2 Form,
and two others forms of ID. You may be asked for
them at the police checkpoints. Better yet, get
micro-chipped, and avoid the hassle of carrying
around your papers.
Bring your library card, the FBI may ask you for it.
Do not put any "anti-government" bumper stickers
on your car. Especially not anything about the right
to keep and bear arms. Police have been trained by
the FBI in "bumper sticker profiling". This attracts
their attention at the check points, and makes you
look like a terrorist.
With regard to "bumper sticker profiling" you should
be especially aware of the fact that "They will get my
gun, when they pry it from my cold dead fingers" is
no longer mere semantics. At WACO, and at RUBY
RIDGE, we learned that they WILL kill you to take
your guns
Be extra thankful for the government bailout of
General Motors. We wouldn't want the nation's auto
manufacturers to go out of business. Even if
unemployment is at record highs, at least President
Obama cares. Change you can believe in.
ALSO, be careful not to have any unauthorized
THOUGHTS. There are now serious penalties for
"thought crime". Be aware that "civil forfeiture"
laws make it possible to take anything that you
own, by alleging that it was "intended" to be used
for the commission of a crime. This could include
transporting or storing a gun. If "civil forfeiture"
proceedings are initiated against you, then you will
have the burden of proof, to show that your thoughts
were in compliance with government standards.
If traveling by air this Independence Day, I mean
4th of July, do not give the airport screeners a hard
time. They are feeling you up and molesting your
daughter and wife for the security of America.
If you complain you could be arrested. You
don't support Bin Laden do you?
Keep an eye on your fellow Americans as you
celebrate this 4th of July. If you see any thing
supicious, take notes so that when you get home
you can call and report them to the Homeland
Security Office. And remember you are not a
nosey snitch, you are a great American Patriot.
Do not mention the signers of the Declaration
of Independence this 4th of July. Mentioning
these white subversive terrorists is not
popular and could get you in big trouble.
Besides what do these guys have to do with
the 4th of July anyway?
Do not leave home without one or more little
plastic American flags made by political slaves
in Communist China. Make sure you have one
flying from the antennae of your vehicle. You
don't want to seem un-American do you?
Do not take a copy of the Declaration of Inde-
pendence with you as it advocates the over-
throw of tyrannical government. It is a
terrorist document and will be confiscated
at the holiday police checkpoints. Same
advice for the Constitution.
And remember, as you leave home for your 4th
of July outing, that the second you stepped out
of your door that you probably broke hundreds
of federal, state, and local laws that you are
probably unaware of. However, if you toe the
line, you will not be charged.
Don't even think about taxes on this great day.
The 50 per cent government confiscation of your
income at the threat of imprisonment or at the
point of a gun should not even cross your mind
as you revel in your freedom. After all, April
15th is a long way off.
And whatever you do, do not let on that you
really know that true freedom died a long time
ago in America, just have fun for the day and
then go home and stick your head back in the
sand and pretend America is not becoming a
socialist police state.
Now go out there and celebrate your freedom
and liberty and have a great sanitized,
politically correct, and government approved
and authorized Independence Day!
If you have a few decades with nothing better
to do, study up on "administrative law". Laws
are now made by the unelected bureaucrats, in
hundreds of "administrative agencies". If you
are charged with violating one of these "laws"
you will not get a trial by a jury of your
peers. You will be tried by the agency that
made the charge.
I hope this message gets past the Department
of Homeland security approved internet filter.
How else can they protect us from unauthorized
thought?
Now go out and celebrate your independence and
have a great 4th of July!
=====
HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY
This transmission screened prior to receipt by
addressee pursuant to applicable sections of
the USA PATRIOT Act.
terryc
Jul 3, 2012, 12:47:05 PM7/3/12
to
On 03/07/12 19:24, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 10:30:01 +1000, terryc
> <newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>
>> And thse rights are?
>
> We arent British..so it would take more than 10 minutes to discuss what
> our freedoms are.
In other words you haven't got any ad have to bluster and bullshit in
> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 10:30:01 +1000, terryc
> <newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>
>> And thse rights are?
>
> We arent British..so it would take more than 10 minutes to discuss what
> our freedoms are.
your dream of "freedom".
>> While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>> that give you those "rights"
>
> Spoken like a true subject, not a freeman.
terryc
Jul 3, 2012, 12:48:35 PM7/3/12
to
On 03/07/12 21:44, Stormin Mormon cross posted another pile of
unattributed drivel starting :
unattributed drivel starting :
terryc
Jul 3, 2012, 12:50:12 PM7/3/12
to
On 03/07/12 13:38, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
> "terryc"<newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote in message
> news:jstklk$1va$2...@dont-email.me...
> "terryc"<newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote in message
> news:jstklk$1va$2...@dont-email.me...
>>> Name even a single freedom you used to have that's been "brutally and
>>> deliberately destroyed"....
>>>
>>> Just one...
>>
>> That is the problem, they
>
> And who exactly would "they" be ?
Hang on and I'll see if there is a spare kiddies picture book to give to
>>> deliberately destroyed"....
>>>
>>> Just one...
>>
>> That is the problem, they
>
> And who exactly would "they" be ?
you.
Gunner Asch
Jul 3, 2012, 1:01:52 PM7/3/12
to
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 15:34:27 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
<wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>The freedom from God is to worship Him and abide by his whim, or go to
>hell.
>
>Only repugnican retards think that is "freedom".
>
You mean its not? Explain yourself.
<wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>The freedom from God is to worship Him and abide by his whim, or go to
>hell.
>
>Only repugnican retards think that is "freedom".
>
Gunner, Buddhist
Frank
Jul 3, 2012, 1:13:29 PM7/3/12
to
happened countless times, I switch to dealing with someone else.
Even you must know you can't do this with your government.
Gunner Asch
Jul 3, 2012, 2:08:48 PM7/3/12
to
On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 02:47:05 +1000, terryc
Gunner
>
<newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>On 03/07/12 19:24, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 10:30:01 +1000, terryc
>> <newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>>>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>>
>>> And thse rights are?
>>
>> We arent British..so it would take more than 10 minutes to discuss what
>> our freedoms are.
>
>In other words you haven't got any ad have to bluster and bullshit in
>your dream of "freedom".
Spoken like a true subject.
>On 03/07/12 19:24, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 10:30:01 +1000, terryc
>> <newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>>>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>>
>>> And thse rights are?
>>
>> We arent British..so it would take more than 10 minutes to discuss what
>> our freedoms are.
>
>In other words you haven't got any ad have to bluster and bullshit in
>your dream of "freedom".
>
>
>>> While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>>> that give you those "rights"
>>
>> Spoken like a true subject, not a freeman.
>
>Thus speaks the fanatical acolyte.
Seems your brainwashing was quite effective.
>
>>> While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>>> that give you those "rights"
>>
>> Spoken like a true subject, not a freeman.
>
>Thus speaks the fanatical acolyte.
Gunner
>
Hawke
Jul 3, 2012, 2:13:05 PM7/3/12
to
scaredy cat right wing. Funny, I'm not worried in the least. Nothing is
coming except more dire predictions from them that aren't ever going to
happen. Freedom isn't in any danger. In fact, I sense an increase in
freedom since Obama has been in office. It was when the republicans were
in power that was when saw freedom being eroded. The right is just
crying over their last whipping. They thought they had the Supreme Court
in their back pocket and they were shocked when it approved Obamacare.
All I can say is you righties better get used to it because I see more
losses for you on the horizon.
Hawke
Hawke
Jul 3, 2012, 2:18:16 PM7/3/12
to
them any more than the other animal life on earth has. Some people think
that a god gives it to them but that's obviously not true. You don't
have them installed in you at birth either. Nobody has any rights at all
to begin with. The only rights anyone ever had were the ones that men
created for you when they created governments and those governments
ensured that you got any rights.
Hawke
George Plimpton
Jul 3, 2012, 2:22:14 PM7/3/12
to
On 7/3/2012 11:18 AM, Hawke wrote:
> On 7/2/2012 3:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/2/2012 3:34 PM, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>>> On Jul 2, 6:20 pm, sittingduck <d...@spamherelots.com> wrote:
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Freedom is our birthright. It comes from God, not from government.
>>>>> BSSSST !!!!! WRONG !!!!
>>>>
>>>> God is santa claus for adults.
>>>>
>>>> Hurray for willful ignorance!
>>>
>>> The freedom from God is to worship Him and abide by his whim, or go to
>>> hell.
>>>
>>> Only repugnican retards think that is "freedom".
>>
>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>
>
> No you don't.
Yes - yes, you do.
> On 7/2/2012 3:39 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/2/2012 3:34 PM, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>>> On Jul 2, 6:20 pm, sittingduck <d...@spamherelots.com> wrote:
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Freedom is our birthright. It comes from God, not from government.
>>>>> BSSSST !!!!! WRONG !!!!
>>>>
>>>> God is santa claus for adults.
>>>>
>>>> Hurray for willful ignorance!
>>>
>>> The freedom from God is to worship Him and abide by his whim, or go to
>>> hell.
>>>
>>> Only repugnican retards think that is "freedom".
>>
>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>
>
> No you don't.
> Humans aren't born with "rights" attached to them or in
> them any more than the other animal life on earth has.
rights at all. Rights only apply to humans, and rights inhere in
individual person at birth.
> Some people think that a god gives it to them but that's obviously not true.
isn't a god. *I* don't believe in any god, and I believe that rights
are not "given" by any entity at all. But none of that is "obvious".
> You don't have them installed in you at birth either.
> Nobody has any rights at all to begin with.
> The only rights anyone ever had were the ones that men
> created for you when they created governments
de...@dudu.org
Jul 3, 2012, 2:23:25 PM7/3/12
to
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:13:29 -0400, Frank
So which is the lesser of two evils? Letting The People control their
government (despite all the human problems that entails) or allowing
just a few ultra wealthy corporations control the government?
Because that's our choice, and for some inexplicable reason you right
wingers are choosing the latter.
government (despite all the human problems that entails) or allowing
just a few ultra wealthy corporations control the government?
Because that's our choice, and for some inexplicable reason you right
wingers are choosing the latter.
George Plimpton
Jul 3, 2012, 2:29:37 PM7/3/12
to
Frank
Jul 3, 2012, 2:37:33 PM7/3/12
to
such as the old Soviet Union.
de...@dudu.org
Jul 3, 2012, 2:38:14 PM7/3/12
to
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 11:29:37 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:
Nope, that's the choice. You have some other players in mind? Be
realistic. It comes down to us and them, us regular working
Americans, and them, the ultra wealthy new aristocracy hiding behind
their legal facade called corporations. And right now it's the
corporations that control our government.
wrote:
realistic. It comes down to us and them, us regular working
Americans, and them, the ultra wealthy new aristocracy hiding behind
their legal facade called corporations. And right now it's the
corporations that control our government.
George Plimpton
Jul 3, 2012, 2:42:22 PM7/3/12
to
Stormin Mormon
Jul 3, 2012, 3:12:55 PM7/3/12
to
Frank, I do agree with you. The way this is shaping up, it will be 1% or
less who are ruling elite, and about 99.5% proles.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Frank" <frankperi...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:jsve5e$g3p$1...@dont-email.me...
less who are ruling elite, and about 99.5% proles.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Frank" <frankperi...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:jsve5e$g3p$1...@dont-email.me...
pyotr filipivich
Jul 3, 2012, 4:53:18 PM7/3/12
to
terryc <newsnine...@woa.com.au> on Tue, 03 Jul 2012 10:30:01
+1000 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
intrinsic to the individual, and not source in Government.
OTOH, the problem with Atheism is that it abolishes the concepts
of Good and Evil, and replaces them with "It seems good to me." Cie
l'vie.
tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
Obi-wan once observed"The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded."
Who knew Dubya was a Jedi Knight?
+1000 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>
>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>
>And thse rights are?
>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>
>While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>that give you those "rights"
I'm going to have to agree with George in this much: rights are
>that give you those "rights"
intrinsic to the individual, and not source in Government.
OTOH, the problem with Atheism is that it abolishes the concepts
of Good and Evil, and replaces them with "It seems good to me." Cie
l'vie.
tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
Obi-wan once observed"The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded."
Who knew Dubya was a Jedi Knight?
Hawke
Jul 3, 2012, 6:00:47 PM7/3/12
to
regulated people in the world and for sure we're subject to the most
laws and have to deal with the biggest police state and the largest
prison system anywhere. We have more prisoners than China does and they
have three times our population. So to talk about us as being some
kind of paragon of freedom is an absolute joke. From the minute I leave
my door I have to obey more rules and regulations than anybody in the
world. So if this is freedom I don't think I have all that much to lose.
Hawke
Hawke
Jul 3, 2012, 6:09:47 PM7/3/12
to
On 7/3/2012 11:22 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>
>>
>> No you don't.
>
> Yes - yes, you do.
You don't. Without a government to give them to you and to protect them
>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>
>>
>> No you don't.
>
> Yes - yes, you do.
for you there isn't a right in the world anyone is born with, except
maybe the right to die.
>> Humans aren't born with "rights" attached to them or in
>> them any more than the other animal life on earth has.
>
> Yes, they are. Non-human animals do not have - *cannot* have - any
> rights at all. Rights only apply to humans, and rights inhere in
> individual person at birth.
to back it up except someone's personal belief. Humans are simply
animals and are no different from the rest even though we wish we were.
All that exists here is plant and animal life.
We're part of the animal life and that's a fact.
>> Some people think that a god gives it to them but that's obviously not
>> true.
>
> No, it's not "obviously" true becuase it's not "obvious" that there
> isn't a god. *I* don't believe in any god, and I believe that rights
> are not "given" by any entity at all. But none of that is "obvious".
don't know why human animals have them but the other animals don't.
We're superior right? That is what the bible says. I don't believe in
the bible so we don't have anything like a right born in us. If there
was you could dissect a human and find it.
>> You don't have them installed in you at birth either.
>
> Not "installed" - they are a fundamental attribute of being human.
evidence humans have rights born with them but you have a "belief" that
we do. And you said you weren't religious. Yes you are.
>
>> Nobody has any rights at all to begin with.
>
> Wrong.
>
>
>> The only rights anyone ever had were the ones that men
>> created for you when they created governments
>
> No.
science.
Hawke
George Plimpton
Jul 3, 2012, 6:58:27 PM7/3/12
to
On 7/3/2012 3:09 PM, Hawke wrote:
> On 7/3/2012 11:22 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>>
>>>
>>> No you don't.
>>
>> Yes - yes, you do.
>
> You don't.
Yes, people do.
> On 7/3/2012 11:22 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>>
>>>
>>> No you don't.
>>
>> Yes - yes, you do.
>
> You don't.
> Without a government to give them to you
them and protect them, or they can infringe upon them, but they *cannot*
give rights.
>
>>> Humans aren't born with "rights" attached to them or in
>>> them any more than the other animal life on earth has.
>>
>> Yes, they are. Non-human animals do not have - *cannot* have - any
>> rights at all. Rights only apply to humans, and rights inhere in
>> individual person at birth.
>
>>> Some people think that a god gives it to them but that's obviously not
>>> true.
>>
>> No, it's not "obviously" true because it's not "obvious" that there
>>> true.
>>
>> isn't a god. *I* don't believe in any god, and I believe that rights
>> are not "given" by any entity at all. But none of that is "obvious".
>
> You don't think they are given, they just are there. But of course you
> don't know why human animals have them but the other animals don't.
Of course I do: because non-human animals are not part of a moral
>> are not "given" by any entity at all. But none of that is "obvious".
>
> You don't think they are given, they just are there. But of course you
> don't know why human animals have them but the other animals don't.
community.
>>> You don't have them installed in you at birth either.
>>
>> Not "installed" - they are a fundamental attribute of being human.
>
> That sounds exactly like the crazy shit the religious think.
wrong reason. They are right in observing and noting that rights are
inherent in the person; they are wrong, in my view, in saying that we
are "endowed by our Creator" with these rights. However, the effect is
the same. People simply have rights. Whether or not government respect
them is a separate issue.
>>> Nobody has any rights at all to begin with.
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>>
>>> The only rights anyone ever had were the ones that men
>>> created for you when they created governments
>>
>> No.
>
>
> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and political
> science.
bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with astrology.
Hawke
Jul 3, 2012, 8:05:36 PM7/3/12
to
On 7/3/2012 3:58 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
> On 7/3/2012 3:09 PM, Hawke wrote:
>> On 7/3/2012 11:22 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No you don't.
>>>
>>> Yes - yes, you do.
>>
>> You don't.
>
> Yes, people do.
Did you forget the rules, Fido? You're making the claim about something
> On 7/3/2012 3:09 PM, Hawke wrote:
>> On 7/3/2012 11:22 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No you don't.
>>>
>>> Yes - yes, you do.
>>
>> You don't.
>
> Yes, people do.
so you have to prove it. Where are you cites showing what you say is
true? I know why. There aren't any because you're giving a personal
opinion and you think that is the same as a fact. It's not.
>> Without a government to give them to you
>
> No. Governments do not - *cannot* - "give" rights. They can recognize
> them and protect them, or they can infringe upon them, but they *cannot*
> give rights.
>>>> Humans aren't born with "rights" attached to them or in
>>>> them any more than the other animal life on earth has.
>>>
>>> Yes, they are. Non-human animals do not have - *cannot* have - any
>>> rights at all. Rights only apply to humans, and rights inhere in
>>> individual person at birth.
>>
>>>> Some people think that a god gives it to them but that's obviously not
>>>> true.
>>>
>>> No, it's not "obviously" true because it's not "obvious" that there
>>> isn't a god. *I* don't believe in any god, and I believe that rights
>>> are not "given" by any entity at all. But none of that is "obvious".
>>
>> You don't think they are given, they just are there. But of course you
>> don't know why human animals have them but the other animals don't.
>
> Of course I do: because non-human animals are not part of a moral
> community.
say it. A moral community is why humans have rights born with them.
Yeah, sure they do. You're a clown.
>>>> You don't have them installed in you at birth either.
>>>
>>> Not "installed" - they are a fundamental attribute of being human.
for that "reasoning".
>> That sounds exactly like the crazy shit the religious think.
>
> They are closer to being right than you are. They are right for the
> wrong reason. They are right in observing and noting that rights are
> inherent in the person; they are wrong, in my view, in saying that we
> are "endowed by our Creator" with these rights. However, the effect is
> the same. People simply have rights. Whether or not government respect
> them is a separate issue.
>
>
>>>> Nobody has any rights at all to begin with.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The only rights anyone ever had were the ones that men
>>>> created for you when they created governments
>>>
>>> No.
came to new lands and people. None of the indigenous people they found
had any idea of "rights" they had. They had no idea what rights were
when the white men talked about them. You would know that if you had and
knowledge of history. You can still find primitive people all over the
world and none of them have any concept of what "rights" are. But you
wouldn't know anything about that either.
>> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and political
>> science.
>
> My knowledge of history vastly exceeds yours. Political science is a
> bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with astrology.
the dismal science, which is called that because it's a social science
where no one can agree about anything. It particularly leaves one with
no information that is worth anything. If you actually had an education
you would know that political science is not thought of as any different
from any other major in academia. Even if you want to make up a lie
about it. Go ahead, you lie about everything else.
Hawke
George Plimpton
Jul 3, 2012, 8:18:56 PM7/3/12
to
On 7/3/2012 5:05 PM, Hawke wrote:
> On 7/3/2012 3:58 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/3/2012 3:09 PM, Hawke wrote:
>>> On 7/3/2012 11:22 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>>>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No you don't.
>>>>
>>>> Yes - yes, you do.
>>>
>>> You don't.
>>
>> Yes, people do.
>
> Did you forget the rules
Of course not - I helped to write them.
> On 7/3/2012 3:58 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/3/2012 3:09 PM, Hawke wrote:
>>> On 7/3/2012 11:22 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>>>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No you don't.
>>>>
>>>> Yes - yes, you do.
>>>
>>> You don't.
>>
>> Yes, people do.
>
> Did you forget the rules
>>> Without a government to give them to you
>>
>> No. Governments do not - *cannot* - "give" rights. They can recognize
>> them and protect them, or they can infringe upon them, but they *cannot*
>> give rights.
>
> There are no rights without a government to grant them and protect them.
Rights can be and have been protected without government.
>>>>> Humans aren't born with "rights" attached to them or in
>>>>> them any more than the other animal life on earth has.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, they are. Non-human animals do not have - *cannot* have - any
>>>> rights at all. Rights only apply to humans, and rights inhere in
>>>> individual person at birth.
>>>
>>>>> Some people think that a god gives it to them but that's obviously not
>>>>> true.
>>>>
>>>> No, it's not "obviously" true because it's not "obvious" that there
>>>> isn't a god. *I* don't believe in any god, and I believe that rights
>>>> are not "given" by any entity at all. But none of that is "obvious".
>>>
>>> You don't think they are given, they just are there. But of course you
>>> don't know why human animals have them but the other animals don't.
>>
>> Of course I do: because non-human animals are not part of a moral
>> community.
>
> Oh brother! If you knew how utterly stupid that sounds
>>>>> You don't have them installed in you at birth either.
>>>>
>>>> Not "installed" - they are a fundamental attribute of being human.
>
> At least according to one person
who was very well acquainted with the theory.
>>> That sounds exactly like the crazy shit the religious think.
>>
>> They are closer to being right than you are. They are right for the
>> wrong reason. They are right in observing and noting that rights are
>> inherent in the person; they are wrong, in my view, in saying that we
>> are "endowed by our Creator" with these rights. However, the effect is
>> the same. People simply have rights. Whether or not government respect
>> them is a separate issue.
>>
>>
>>>>> Nobody has any rights at all to begin with.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The only rights anyone ever had were the ones that men
>>>>> created for you when they created governments
>>>>
>>>> No.
>
> Yes.
>>> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and political
>>> science.
>>
>> My knowledge of history vastly exceeds yours. Political science is a
>> bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with astrology.
>
> You don't have any knowledge.
"science" is not anything worth knowing.
rbowman
Jul 3, 2012, 8:54:30 PM7/3/12
to
George Plimpton wrote:
> Nope - it's a false choice.
And the correct choice is?
> Nope - it's a false choice.
rbowman
Jul 3, 2012, 8:56:30 PM7/3/12
to
Stormin Mormon wrote:
> You're just too dense to realize that the "people" will be a party elite
> such as the old Soviet Union.
The party elite didn't annoit Romney and act out the primary charade?
> You're just too dense to realize that the "people" will be a party elite
> such as the old Soviet Union.
Stormin Mormon
Jul 3, 2012, 9:34:20 PM7/3/12
to
Robert, you misquoted to me, what Frank wrote.
"Stormin Mormon" <cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:JxHIr.288136$N74.1...@news.usenetserver.com...
"Stormin Mormon" <cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:JxHIr.288136$N74.1...@news.usenetserver.com...
Frank, I do agree with you. The way this is shaping up, it will be 1% or
less who are ruling elite, and about 99.5% proles.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Frank" <frankperi...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:jsve5e$g3p$1...@dont-email.me...
less who are ruling elite, and about 99.5% proles.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Frank" <frankperi...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:jsve5e$g3p$1...@dont-email.me...
terryc
Jul 3, 2012, 10:56:20 PM7/3/12
to
On 04/07/12 04:08, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>> While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>>>> that give you those "rights"
>>>
>>> Spoken like a true subject, not a freeman.
>>
>> Thus speaks the fanatical acolyte.
>
> Seems your brainwashing was quite effective.
Oh, so that excuses your fanatical view.
>>>> While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>>>> that give you those "rights"
>>>
>>> Spoken like a true subject, not a freeman.
>>
>> Thus speaks the fanatical acolyte.
>
> Seems your brainwashing was quite effective.
My 2c is that yours is the effects of all that Agent Orange rain you
experienced during your secret hush hush missions into Cambodia?
The problem with "brain washing" is that it only sticks whilst the
subject allows it.
terryc
Jul 3, 2012, 11:00:30 PM7/3/12
to
On 04/07/12 06:53, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> terryc<newsnine...@woa.com.au> on Tue, 03 Jul 2012 10:30:01
> +1000 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>> On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>
>> And thse rights are?
>> While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>> that give you those "rights"
>
> I'm going to have to agree with George in this much: rights are
> intrinsic to the individual, and not source in Government.
My 2c is that is just philosophical sophistry. Nature, the base of all
> terryc<newsnine...@woa.com.au> on Tue, 03 Jul 2012 10:30:01
> +1000 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>> On 03/07/12 08:39, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any source
>>> outside the human self. You have rights because you're human.
>>
>> And thse rights are?
>> While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>> that give you those "rights"
>
> I'm going to have to agree with George in this much: rights are
> intrinsic to the individual, and not source in Government.
life, only knows about the "rights" of prey or hunter.
>
> OTOH, the problem with Atheism is that it abolishes the concepts
> of Good and Evil, and replaces them with "It seems good to me." Cie
> l'vie.
definitions is that animals sometimes follow them too whicj implies that
they believe in "god" too.
rbowman
Jul 3, 2012, 11:23:23 PM7/3/12
to
terryc wrote:
> My 2c is that is just philosophical sophistry. Nature, the base of all
> life, only knows about the "rights" of prey or hunter.
To paraphrase Mao, rights flow from the barrel of a gun.
> My 2c is that is just philosophical sophistry. Nature, the base of all
> life, only knows about the "rights" of prey or hunter.
David R. Birch
Jul 3, 2012, 11:54:16 PM7/3/12
to
On 7/3/2012 1:38 PM, de...@dudu.org wrote:
>>> So which is the lesser of two evils? Letting The People control their
>>> government (despite all the human problems that entails) or allowing
>>> just a few ultra wealthy corporations control the government?
>>
>> False choice.
>
> Nope, that's the choice. You have some other players in mind? Be
> realistic. It comes down to us and them, us regular working
> Americans, and them, the ultra wealthy new aristocracy hiding behind
> their legal facade called corporations. And right now it's the
> corporations that control our government.
No choice. A few ultra wealthy corporations and individuals control the
>>> So which is the lesser of two evils? Letting The People control their
>>> government (despite all the human problems that entails) or allowing
>>> just a few ultra wealthy corporations control the government?
>>
>> False choice.
>
> Nope, that's the choice. You have some other players in mind? Be
> realistic. It comes down to us and them, us regular working
> Americans, and them, the ultra wealthy new aristocracy hiding behind
> their legal facade called corporations. And right now it's the
> corporations that control our government.
government and decide whether Dems or Reps get to express the will of a
few ultra wealthy corporations. And they maintain a charade that we have
a choice. This is what is known as the Establishment.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
Some of us won't get fooled again.
David
Gunner Asch
Jul 4, 2012, 1:21:52 AM7/4/12
to
On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:56:20 +1000, terryc
<newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>On 04/07/12 04:08, Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>>>>> While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>>>>> that give you those "rights"
>>>>
>>>> Spoken like a true subject, not a freeman.
>>>
>>> Thus speaks the fanatical acolyte.
>>
>> Seems your brainwashing was quite effective.
>
>Oh, so that excuses your fanatical view.
>My 2c is that yours is the effects of all that Agent Orange rain you
>experienced during your secret hush hush missions into Cambodia?
While Ive indeed been in Cambodia, there were no "hush hush" missions I
<newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>On 04/07/12 04:08, Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>>>>> While you are at it, you might also list the matching responsibilities
>>>>> that give you those "rights"
>>>>
>>>> Spoken like a true subject, not a freeman.
>>>
>>> Thus speaks the fanatical acolyte.
>>
>> Seems your brainwashing was quite effective.
>
>Oh, so that excuses your fanatical view.
>My 2c is that yours is the effects of all that Agent Orange rain you
>experienced during your secret hush hush missions into Cambodia?
was involved in there. It was more of a ..walkabout. I didnt even kill
anybody there. Shrug.
>
>The problem with "brain washing" is that it only sticks whilst the
>subject allows it.
So why havent you cast yours off as of yet?
>The problem with "brain washing" is that it only sticks whilst the
>subject allows it.
Gunner
pyotr filipivich
Jul 4, 2012, 1:47:27 AM7/4/12
to
Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Tue, 03 Jul 2012 22:21:52 -0700
He knows that he wasn't, so there is no need for him to consider
the question.
Fark - religious people question their religion at least once in
their life, even going to far as to have serious doubts about the
whole "God" thing. Yet it is the believers in No God who claim to
have the open questioning minds.
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
the question.
Fark - religious people question their religion at least once in
their life, even going to far as to have serious doubts about the
whole "God" thing. Yet it is the believers in No God who claim to
have the open questioning minds.
jon_banquer
Jul 4, 2012, 2:33:38 AM7/4/12
to
On Jul 3, 3:18 am, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 18:33:06 -0700 (PDT), jon_banquer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <jonbanq...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Notice how little time Gummer spends on truly important issues like
> >the one way "Free Trade" agreements we keep signing. That's because
> >Gummer can't comprehend that both Democrats and Republicans / Liberals
> >and Conservatives are equally at fault.
> >That's the kind of reality that Gummer can't handle.
>
> Notice Johnny keeps trying to make people think he knows something
> significant about CAD/CAM, and keeps getting his ignorance and
> buffoonery slapped across his face?
>
> Btw..there are many many many people working on the Fee Trade issue.
>
> Im one of the ones working on that pesky 2nd Amendment issue
>
> Dont like it? Feel free to kiss my ass.
>
> Gunner
>
> --
> "The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
> capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
> It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
> Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
> and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
> such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
> fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
> fools that made him their prince".
> Btw..there are many many many people working on the Fee Trade issue.
The idiot can't even spell Free Trade let alone understand what the
problem is and who is responsible.
> On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 18:33:06 -0700 (PDT), jon_banquer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <jonbanq...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >the one way "Free Trade" agreements we keep signing. That's because
> >Gummer can't comprehend that both Democrats and Republicans / Liberals
> >and Conservatives are equally at fault.
> >That's the kind of reality that Gummer can't handle.
>
> Notice Johnny keeps trying to make people think he knows something
> significant about CAD/CAM, and keeps getting his ignorance and
> buffoonery slapped across his face?
>
> Btw..there are many many many people working on the Fee Trade issue.
>
> Im one of the ones working on that pesky 2nd Amendment issue
>
> Dont like it? Feel free to kiss my ass.
>
> Gunner
>
> --
> "The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
> capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
> It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
> Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
> and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
> such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
> fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
> fools that made him their prince".
> Btw..there are many many many people working on the Fee Trade issue.
The idiot can't even spell Free Trade let alone understand what the
problem is and who is responsible.
de...@dudu.org
Jul 4, 2012, 8:40:09 AM7/4/12
to
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 14:37:33 -0400, Frank
No, that's ridiculous. You are making up evils then dismissing our
entire republic as inferior because of your own made up shit.
There is no left wing "party elite" in the US with totalitarian goals.
It's the ultra wealthy hiding behind their corporations who have the
dream of totalitarianism.
entire republic as inferior because of your own made up shit.
There is no left wing "party elite" in the US with totalitarian goals.
It's the ultra wealthy hiding behind their corporations who have the
dream of totalitarianism.
Flint
Jul 4, 2012, 8:47:34 AM7/4/12
to
But I think if I have to choose between the two, I do favor the ultra
wealthy aristocracy over a bunch of stinkin drugged up, raping,
pillaging 99'ers.
--
MFB
de...@dudu.org
Jul 4, 2012, 9:16:09 AM7/4/12
to
On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 08:47:34 -0400, Flint <agen...@section31.org>
wrote:
Everyone in the 99% are drugged up rapists and pillagers?
Really?
I had no idea. And here I've been missing all he fun.
wrote:
Really?
I had no idea. And here I've been missing all he fun.
Hawke
Jul 4, 2012, 4:29:22 PM7/4/12
to
On 7/3/2012 5:18 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
> On 7/3/2012 5:05 PM, Hawke wrote:
>> On 7/3/2012 3:58 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>> On 7/3/2012 3:09 PM, Hawke wrote:
>>>> On 7/3/2012 11:22 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>>>>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're
>>>>>>> human.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No you don't.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes - yes, you do.
>>>>
>>>> You don't.
>>>
>>> Yes, people do.
>>
>> Did you forget the rules
>
> Of course not - I helped to write them.
Then you damn well better follow them. You are making the claims here.
> On 7/3/2012 5:05 PM, Hawke wrote:
>> On 7/3/2012 3:58 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>> On 7/3/2012 3:09 PM, Hawke wrote:
>>>> On 7/3/2012 11:22 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't believe in any god, but rights do not come from government.
>>>>>>> Rights are inherent in the individual. They don't "come from" any
>>>>>>> source outside the human self. You have rights because you're
>>>>>>> human.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No you don't.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes - yes, you do.
>>>>
>>>> You don't.
>>>
>>> Yes, people do.
>>
>> Did you forget the rules
>
> Of course not - I helped to write them.
Back them up with facts, evidence, and citations, or withdraw them.
>>>> Without a government to give them to you
>>>
>>> No. Governments do not - *cannot* - "give" rights. They can recognize
>>> them and protect them, or they can infringe upon them, but they *cannot*
>>> give rights.
>>
>> There are no rights without a government to grant them and protect them.
>
> False. Governments do not grant rights - period.
primitive people and ask them what rights they have. They'll look at you
like you're crazy, which of course, you are.
> Rights can be and have been protected without government.
have government, and that is who is protecting those rights. The
government came first, then the rights.
>>>>>> Humans aren't born with "rights" attached to them or in
>>>>>> them any more than the other animal life on earth has.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, they are. Non-human animals do not have - *cannot* have - any
>>>>> rights at all. Rights only apply to humans, and rights inhere in
>>>>> individual person at birth.
decide on the rights and how to protect them. Until that happens no one
has any kind of right to anything.
>>>>>> Some people think that a god gives it to them but that's obviously
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> true.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it's not "obviously" true because it's not "obvious" that there
>>>>> isn't a god. *I* don't believe in any god, and I believe that rights
>>>>> are not "given" by any entity at all. But none of that is "obvious".
>>>> You don't think they are given, they just are there. But of course you
>>>> don't know why human animals have them but the other animals don't.
>>>
>>> Of course I do: because non-human animals are not part of a moral
>>> community.
>>
>> Oh brother! If you knew how utterly stupid that sounds
>
> You clearly don't know anything about rights theory.
that gives humans the ability to have rights. Animals have no moral
community so they have no rights. Lots of people believe animals have
rights too. But the truth is no animal has any rights, neither human or
otherwise until a government is created. Before that we're all on the
same animal level and as you said, animals have no rights. But if they
ever get a moral community they will. That's a real crock of shit,
irrationality.
>>>>>> You don't have them installed in you at birth either.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not "installed" - they are a fundamental attribute of being human.
>>
>> At least according to one person
>
> According to basic rights theory. According to Thomas Jefferson, too,
> who was very well acquainted with the theory.
fallacies are not allowed. Just because someone came up with a "rights
theory" doesn't mean it's worth a darn. It's just opinion and has no
evidence to prove it's veracity.
>>>> That sounds exactly like the crazy shit the religious think.
>>>
>>> They are closer to being right than you are. They are right for the
>>> wrong reason. They are right in observing and noting that rights are
>>> inherent in the person; they are wrong, in my view, in saying that we
>>> are "endowed by our Creator" with these rights. However, the effect is
>>> the same. People simply have rights. Whether or not government respect
>>> them is a separate issue.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Nobody has any rights at all to begin with.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The only rights anyone ever had were the ones that men
>>>>>> created for you when they created governments
>>>>>
>>>>> No.
>>
>> Yes.
>
> No.
>
>
>>>> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and political
>>>> science.
>>>
>>> My knowledge of history vastly exceeds yours. Political science is a
>>> bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with astrology.
>>
>> You don't have any knowledge.
>
> I have a very solid knowledge of history. Unscientific political
> "science" is not anything worth knowing.
mile. Your "knowledge" of history isn't even up to what any ordinary
college grad with a degree in history has. Moreover, you show your
ignorance by trying to paint my field as not as valid as yours. If you
actually spent time among professors and educated people you would know
that political science is not thought of as inferior to other
disciplines. You are just pretending that what you know is more
important than what I do because of your over inflated view of yourself.
The fact is it's not. Political science is just as important as
economics, or history, or biology, or any other field. Just because you
say it isn't doesn't make it so. In fact, if you allege it the chances
are the opposite is true.
Hawke
Hawke
Jul 4, 2012, 4:37:02 PM7/4/12
to
just described as utter scum. They sure don't think of you as one of
them. So when you hand them the controls you better darn well expect
they are going to treat you just like one of the stinking, drugged up,
raping, pillaging 99 percenters. So if you think by giving them control
it's going to be of any benefit to you forget it. The truth is they will
try to take even more away from you and keep it for their benefit. So
choose to have representatives of 99 percent of the people look out for
your interests or choose to have super rich elites look out for you. I
know that you know the rich aren't going to do anything to help you. You
have a lot better chance throwing your lot in with the rest of the
people than them. Everybody who isn't rich themselves needs to learn
that lesson well.
Hawke
Flint
Jul 4, 2012, 8:04:26 PM7/4/12
to
period. If, however, compelled to make a choice between the two, I
prefer the 1%.
They sure don't think of you as one of
> them.
So when you hand them the controls you better darn well expect
> they are going to treat you just like one of the stinking, drugged up,
> raping, pillaging 99 percenters. So if you think by giving them
> control it's going to be of any benefit to you forget it. The truth is
> they will try to take even more away from you and keep it for their
> benefit.
of them. With the 99%, they'll screw you regardless of who they
perceive you as if they think there is something to be gained from you.
As I said, the whole 1%/99% thing is a false dichotomy that operates
under a false premise that all 1%ers are 'out to get you', when in
fact the opposite is true. The 99% contains a much greater percentage
of folks that'll screw you.
So choose to have representatives of 99 percent of the people
> look out for your interests or choose to have super rich elites look
> out for you. I know that you know the rich aren't going to do anything
> to help you. You have a lot better chance throwing your lot in with
> the rest of the people than them.
there own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather
than fools.
Everybody who isn't rich themselves
> needs to learn that lesson well.
>
> Hawke
MFB
Hawke
Jul 4, 2012, 8:44:12 PM7/4/12
to
have anything to worry about from the Nazis. Putting your trust that the
wealthiest 1% will do anything for you is a pipe dream. When have the
rich willingly given to the poor? Never. And if you think you have a
chance to become one of the 1% you really are on the pipe. You might as
well buy lottery tickets and hope to win. The chances are about the
same. History shows that the elites only look out for themselves. I
guess you haven't learned that. You aren't a part of their class and
never will be. You are far better off with your own kind than trying to
be something you aren't. The poor will treat you better than the rich.
Hawke
George Plimpton
Jul 4, 2012, 8:48:46 PM7/4/12
to
Stormin Mormon
Jul 4, 2012, 9:09:37 PM7/4/12
to
I'd dare to guess that many of the 99% are the "git R Dun" type. They may be
better than the 1% who rely on technology.
"Flint" <agen...@section31.org> wrote in message
news:jt2lmb$91b$1...@dont-email.me...
better than the 1% who rely on technology.
"Flint" <agen...@section31.org> wrote in message
news:jt2lmb$91b$1...@dont-email.me...
Gunner Asch
Jul 4, 2012, 10:21:42 PM7/4/12
to
On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 20:04:26 -0400, Flint <agen...@section31.org>
wrote:
> So choose to have representatives of 99 percent of the people
>> look out for your interests or choose to have super rich elites look
>> out for you. I know that you know the rich aren't going to do anything
>> to help you. You have a lot better chance throwing your lot in with
>> the rest of the people than them.
>
>Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of
>there own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather
>than fools.
The fact of the matter is..is that that "99%" is less than 25% of our
population and are made up largely of children, the mentally ill,
communist idealists etc etc..all of which are largely helpless and
hopeless. They are generically demonstrated by these photos:
http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-man-pooping-on-police-car-oct-2011.jpg
http://savingtherepublic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Occupywall-street-shitting-on-US-flag.bmp
http://godlesspaladin.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-turns-violent.jpg
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/OWS-Couple.jpg
wrote:
> So choose to have representatives of 99 percent of the people
>> look out for your interests or choose to have super rich elites look
>> out for you. I know that you know the rich aren't going to do anything
>> to help you. You have a lot better chance throwing your lot in with
>> the rest of the people than them.
>
>Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of
>there own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather
>than fools.
population and are made up largely of children, the mentally ill,
communist idealists etc etc..all of which are largely helpless and
hopeless. They are generically demonstrated by these photos:
http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-man-pooping-on-police-car-oct-2011.jpg
http://savingtherepublic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Occupywall-street-shitting-on-US-flag.bmp
http://godlesspaladin.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-turns-violent.jpg
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/OWS-Couple.jpg
Michael A. Terrell
Jul 4, 2012, 11:28:28 PM7/4/12
to
Stormin Mormon wrote:
>
> I'd dare to guess that many of the 99% are the "git R Dun" type. They may be
> better than the 1% who rely on technology.
bates2012
Jul 4, 2012, 11:39:21 PM7/4/12
to
On Jul 4, 9:21 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 20:04:26 -0400, Flint <agent...@section31.org>
>
> http://savingtherepublic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Occupywa...
>
> http://godlesspaladin.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-...
police, lol
NB
> On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 20:04:26 -0400, Flint <agent...@section31.org>
> wrote:
>
> > So choose to have representatives of 99 percent of the people
> >> look out for your interests or choose to have super rich elites look
> >> out for you. I know that you know the rich aren't going to do anything
> >> to help you. You have a lot better chance throwing your lot in with
> >> the rest of the people than them.
>
> >Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of
> >there own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather
> >than fools.
>
> The fact of the matter is..is that that "99%" is less than 25% of our
> population and are made up largely of children, the mentally ill,
> communist idealists etc etc..all of which are largely helpless and
> hopeless. They are generically demonstrated by these photos:
>
> http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzo...
>
> > So choose to have representatives of 99 percent of the people
> >> look out for your interests or choose to have super rich elites look
> >> out for you. I know that you know the rich aren't going to do anything
> >> to help you. You have a lot better chance throwing your lot in with
> >> the rest of the people than them.
>
> >Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of
> >there own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather
> >than fools.
>
> The fact of the matter is..is that that "99%" is less than 25% of our
> population and are made up largely of children, the mentally ill,
> communist idealists etc etc..all of which are largely helpless and
> hopeless. They are generically demonstrated by these photos:
>
>
> http://savingtherepublic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Occupywa...
>
> http://godlesspaladin.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-...
>
> http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/OWS-Couple.jpg
>
> Gunner
>
> --
> "The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
> capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
> It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
> Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
> and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
> such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
> fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
> fools that made him their prince".
The one rubbing his ass on the cop car shares my sentiments for
> http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/OWS-Couple.jpg
>
> Gunner
>
> --
> "The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
> capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
> It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
> Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
> and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
> such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
> fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
> fools that made him their prince".
police, lol
NB
rbowman
Jul 5, 2012, 12:28:15 AM7/5/12
to
Stormin Mormon wrote:
> I'd dare to guess that many of the 99% are the "git R Dun" type. They may
> be better than the 1% who rely on technology.
What makes you think the '1%', defined by economic status, rely on
> I'd dare to guess that many of the 99% are the "git R Dun" type. They may
> be better than the 1% who rely on technology.
technology? I should frame the question as 'have any understanding of the
technology they rely on?' to be more accurate.
In a decadent society that keeps score by wealth, the elite aren't
necessarily the brightest.
Flint
Jul 5, 2012, 12:46:53 AM7/5/12
to
put the trust in myself and a divine power to guide me. It's just
that the so called "1%" have more concentrated wealth than the 99% in
which to derive income from.
When have
> the rich willingly given to the poor? Never. And if you think you have
> a chance to become one of the 1% you really are on the pipe.
having nothing.
> You might
> as well buy lottery tickets and hope to win. The chances are about the
> same. History shows that the elites only look out for themselves. I
> guess you haven't learned that. You aren't a part of their class and
> never will be. You are far better off with your own kind than trying
> to be something you aren't. The poor will treat you better than the rich.
>
mediocrity on everyone. You hate yourselves and have such
self-loathing, you can't stand seeing anyone else bettering themselves
and rising above bad circumstances to a better way of life.
You fear they might leave you in your cesspool, and succeed where
you've failed miserably, donchya?
--
MFB
terryc
Jul 5, 2012, 12:51:46 AM7/5/12
to
On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of there
> own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than fools.
And there we have the hedgemonic ideaology that allows the 1% to retain
> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of there
> own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than fools.
control.
>> Everybody who isn't rich themselves
>> needs to learn that lesson well.
terryc
Jul 5, 2012, 12:53:25 AM7/5/12
to
produce/do anything and need the 99% to do the work.
Gunner Asch
Jul 5, 2012, 2:12:23 AM7/5/12
to
bates2012
Jul 5, 2012, 3:12:44 AM7/5/12
to
NB
Michael A. Terrell
Jul 5, 2012, 6:30:31 AM7/5/12
to
Michael A. Terrell
Jul 5, 2012, 6:32:41 AM7/5/12
to
terryc wrote:
>
> On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>
> > Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of there
> > own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than fools.
>
> And there we have the hedgemonic ideaology that allows the 1% to retain
> control.
terryc
Jul 5, 2012, 10:16:01 AM7/5/12
to
Michael A. Terrell
Jul 5, 2012, 10:40:30 AM7/5/12
to
the 99% are mindless laborers who only exist to serve the 1%.
Flint
Jul 5, 2012, 12:49:43 PM7/5/12
to
loon...
Putting your trust that
> the wealthiest 1% will do anything for you is a pipe dream.
That's your erroneous assumption. I simply think I will have more
opportunity to WORK for and get PAID by them more so than the poor
huddling masses you loons make the 99% out to be (which is even more
absurd than all the 1%ers are inherently evil).
As far as I can remember, no poor person ever gave me a job.
Too bad you're too dense to realize this. Die in your ignorance...
When have
> the rich willingly given to the poor? Never. And if you think you have
> a chance to become one of the 1% you really are on the pipe. You might
> as well buy lottery tickets and hope to win. The chances are about the
> same. History shows that the elites only look out for themselves. I
> guess you haven't learned that. You aren't a part of their class and
> never will be. You are far better off with your own kind than trying
> to be something you aren't.
that be, oh presumptuous one?
The poor will treat you better than the rich.
--
MFB
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 3:08:56 PM7/5/12
to
and never will be. Here's an example of how it really is. I just saw
this statistic yesterday. The net worth of the average American is 77K.
The average net worth of a U.S. senator is 13 million. Now, that may
seem like a lot but it doesn't put them in the really rich class at all.
So not only will you never be in the class of a senator but you will
surely never get into the really rich class.
So you're one of the commoners. In no way have you won anything in this
society. If you're lucky you have a decent quality of life but without
working every day you would be out on the street in nothing flat. You
are one of the 99% that can't live off your wealth. By any standard
you're mediocre. I sure didn't make you or anyone else that way. That's
the best you can do. So blame yourself for only achieving ordinary status.
Calling me names and pretending you know my status doesn't change where
you find yourself, and it doesn't mean I'm where you are. You blame me
for telling you how it is. You know why you do that? It's because like
Jack Nicholson said in the movie a Few Good Men, You can't handle the
truth. It's not my fault that things in this country aren't as they are
advertised.
Hawke
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 3:12:19 PM7/5/12
to
athletes, to see the truth in that. Having or making lots of money
doesn't imply intelligence. They want you to think it does but it doesn't.
Hawke
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 3:15:26 PM7/5/12
to
On 7/4/2012 9:51 PM, terryc wrote:
> On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>
>> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of there
>> own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than fools.
>
> And there we have the hedgemonic ideaology that allows the 1% to retain
> control.
That's where the term "useful idiots" came from, people who are helpful
> On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>
>> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of there
>> own stupidty. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than fools.
>
> And there we have the hedgemonic ideaology that allows the 1% to retain
> control.
to those who are working against their interests.
Hawke
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 3:23:50 PM7/5/12
to
On 7/4/2012 5:48 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and
>>>>>> political
>>>>>> science.
>>>>>
>>>>> My knowledge of history vastly exceeds yours. Political science is a
>>>>> bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with astrology.
>>>>
>>>> You don't have any knowledge.
>>>
>>> I have a very solid knowledge of history. Unscientific political
>>> "science" is not anything worth knowing.
>>
>>
>> Your problem is you over rate yourself in every way, and
>
> I don't. That would be you, you unaccomplished do-nothing.
Every time you fail to respond to what I say with an intelligent counter
>>>
>>>>>> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and
>>>>>> political
>>>>>> science.
>>>>>
>>>>> My knowledge of history vastly exceeds yours. Political science is a
>>>>> bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with astrology.
>>>>
>>>> You don't have any knowledge.
>>>
>>> I have a very solid knowledge of history. Unscientific political
>>> "science" is not anything worth knowing.
>>
>>
>> Your problem is you over rate yourself in every way, and
>
> I don't. That would be you, you unaccomplished do-nothing.
argument it means what I am saying is true. You simply are not able to
successfully rebut the arguments that I make. Over and over you fail to
either prove your contentions or disprove my arguments. The only one who
doesn't know that is you. But then as I have told you already, you over
rate your abilities by a wide margin. Thinking you can win political
arguments against someone with far more knowledge and education in
politics than you have is a perfect illustration of my point. In the
vernacular, you're out of your league, and you're the only one who
doesn't know it. You don't see me trying to tell people in other
disciplines I know more than they do about their field. You do that all
the time and that's why your wrong so often.
Hawke
bates2012
Jul 5, 2012, 3:45:24 PM7/5/12
to
On Jul 5, 11:49 am, Flint <agent...@section31.org> wrote:
> On 7/4/2012 8:44 PM, Hawke wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 7/4/2012 5:04 PM, Flint wrote:
> >> On 7/4/2012 4:37 PM, Hawke wrote:
> >>> On 7/4/2012 5:47 AM, Flint wrote:
> On 7/4/2012 8:44 PM, Hawke wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 7/4/2012 5:04 PM, Flint wrote:
> >> On 7/4/2012 4:37 PM, Hawke wrote:
> >>> On 7/4/2012 5:47 AM, Flint wrote:
> >>>> On 7/3/2012 2:38 PM, d...@dudu.org wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 11:29:37 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
> >>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 11:29:37 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
> >>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On 7/3/2012 11:23 AM, d...@dudu.org wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:13:29 -0400, Frank
> >>>>>>> <frankperiodlogu...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:13:29 -0400, Frank
been "middle class" people. Maybe upper middle class mostly, but
certainly not rich.
When I was a traveling flea market vendor, my main customers were the
poor, at the first of the month when the SSI checks came.
NB
George Plimpton
Jul 5, 2012, 4:26:43 PM7/5/12
to
George Plimpton
Jul 5, 2012, 4:27:14 PM7/5/12
to
On 7/5/2012 12:23 PM, Hawke wrote:
> On 7/4/2012 5:48 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>>>>> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and
>>>>>>> political
>>>>>>> science.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My knowledge of history vastly exceeds yours. Political science is a
>>>>>> bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with astrology.
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't have any knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> I have a very solid knowledge of history. Unscientific political
>>>> "science" is not anything worth knowing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Your problem is you over rate yourself in every way, and
>>
>> I don't. That would be you, you unaccomplished do-nothing.
>
>
> Every time you fail to respond to what I say with an intelligent counter
> argument
I never fail in that regard.
> On 7/4/2012 5:48 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>>>>> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and
>>>>>>> political
>>>>>>> science.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My knowledge of history vastly exceeds yours. Political science is a
>>>>>> bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with astrology.
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't have any knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> I have a very solid knowledge of history. Unscientific political
>>>> "science" is not anything worth knowing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Your problem is you over rate yourself in every way, and
>>
>> I don't. That would be you, you unaccomplished do-nothing.
>
>
> Every time you fail to respond to what I say with an intelligent counter
> argument
George Plimpton
Jul 5, 2012, 4:31:18 PM7/5/12
to
On 7/4/2012 9:51 PM, terryc wrote:
> On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>
>> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of their
>
>> own stupidity. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than fools.
>
> And there we have the hedgemonic [sic] ideaology [sic] that allows the 1% to retain
> control.
All the so-called "1%" wish to control is the property rights to their
own lawfully acquired wealth.
Learn to spell, douchebag.
Mighty Wannabe
Jul 5, 2012, 5:20:27 PM7/5/12
to
On Jul 5, 4:31 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 7/4/2012 9:51 PM, terryc wrote:
>
> > On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>
> >> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of their
> >> own stupidity. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than fools.
>
> > And there we have the hedgemonic [sic] ideaology [sic] that allows the 1% to retain
> > control.
That is just Australian accent.
> On 7/4/2012 9:51 PM, terryc wrote:
>
> > On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>
> >> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of their
> >> own stupidity. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than fools.
>
> > And there we have the hedgemonic [sic] ideaology [sic] that allows the 1% to retain
> > control.
>
> All the so-called "1%" wish to control is the property rights to their
> own lawfully acquired wealth.
>
> Learn to spell, douchebag.
That is how the feudal lords used to insult the serfs.
Today the modern feudal lords call themselves "job creators" who pride
themselves in providing the serfs with jobs for subsistence wage to
create even more wealth for themselves, while the serfs have the
additional responsibility of fighting and dying for the feudal lords
to protect the best interest of the "job creating" feudal lords.
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 7:14:01 PM7/5/12
to
corporations that do the hiring. It's the much smaller operations that
hire most people. The rich aren't job creators either. That's pure
propaganda. They invest money in businesses that exist and make money.
Sure things. They don't risk money on new businesses or on risky
ventures. That's what regular people do all the time. Every time someone
borrows money and starts a new business they are taking risks. Rich
people seldom do that. Of course you don't go to poor people for a job.
You obviously go to a higher echelon of society for that. People who
actually are well off enough to start and have businesses. They are
middle class. Like I said, the rich do very little for anybody but
themselves.
Hawke
George Plimpton
Jul 5, 2012, 7:21:51 PM7/5/12
to
business, and do everything they can to destroy it and get most
production taken over by huge corporations? Because that is exactly
what all Democrat policy does: it tends to force consolidation and
concentration.
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 7:36:08 PM7/5/12
to
have power and don't want to use it in any way and just want to be left
alone to enjoy all that money they "earned". Fuck you! That's pure
bullshit. But who are you to speak for the 1%? You sure ain't one of
them. We all know by now you sure do wish you were though. Nobody is
more envious of wealth than you. But you're in no position to speak for
them, so don't.
Oh, and by the way you dumb fuck, douche bag is two words. Try to
remember that next time you think you're the grammar police.
Hawke
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 7:40:00 PM7/5/12
to
turned out to be. Not rich, not famous, not known for any
accomplishment. You're lucky to even have made it to the the middle.
That, my boy does not make you a success. So why not just keep quite and
no one will know but you?
Hawke
George Plimpton
Jul 5, 2012, 7:44:26 PM7/5/12
to
On 7/5/2012 4:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
> On 7/5/2012 1:31 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/4/2012 9:51 PM, terryc wrote:
>>> On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of their
>>>> own stupidity. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than
>>>> fools.
>>>
>>> And there we have the hedgemonic [sic] ideaology [sic] that allows the
>>> 1% to retain
>>> control.
>>
>> All the so-called "1%" wish to control is the property rights to their
>> own lawfully acquired wealth.
>>
>> Learn to spell, douchebag.
>
>
>
> All the 1% wish to control is their property. Yeah, sure.
Yep.
> On 7/5/2012 1:31 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/4/2012 9:51 PM, terryc wrote:
>>> On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of their
>>>> own stupidity. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than
>>>> fools.
>>>
>>> And there we have the hedgemonic [sic] ideaology [sic] that allows the
>>> 1% to retain
>>> control.
>>
>> All the so-called "1%" wish to control is the property rights to their
>> own lawfully acquired wealth.
>>
>> Learn to spell, douchebag.
>
>
>
> All the 1% wish to control is their property. Yeah, sure.
> Oh, and by the way you dumb fuck, douche bag is two words.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=douchebag
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douchebag
It's one word, you shitbag.
George Plimpton
Jul 5, 2012, 7:47:17 PM7/5/12
to
On 7/5/2012 4:40 PM, Hawke wrote:
> On 7/5/2012 1:27 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/5/2012 12:23 PM, Hawke wrote:
>>> On 7/4/2012 5:48 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and
>>>>>>>>> political
>>>>>>>>> science.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My knowledge of history vastly exceeds yours. Political science
>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>> bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with
>>>>>>>> astrology.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You don't have any knowledge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a very solid knowledge of history. Unscientific political
>>>>>> "science" is not anything worth knowing.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Your problem is you over rate yourself in every way, and
>>>>
>>>> I don't. That would be you, you unaccomplished do-nothing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Every time you fail to respond to what I say with an intelligent counter
>>> argument
>>
>> I never fail in that regard.
>
>
> That's all you ever do.
I never do that, Mr. Failure.
> On 7/5/2012 1:27 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/5/2012 12:23 PM, Hawke wrote:
>>> On 7/4/2012 5:48 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You only think that because of your ignorance of history and
>>>>>>>>> political
>>>>>>>>> science.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My knowledge of history vastly exceeds yours. Political science
>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>> bullshit discipline - it is on an intellectual level with
>>>>>>>> astrology.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You don't have any knowledge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a very solid knowledge of history. Unscientific political
>>>>>> "science" is not anything worth knowing.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Your problem is you over rate yourself in every way, and
>>>>
>>>> I don't. That would be you, you unaccomplished do-nothing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Every time you fail to respond to what I say with an intelligent counter
>>> argument
>>
>> I never fail in that regard.
>
>
> That's all you ever do.
62 years old, born to privilege, had every possible advantage you needed
to become a big success, and all you ever did was dabble at a bunch of
loser pursuits like tennis bum, real estate agent, "paralegal". You
were too self absorbed to have a family, too selfish to do any volunteer
activity. You give nothing to charity.
You suck. You blow. You blow and you suck.
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 7:51:19 PM7/5/12
to
On 7/5/2012 4:21 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>
>> I guess most people don't know it but it's not the big companies or
>> corporations that do the hiring. It's the much smaller operations that
>> hire most people.
>
> So, is it not ironic that Democrats and the rest of the left hate small
> business, and do everything they can to destroy it and get most
> production taken over by huge corporations? Because that is exactly
> what all Democrat policy does: it tends to force consolidation and
> concentration.
Is that right? Just how is that accomplished? I hear Obama talking a lot
>>
>>
>> I guess most people don't know it but it's not the big companies or
>> corporations that do the hiring. It's the much smaller operations that
>> hire most people.
>
> So, is it not ironic that Democrats and the rest of the left hate small
> business, and do everything they can to destroy it and get most
> production taken over by huge corporations? Because that is exactly
> what all Democrat policy does: it tends to force consolidation and
> concentration.
about all the things he's trying to do to help small businesses. And you
say the opposite is true. I'd like to see some proof of how Democrats by
themselves force consolidation and concentration on small business. I
don't believe that is true. So prove it.
Hawke
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 8:00:48 PM7/5/12
to
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/douche+bag?s=t&ld=1032
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=douche%20bag
> http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlla/the-copy-editors-quandary-is-douche-bag-one-word-or-two_b11319
Try to keep that in mind grammar cop! I guess you forget again that
you're not an English major just a nobody claiming to have an economics
degree?
Hawke
George Plimpton
Jul 5, 2012, 8:14:32 PM7/5/12
to
On 7/5/2012 4:51 PM, Hawke wrote:
> On 7/5/2012 4:21 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess most people don't know it but it's not the big companies or
>>> corporations that do the hiring. It's the much smaller operations that
>>> hire most people.
>>
>> So, is it not ironic that Democrats and the rest of the left hate small
>> business, and do everything they can to destroy it and get most
>> production taken over by huge corporations? Because that is exactly
>> what all Democrat policy does: it tends to force consolidation and
>> concentration.
>
>
> Is that right? Just how is that accomplished?
By enacting regulation after regulation and mandate after mandate that
> On 7/5/2012 4:21 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess most people don't know it but it's not the big companies or
>>> corporations that do the hiring. It's the much smaller operations that
>>> hire most people.
>>
>> So, is it not ironic that Democrats and the rest of the left hate small
>> business, and do everything they can to destroy it and get most
>> production taken over by huge corporations? Because that is exactly
>> what all Democrat policy does: it tends to force consolidation and
>> concentration.
>
>
> Is that right? Just how is that accomplished?
are much easier for big business to achieve than for small business, due
to economies of scale. One example: the Americans with Disabilities
Act. Businesses have to set aside parking for cripples, build
wheelchair access ramps, put in special cripples' toilet stalls, and
they have to have someone to deal with the compliance paperwork. Small
business can't afford to do that, so either small businesses merge, or
they go out of business.
All the EEOC bullshit is the same. It takes staff to comply with that
bullshit, and big business can afford it; small business can't.
> I hear Obama talking a lot
> about all the things he's trying to do to help small businesses.
> And you
> say the opposite is true. I'd like to see some proof of how Democrats by
> themselves force consolidation and concentration on small business. I
> don't believe that is true. So prove it.
George Plimpton
Jul 5, 2012, 8:15:01 PM7/5/12
to
On 7/5/2012 5:00 PM, Hawke wrote:
> On 7/5/2012 4:44 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/5/2012 4:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
>>> On 7/5/2012 1:31 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>> On 7/4/2012 9:51 PM, terryc wrote:
>>>>> On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of
>>>>>> their
>>>>>> own stupidity. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than
>>>>>> fools.
>>>>>
>>>>> And there we have the hedgemonic [sic] ideaology [sic] that allows the
>>>>> 1% to retain
>>>>> control.
>>>>
>>>> All the so-called "1%" wish to control is the property rights to their
>>>> own lawfully acquired wealth.
>>>>
>>>> Learn to spell, douchebag.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All the 1% wish to control is their property. Yeah, sure.
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>>
>>> Oh, and by the way you dumb fuck, douche bag is two words.
>>
>> Nope.
>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=douchebag
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douchebag
>>
>> It's one word, you shitbag.
>
>
> No it ain't.
It is, fuckstain.
> On 7/5/2012 4:44 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 7/5/2012 4:36 PM, Hawke wrote:
>>> On 7/5/2012 1:31 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>> On 7/4/2012 9:51 PM, terryc wrote:
>>>>> On 05/07/12 10:04, Flint wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Not necessarily. A lot of those 99% are where they are because of
>>>>>> their
>>>>>> own stupidity. I prefer to deal with intelligent folks rather than
>>>>>> fools.
>>>>>
>>>>> And there we have the hedgemonic [sic] ideaology [sic] that allows the
>>>>> 1% to retain
>>>>> control.
>>>>
>>>> All the so-called "1%" wish to control is the property rights to their
>>>> own lawfully acquired wealth.
>>>>
>>>> Learn to spell, douchebag.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All the 1% wish to control is their property. Yeah, sure.
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>>
>>> Oh, and by the way you dumb fuck, douche bag is two words.
>>
>> Nope.
>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=douchebag
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douchebag
>>
>> It's one word, you shitbag.
>
>
> No it ain't.
Mighty Wannabe
Jul 5, 2012, 8:42:01 PM7/5/12
to
On Jul 5, 8:14 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 7/5/2012 4:51 PM, Hawke wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 7/5/2012 4:21 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>
> >>> I guess most people don't know it but it's not the big companies or
> >>> corporations that do the hiring. It's the much smaller operations that
> >>> hire most people.
>
> >> So, is it not ironic that Democrats and the rest of the left hate small
> >> business, and do everything they can to destroy it and get most
> >> production taken over by huge corporations? Because that is exactly
> >> what all Democrat policy does: it tends to force consolidation and
> >> concentration.
>
> > Is that right? Just how is that accomplished?
>
> By enacting regulation after regulation and mandate after mandate that
> are much easier for big business to achieve than for small business, due
> to economies of scale. One example: the Americans with Disabilities
> Act. Businesses have to set aside parking for cripples, build
> wheelchair access ramps, put in special cripples' toilet stalls, and
> they have to have someone to deal with the compliance paperwork. Small
> business can't afford to do that, so either small businesses merge, or
> they go out of business.
>
The access for the disabled is the society's responsibilities. Most of
> On 7/5/2012 4:51 PM, Hawke wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 7/5/2012 4:21 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>
> >>> I guess most people don't know it but it's not the big companies or
> >>> corporations that do the hiring. It's the much smaller operations that
> >>> hire most people.
>
> >> So, is it not ironic that Democrats and the rest of the left hate small
> >> business, and do everything they can to destroy it and get most
> >> production taken over by huge corporations? Because that is exactly
> >> what all Democrat policy does: it tends to force consolidation and
> >> concentration.
>
> > Is that right? Just how is that accomplished?
>
> By enacting regulation after regulation and mandate after mandate that
> are much easier for big business to achieve than for small business, due
> to economies of scale. One example: the Americans with Disabilities
> Act. Businesses have to set aside parking for cripples, build
> wheelchair access ramps, put in special cripples' toilet stalls, and
> they have to have someone to deal with the compliance paperwork. Small
> business can't afford to do that, so either small businesses merge, or
> they go out of business.
>
the people who need such access are the wounded war heroes, the
elderly and the unfortunate. Without the Disabilities Act, such people
will be confined to their own homes, you fucking selfish repugnican
retard.
Hawke
Jul 5, 2012, 8:57:04 PM7/5/12
to
Hawke
Stormin Mormon
Jul 5, 2012, 9:20:43 PM7/5/12
to
I've enjoyed reading your posts. But, now, you combine socialism with bad
manners. Sorry, but I'm filtering you, now.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Mighty Wannabe" <wannabe...@gmail.com>
wrote in message
news:46233980-fa10-41b5...@b20g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
manners. Sorry, but I'm filtering you, now.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Mighty Wannabe" <wannabe...@gmail.com>
wrote in message
news:46233980-fa10-41b5...@b20g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
rbowman
Jul 5, 2012, 10:08:20 PM7/5/12
to
Hawke wrote:
> Is that right? Just how is that accomplished? I hear Obama talking a lot
> about all the things he's trying to do to help small businesses. And you
> say the opposite is true. I'd like to see some proof of how Democrats by
> themselves force consolidation and concentration on small business. I
> don't believe that is true. So prove it.
I've heard a lot of rhetoric about supporting small businesses from both
> Is that right? Just how is that accomplished? I hear Obama talking a lot
> about all the things he's trying to do to help small businesses. And you
> say the opposite is true. I'd like to see some proof of how Democrats by
> themselves force consolidation and concentration on small business. I
> don't believe that is true. So prove it.
sides of the aisle over the years and even been sucked into bidding on
projects that supposedly would give preference to small businesses. Funny
how at the end of the day companies like Lockheed Martin walk off with the
job. It wouldn't be so bad but they usually fubar it completely, collect
massive overruns, and leave a non-working system in their wake.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gw-schulz/with-border-surveillance-
_b_773801.html
That is the latest or greatest, but after Boeing pisses away a few billion
they pass the wand to Raytheon. Meanwhile Obama jawbones about small
businesses.
rbowman
Jul 5, 2012, 10:12:31 PM7/5/12
to
George Plimpton wrote:
> All the so-called "1%" wish to control is the property rights to their
> own lawfully acquired wealth.
Or semi-lawfully acquired wealth if you don't look too closely. One wonders
> All the so-called "1%" wish to control is the property rights to their
> own lawfully acquired wealth.
who profited from the little LIBOR jig to name the latest less than
absolutely honest way to make bucks.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages