176 replies to this topic

[Anonymouse]

That begs the question: in what way are the conservatives different from the liberals (in America)?

I am not a conservative nor am I defending conservatives. However, I am not a liberal and I am attacking liberals in this instance. One could argue, however, thta in the modern context, there really isn't that big of a difference among them.

[Stormig]

Here, the Stormtrooper displays exactly what I have been pointing out about the liberal, in all its polyglot existence, that it is a malleable creature capable of only thinking in terms of "groups" and wholes such as the vague and abstract holistic entity known as "the people". In the liberal's ignorance of history, political philosophy and economics it appears that is has forgotten to distinguish between actual bona fide laws or rules, and mere intrusive statute laws and Legislative decrees.

Indeed, I do believe in defining lowest common denominators and sorting out the rest from there. That is how people started out with, say, designing facilities for the handicapped. I do not however think in terms of clear-cut groups - it is all transitory and changes with time.

And it displays the impetus behind many liberals and the liberal policies that are one of "Do as I say" because "I know better" and "I know what's best for you."

That simply isn't fair. I have rights and grievances, and it is also my right to defend myself. I know myself well enough to know what's good for myself better than most people know for me and I speak on my own behalf and draw parallels with those of others who share similar experiences to support my stance. I never spoke about "you" - I don't care if you stick that stub or a stick of dynamite up where it don't shine. I speak for myself and for people like myself. There are those who spend their lives campaigning for this group or that cause - these ones concern my very own self.

And it is often a reflection of their character trait as I believe the Stormtrooper is the domineering controlling type, who will either dominate her man with a whip or nag him to death and submission.

That is so laughable. I feel compelled to avoid the company of women who nag, so much so that - yes, this I publicly admit for the first time - I wonder why anyone would want to be a lesbian or a bisexual female with the odds that you'll come across one that nags. And I hate to brag, but I am one of the most conforming ladies that I know. Even if I were "domineering" by any stretch of imagination, I would be considered very "empowering" for my man. So I'll leave it at that and you to your rodent fantasies.

This doctrine of forcing down their beliefs on others is of course hidden and packaged and marketed in vague little catch phrases such as "I believe in respect between individuals and their right to the best basic quality of life" as the Stormtrooper so half eloquently put it. Indeed, the liberal embodies all the kindness of the world and believes unrelentingly in promoting and imposing happiness and security whether desired or not. The creed of the Stormtrooper is that people must be happy, secure and socialized to a life of orderly boring routine, whether desired or not.

Orderly boring routine? Well, then, I wish you to New Delhi or Calcutta or some such place for the rest of your life.

The liberal likes to believe that they as the humans are the highest achievement and what they espouse and believe are the most enlightened, illuminated and correct beliefs and ways.

Highest achievement? Whose? We are animals, only to have taken up the habit of formulating our rights and what-not so that everyone has equal rights and no-one has their kid kidnapped and killed like orangutans do among themselves.

If you do not believe as the liberal does there is something wrong with you. It believes that it's ways are "by discourse and concensus, much more humane, if it matters" yet goes on to contradict itself when it says, "It is the human-vermin, of which you set the perfect example, with its foul brain and mouth that messes things up for everyone" referring to me. (She is the one that seeks to control everyones life and tell everyone what to do, yet I mess it all up!) It goes on to state, "if a rule against littering is considered 'coercive' and some 'liberal's self-serving need,' then so be it." So which is it? Is it about discourse and consensus and all things humane, or is it the coercive, dominating intrusiveness and eliminating all those that disagree with the liberal that stand in the way of the liberal utopia?

Then join the discourse and give your case, try to convince others that littering is in everyone's interest or does not and should not bother them. I on my part am not interested in it and don't expect much success for you, not that it should deter you, of course. Let's see the action. It is one thing to whine and complain and another to get going. As we speak I am in the process of gathering information as to what can be done to do away with a discriminating clause in the civil code or how to cut it down and who is working on it - or would be. So walk the walk.

And the liberal ends with its oft-repeated plug, "If people stopped to think and show respect, it wouldn't even have to involve most formalities." That begs the question. What if I do not want to show you respect?

By "respect," I of course don't mean that you should kiss my arse.

Anonymouse says "If I believe you are not even worth a fingernail to me"
I'm crushed.

If I believe you are not even worth a fingernail to me, why should I respect you?

I don't care what you believe or feel. Let me put it this way - if, because I don't believe you're worth a fingernail to me, I don't respect you, then that puts me in a position to disrespect you by mowing you with a car or stalking you? You may not be bothered by stalking, but there are people who are, no amount of "too bad for them" is going to cut it. It has nothing to do with what either side "thinks is best for you" or whatever other BS degenerate mantra.

Who says people are automatically entitled to respect just because they are people? And I am reminded of Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland which I recommend for the liberal troll. Here is a quote to ponder: "If everybody minded their own business," the Duchess said in a hoarse growl, "the world would go round a deal faster than it does."

I don't see how deals going faster is necessarily such a "good" thing. Long permit processes, which come to mind, are what ensures that we don't die from a packet of crisps.

But unfortunately, if the liberal believes respect is lacking, the arm of the government must be brought in, votes must be entered, results tabulated, judgment entered, a law drawn up and decreed and enforced to make sure everyone proceeds in an orderly and respectful manner otherwise it might offend the sensibilities of the domineering types.

We vote and they decide, boo hoo... Forget the domineering types - what about the sensibilities of the unhealthy?


quotes fixed

Edited by Edward, 24 November 2006 - 12:46 PM.

[Stormig]

Eh, my quote tags are fine - what gives?

[Armenak]

Eh, my quote tags are fine - what gives?

Test...

[DominO]

Eh, my quote tags are fine - what gives?

There is a limit of numbers of quotes for the same post.

[ED]

Maximum number of quotes one can use in a single post is 10

[Anonymouse]

Indeed, I do believe in defining lowest common denominators and sorting out the rest from there. That is how people started out with, say, designing facilities for the handicapped. I do not however think in terms of clear-cut groups - it is all transitory and changes with time.
That simply isn't fair. I have rights and grievances, and it is also my right to defend myself. I know myself well enough to know what's good for myself better than most people know for me and I speak on my own behalf and draw parallels with those of others who share similar experiences to support my stance. I never spoke about "you" - I don't care if you stick that stub or a stick of dynamite up where it don't shine. I speak for myself and for people like myself. There are those who spend their lives campaigning for this group or that cause - these ones concern my very own self.
That is so laughable. I feel compelled to avoid the company of women who nag, so much so that - yes, this I publicly admit for the first time - I wonder why anyone would want to be a lesbian or a bisexual female with the odds that you'll come across one that nags. And I hate to brag, but I am one of the most conforming ladies that I know. Even if I were "domineering" by any stretch of imagination, I would be considered very "empowering" for my man. So I'll leave it at that and you to your rodent fantasies.
Orderly boring routine? Well, then, I wish you to New Delhi or Calcutta or some such place for the rest of your life.
Highest achievement? Whose? We are animals, only to have taken up the habit of formulating our rights and what-not so that everyone has equal rights and no-one has their kid kidnapped and killed like orangutans do among themselves.
Then join the discourse and give your case, try to convince others that littering is in everyone's interest or does not and should not bother them. I on my part am not interested in it and don't expect much success for you, not that it should deter you, of course. Let's see the action. It is one thing to whine and complain and another to get going. As we speak I am in the process of gathering information as to what can be done to do away with a discriminating clause in the civil code or how to cut it down and who is working on it - or would be. So walk the walk.
By "respect," I of course don't mean that you should kiss my arse.

Anonymouse says "If I believe you are not even worth a fingernail to me"
I'm crushed.
I don't care what you believe or feel. Let me put it this way - if, because I don't believe you're worth a fingernail to me, I don't respect you, then that puts me in a position to disrespect you by mowing you with a car or stalking you? You may not be bothered by stalking, but there are people who are, no amount of "too bad for them" is going to cut it. It has nothing to do with what either side "thinks is best for you" or whatever other BS degenerate mantra.
I don't see how deals going faster is necessarily such a "good" thing. Long permit processes, which come to mind, are what ensures that we don't die from a packet of crisps.
We vote and they decide, boo hoo... Forget the domineering types - what about the sensibilities of the unhealthy?
quotes fixed

All that gibberish just to prove that you are nothing more than a control freak bent on telling other people what to do. I must have hit a quivering nerve in the Stormtrooper.

[Boghos]

Moog,

I know you have a strong libertarian bent. So do I. But sometimes what matters is what you don´t see, not what you see (Bastiat) .
So, have you signed up for the Mises University courses?

[Anonymouse]

Moog,

I know you have a strong libertarian bent. So do I. But sometimes what matters is what you don´t see, not what you see (Bastiat) .
So, have you signed up for the Mises University courses?

Wow, Bastiat AND Mises rolled into one eh?

Unfortunately for me, right now time and money are against me. But I plan on it someday...to go to the beautiful Auburn, Alabama. And you?

[Stormig]

All that gibberish just to prove that you are nothing more than a control freak bent on telling other people what to do. I must have hit a quivering nerve in the Stormtrooper.

Control-freak-bent-what-do, sputter sputter sputter. Cornered mouse. You're just incapable of taking an issue head-on, aren't you? All this "Why do I have to respect you," as if anyone here has the time or the desire to help some mouse rediscover the Americas all over again, because you're incapable of engaging in any actual discourse - it's more comfortable to sit in a corner and whine and complain and expect to have your non-rights brought to you. Some things just are not breakfast in bed.

[Anonymouse]

Control-freak-bent-what-do, sputter sputter sputter. Cornered mouse. You're just incapable of taking an issue head-on, aren't you? All this "Why do I have to respect you," as if anyone here has the time or the desire to help some mouse rediscover the Americas all over again, because you're incapable of engaging in any actual discourse - it's more comfortable to sit in a corner and whine and complain and expect to have your non-rights brought to you. Some things just are not breakfast in bed.

So when sycophants run out of material and are in effect forced to admit they are nothing more than control-freaks and love telling other people what to do because "they know best" their last refuge is coming up with statements such as telling the other party as being cornered and incapable of taking an issue head on? For what is "actual discourse"? As opposed to apparent discourse? All of a sudden the Stormtrooper must vindicate itself and make itself believe that it is humane and its ends are noble, despite being a control freak of her men and her neighbors, and even the public, who cannot smoke because how dare they disturb the tranquil waters of the feminazi busy typing on the internets to people about her myasma of opinions. A discussion is unknown to anyone discussing with control-freak-feminazis who are hellbent on telling everyone what to do for their superficial selfish ends. Such beings are incapable of rational discourse, despite their call to arms for such, as you have displayed above. Anything beyind your tongue, your supposed lungs and your "reproductive rights" is anathema to you.

[Accelerated]

This thread delivers

[ED]

This thread delivers

Not quiet, Accel….



I like to ask so called self proclaimed, yappy BMW, MB, BS & ABS (sorry Error404 don’t make me to expand) silicon Valley CEO, Vice, verse etc….self proclaimed liberals,


What does give them a right to allow, or, disallow for passing such BS laws??!
When they should be banned from rest of the world and be labeled as polluters, danger to men kind for dumping there radioactive waist in 3rd world countries, and,
IF there laws would stand, (which is illegal) pass, enforce a law on them, and let them have there “moral” orgies and wife swapping liberal “thing” within there city limits.

Irony of this thing is, a thru liberal is arguing about his/her civil rights, a self proclaimed liberal is claiming its my liberal right to screw your civil rights, “I don’t have a scientific evidence but doesn’t matter I still am a “liberal”

If those who need to look up to what really is the meaning of a Liberal?!
Then do so, before you argue in a name of Liberalism, AKA Freedom.
A freedom for someone to decide for them self’s what’s right, or what’s wrong for there health, at list its no ones business if one wants to smoke, and don’t argue in a name of a Liberal for your own selfish reasons, let alone above pathetic passing of such laws.
What’s next?
Liberal, eh?

[Yervant1]

What’s next?

What's next? Very good question my friend Edward.
The new law will be very soon for people to wear special masks to filter the CO2.
Right after that the new requirement will be to wear a special device which captures the methane gas when people fart.
Later people will be tagged with an oxygen meter and charged accordingly.

Now that we know what's coming how about some of you investing some money with me to start the manufacturing of these devices so that we can please the liberals and capitalists at the same time.

[Takoush]

What's next? Very good question my friend Edward.
The new law will be very soon for people to wear special masks to filter the CO2.
Right after that the new requirement will be to wear a special device which captures the methane gas when people fart.
Later people will be tagged with an oxygen meter and charged accordingly.

Now that we know what's coming how about some of you investing some money with me to start the manufacturing of these devices so that we can please the liberals and capitalists at the same time.

OK Yervant; but all I ask is just 10% of the profits of those masks and of the devices you're going to manufacture.

[ED]

liberals and capitalists at the same time.

shame on you Yervant!
I'm not that kind of a guy

[Takoush]

Yervant jan, amen esvadsneroun mi havadar.

[Yervant1]

OK Yervant; but all I ask is just 10% of the profits of those masks and of the devices you're going to manufacture.

10% is OK by me as long you provide the initial 10% of the cost of start up money.

[Yervant1]

shame on you Yervant!
I'm not that kind of a guy

What kind of a guy are you?

[Stormig]

Not quiet, Accel….
I like to ask so called self proclaimed, yappy BMW, MB, BS & ABS (sorry Error404 don’t make me to expand) silicon Valley CEO, Vice, verse etc….self proclaimed liberals,
What does give them a right to allow, or, disallow for passing such BS laws??!
When they should be banned from rest of the world and be labeled as polluters, danger to men kind for dumping there radioactive waist in 3rd world countries, and,
IF there laws would stand, (which is illegal) pass, enforce a law on them, and let them have there “moral” orgies and wife swapping liberal “thing” within there city limits.

Irony of this thing is, a thru liberal is arguing about his/her civil rights, a self proclaimed liberal is claiming its my liberal right to screw your civil rights, “I don’t have a scientific evidence but doesn’t matter I still am a “liberal”

If those who need to look up to what really is the meaning of a Liberal?!
Then do so, before you argue in a name of Liberalism, AKA Freedom.
A freedom for someone to decide for them self’s what’s right, or what’s wrong for there health, at list its no ones business if one wants to smoke, and don’t argue in a name of a Liberal for your own selfish reasons, let alone above pathetic passing of such laws.
What’s next?
Liberal, eh?

Indeed it is ironic that the U.S. does not sign and enforce the Kyoto Protocol, indeed it is ironic that people still use and will continue to use fossil fuels, unfortunately an indispensable necessity in today's circumstances... In fact, if you look at it, it is also ironic that the U.S. can walk into anyone's country and kill with bullets for the same fossil fuel which causes all that pollution, quite a heavy price to pay, don't you think, but that isn't an argument against banning smoking in buses and restaurants, is it? How is any of that related to banning smoking in a park while sitting on a bench with an asthmatic or a breast-feeding lady right next to you, the same lady who wanted to get away from the smog of the heavy-traffic street? Indeed there are people dense enough not to figure out what's wrong with smoking in an "open space" in such a situation, not to mention some who will indulge in the profanity of actually blowing smoke in others' faces. It is one thing to decide what's right and what's wrong for one's health and another to decide what's right and what's wrong for another's.