Just open up the dictionary (or use Dictionary.com) and you’ll understand:
Terrorist: a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
Terrorism: the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
OK, so we know what’s a terrorist. Now let’s see what’s a politician and what they do:
Politician: a person who holds a political office.
Law: any written or positive rule or collection of rules prescribed under the authority of the state or nation.
Taxes: a burdensome charge, obligation, duty, or demand.
the French revolutionary governments who coined the word terrorism by instituting systematic state terror against the population of France in the 1790s, killing thousands…
…so actually, yes, it was the French revolutionary politicians who started this.
So, its coercion (law) or anarchy (liberty), eh? That might make a Republican’s head explode.
They are not terrorists.
Propagantists pandering to fear and stupidity? Yea, verily – but thats not the same thing.
I won’t waste my time reading that drivel, but for hardcore libertarians like this, I have a few questions:
– Do you refuse to drive on the roads paid for by the ill-gotten revenue called taxes?
– Do you refuse to go to the municipal hospitals because they, too, were paid for (at least in part) by those evil taxes?
– When your smoke detector went off and flames were shooting from the oil fire on your stove, did you refuse entry to the firemen and women who tried to save your house?
Unless you did all of the above, please STFU about calling anybody who dares believe differently than you a “terrorist.”
Please, too, work towards reasonable, logical, civil changes to this society to closer match your libertarian ideals. But this BS of whining about anybody who dares collect a tax because a portion is spent on something your all-knowing mind does not like is, well, bullcrap.
responsibility?
The problems come with WHOM to blame.
from president
Congress
representatives
Pentagon
FBI
CIA
PDQ…and all the rest of the alphabet..
Only 1-2 presidents LIVEd by the moto “THE BUCK STOPS HERE”
#4, the money is in theory stolen from people, so it is not hypocritical to use gov’t services even if you oppose it.
Cherman, taking a political stand against something, and then enjoying the rewards of that thing you fight against, makes someone a whiner and a hypocrit.
Taking a stand, by definition, requires sacrifice.
How to identify a nutcase: “the money is in theory stolen from people.” /// Ummm, baby Cherman, please inform us how “any” society above a few dozen people can better exist than with the consent of the governed in all things including the creation and distribution of a tax base? When you determine your “philosophy” exists only by stalwart lack of examination, surely you must change it?
No?
It truly is dogma then?
Heh, heh.
Stupid LIEbertarians. Playing in their own poop, thinking its artisitic.
Not to beat this dead horse, but YES, its entirely HYPOCRITICAL to recognize the benefits of those services you find yourself USING and yet then still hold on to the flushed idea you/society would be “better off” without said services.
Truly inane.
Bush is a war criminal, but the winners of a war, won or ongoing, rarely convict their leaders for successes achieved. We’ll have to see what happens to Tony Blair.
If the Terrorists could win the war, our leaders could be convicted of war crimes. But the Terrorists can never win this war in the convential sense. The Terrorists don’t have a vast arsenal and a powerful fighting force. They are the equivelent of a few Fire Ants that bite at our collective skin, causing us to flinch. That’s why the Terrorists use terrorism, to inflict minor damage that receives a lot of attention.
We will defeat the Terrorists when they join our world of plenty and mirth.
Adam Curry would say that our corporate overlords want to kill us all, and as the Terrorists are on the fring of their societies, the Terrorists are indirectly being crushed the force of corporate greed and the stark reality of a harsh life in a collectively failed society.
I think Jack Liberty knows Jack about forming a logical argument. Where in his definitions does it imply that politicians use violence for the purpose of coercion? Lest we not forget that the populace vote for politicians unlike terrorists. Furthermore, politicians are required to abide by the laws they pass (or at least, are supposed to be). There are no laws or rules with terrorists.
#8: You show your own naivety to claim that the current way of distributing services through coercion and violence is the only way humanity can do so. It’s a common fallacy to state that the way things are is the only way it can be.
#11–tryingtothink: name that other way.
There have been, at least, one President and one VP (?) who have claimed that whatever the President does *is* the law.
Terrorists make the ultimate, but irrational, sacrifice when they commit suIcide during an act against us. Gandhi choose a more inspirational path.
#9,
and WE WERE terrorists in the war of independence. BUSH instigated the war in Iraq..
#10,
Umm, and 90% of the people in Washington DC werent Elected.. Look at all the assistants, information gatherers, the PENTAGON, CIA, FBI…and soforth.. all the APPOINTED jobs..
#11,
its called PORK BARREL..If you dont pass this bill, I wont BACK your LAW.. Also the threat of the USA finding a reason to INVADE..
#13,
Problem comes with the idea, that LAW is for 1 person…It HAS TO BE for everyone, no matter race/religion/sex/anything.. THAT is what our country is SUPPOSED to stand for. There is not to be a law for the individual, only the gathering/interaction of people.
All I wanna know is where do i sign up for the Hunt? Marksman ready to go Sir!
This is slightly worse than the old “if pro is the opposite of con then what’s the opposite of progress?”
This version only makes sense if you think taxes are inherently bad or that the government doesn’t have the authority to collect taxes.
If Bush is a war criminal then so is Barack Hussein Obama, right? Obama continues to the same policies as Bush and has reneged on doing the things he said he was going to do during the campaign. We are still fighting in Iraq. Obama has escalated his terrorism in Afghanistan. Gitmo is still open for business. And to top it all off, Obama is waging his terrorism on the people of the United States with his terrorist policies of enslaving us under the guise of health care reform.
And where are the libtards on here pointing out the hypocrisy of Obama on using the NUCLEAR OPTION to pass health care? Obama and Bider were both ardently against the NUCLEAR OPTION when Bush was president and congress was in control of the Pubes.
Obama in 2005 said this about the pubes using the nuclear option:
President Barack Obama: “And what I worry about would be you essentially still have two chambers – the House and the Senate – but you have simply majoritarian, absolute power on either side. And that’s just not what the Founders intended.” (April 25, 2005)
And Biden:
Vice President Joe Biden: “This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab….I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.” (May 23, 2005)
And Reid:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: “The right to extended debate is never more important than when one party controls Congress and the White House. In these cases a filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.” (May 18, 2005)
OF course we’d never read about this about face by the democrats on this leftist site but I thought I’d just point out just how disingenuous the democrats are.
#17: Those tactics are used by both parties, and have been for decades. You’re the pot that is calling the kettle black…
JESUS!! Why do you keep posting this shit from Jack Moron?? Is he your son/nephew/cousin that you’re trying to make into a famous blogger?? He’s 15 years old for fuck’s sake, who gives a shit what that skull full of mush thinks?? And for that matter, who gives s shit what YOU think?? You should both hang yourselves in your closets, now THAT’S something I would like to see…
Get your own damn blog, get off this one, I swear, I gotta find out what Dvorak likes about you that he lets you post here, I might actually have to stop reading this blog.
CON,
Its easier to erase 1 person then it is 2..
AND as posted many time before..this is JUST A BLOG. its here to get people to BITCH/COMPLAIN/ARGUE/DEBATE/POST nothing more.
Hours pass idly by and no LIEbertarian as yet to offer the alternative to slavery thru taxation. The concept is as mythical as Tirion himself.
You’d think the inability/impossibility of a response would cause a rethink of the proposition, but I suspect we won’t be so lucky.
Libertarianism has a lot to offer, but when it becomes dogma we get our current bank failures and the ruin of the world economy, still yet to have played out, yet these fools keep pushing the dogma.
“Let’s go step by step”
“Let’s not kill the goose that lays the golden egg.”
“Free market capitalism is the best system in the world.”
The watchwords of these vermin.
This is a 99.675% non sequitur.
There is no:
A is a/includes a/B
B is a/includes a/c
—
Therefor A is/includes B
…form of syllogism here.
I’m beginning to think Cherman’s mother doesn’t know what he is posting, and his logic teacher needs to give him an F double minus.
Huh, huh. Huh, huh. Huh, huh. You said “Dict.” Huh, huh.
The Warden said,
And where are the libtards on here pointing out the hypocrisy of Obama on using the NUCLEAR OPTION to pass health care? Obama and Bider were both ardently against the NUCLEAR OPTION when Bush was president and congress was in control of the Pubes.
Of course it is only the “nuclear option” when Democrats do it because the Republicans have used reconciliation several times and it was just the rules of the Senate. That’s how the Bush tax cuts were passed.
And it has been used to pass health care in this country several times including COBRA. …I’ll give you three guesses as to what that “R” in the Consolidated Omnibus Budget R_____________ Act of 1985 of stands for…
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201002240063
#2, As it is impossible to live the utopian dream no government, you must have one. However, it should be restricted as per the U.S. Constitution.
Therefore, equating Liberty with Anarchy is a non-sequitur.
I am willing to live within the bounds as specified by the U.S. Constitution. I am not willing to live within the expanded bounds where I have no choice but to follow what are clearly violations of said document without speaking my mind. Thus, I try to effect change through legal means and educating the public on the difference.
#4, These are all strawmen because they are not federal functions. They are State and local functions. Until you learn the difference, I would refrain from commenting on things you obviously know nothing about.