Furthermore the Monroe Doctrines, "Messing Around" is different then having constructive, mutually beneficial agreements between nations that advance the cause of civilization."  So I don't know if the Monroe Doctrine has anything to do with Trade.

Ben

Government is not trade, it is the single largest hinderance to it.

Free trade was possible long before government got involved.  Marco Polo anyone?

You guys need to go back and read Jarhead_22's post, I think you are all missing something.
"You must understand, therefore, that there are two ways of fighting: by law or by force.  The first way is natural to men, and the second to beasts.  But as the first often proves inadequate one must needs have recourse to the second."  Niccolo Machiavelli in "The Prince."

Post from zazou -

There's absolutely nothing I don't understand about the situation you little turd! You say go to another man's book to understand something that you don't care to explain yourself.

Why? Because you have no intellect to explain it for yourself? If THIS is the 'real knowledge' that you libertarians possess over all others, then it quite simply no knowledge at all!

Just go ahead and let Bin Laden run America's foreign policy for us? We seem to have done so
badly on our own?

You're so screwed up you don't even realize it!

Eric The(IfThatWasAHistoryLesson,YouGetAn'F'!)Hun[>]:)]

Post from Fuzzbean -

So Bill Clinton is the only President the United States has had for the past fifty years?

If you hate America so much that you regard it as the [u]only[/u] country that is swayed by internal polls, contributions from citizen groups, and the like, why don't you just say so?

As a debating society (which it will ALWAYS be) the Libertarian Party leaves a helluva lot to be desired.

Eric The(YouGuysScareMe,ButThankGodYou'llNeverWin)Hun[>]:)]

Post from robino -

If that's a lesson, it's a pretty piss-poor one!

I assume you mean President Reagan was a great president, but then you imply that giving money/weapons to Israel was a mistake?

During the Cold War, giving money/weapons to Israel was a mistake? How so, oh great Teacher?

BTW, I'm not certain that the amount Israel received from the United States during Reagan's terms in office was anything more or less than his predecessors, or his successors, gave. Do you have the numbers showing otherwise?

And why was giving money/weapons to Israel such a mistake? Because it pissed off Brezhnev or because it pissed off the Bin Ladens of the Middle East?

And why should we care who it was that was pissed off? Shouldn't America have the right to decide who its friends are, and how much our friends should be helped? That is what our ideas concerning national soverignty are all about, right?

And why am [b]I[/b] an example of how we should all be trusting of government? WTF do I have to do with our government?  Hmmmmm?

Eric The(You,Sir,NeedToGoBackToSchool)Hun[>]:)]

Post from Fuzzbean -

Absolutely! Read this sentence and tell us what YOU think -

If we punish Bin Laden for what he has done, it will only feed the desire for vengeance on the part of other terrorists! And create new ones to boot!

[u][b]That sounds a lot like letting Bin Laden off the hook to me. Hmmmm?[/b][/u]

Eric The(YouDidReadBrowne'sArticleDidn'tYou?)Hun[>]:)]

Post from zazou -

Yeah, like Marco Polo was sent along his way with financial assistance from the Republic Of Venice, and a letter from Pope Gregory X!

Kinda like the financial assistance given by the Kingdom of Castille and Aragon. Christopher Columbus anyone?

Even more to the point, the kind of government assistance to private enterprise given by the Jefferson Administration. Lewis and Clark anyone?

Jeepers, zazou, don't you ever fact check anything?

Eric The(ISupposeNot)Hun[>]:)]

You know I've avoided these posts like the plague, but I've really heard just about enough shit. Eric you post nothing but I hate Harry Browne, Libertarianss are ignorant or fucking Israel is great posts. You seem to think that your the only person with a valuable opinion or that deserves to be treated with any respect whatsoever. You endlessly slam anyone who disagrees with you and try to invalidate their opinion with belittling comments. It's just an asshole way to behave in general and it's easy to do from behind a keyboard, but if any human ever treated me with the lack of respect you treat others with I would lose my fucking temper. You want to support Israel? Sweet, you write the fucking check, but don't ask me to support policy that I wasn't alive to have a say in and don't agree with. You want to kill you some ragheads? Get on the boat tough guy!

I am going to become a republican because the libertarians have the outdated beliefs of the isolationist founding fathers.

Join with me fellow GOPers on Wednesday October 24 to celebrate the anniversary of the only organization that promotes the agenda of a  modern world.

By no means do I agree with everything Eric posts, and some of it I disagree with very strongly, but it seems to me that he gets ugly in proportion to how ugly folks get with him. Yeah, he's an opinionated son of a gun. But read back through this thread and see how shitty people get when their particular pinata is whacked. Seems pretty proportional to me.

If you can't take the heat, stay out of the furnace. Your mileage may vary. Void where prohibited by law. 100% man made materials. Objects in mirror are larger than they appear. Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. Do not shine laser directly into eye.

Let's see Harry Browne is an idiot, Liberals are Ignorant, Isreal is a great country. These are universal facts, especially the one about liberals. And you disagree, because...

The Libs have some good ideas, but I don’t think a change in foreign policy on our part or an apology for our past evil deeds will affect the situation in the Middle East. In order for this type of policy to work, you have to assume you are dealing with rational individuals. Everything we’re seeing as of late leads me to believe that we are dealing with extremely irrational -- if not fanatical -- individuals. How does one present his case to people like this? We are dealing with people who have no access to the media, literature, varied thought and religion, etc. From birth, they are raised in an extremely hard-line fashion, with hateful propaganda occupying a large part of their primary curriculum. They actively seek a holy way with the West with the ultimate goal being the subjugation of all non-Muslims. In a perfect world, one could go on with his life, simply ignoring the fanatics. But they insist on bringing their war to us. As a nation, we have interests, and at this time our interests call for the extermination of these fanatics.

Post from hatebreed -

Where do you suppose I went wrong with this thread, hmmm? Let me ask you, do you believe that the United States government was responsible for the deaths of 6,000 American citizens? 'Cause if you do, then you are indeed an a-hole. Simple as that.

If you don't believe that, then WTF's your problem? I do believe that the folks here can defend themselves properly without you coming to their defense. They are big boys and girls, I would imagine.

Now just when did the invective begin to fly?
In libertyof76's first 'EricTheHun Shut the 'F'Up' post? No?

Then possibly Garand_Shooter's diatribe against me for attacking the Libertarian Party? When I didn't even mention the LP in my post at all!

Or maybe zazou in his posts?

I never attacked anyone personally until I was attacked by them first![:D]

See how fair and considerate I am!

And as for you, dear hatebreed, let me see...

Quite simply, I don't hate Harry Browne, I just think he's a faux-patriot that loves to hear himself rattle. I know I'm not alone in this 'cause even he is defensive about the amount of controversy his position has engendered among his erstwhile supporters!

I don't consider libertarians ignorant at all, as I consider myself a libertarian Republican. The Libertarian Party has found itself on the wrong side of history on numerous issues, such as:

* unlimited immigration (boy, you can hear the reverse gears grinding even now on that one!)

* death penalty

* isolationism today (just how would we repay the Bin Ladens of this world for their crimes if we didn't have worldwide support in general, and Pakistani, Uzbekistani, Russian and Bahrainian support in particular, for what we're doing at present in Afghanistan)

But the main problem with the LP is that the Party is over, it's just a debating society, and not a political party that can ever win anything! Just ask Hon. Ron Paul (R-Tx) about that!

And Israel may not be great, but then they don't have to be. There simply the only reliable friend we have in the Middle East.

That's just your opinion of course, and you're free to express it. See. Don't you feel better already?

And the really great thing about the internet is you can lose your freaking temper and get away with it! So feel free to unload!

BTW what part of 'freedom of expression' don't you understand?  Or does that only apply to 'hatebreed-approved free speech'?

Eric The(GetAGrip,LoseTheHate)Hun[>]:)]

Harry Browne?!?!

Sounds like something out of my a$$

I was probably hasty in my reply as i've had some beers tonight....ok lots of beer!
None the less, yes I do think our policy played a part in the attacks. If that makes me an asshole so be it. Maybe it's not the "in" opinion but fuck it. Way I see it, if we bomb a country it's their fault, and if they bomb us it's their fault. At some point insight into a possible role we played in pissing so many people off may be called for. These aren't the first people we've pissed off, they're just the first to act on it on such a large scale.

I liken it to a druggy who continually has hard luck and continually pushes blame elsewhere. His life will never change until he looks inwards for the answer. Same with America, we can kill Bin laden as much as we want, but terrorism will take a serious decline when we look into our policy and not until.
Failure to accept accountability for ones own errs is a serious character flaw and Americans suffer it big time. America is not lilly white in all this. That's all you'll hear me say on this whole thing. I basically just tire of your endless pro Israel posts. Like I said you send the check. But don't take it from me. anyway i apologize for my rash attitude, like I said I'm buzzed. That's my .02 cents, even if they are soaked in booze.

That's quite all right, hatebreed, I respect your candor. I'm a tad dangerous myself behind the keyboard and 'under the influence.'

With respect to the other, let me just say that if history has taught us anything, it's that we learn nothing from history.

When Gen. Black Jack Pershing put down Islamic terrorism in the Philippines back in the early part of the 20th Century, his methods stopped such terrorism for more than 40 years!

Sure enough, Islamic terrorism is back again in the Philippines, but there was a respite of 40 years, and that's just something else for which the General can be proud!

We've been executing murderers in the United States for almost the entirety of our history, save for a period between 1972 and 1976. While we don't have any ideas of the true numbers before centralized record keeping began in 1930, there must have been several tens of thousands.

Since 1930, approximately 4,500 Americans have been executed by state and federal governments!

Yet capital crimes continue to be committed!

Should we just throw up our hands and surrender?

I don't think so, because even if the death penalty was [u]not[/u] a deterrant (I believe it is), it is nevertheless a necessary evil in a free society.

So, too, is our nation's foreign policy. I suppose if foreign countries could never hurt us, if Americans refused to travel overseas, and no foreigners ever came to our shores, if American business enterprises never left our borders, and no foreign businesses operated in the United States, then and only then could we disband the State Department in complete confidence that 'foreign relations' meant nothing to us and could never hurt us.

Until such messianic times as those, we will need to deal with foreign nations, and when we do, God help us, we better do it from a position of strength, which brings me to my last serious disagreement with the Libertarian Party -

We need a strong and well-supplied military!

Eric The(Period!)Hun[>]:)]

Post from zazou -

I think I've heard quite enough from you two super patriots! The rest of your post, zazou, is ludicrous!

So if Bin Laden didn't kill your kith and kin you've got no problem with him?

You think the widows and orphans of the 6,000 American victims in this tragedy should be forced to go and take their own vengeance out on Bin Laden themselves?

Surely you jest, even about so serious a topic, you simply must be joking? Right? Say it's a joke!

Now let me get personal - go f*** yourselves!

Eric The(AndTheCamelsYouBothRodeInOn!)Hun[>]:)]

I am gonna post one last reply and I'm through. i'm surprised I can even type. Our foreign policy as far as funding wars and our trade agreements or whatever with other nations have nearly no need to cross paths in my opinion. I don't fancy myself a libertarian or anything else for that matter, but I understand the point they try and make. Your religion and your fury over the loss of American life are clouding your judgement in my honest opinion. We have been pitting these people against one another and supplying one side with bombs to kill the other for far too long. Their little "holy wars" in no way relate to the liberty or jeopardize the liberty of america. If we side with Israel it is reasonable to assume we will also have the same enemies, an undertaking which was entirely our own choice. If we did not want these people for enemies we should not have sown the seeds. Let Israel fight their own wars. No part of the constitution mentions anything about our liberty "and that of Israel." Take it or leave it, either you support the constitution and the principles it was founded on or you don't. If the constitution is to be taken literally when pertaining to your second ammendmant rights, then it should be taken literally in every other aspect as well or we can't fault the libs and other assorted antis for their views as they pertain to the forfathers "having no way of knowing how america would be in 200 years."

One last point. You don't honestly believe these peole "hate us for our freedom" do you? It clearly goes far beyond that to very specific and precise animosities. to believe otherwise would be liken to the perception that a gun LITERALLY kills people. It's time to recognize that our policy has consequence and decide that that policy is not worth the loss of
American life or that it is and quit bitchimg when we reep as we have sown. Again just the rantings of a not so sober guy. I hope that my views are more clear now, though I have serious doubt I've spoken as well as I'd like to under normal circumstances.

Hatebreed

Well sir! you are in the wrong party, as the libertarian party platform specifically says abortion should not be made illegal!

"we believe the government should be kept out of the question"
[url]http://www.lp.org/issues/platform/womerigh.html[/url]
If the government can't regulate it (i.e., it's "out of the question"), then the government can't make it illegal...

Hatebreed, first let me say that you type quite well for one inebriated! Well written responses.

That said, perhaps you and others could explain how U.S. foreign policy/interventionism justifies the terrorist attacks in Australia (Christian churches firebombed, national monuments defaced with pro-bin Laden slogans, ship with large numbers of M.E. "refugees" who attacked Austrailian soldiers and threw fecal matter at them)???!!! Europe has undergone these attacks for decades. How does OUR fereign policy dictate that the European Parliament and NATO HQ should become targets (these were foiled before they were actually attacked)??? These attacks/targets had/have been tied directly to the current campaign waged by bin Laden and Al Quaida, so how does the foreign policy of the USA garner justification of these non-US targets?

I do not seek a fight, but a clearer understanding of how these facts are left out of the "Blame the USA/Gov't" crowd's arguments, and how you would address them.

Thanx.

[b][size=1]Don Out[/size=1][/b]
[b][size=4][red]AIRBORNE!
2/505 PIR
H-MINUS[/red][/size=4][/b]

Excellent points [b]11H1P[/b], but I think your questions should be directed to Messrs. Browne, zazou, and trickshot, rather than hatebreed.

He at least seems to be genuinely searching for answers!

Eric The(ButTheOthers...Well,Let'sNotGoThere)Hun
[>]:)]

Then you, sir, are a shitty American.
Go hide.  We'll defend you freedom and tell you when it's safe to come out.  While you're waiting, enjoy the economic fruits of those who contribute, and those who died.

The biggest flaw that Libertarians suffer from is that they live in a constant state of denial. They know that the society they pine for is an unattainable Utopia, but they don't care. It's not possible, given reality and human nature.  Those who point out that it's impossible are labeled "cowards".  
That Utopia would be great, were it possible.
It's not.  
Deal with reality.

(Anyone who "justifies" or "rationalizes" the WTC attack, is no different than the whiny liberals who say it wasn't the murderer's fault, "he had a rough childhood", he's suffering from "black rage", etc..)

Here's the typical Cali-leftist's take on the whole 'war on terrorism' thing. Tell me how her views differ any from Harry Browne's, if at all.

Her commentary is found at: [url]http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1014-01.htm[/url]

Excerpts from: No Glory in Unjust War on the Weak, [i]by Barbara Kingsolver.[/i]

"We've answered one terrorist act with another, raining death on the most war-scarred, terrified populace that ever crept to a doorway and looked out. The small plastic boxes of food we also dropped are a travesty. It is reported that these are untouched, of course--Afghanis have spent their lives learning terror of anything hurled at them from the sky."

"I am going to have to keep pleading against this madness. I'll get scolded for it, I know.. I'm told I am dangerous because I might get in the way of this holy project we've undertaken to keep dropping heavy objects from the sky until we've wiped out every last person who could potentially hate us."

"We remind ourselves in plain English that the last time we got to elect somebody, the majority of us, by a straight popular-vote count, did not ask for the guy who is currently telling us we will win this war and not be "misunderestimated."...There are millions of us, surely, who know how to look life in the eye, however awful things get, and still try to love it back."

"It is not naive to propose alternatives to war. We could be the kindest nation on Earth, inside and out. I look at the bigger picture and see that many nations with fewer resources than ours have found solutions to problems that seem to baffle us. I'd like an end to corporate welfare so we could put that money into ending homelessness, as many other nations have done before us. I would like a humane health-care system organized along the lines of Canada's. I'd like the efficient public-transit system of Paris in my city, thank you. I'd like us to consume energy at the modest level that Europeans do, and then go them one better. I'd like a government that subsidizes renewable energy sources instead of forcefully patrolling the globe to protect oil gluttony. [b]Because, make no mistake, oil gluttony is what got us into this holy war, and it's a deep tar pit[/b]. I would like us to sign the Kyoto agreement today, and reduce our fossil-fuel emissions with legislation that will ease us into safer, less gluttonous, sensibly reorganized lives. If this were the face we showed the world, and the model we helped bring about elsewhere, I expect we could get along with a military budget the size of Iceland's."

"How can I take anything but a child's view of a war in which men are acting like children? What they're serving is not justice, it's simply vengeance....The World Court and the entire Muslim world stand ready to judge Osama bin Laden and his accessories. [b]If we were to put a few billion dollars into food, health care and education instead of bombs, you can bet we'd win over enough friends to find out where he's hiding[/b]."

"We need to take a moment's time out to review the monstrous waste of an endless cycle of retaliation. The biggest weapons don't win this one, guys. When there are people on Earth willing to give up their lives in hatred and use our own domestic airplanes as bombs, it's clear that we can't out-technologize them."

Now, does that sound like someone you know? Is it perhaps your own views on the subject?

Eric The(SoundsLikeHarryBrowne,TheFemaleVersion)Hun[>]:)]

Not enough TRUE capitalists out there. That's the problem.
We need markets, GLOBAL markets.  We need to impose our will, GLOBALLY, to ensure these markets are opened.  We've been doing this for a while, and it works.

Hippies and libertarians want to retreat into some cozy little world of bazaars and trading posts. No thanks.
I prefer my country to be a SUPERPOWER.
I see no reason to apologize for that.

I was complimenting his communication skills while inebriated, as well as his example of clarifying his position with the "our policy, [b]in part[/b]" statement being more fact oriented than a blanket condemnation that refuses to see evidence not in support of one's position.  I did not single out any member, as there are questions that need to be observed/asked by all sides in this debate, as well as valid points made by all. IOW, we ALL need to see a more panoramic view of the situation.

Thanx for making me clarify, ya bastige!!![:D] (Need more coffee to wake up the last 2 brain cells, and get them on speaking terms again)

[b][size=1]Don Out[/size=1][/b]
[b][size=4][red]AIRBORNE!
2/505 PIR
H-MINUS[/red][/size=4][/b]

Major, I know we all have differences of opinion , but you hit this dead on. This would be no different than East India Company having its own Army and Navy, and whether some here like it or not, the US Gov't has a Constitutional Duty to engage in and protect free trade with other nations.

Good point, Sir!

[b][size=1]Don Out[/size=1][/b]
[b][size=4][red]AIRBORNE!
2/505 PIR
H-MINUS[/red][/size=4][/b]

posted by Eric(productofbrainwashedamerican) The Hun:

-"And Israel may not be great, but then they don't have to be. There simply the only reliable friend we have in the Middle East."

There our friend? hmmmmm

ooooohhhh, i understand now...jeez you had me thinking THERE.

Yeah, I would consider Israel our friend, as much as I consider China, our friend...but you would not agree.

What's funny is that you actually beleive everything our Government is telling you, and that gives you the Eric(theperfectpuppetaward)TheHun.

Robino(itisnotI,thatneedstogobacktoschool)TheHun[>]:)]

Damn straight, [b]Major-Murphy[/b], it's worked for us in the past, it'll still work for us in the future.

These others are simply weak sisters who squeal at the thought of being challenged in the rough and tumble world of global politics.

If it ain't the Barbary Pirates, the Brits (before we made peace), the Kaiser, the Nazis, the Imperial Japanese, and on and on, it will always be somebody, somewhere, standing in our way.

The object is to knock that 'somebody' on his ass, and carry on!  If that's too much to ask, then you don't really want to be a superpower anyway, right?

Eric The(libertarian,WithASmall'l')Hun[>]:)]

Sir, would you ensure the safety of your own family before your neighbor's? And once that is done, would you then do all you could to protect/help them in time of need?

I don't think anyone here is swallowing the gov't line blindly, but placing themselves in the situation, and bringing it down to personal allegory, would help in evaluating the situation.

That said, some here express blind hatreds that rival those held by the Islamic Extremists that attacked the West, and the US in particular. I pray for those whom this shoe fits.

[b][size=1]Don Out[/size=1][/b]
[b][size=4][red]AIRBORNE!
2/505 PIR
H-MINUS[/red][/size=4][/b]

The Libertarian party has shot itself in the foot many times.   Too many average Joe's will not go along with some of their views & that is the problem with their ability to gain more support.

They (libs) are a easy place for Liberals like Bill Maher to use to claim they aren't liberal.

Right now is the wrong time for Browne to be saying "Our government brought about the deaths"
Even if in some philosophical way of reasoning he has a point, it sure would have been better left alone at this time.

By saying this now he most likely has pushed people away from his party rather than attract them.

Post from robino -

Well, when history's lessons were being taught, you must have been in the ladies room....I OTOH was paying attention.

From the article by Janine Zacahria, Jerusalem Post, 11 Oct 2001:

"Asked about the Israeli concerns on NBC's Today Show yesterday, Powell said: '[b]Israel is a strong friend of the United States[/b]. We will always support Israel and its security. It is the democratic nation in that region that we absolutely treasure as a friend. And so there should be no concern on the part of any Israeli citizen or leader that the United States would ever do anything to 'sell them out' or to trade away their security."

Now we can either listen to you, [i]mein kleine Schnickle Fritz[/i], or we can listen to the US Secretary of State.

I think we should listen to the better informed fellow!

Eric The(AndThatSimplyAin'tYou)Hun[>]:)]

Naw, why don't you become a Democrat.  You can do much more damage to a party you support than one you oppose, and I would rather see you do it to them.

IF that was the case, you would be right.  However, you ignore the fact that the REASON we tried to bomb Al Quaida in the FIRST place was that they ALREADY bombed us.  The WTC attack isn't some "retaliation" for bombing Afghanistan and the Sudan, it's the CONTINUATION of the UNPROVOKED attacks that included the first WTC bombing, the Tanzania embassy bombing and the attack on the USS Cole.
Al Quaida does not hate us because we attacked them, they hate us because we have troops in Saudi Arabia.  Period.

That seems to be the same flaw from which many of the posters on this message board suffer.  They want utopia and if anyone says anything that differs from their utopia, that person is a communist or whatever.

I think the real psychology is this:  The Middle Eastern Dictatorships(and they are) focus the hate of their citizens(which if the citizens are in the know is focused on the government) on the United States in order to preserve their own regimes.  They manipulate their peoples emotions away from the center of power in their own countries. Even though it is the dictatorial regimes and their inherent lack of tools for creating a prosperous nation which is the true reason for the peoples hatred.  If a Middle Eastern Nation were to have a land sale(on the cheap) and open up their countries to private enterprise, and educate their people truthfully( Allah would probably not mind having engineers in his flock) they would get busy building a better country and forget about hating Americans. They would tend to their own business. Just as Americans do day in and day out.

Ben

Furthermore, going out on a limb , however improbably. In the long term it will be better for the people in the ME for them to have their governments toppled and REPUBLICs put into place instead. I think it will be better for America in the long run as well. I know this will not happen. They would have to let each other live in peace, I don't know if they can do this.  They have no respect for a reasoning mind.  And if it would probably please god a great deal to see peace in the middle east. And a happy wealthly people enjoying the fruits of their own labors.

Benjamin

Say there's a big guy on your street.  Sometimes when you walk down the street, he punches you in the nose.  You wonder why.  After looking into your own behavior and patterns, you realize that he only punches you when you wear your red hat.
Should you:

1) ...stop wearing the hat, because your wearing of the hat is what caused the attacks.

2) ...talk to your neighbor and find out why he dislikes red hats, then see if you can work out a compromise.

3) ...hit him so hard that he never dreams of fucking with you ever again.

Post from Garand_Shooter -

Well, then, what are the percentages of fault you are willing to assess in this matter? 50-50?

I, benighted Patriot and child-like Republican that I am, believe we bear absolutely no friggin fault whatsoever!

If you sell a gun to another man, and then you sell him the ammo to use it, under what theory of natural law do you suppose that you're guilty when he uses it?  Whether he uses it lawfully or unlawfully, you bear no guilt.

Why then does the United States not have the right as a sovereign nation to sell weapons to whomsoever it desires, and to reasonably expect that if such weapons are used, only the country actually using the weapons should be held responsible?  Yet if Israel uses weapons bought lawfully under international law from the US, then the Bin Ladens may use [u]that[/u] as a rationale for attacking, not our government, but our citizens?

Excuse me, but I thought the Libertarian Party touted its strong committment to personal responsibility. Where's the cry for assessing these crimes against Bin Laden, his crew, and their supporters? You won't find any but the most obsequious mention of THAT in Browne's article!

So, let me get this straight, we just give up? Simply because the undefended borders can't be 100% safeguarded, we simply throw up our hands in dispair?

I think you need to read about the 'border' wars that are presently being fought in Texas, by simple country farmers against the coyotes, the illegal aliens, and drug smugglers on the Texas side of the Rio Grande. Look at the latest issue of Texas Monthly magazine for starters.

Eric The(ButIfYouSayTheWarIsLostBeforeItEvenBegins,HowWillWeEverWin?)Hun[>]:)]

You should add: "Caution, hot coffee my be hot" and my favorite dissicant bag warning "Do not eat". Then the all time best gasoline pump warning: "Do not drink".

Yep, we as a society are in deep Do-Do.
"Do not eat the Do-Do...."
Or, on second thought, go ahead...eat up...:)

Rich

^This bears repeating^

Yes, it must be the hat. It couldn't be that the neighbor is just a sociopathic a$$hole whose own life is so pathetic that he's looking for anyone with a hat nicer than his to punch.

Hound here...let me take the side of the Libertarian party that is not represented by Mr.Brown...immigration--unlimited but quit paying people to live here and supporting them-come here and get a job. Abortion--personal view-I support a woman's right to kill anything she wants, but do not BS me and call it a choice and be prepared for the Mindf*ck you have to go through after you pay someone to kill your child. And why in the hell do women's organizations fight to pay old-white men(doctors)money to help them with their problems...a morning after pill is all you need-
Take responsibility for your own body. Big government--bad idea..policy changes and outright insanity in our relationships with other countries. As a representative of a multi-national corporation, I can't think of one regulation that helps me do my business, I can think of a lot that hinder my business. As for the rest of the babble I have seen about libertarians...I think the biggest problem that the libertarians have with gov't is that the gov't does things that would be unthinkable to an individual "Of the peole and for the people" is no longer recognized. And as for the idea of people taking action against Osama...I could organize and field a force with the people I know to do it...couldn't a lot of you do the same? I am sure everyone wants to throw fireballs now, so I will try to answer.....

First, if you are going to quote me, quote me.  Don't doctor is so I fit your mold.  The response was



Second, it is not my responsibility to educate you.  I also posted the book as a resource for you to use.  I guess you want a book report instead.

Third, you have chosen to be angry and are making this personal.  'F' you' this and 'you little turd' that.  I you have come that point in regard to my posts I could tell you the sky was blue you would argue it.

So, you see fit to reconstruct my posts into what you think I will say.  You insist on putting words in my mouth to demonize me.  And you have taken up the tack of verbally insulting me in the betweens.

So flame on, Eric.  I really just don't care to get into a pissing match with you.  

Actually zaz, if you IN ANY WAY agree with the above statement, the "FUCK YOU" is very approriate.
[:)]

Post from Major-Murphy -

4) ...never leave your friggin house ever again.

...which is apparently what some on the Board would invaribly choose. Don't worry you can always call for delivery, catering, and then there's www.groceryworks.com for the groceries.

There's call girls, private duty nurses, yard boys, and an assortment of others who can assist you in your cloistered life very ably.

Eric The(AnotherHomeRunThereMajor!)Hun[>]:)]

OK, now i respect that.  i do not agree, but i can see why you have your view  point.  You believe it is OK to impose our will (i gather you militarily) on other sovereign nations to get what you want, econimically etc, even if it is at their detriment.  if you believe that, that it is OK to threaten them with force, I applaud you for your honesty.  and you are right, it does work, for you and the USA, but not everyone.

I just don;t think that it is OK.  I would not want Japanese [sic] warships in SF bay, threatening to blow up whatever, to ensure they get a good price on Levis.  

I respect that opinion.  I don't, however, agree.

I don't.  At all.  That whole section was the exception.

Once again, let me state, we should turn Bin Laden and his group into glass statues and then fill them full of holes just to be sure. We need to strike swiftly and hard so anyone whothinks of doing these deeds is scared shitless.  

I also believe that as freedom loving Americans we need to examine our policy and be sure there is nothing we are doing to justly fuel their hatred.  Their hatred is irrational, but it does exist  We need to be sure that we aren't bullying a nation militarily for our own gains at their expense, that it is isn't the proverbial 'straw that broke the camels back.'  A change in policy may mean things will cost more but if that is the correct and moral solution, we need to be the instgators because they will not.

is that a little more clear?