Gunman Shoots Arkansas Democratic Party Chair [Archive]

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 07:54 PM

By ANDREW DeMILLO, Associated Press Writer
26 minutes ago

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - A gunman entered the Arkansas Democratic Party headquarters Wednesday and shot the party chairman, who was hospitalized in critical condition, authorities said.

The gunman asked to speak to the party chairman, Bill Gwatney, and fired three shots at the office near the state Capitol.

"He came in and went into this office and started shooting," police Lt. Terry Hastings told reporters near the party headquarters.

Gwatney, a former legislator, was in critical condition, Hastings said. Party officials confirmed the victim was Gwatney.

The suspect was chased into Grant County, south of Little Rock, and apprehended after being shot, the police spokesman said. The suspect's condition and motive were not known.

Sarah Lee, a sales clerk at a flower shop across street from the party headquarters, said that around noon Gwatney's secretary ran into the shop and asked someone to call 911.

more ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080813/ap_on_re_us/democratic_party_shooting

Hmmm, and I thought today was going to be a bad day. Things are looking up.

:evil:

AnnEsthesia

08-13-2008, 07:57 PM

What a sick thing to say. I don't care if you were "joking", that is just sick.

I Like Beer

08-13-2008, 07:59 PM

more ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080813/ap_on_re_us/democratic_party_shooting

Hmmm, and I thought today was going to be a bad day. Things are looking up.

:evil:

Ha ha. And he's in critical condition, too!

I hope his family can see the humour in the situation.

Buck Laser

08-13-2008, 08:31 PM

more ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080813/ap_on_re_us/democratic_party_shooting

Hmmm, and I thought today was going to be a bad day. Things are looking up.

:evil:
Disgusting. Not funny. Wouldn't be funny if it were a republican. I couldn't work up a laugh even if it were a libertarian.

potter

08-13-2008, 08:45 PM

more ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080813/ap_on_re_us/democratic_party_shooting

Hmmm, and I thought today was going to be a bad day. Things are looking up.

:evil:

So this is what the GOP division of the country has come to? Assassinating political opponents is "the thing to do"? :unreal:

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 08:47 PM

Hmmm, and I thought today was going to be a bad day. Things are looking up.

Yeah maybe the guy will die and that will really brighten up your day. :shame:

ilikegw

08-13-2008, 08:49 PM

So this is what the GOP division of the country has come to? Assassinating political opponents is "the thing to do"? :unreal:

Why not blame the lunatic who shot the man and not the entire party?

micfranklin

08-13-2008, 08:55 PM

Trying to assassinate people is always an LOL moment.

/sarcasm

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 09:07 PM

Well, let me attempt to clear things up here.

First off, I'm not a Republican, and secondly, I was serious. I live for the few moments of true justice I get to see in this perverted political system.

I don't need to see evidence to know that the State "Democratic" party Chair is a subversive working to undermine the Constitution, and with it, my rights as an individual.

Hooray for justice, Wild west fashion. A fitting punishment for crimes against country, and countrymen.

Sorry folks, but this is how a real Patriot feels when those would enslave him are dispatched to the great beyond.

This is the difference between "nationalist", and "patriot", right here.

AnnEsthesia

08-13-2008, 09:10 PM

Again, it is sick to rejoice in someone being shot. You don't have to like their politics, but to celebrate it is just wrong.

potter

08-13-2008, 09:11 PM

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 09:15 PM

This is the difference between "nationalist", and "patriot", right here.

The action of going in there and shooting is no sign of a patriot, but a terrorist.

suedanim

08-13-2008, 09:15 PM

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 09:16 PM

Hmmmmmm....in an unsettling way...you're making some sense here..... :ponder:

I often have to remind people that our Founding Fathers had to kill to secure the rights they are content to see removed.

Me, I'm more inclined to behave as our Founding Fathers did.

I will not be enslaved, period.

This appears to be the only avenue left for those who feel we can't vote them out of office.

But then, where would they ever get that idea? ( I'm looking at you bipartisans. )

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 09:17 PM

... assuming that too hasn't been corrupted by the right via Diebold.

That's assuming a Hell of a lot these days.

Just sayin...

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 09:17 PM

I often have to remind people that our Founding Fathers had to kill to secure the rights they are content to see removed.

Me, I'm more inclined to behave as our Founding Fathers did.

I will not be enslaved, period.

This appears to be the only avenue left for those who feel we can't vote them out of office.

But then, where would they ever get that idea? ( I'm looking at you bipartisans. )

So your idea is that when you don't get your way, you throw a hissy fit and shoot people?

Blueneck

08-13-2008, 09:19 PM

Shooting an unarmed person isn't really considered courageous these days, is it?

potter

08-13-2008, 09:21 PM

The way Americans solve their complaints with the system is in the voting booth... assuming that too hasn't been corrupted by the right via Diebold.

We need to assume they system has been corrupted and do something about it. Democracy is too important to just "trust" an inherently flawed system.....

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 09:21 PM

So your idea is that when you don't get your way, you throw a hissy fit and shoot people?

I haven't shot anybody, so no, that's a completely false accusation.

I was celebrating the fact that I believe one of the bad guys just got his just reward.

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 09:22 PM

I was celebrating the fact that I believe one of the bad guys just got his just reward.

Alright show me the specific law violations this guy did to deserve being shot. Specifics please.

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 09:24 PM

We need to assume they system has been corrupted and do something about it. Democracy is too important to just "trust" an inherently flawed system.....

You would be overthrowing the current system for a worse system, might makes right. I'd take the system we have to the system that would spawn from just shooting unarmed people.

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 09:25 PM

Alright show me the specific law violations this guy did to deserve being shot. Specifics please.

I have none, but we are speaking of a State Democratic Chairperson here. Guilt by association.

Sadly, I feel I must inform you that I believe the Democratic party is a subversive institution, and this is the type of hostility they are breeding with their above the law approach to law making.

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 09:28 PM

I have none, but we are speaking of a State Democratic Chairperson here. Guilt by association.

Sadly, I feel I must inform you that I believe the Democratic party is a subversive institution, and this is the type of hostility they are breeding with their above the law approach to law making.

So in other words you just support killing people that haven't done anything wrong. Thank you for admitting that you have nothing just the support of killing unarmed people.

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 09:31 PM

So in other words you just support killing people that haven't done anything wrong. Thank you for admitting that you have nothing just the support of killing unarmed people.

Incorrect.

I'm saying that being a State Democratic Party Chairperson, he was heading a subversive institution Hell bent of subverting my Constitutional rights, and therefore, I consider this just reward.

See, I understand that no bipartisan institution will ever take him to court for his crimes against country, and countrymen, and therefore, this is the only way people like myself ever see any shred of true justice.

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 09:40 PM

See, I understand that no bipartisan institution will ever take him to court for his crimes against country, and countrymen, and therefore, this is the only way people like myself ever see any shred of true justice.

That isn't justice, that is the act of a coward.

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 09:44 PM

That isn't justice, that is the act of a coward.

No, the act of cowards were the Democratic, and Republican parties making all but impossible for other parties to get on each States ballot.

What we are seeing here is one of the cowards getting his just reward.

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 09:53 PM

No, the act of cowards were the Democratic, and Republican parties making all but impossible for other parties to get on each States ballot.

And how did they make it all but impossible? Again specifics since you are making the claim.

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 09:56 PM

And how did they make it all but impossible? Again specifics since you are making the claim.

I'm sure you have heard all the stories of the many hoops third parties have to jump through to get on the ballot with the Big Boys.

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 09:58 PM

I'm sure you have heard all the stories of the many hoops third parties have to jump through to get on the ballot with the Big Boys.

Yes I have and they are called "STORIES" for a reason and not facts.

Simple fact of the matter is someone like Ron Paul would have had NO PROBLEM whatsoever getting on the ballots had he run as an independent had he chose to do so.

What it takes is work and money. Since the independents can't even agree amongst themselves who is electable, that is the problem.

That is why this guy that did the shooting is a coward.

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 10:01 PM

Yes I have and they are called "STORIES" for a reason and not facts.

Simple fact of the matter is someone like Ron Paul would have had NO PROBLEM whatsoever getting on the ballots had he run as an independent had he chose to do so.

What it takes is work and money. Since the independents can't even agree amongst themselves who is electable, that is the problem.

That is why this guy that did the shooting is a coward.

Sorry, but pointing to the one exception to the rule does not validate your views in my opinion. Ron Paul was the exception, not the norm.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Elrathin

08-13-2008, 10:05 PM

Sorry, but pointing to the one exception to the rule does not validate your views in my opinion. Ron Paul was the exception, not the norm.

And how was he an exception? What made him an exception? HE gathered support, he could have been on the ballot. If what you are saying is that the independent candidates in the past have had no substance, charisma, or put forth the effort then you would be correct. But that isn't the fault of the Dems or Reps, that is the fault of the Independents.

Stoner

08-13-2008, 10:35 PM

The Democrat just died.

potter

08-13-2008, 10:38 PM

Well, the DNC party chair is dead.

I hope it was a random act of violence or even personal. The divide between reds and blues has grown vast these past few years egged on and encouraged by the two corporate political parties. Corporate political parties..... deliberately dividing the people of this country for political and ultimately monetary gain...and we eat it all up.

If this is what political discourse has come to in this country, put a fork in it folks, we can forget about a democracy cause it's over.

:unreal:

BoogyMan

08-13-2008, 10:48 PM

Wow, this is disturbing. May the poor guy rest in peace and hopefully his family will find some source of comfort.

Stoner

08-13-2008, 10:49 PM

If this is what political discourse has come to in this country, put a fork in it folks, we can forget about a democracy cause it's over.

:unreal:

Over-dramatic. We're not in the realm of that.

potter

08-13-2008, 10:55 PM

Over-dramatic. We're not in the realm of that.

I'll go smoke a fattie and see if I feel the same afterwards...:ponder:

xLIBREx

08-13-2008, 10:59 PM

Disgusting. Not funny. Wouldn't be funny if it were a republican. I couldn't work up a laugh even if it were a libertarian.

So, the more common sense someone possesses the more you dislike them?

NortheastCynic

08-13-2008, 11:05 PM

My sympathies to this guy's family.

-NC

Alonzo

08-13-2008, 11:17 PM

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 11:19 PM

And how was he an exception? What made him an exception? HE gathered support, he could have been on the ballot. If what you are saying is that the independent candidates in the past have had no substance, charisma, or put forth the effort then you would be correct. But that isn't the fault of the Dems or Reps, that is the fault of the Independents.

He was the "exception" in that he garnered "visible support", "in the opinion of the press". The subjective opinion of the very institutions which work to discredit the Libertarian position constantly. The very institutions that espouse the two parties lies, and half truths.

He was also an exception because he would have been on the ballots in all fifty states because he is "under cover" as a Republican Congressmen, and therefore, would have been privvy to equal treatment under the law.
( Not that he got equal treatment from the debate Moderators, or the press. )

I think it's pretty presumptuous of you to imply that every person who ever failed to meet ballot access requirements set by the bipartisans could have had any chance whatsoever to get elected. Because that's basically what your position must to assume to be defending the status quo in election laws.

The Commission on Presidential Debates is a known bipartisan tool that works to disenfranchise any who would dare oppose them.

Milton Bradley

08-13-2008, 11:22 PM

What is it with libertarians and killing people? You're not the first otherwise normal libertarian on this site to suggest killing politicians is a good thing.

It appears as if that is the only way we will ever see justice.

I, like the Founding Fathers, have no compassion for those who would enslave me.

If I'm forced to choose betwen them, or me, (* and it appears more every day that I am, ) then I will pick me.

Surprised?

aaronssongs

08-13-2008, 11:29 PM

more ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080813/ap_on_re_us/democratic_party_shooting

Hmmm, and I thought today was going to be a bad day. Things are looking up.

:evil:

Disgusting and reprehensible, that you would relish the cold blooded murder of anyone, especially an innocent honorable man. Speaks volumes. I hope you're soundly condemned for your repugnant sentiments.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 12:38 AM

Disgusting and reprehensible, that you would relish the cold blooded murder of anyone, especially an innocent honorable man. Speaks volumes. I hope you're soundly condemned for your repugnant sentiments.

I'm not surprised that some feel this way. But again, you are the ones I accuse of sanctioning the type of government we have, so I suspect you're profitting from it in some way.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 12:38 AM

So, you would be happy if anyone who called themselves a Democrat or a Republican were murdered? Or do you reserve your gloating and glee for just one party?

Phyxius

08-14-2008, 12:44 AM

It appears as if that is the only way we will ever see justice.

I, like the Founding Fathers, have no compassion for those who would enslave me.

If I'm forced to choose betwen them, or me, (* and it appears more every day that I am, ) then I will pick me.

Surprised?

No. Do you, like the founding fathers, have no problem with enslaving others, though? I mean, as long is it isn't anyone you know? :unreal:

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 12:51 AM

What is it with libertarians and killing people? You're not the first otherwise normal libertarian on this site to suggest killing politicians is a good thing.

Allow me to offer an answer with a little more substance, to help clarify my position. I know it seems pretty radical to some.

In my view, we are now at a point where we are being asked to reason with sociopaths. Having a little knowledge of psychology, ( and a little personal experience attempting to reason with sociopaths, ) I know that that is an excercise in futility. One cannot reason with a sociopath.

Sure, they disguise it well when they speak of compromise, and saccrifice, yet they do not intend to be the ones who compromise their position, or to make the saccrificial offering. That is always the act of the other person, or group in the dialogue.

At a fundamental level, there are only two ways of interacting with other human beings, you either negotiate with them, or you use force against them.

As I believe it is not right to use force against others, I rally to side of those who oppose force, and meet force with force.

Sadly, I believe if that if don't have another revolution before the perfection of nano-technology, free people will be a thing of the past. Merely a side note in human history.

I inch closer, and closer to the Unabombers postion every day that see the intent of this government, and the injustice they create.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 12:59 AM

So, you would be happy if anyone who called themselves a Democrat or a Republican were murdered? Or do you reserve your gloating and glee for just one party?

I hate any who would work to destroy my Constitution, as any partiot would.

I'm no partisan hack. ( As a matter of fact, I'm not even a "libertarian" with a capital "L". ) I am a true independent.

Ron Paul, and Alan Keyes are the only "mainstream" candidates I have ever sanctioned in an election. Coincidentally, both hold the Constitution in high regard.

Believe me, I'd like to see the entire Federal gocvernment hauled before a tribunal, but it would only end up looking like another 9/11 Commission Report. Sadly, at that level of government, you get to pick the actual "peers" at your "trial".

NIOSA

08-14-2008, 01:02 AM

So this is what the GOP division of the country has come to? Assassinating political opponents is "the thing to do"? :unreal:

I couldn't find anything on the political bent of the shooter. How do you know that he was a republican?
Isn't it cruel to blame a whole political party for the actions of one? Basically what the shooter did, you have done, blame innocent people.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 01:03 AM

No. Do you, like the founding fathers, have no problem with enslaving others, though? I mean, as long is it isn't anyone you know? :unreal:

You say that as if there was universal support amonst the Founding Fathers for the practice of slavery.

A bit disingenuous on your part, don't you think?

:evil:

Alonzo

08-14-2008, 01:09 AM

Ron Paul, and Alan Keyes are the only "mainstream" candidates I have ever sanctioned in an election. Coincidentally, both hold the Constitution in high regard.

Alan Keyes? The guy who disowned his daughter because she was gay? Sad.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 01:14 AM

Alan Keyes? The guy who disowned his daughter because she was gay? Sad.

Hey, I don't care about his personal squables in his family life.

And for the record, I have a great big problem with his religious beliefs, but I'll take a religious nutcase with a healthy respect for contituinal law over some potential socialist, or fascist offered up by the Left, and Right year after year.

lily

08-14-2008, 01:16 AM

I hate any who would work to destroy my Constitution, as any partiot would.

I'm no partisan hack. ( As a matter of fact, I'm not even a "libertarian" with a capital "L". ) I am a true independent.

Ron Paul, and Alan Keyes are the only "mainstream" candidates I have ever sanctioned in an election. Coincidentally, both hold the Constitution in high regard.

Yet the one you hold near and dear is Ron Paul....who would rather stick with the Republican party and sell his soul out, for a guaranteed
seat and paycheck? That doesn't seem to be holding the Constitution ih high regard to me.

...........but back to the topic at hand........I feel for this man's family and to sit behind a computer screen and cheer that someone was shot dead, tells me a lot about a person.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 01:29 AM

Yet the one you hold near and dear is Ron Paul....who would rather stick with the Republican party and sell his soul out, for a guaranteed
seat and paycheck? That doesn't seem to be holding the Constitution ih high regard to me.

That;s because you seem to be confusing party loyalty with the legal process.

And for the record, Ron Paul is still representing his constituents in Congress, unlike Barak Obamma.

...........but back to the topic at hand........I feel for this man's family and to sit behind a computer screen and cheer that someone was shot dead, tells me a lot about a person.

I feel for his family as well.

But at the same time, when you become involved that deeply with a subversive organization, perhaps your family values are not all that you say they are, and they have taken a back seat behind political agenda.

Enemies of the Constitution are enemies of mine, period.

Alonzo

08-14-2008, 01:44 AM

I wonder how far you that death wish extends. Do people like me, who vote and advocate for the democrats, also get cheered upon death?

Maybe you should go around and picket funerals like the Phelps, just to let people know how just their death was.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 01:50 AM

I wonder how far you that death wish extends. Do people like me, who vote and advocate for the democrats, also get cheered upon death?

I do all I can to talk you people out of becoming complicit in their crimes by sanctioning it with your vote.

I offer that up as proof of my compassion for others, and my willingness to help.

At the same time, if you do find yourself voting for these fraudulent schmucks, I do consider you complicit, and make a mental note of such behavior.

Maybe you should go around and picket funerals like the Phelps, just to let people know how just their death was.

Hmmm, that seems like a cheap shot. I'm trying to imagine another way to take it, but I'm not having a lot of success.

:love:

Alonzo

08-14-2008, 01:52 AM

At the same time, if you do find yourself voting for these fraudulent schmucks, I do consider you complicit, and make a mental note of such behavior.

Mental note for what end?

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 01:55 AM

Mental note for what end?

People I don't want to cozy up too close with, for fear of them selling me up the river somewhere down the road.

I pick my friends very carefully.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 02:00 AM

This is how i feel attempting to defend liberty from those who appearently don't understand it.

( This video contains adult language. )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNiiHVYnQ6A

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 02:14 AM

I hate any who would work to destroy my Constitution, as any partiot would.

I'm no partisan hack. ( As a matter of fact, I'm not even a "libertarian" with a capital "L". ) I am a true independent.

Ron Paul, and Alan Keyes are the only "mainstream" candidates I have ever sanctioned in an election. Coincidentally, both hold the Constitution in high regard.

Believe me, I'd like to see the entire Federal gocvernment hauled before a tribunal, but it would only end up looking like another 9/11 Commission Report. Sadly, at that level of government, you get to pick the actual "peers" at your "trial".

Answer the question. Are you advocating the killing of anyone who calls themselves Dem or Rep?

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 02:16 AM

People I don't want to cozy up too close with, for fear of them selling me up the river somewhere down the road.

I pick my friends very carefully.

You mean like letting the authorities know about how you are stating people should be killed like the one was killed today?

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 02:39 AM

Answer the question. Are you advocating the killing of anyone who calls themselves Dem or Rep?

Absolutely not.

But I am almost at a point where I'm up for a good war. If you people can't understand the concept of dissent, and leave room for those dissentors, then I feel every other avenue has been exhausted.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 02:45 AM

You mean like letting the authorities know about how you are stating people should be killed like the one was killed today?

I'm sure you won't be the first overly sensitive type to report me to Fatherland Security. :evil:

I have a fairly long history ( 6 1/2 years ) of typing my unadulterated views into these message board forums, and I still don't see any evidence of government scrutiny above what the average citizen reicieves.

Besides, these authorities that you would call are my real enemies, and they are well aware of that fact.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 02:53 AM

lily

08-14-2008, 02:53 AM

That;s because you seem to be confusing party loyalty with the legal process.

You've lost me on this one, Milton...are you saying Ron Paul has some type of loyalty to the Republican party?

And for the record, Ron Paul is still representing his constituents in Congress, unlike Barak Obamma.

Was he doing that when he was running also?

I feel for his family as well.

But at the same time, when you become involved that deeply with a subversive organization, perhaps your family values are not all that you say they are, and they have taken a back seat behind political agenda.

Well.....take your loyalty of Ron Paul and Alan Keyes.......that's how I feel about Obama.....since I can't seem to shake your's what makes you think you can shake mine? I sincerely hope that you find an Independent that does this for you.......Anderson was mine.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 03:08 AM

You've lost me on this one, Milton...are you saying Ron Paul has some type of loyalty to the Republican party?

No, I'm saying say he is still representing his constituents in Congress. He is there voting in their interests.

Unlike Obamma, who, weeks into his first stint in office, abandonned his constituents to run for President.

Ron Paul is loyal to libertarian principles despite his membership in the republican party.

Was he doing that when he was running also?

A fair question, and one I don't truly have an answer for at this time.

Well.....take your loyalty of Ron Paul and Alan Keyes.......that's how I feel about Obama.....since I can't seem to shake your's what makes you think you can shake mine? I sincerely hope that you find an Independent that does this for you.......Anderson was mine.

My "loyalty", as you charaterize it, comes only for their espoused views, and voting records. These men practice what they preach, and cannot be called hypocrites.

Barack, and all of his Liberal cronies are among the most notoriua hypocrites currently roaming the Earth.

This is why I work towards getting people to investigate the candidates, or the parties they sanction. ( I never ask that my words be taken as gospel, I only try to get people to look beyond the Talking Points, and the shiny presentation. )

Unfortunately, one Democrat is as bad as the next, as are Republicans, save for a select few. They are all lying fraudsters who will do, or say anything to continue their reign at the helm of this nation. They speak for the monied interests, and they seem to have a dark future planned for those of us who do not intend to fight back.

Perhaps you would care to take a stab at answering the question posed in my signature?

I'm fighting for my Constitutionally Limited Republic.

Alonzo

08-14-2008, 03:31 AM

Absolutely not.

But I am almost at a point where I'm up for a good war. If you people can't understand the concept of dissent, and leave room for those dissentors, then I feel every other avenue has been exhausted.

So if you can't get your way by having the public on your side, you'll kill people instead.

So when you come to power, and we don't like what you did, we can kill you then?

lily

08-14-2008, 03:46 AM

Ron Paul is loyal to libertarian principles despite his membership in the republican party.

Milton.......he ran as a Libertarian once......it didn't work out, so he went back to the Republican party.....if he is a truly loyal Libertarian, why take the cowardly way out and go back to where "the paycheck" is? To me this smacks of a cowardly way out. He could have had a shot......especially this year, but he didn't have the gumption, or stones.......take your pick.

Perhaps you would care to take a stab at answering the question posed in my signature?

I would.........but I don't understand it. :embarrased:

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 04:41 AM

So if you can't get your way by having the public on your side, you'll kill people instead.

What an odd perception you have managed to infer from my posts.

My point is that these institutions have become subversive in nature. That is to say that they actively, and intentionally seek to undermine Constitutional limitations.

That is a crime.

So when you come to power, and we don't like what you did, we can kill you then?

Within the bounds of the law, yes.

Indeed, if I'm guilty of transgressions of Constitution, or oath of office, hiding behind my appointed Court Justices, I would expect no less. Why other people expect anything else is beyond me. High crimes, perjury, sedition, and treason are all offenses that come under the jurisdiction of that "oath of office".

There is a reason that the oath makes specific reference to "all enemies, foreign, or domestic". The Founders understood that the countries main weakness was overthrow from within, and that's why there is an avenue to punish people who violate that oath. ( Not that it's ever been used. ) Coincidentally, ( or not ) they also thought people who commit crimes of such nature should be punished by death. )

NortheastCynic

08-14-2008, 04:47 AM

Milton.......he ran as a Libertarian once......it didn't work out, so he went back to the Republican party.....if he is a truly loyal Libertarian, why take the cowardly way out and go back to where "the paycheck" is? To me this smacks of a cowardly way out. He could have had a shot......especially this year, but he didn't have the gumption, or stones.......take your pick.Ridiculous. I've criticized Ron Paul before and will always criticize him when he deserves it, but this is not one of those instances. Ron Paul is not loyal to large "L" Libertarianism. That is to say, he's not loyal to the Libertarian Party. He's loyal [for the most part] to the libertarian [note the small 'l'] philosophy. He understands that a libertarian cannot be elected as a Libertarian [large L], but only as a member of the duopoly. He understood that the only way he [a libertarian] can be elected is as a Republican or Democrat and he determined that that is more important than being loyal to the LP.

-NC

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 04:50 AM

Milton.......he ran as a Libertarian once......it didn't work out, so he went back to the Republican party.....if he is a truly loyal Libertarian, why take the cowardly way out and go back to where "the paycheck" is? To me this smacks of a cowardly way out. He could have had a shot......especially this year, but he didn't have the gumption, or stones.......take your pick.

Hmm, here I thought that he felt he was more effective actually serving as a Congressman, where he could vote on legislation that affects his constituents.

I would.........but I don't understand it. :embarrased:

And you are debating politics? Gosh, how sad is that?

That question points to the utter hypocrisy in the cotemporary nation attempting to call itself a "Constitutionally Limited, Democratic Republic", as defined in the ratified documents that this nation was founded upon.

If they ignore the limitations placed upon them by ignoring the constitutional process, that makes them criminal, and liable. This is a "legal contract" we are talking about.

Ironically, my government still honors contracts ( S.A.L.T Treaties ) it signed with the former Soviet Union, yet it won't honor the one contract it has with the people who elect them to office.

lily

08-14-2008, 04:52 AM

Ridiculous. I've criticized Ron Paul before and will always criticize him when he deserves it, but this is not one of those instances. Ron Paul is not loyal to large "L" Libertarianism. That is to say, he's not loyal to the Libertarian Party. He's loyal [for the most part] to the libertarian [note the small 'l'] philosophy. He understands that a libertarian cannot be elected as a Libertarian [large L], but only as a member of the duopoly. He understood that the only way he [a libertarian] can be elected is as a Republican or Democrat and he determined that that is more important than being loyal to the LP.

-NC

He has Libertarian ideals, ran as Libertarian then is still Republican? Why that party doesn't believe in the same things he does.

........ok forget what I said about the Libertarians, or for that matter Independents finally having a viable candidate.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 05:51 AM

He has Libertarian ideals, ran as Libertarian then is still Republican? Why that party doesn't believe in the same things he does.

........ok forget what I said about the Libertarians, or for that matter Independents finally having a viable candidate.

He is a Libertarian, perhaps even a Constitutionalist under cover as a Republican.

As I articulated before, he feels he can do more good, or affect more change as a Congress person than as a Libertarian activist.

I suspect he's probably right.

aaronssongs

08-14-2008, 06:08 AM

I'm not surprised that some feel this way. But again, you are the ones I accuse of sanctioning the type of government we have, so I suspect you're profitting from it in some way.

Sanctioning the type of government we have? Right now? I don't sanction dog poo poo...and I'm almost sure the majority of folks, here and elsewhere, don't sanction the type of government we've been under for the last almost 8 years, if the polls are to be believed.
That is neither here nor there, in comparison to the gravity of your statements and their implied meaning. Because you feel "others" are profiting from your distorted view of reality and the so-called "government" therein, you feel, somehow, justified in rejoicing in the murder of a civil servant.
You need psychiatric care....because you are dangerous, and a menace.
Six degrees of separation and you'd be threatening the president of the United States. I hope I'm not the only one that thinks you should be reprimanded if not banned for such outrageous statements.
Prosecute offenders to the fullest extent of the law. But vigilante justice has no place in civilized society.

aaronssongs

08-14-2008, 06:12 AM

Milton Bradley;240150]I hate any who would work to destroy my Constitution, as any partiot would.

I'm no partisan hack. ( As a matter of fact, I'm not even a "libertarian" with a capital "L". ) I am a true independent.

Ron Paul, and Alan Keyes are the only "mainstream" candidates I have ever sanctioned in an election. Coincidentally, both hold the Constitution in high regard.

One, an alleged racist...the other, an alleged "homophobe".....figures.

aaronssongs

08-14-2008, 06:15 AM

[QUOTE]People I don't want to cozy up too close with, for fear of them selling me up the river somewhere down the road.

You wouldn't sell for $5...hell, you couldn't be given away.

aaronssongs

08-14-2008, 06:16 AM

Answer the question. Are you advocating the killing of anyone who calls themselves Dem or Rep?

Obviously...I think someone should report him to the authorities.

aaronssongs

08-14-2008, 06:18 AM

What an odd perception you have managed to infer from my posts.

My point is that these institutions have become subversive in nature. That is to say that they actively, and intentionally seek to undermine Constitutional limitations.

That is a crime.

Within the bounds of the law, yes.

Indeed, if I'm guilty of transgressions of Constitution, or oath of office, hiding behind my appointed Court Justices, I would expect no less. Why other people expect anything else is beyond me. High crimes, perjury, sedition, and treason are all offenses that come under the jurisdiction of that "oath of office".

There is a reason that the oath makes specific reference to "all enemies, foreign, or domestic". The Founders understood that the countries main weakness was overthrow from within, and that's why there is an avenue to punish people who violate that oath. ( Not that it's ever been used. ) Coincidentally, ( or not ) they also thought people who commit crimes of such nature should be punished by death. )

Looney Tunes

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 08:38 AM

Sanctioning the type of government we have? Right now? I don't sanction dog poo poo...and I'm almost sure the majority of folks, here and elsewhere, don't sanction the type of government we've been under for the last almost 8 years, if the polls are to be believed.

If you have ever voted Republican, or Democrat, you have sanctioned your own disenfranchisement.

If you plan on voting for one ( other than Ron Paul ), you most certainly do sanction all that befalls you.

That is neither here nor there, in comparison to the gravity of your statements and their implied meaning. Because you feel "others" are profiting from your distorted view of reality and the so-called "government" therein, you feel, somehow, justified in rejoicing in the murder of a civil servant.

You say civil servant, I say subversive agent, let's call the whole thing off.

You need psychiatric care....because you are dangerous, and a menace.

Hmmm, I haven't harmed anybody, and on top of that, I thought I was the victim. Shows how much I know. :evil:

Six degrees of separation and you'd be threatening the president of the United States.

Actually, I didn't threaten anybody. Six degrees, to use your analogy, would have me celebrating the Presidents assassination. ( I'd confess to being guilty of that simple pleasure as well. )

I hope I'm not the only one that thinks you should be reprimanded if not banned for such outrageous statements.

Truly, I think your outrage blinds your perception. I didn't threaten anybody. I'm just celebrating an attack on what I consider to be my enemy. A perfectly normal human response.

Prosecute offenders to the fullest extent of the law. But vigilante justice has no place in civilized society.

There is no fair playing field, only the perception of what once was. Every single Supreme Court Justice on the bench has been appointed by an Executive who has violated the constitutional process, bar none.

Reality Check...

I contend that if your reality were the real reality, you would be able to link to page after page of "bad laws" that were repealed by the "good guys", laws that were crammed up our backsides when the "bad guys" were in the majority.

Unfortunately, many years of observation have lead me to believe that this really is a "worst case scenario". We are being taken over from the inside, and elected officials are the agents of this illegal change.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 08:44 AM

Looney Tunes

Ah yes, I love Looney Tunes as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHcV5QPaj2U&feature=related

Too bad life wasn't more like cartoons. Then maybe some of these Darwin Award candidates could live long enough to learn from their stupid mistakes.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 08:54 AM

One, an alleged racist...the other, an alleged "homophobe".....figures.

What part of "alleged' do you not understand?

[Dripping with sarcasm]
Here in America, we are "innocent, until proven guilty".
[/Sarcasm]

Obviously...I think someone should report him to the authorities.

I don't see anybody preventing you from exercising your right to turn in suspected terrorists.

Nanny is waiting...

:clapper:

Ah, the irony.

preservanation

08-14-2008, 11:36 AM

The action of going in there and shooting is no sign of a patriot, but a terrorist.Agreed.
Or an anarchist.
It sure isn't any part of a Democracy.

Thinking that this is an acceptable way to handle American politics is chilling and...INSANE!

I don't think we've sunk this low as to advocate assassination as a means of governing ourselves.

aaronssongs

08-14-2008, 11:51 AM

Agreed.
Or an anarchist.
It sure isn't any part of a Democracy.

Thinking that this is an acceptable way to handle American politics is chilling and...INSANE!

I don't think we've sunk this low as to advocate assassination as a means of governing ourselves.

Just when your faith is renewed by the appearance of an Obama, or a Jim Webb, or a Deval Patrick, hopes are suddenly dashed by those advocating insanity and lunacy. Sometimes it's the Twilight Zone, the Outer Limits and Hell all rolled into one.

preservanation

08-14-2008, 12:05 PM

Just when your faith is renewed by the appearance of an Obama, or a Jim Webb, or a Deval Patrick, hopes are suddenly dashed by those advocating insanity and lunacy. Sometimes it's the Twilight Zone, the Outer Limits and Hell all rolled into one.A Webb fan, eh?
He does have potential.

Sure libertarians view our Constitution to be the foundation of our existence, but I have never heard one say that since someone violates it, vigilanteeism is the way to go. Judge jury executioner.
Libertarians are usually much smarter, more rational and principled than that as a rule.

I think some use the mantel of Libertarianism (falsely) as a cover so they can be against all sides and still claim legitimacy.
Usually easy to spot...

preservanation

08-14-2008, 12:15 PM

My point is that these institutions have become subversive in nature. That is to say that they actively, and intentionally seek to undermine Constitutional limitations.

That is a crime.Show me where vigilantly political "justice" is in the Constitution?
You say you are a proponent of our founding document but advocate supporting it by shredding it.
Odd

Buck Laser

08-14-2008, 05:41 PM

[QUOTE=preservanation;240444]Show me where vigilantly political "justice" is in the Constitution?
You say you are a proponent of our founding document but advocate supporting it by shredding it.
Odd

Hot Damn! Any time Preserv and I are in agreement on an issue, I get worried. But this business of rejoicing in the death of a political leader just scares the hell out of me. I guess there was a time in my sophomoric youth when I thought anarchy was a good idea, but that didn't last very long.

But when pre and I agree, I have to wonder which one of us is sober. :evil:

PatrickHenry

08-14-2008, 06:38 PM

The gunman was apparently deranged, not a principled political assassin.

Gwatney, the slain man, was a former politician, not currently in office and was a party official. There is no evidence yet that he did anything tyrannical.

I don't think he deserved to die.

I agree with Milton that the political system is unfair and unavailable to those whose ideas include opening up the debate.

It is a desperate political time, because dissent is squelched by an overwhelming interlocking system of corporate structures that refuse coverage of important topics while forcing Americans to consider only two alternatives (the bad and the worse).

The time is coming for a revolution, but I can't countenance gunning down party officials. That would mean that it would be unsafe to engage in the electoral process, not a prescription for freeing up debate.

It would deteriorate into warlordism.

My saympathy to Gwatney's family. Sad that a deranged man could impact the campaigns in Arkansas.

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:01 PM

I side with Milton here, and its obvious he is arguing the valid points.

The two major parties are removing the publics choice to use the ballot as a means to change.
The two major parties have gerrymandered the entire system to benefit their two parties exclusively.
The two major parties are working together to dismantle individual rights and public control and oversight of government.
The two major parties refuse to address valid petitions for redress of grievance.
The two major parties have REPEATEDLY violated their oaths of office at every level, from local to national.......

Let me remind you partisans of the FACT on partisan noticed before being assasinated.

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”
-John F. Kennedy, 1962

Time to wake up bi-partisan sheeple.

potter

08-14-2008, 08:07 PM

You would be overthrowing the current system for a worse system, might makes right. I'd take the system we have to the system that would spawn from just shooting unarmed people.

Huh? How is this in context to my response? Might makes right? How about a ballot system that can be verified where votes cannot be so ealily wiped out or changed?

I would "overthrow" the current Ballot system for a paper and pen system, one that could be verified.
:thumbsup:

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 08:07 PM

potter

08-14-2008, 08:09 PM

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:09 PM

AnnE said:
So you are also rejoicing that this man was murdered?

Rejoicing? I don't know if I would say that....

I would say that FINALLY one of these people who decided to go postal aimed at the likely source of their anger, instead of innocent people in some mall.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 08:12 PM

Wow, never thought I would hear you say something so disgusting, Osborn. This is about MURDER and no murder is justified, even if you can find a way to shape it to fit your ideology.

NortheastCynic

08-14-2008, 08:14 PM

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:20 PM

AnnE said:
Wow, never thought I would hear you say something so disgusting, Osborn.

Obviously we view the meaning of the word disgusting differently.
I find the bi-partisan, unified abuse of our nations laws, individual rights and constitutional process FAR more disgusting and of vile character than a person who takes one life.......

The bi-partisans are destroying millions of lives.... this guy took one.

How many of you showing shock and awe at Milton and my position cheered when Saddam was killed? That was murder.

Am I defending Saddam? No. Am I saying both were murder and many of you likely had far different reactions to each of them? Yes.

AnnE said:
This is about MURDER and no murder is justified, even if you can find a way to shape it to fit your ideology.

One mans junk is another mans jewels.
One mans murderer is another mans freedom fighter.

I am not advocating killing....
I am not advocating or applauding murder....

I am saying FINALLY someone went postal on the people who are LIKELY the source of their grievance, instead of TRULY innocent people shopping in some mall, or going to work to feed their family.

Fell however you like AnnE, no feeling harmed here, but we see this differently.

The time for violent revolt grows close everyday the two parties are in power and continue their subversion of U.S. Law. This guy was tired of it..... and frankly, I find it hard to blame him.

Easy90

08-14-2008, 08:21 PM

I don't care what your politics are, in my opinion, obviously, the person who did that was nuts, and the fact that it happened is a terrible tragedy! My sympathy goes to the man's family and friends...and I'm glad the jerk who shot him was killed.

Sad indeed!

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 08:22 PM

No, what you are supporting is domestic terrorism. You are saying that it is OK, according to you, to murder people if you have a political agenda.

potter

08-14-2008, 08:24 PM

If they would murder you first...why not?

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:26 PM

NEC said:
Let me say this.

I'm a libertarian, I value the human and civil rights, including those of people with whom I have severe political disagreements. The murderer had no more right to violate this man's right to life as he did to violate any of their rights.

Let me say this....

I agree with you.

The fact is though, not all people do agree with us.

When things like this happen, it's sad.... but some margin of my unhappiness is removed when I find it isn't joe average, his wife and kids being slaughtered because instead its a corrupt, criminal bi-partisan enabler.

Do some find that bothersome? Perhaps...

Do I find it bothersome that many don't see the criminality and patent unconstitutional actions of the bi-partisans as worthy of DUE PROCESS? Yes.

This guy didn't have a RIGHT to shoot the politician.....but its obvious there aren't many steps left for peaceful change.... DUE to the bi-partisans. This guy obviously acted before exhausting every last option.... some% out of every hundred will.

When your voice is removed by force, who do you shoot? The people responsible for the issuance of that force, not some innocent family out for ice-cream.

NortheastCynic

08-14-2008, 08:30 PM

I understand, Os, and I certainly know that you don't condone the shooting. That said, there is no part of me that is relieved that the man killed was a 'bi-partisan enabler', he still had a family and is one of millions of bi-partisan enablers in this country. His death will make no difference on a political level, but it just destroyed a family.

-NC

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:32 PM

AnnE said:
No, what you are supporting is domestic terrorism. You are saying that it is OK, according to you, to murder people if you have a political agenda.

Complete and utter BS Ann.

I didn't say it was Ok. I didn't say it was right.

Now, what about the fact....

I DEFINITIVELY have a right to kill to defend against unjust force used against me, a political agenda, when that political agenda is built upon the premise of REMOVING its binding limitations, constitutional process and MY AND MY LOVED ONES INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, which are GUARANTEED BY LAW. Is this happening yet? To some degree. Am I WILLING TO KILL OVER IT YET? No. Do I advocate killing yet? No.

I abhor the use of force AnnE, but I still reserve the right to use it in defense.
This guy didn't use it in defense from my eyes, but from his, maybe he did.

Is that what this guy did? Maybe, from his eyes. Not from mine. I am only relieved that it wasn't some average guy in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Blueneck

08-14-2008, 08:35 PM

Rejoicing? I don't know if I would say that....

I would say that FINALLY one of these people who decided to go postal aimed at the likely source of their anger, instead of innocent people in some mall.Which wasn't a public official or anybody with any real power, just the chair of the Democratic party. So Democrats are causing all the problems in the country and if people just shot them everything would be much better. Yeah, that works. :unreal:

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:37 PM

Blueneck said:
Which wasn't a public official or anybody with any real power, just the chair of the Democratic party.

He was also a SuperDelegate.

Again... I am not defending this guys actions... I am CLAPPING because it was someone involved with the bi-partisan theft of our government.

Blueneck said:
So Democrats are causing all the problems in the country and if people just shot them everything would be much better. Yeah, that works.

Who said that?

Did you miss the word BI-PARTISAN?!?!?!?

Who ADVOCATED SHOOTING PEOPLE?! Nobody I have read in this thread.

AlanC

08-14-2008, 08:41 PM

This was the action of a nut job who took out his frustrations over his own life's failures on someone else. Nothing more and nothing less.

It is the antithesis of accepting personal responsibility and neither the action, nor the result is any cause for joy, relief, or even the slightest mitigation of what transpired.

This was not someone who "got it right". It was not someone who properly understood the greater implications of the geopolitical world. And it was not someone striking a blow for the freedom of the rest of us.

There are heros in this world and this idiot was not one of them. Trying to make him into one is just not becomming a legitimate political veiw.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 08:42 PM

Blueneck

08-14-2008, 08:46 PM

He was also a SuperDelegate.

Again... I am not defending this guys actions... I am CLAPPING because it was someone involved with the bi-partisan theft of our government.

Who said that?

Did you miss the word BI-PARTISAN?!?!?!?

Who ADVOCATED SHOOTING PEOPLE?! Nobody I have read in this thread.
So you're clapping over who got shot, not the shooting itself, but it's somehow a bi-partisan thing. Okay. :shame:

BTW, that smiley ^ wasn't for what you said, but for the part where it didn't make any damn sense.

I Like Beer

08-14-2008, 08:47 PM

Let me say this.

I'm a libertarian, I value the human and civil rights, including those of people with whom I have severe political disagreements. The murderer had no more right to violate this man's right to life as he did to violate any of their rights.

-NC

Phew! Thank you for that, I was starting to get very worried.

I find it odd that MB and Os (I assume) are advocating suspension of civil rights guaranteed by your constitution (due process, etc) in order to force people to uphold the constitution.

To MB

The ends justify the means, is that it? By what right do you claim to judge what this man has done? (Why not some other apparent disenfranchised group?) Before yesterday, I bet you never even heard his name.

Ron Paul is part of the Republican machinery. His presence in that party brings Libertarians to vote for, and support Republicans. Regardless of what he personally stands for he's supporting the very bipartisan system you say is responsible for your current state of affairs, yet you support him. Shouldn't he be fair game, too?

How is he less guilty than this poor man? Because you KNOW what he stands for? Maybe Gwatney was also a libertarian working from within the Democratic Party? But, all you see is Democrat, he's part of the problem, therefore his death without any due process, is fine by you.

Must be nice to have such a high opinion of yourself that you feel no guilt over approving of, who lives and who dies. Who else deserves death? Do you feel you can make those determinations easily? Yes, I know you didn't pull the trigger but you referred to this particular killing as "true justice". Reminds me of the Wild West.

If 'killings by association' are allowed and encouraged, you seem to be eliminating the exact 'constitutional limitations' that you seem to covet.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 08:47 PM

So you're clapping over who got shot, not the shooting itself, but it's somehow a bi-partisan thing. Okay. :shame:

BTW, that smiley ^ wasn't for what you said, but for the part where it didn't make any damn sense.

I believe he is saying he would clap if it had been the Republican Committee chair...

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:48 PM

I don't really care what any of you think of me.... I am just being honest....pretty rare these days.

Once again... nobody ADVOCATED shooting people, or murder.

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:49 PM

I Like Beer said:
I find it odd that MB and Os (I assume) are advocating suspension of civil rights guaranteed by your constitution (due process, etc) in order to force people to uphold the constitution.

Please quote where I said that?

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 08:49 PM

MB is advocating it. Or are you not reading what he is writing?

Hooray for justice, Wild west fashion. A fitting punishment for crimes against country, and countrymen.

Sorry folks, but this is how a real Patriot feels when those would enslave him are dispatched to the great beyond.

NortheastCynic

08-14-2008, 08:49 PM

I'll give it a try, Os, as I know you wouldn't [and haven't] called for the assassination of political enemies.

What Os is saying is, while the gunman had no right to do what he did, it is better that the person killed was an individual with political power rather than a random, average person.

Am I wrong, Os?

-NC

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:51 PM

AnnE said:
MB is advocating it. Or are you not reading what he is writing?

I am not Milton....

Where did I say it?

Blueneck

08-14-2008, 08:52 PM

I believe he is saying he would clap if it had been the Republican Committee chair...Which is unlikely, as liberals rearely shoot people.

I can't wait to find out what books this guy had in his house.

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:52 PM

NEC said:
I'll give it a try, Os, as I know you wouldn't [and haven't] called for the assassination of political enemies.

What Os is saying is, while the gunman had no right to do what he did, it is better that the person killed was an individual with political power rather than a random, average person.

Am I wrong, Os?

Bingo, in a nutshell.

Most who are arguing against me here DON'T WANT to get it... they just want to show PC outrage... at least, thats how it seems to me.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 08:52 PM

I am not Milton....

Where did I say it?

You stated that no one had said it...

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:52 PM

Blueneck said:
Which is unlikely, as liberals rearely shoot people.

I can't wait to find out what books this guy had in his house.

LIberals blah blah blah... Liberals blah blah blah...

Can you turn off your defense of liberals for a second, and understand what I am saying?

Read my signature quotes....its obvious I am ANTI-BOTH PARTIES..... but keep standing in de-nial if you like.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 08:54 PM

Just when your faith is renewed by the appearance of an Obama, or a Jim Webb, or a Deval Patrick, hopes are suddenly dashed by those advocating insanity and lunacy. Sometimes it's the Twilight Zone, the Outer Limits and Hell all rolled into one.

Sorry, but the insanity, and the lunacy is getting in any way involved in your own disenfranchisement. Giving any credibility to the current process by taking part in it in any way is literally the act of cutting your own throat.

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 08:56 PM

AnnE said:
You stated that no one had said it...

I don't see that as advocation....

NortheastCynic

08-14-2008, 08:56 PM

Which is unlikely, as liberals rearely shoot people.

I can't wait to find out what books this guy had in his house.
Just curious, as this isn't overly pertinent to the topic, but do you have any statistics to back that up?

-NC

I Like Beer

08-14-2008, 08:59 PM

Once again... nobody ADVOCATED shooting people, or murder.

MB said it was "true justice". That kind of sounds like advocating to me.

I know you didn't advocate and I'm not asking you to defend your brother. He can do fine on his own.

Comments like the one MB made do nothing to help your case. Not that I ever was a Libertarian, but how much more support do you think I have for your cause now?

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 09:05 PM

I LIKE BEER said:
MB said it was "true justice". That kind of sounds like advocating to me.

I see it as the only true justice myself....but that is far from advocation. I would much rather have seen the SAME END come about through due process, but criminals don't usually find justice when judging other criminals of their own ilk.

I LIKE BEER said:
I know you didn't advocate and I'm not asking you to defend your brother. He can do fine on his own.

Thank you.

I LIKE BEER said:
Comments like the one MB made do nothing to help your case. Not that I ever was a Libertarian, but how much more support do you think I have for your cause now?

I think you misunderstand.....

I am not a Libertarian, I just usually vote that way since they are the only ones actually making a platform issue of PROTECTING INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS and CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS.

I am not here to "raise support" for anything other than the contractual binding document this government is limited by, in doing its job.

We the people, reserve the right of force to shrug off government that becomes abusive of those rights, and refuses to allow the people change through the constitutional methods provided.

This person obviously drew that line before many other, perhaps "more rational" people.

I am not that far off though..... the bi-partisan government of the last 157 years has done a lot more to remove and restrict rights, and to break constitutional process than they have done to defend it, or empower people. Their bi-partisan transgressions against constitutional process and protection of individual rights is obvious on every level from local to national.

I Like Beer

08-14-2008, 09:08 PM

Which is unlikely, as liberals rearely shoot people.

I can't wait to find out what books this guy had in his house.

Blueneck,

I'm as liberal as the day is long and liberals definitely shoot people. I never seen anything to suggest that murder and political ideology go hand in hand.

Also, has there been any information that this murder was politically motivated? There are at least a dozen other reasons why this maniac did what he did.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 09:09 PM

I find it odd that MB and Os (I assume) are advocating suspension of civil rights guaranteed by your constitution (due process, etc) in order to force people to uphold the constitution.

There will never be any chance of "due process" with the entire Legislature, Judicial system, and Executive branches beholden to the same people, and the money that props them up.

Sadly, this is the same fight the Founders had to fight. This is a fight against tyranny.

To MB

[/B]The ends justify the means, is that it? By what right do you claim to judge what this man has done? (Why not some other apparent disenfranchised group?) Before yesterday, I bet you never even heard his name.

Ron Paul is part of the Republican machinery. His presence in that party brings Libertarians to vote for, and support Republicans. Regardless of what he personally stands for he's supporting the very bipartisan system you say is responsible for your current state of affairs, yet you support him. Shouldn't he be fair game, too?

Indeed he is, and he takes that risk of his own volition. I would never ask anybody to do what Ron Paul does, but since he has the stones to attempt it, I support him.

How is he less guilty than this poor man? Because you KNOW what he stands for?

Yes.

Maybe Gwatney was also a libertarian working from within the Democratic Party? But, all you see is Democrat, he's part of the problem, therefore his death without any due process, is fine by you.

This is not the way it should be, ideally, but ideals seem to have gone out the window with my Constitutional protections. The Democratic party has zero respect for me, so I, in turn, have zero respect for them. See how that works? I feel justified in that they have drawn first blood. ( and second, and third, and fourth, ect... )

Must be nice to have such a high opinion of yourself that you feel no guilt over approving of, who lives and who dies.

Hmmm, I didn't "decide" anything. You make it sound like I was the one pulling that trigger.

Who else deserves death? Do you feel you can make those determinations easily? Yes, I know you didn't pull the trigger but you referred to this particular killing as "true justice". Reminds me of the Wild West.

Everybody that's trampling our precious Constitution under foot, and feeding it into the shredder deserves death in my opinion.

Don't blame me for my Wild West mentality, as I'm not the one working to remove rights, and herd people into little ideological corrals.

If 'killings by association' are allowed and encouraged, you seem to be eliminating the exact 'constitutional limitations' that you seem to covet.

If one side decides to ignore the rule of law, what other choice does the other side really have but to fight dirty as well?

They drew first blood.

AlanC

08-14-2008, 09:16 PM

Everybody that's trampling our precious Constitution under foot, and feeding it into the shredder deserves death in my opinion.

If one side decides to ignore the rule of law, what other choice does the other side really have but to fight dirty as well?

They drew first blood.

You should move to Montana. I hear they have the other two or three people who hold similar views up there.

The trouble is that until a majoirity feel this way, anyone acting in the manner you find so admirable is still just a punk criminal and will likely meet the same fate as this idiot who probably had absolutely no idea of what it is you are trying to say.

I Like Beer

08-14-2008, 09:24 PM

I see it as the only true justice myself....but that is far from advocation. I would much rather have seen the SAME END come about through due process, but criminals don't usually find justice when judging other criminals of their own ilk.

Not to quibble too much, (but I'm gonna do it anyway :)) but justice means 'moral rightness' or the 'administration and procedure of law'. To say someone was 'truly' treated thusly, seems to support what happened to them.

I feel that people who are judged by 12 of their peers in an open court of law get 'true justice'.

I think you misunderstand.....

I am not a Libertarian, I just usually vote that way since they are the only ones actually making a platform issue of PROTECTING INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS and CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS.

I am not here to "raise support" for anything other than the contractual binding document this government is limited by, in doing its job.

We the people, reserve the right of force to shrug off government that becomes abusive of those rights, and refuses to allow the people change through the constitutional methods provided.

This person obviously drew that line before many other, perhaps "more rational" people.

I am not that far off though..... the bi-partisan government of the last 157 years has done a lot more to remove and restrict rights, and to break constitutional process than they have done to defend it, or empower people. Their bi-partisan transgressions against constitutional process and protection of individual rights is obvious on every level from local to national.

Fair enough. I'm sorry for my assumption of you being a Libertarian. Most of what you wrote, I agree with. I'm a huge proponent of individual rights, and protecting privacy, and limiting government intrusion in private lives, which is one reason I love my country so much.

You should join up with the Chomskyites of the world. Despite the obvious differences, you seem to have a common enemy. Politics and strange bed fellows and all that.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 09:24 PM

You should move to Montana. I hear they have the other two or three people who hold similar views up there.

The trouble is that until a majoirity feel this way, anyone acting in the manner you find so admirable is still just a punk criminal and will likely meet the same fate as this idiot who probably had absolutely no idea of what it is you are trying to say.

Heh, that's exactly the way I feel about people who would remove my Constitutional protections.

So we're even. :love:

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 09:24 PM

Alan said:
You should move to Montana. I hear they have the other two or three people who hold similar views up there.

Funny you should mention that.... I intend to move to Montana or Idaho, if not New Hampshire.

Alan said:
The trouble is that until a majoirity feel this way, anyone acting in the manner you find so admirable is still just a punk criminal and will likely meet the same fate as this idiot who probably had absolutely no idea of what it is you are trying to say.

Again, did this stop people from cheering for the death of any person in history?

I wonder how many here who are so "upset" over what Milton said, cheered the day Saddam was hanged?

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 09:27 PM

Funny you should mention that.... I intend to move to Montana or Idaho, if not New Hampshire.

Again, did this stop people from cheering for the death of any person in history?

I wonder how many here who are so "upset" over what Milton said, cheered the day Saddam was hanged?

So you are comparing this innocent man to Saddam Hussein? Really?

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 09:32 PM

I LIKE BEER said:
Not to quibble too much, (but I'm gonna do it anyway ) but justice means 'moral rightness' or the 'administration and procedure of law'. To say someone was 'truly' treated thusly, seems to support what happened to them.

Again, I view the person who was the victim in this case deserving somewhat the end he reached for reasons I have outlayed. I don't advocate the MEANS, I am only content with the end. I am sure many would say the same of me if I were the victim, as right or wrong as it may be. Its just human nature, and result of perspective.

I LIKE BEER said:
I feel that people who are judged by 12 of their peers in an open court of law get 'true justice'.

I am no elitist, but with the average IQ and political "awareness" of some of my fellow citizens, I would be searching for a while for people I could call "peers".

Our judicial, legislative and executive branch have been tainted by 157 years of bi-partisan appointment, legislative malfeasance and questionable intents as well as tactics.... Justice is pretty hard to find today unless you have bi-partisan clout or a LOT of money, and could that be called justice, or is it more political favors and "paying for protection"?

Here nor there, I still don't see any "ADVOCATION".

I LIKE BEER said:
Fair enough. I'm sorry for my assumption of you being a Libertarian. Most of what you wrote, I agree with. I'm a huge proponent of individual rights, and protecting privacy, and limiting government intrusion in private lives, which is one reason I love my country so much.

You should join up with the Chomskyites of the world. Despite the obvious differences, you seem to have a common enemy. Politics and strange bed fellows and all that.

Thanks for the understanding, and openness with which you speak.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 09:33 PM

So you are comparing this innocent man to Saddam Hussein? Really?

Can you really call the Chair of a State Democratic party "innocent"?

If so, I suggest you dig deeper into the philosophies of the Democratic party, and the rules by which they play.

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 09:34 PM

AnnE said:
So you are comparing this innocent man to Saddam Hussein? Really?

Come on Ann, you are smarter than that. Look at what I said, and what others said.

People said murder is murder.... Saddam was murdered, this man was murdered, Randy Weavers wife was murdered.... they are all different, and all evoke different "emotional responses" in different people, based on their perception, their intellect, their knowledge of the facts related to the incidents, etc.....

I am not comparing the victims, I am comparing the hypocrites who fail to understand the difference in perspectives.

I am willing to bet that many who took offense to Miltons comments about this victim, were cheering when Saddam was killed.....

Pointing out the hypocrisy.... thats all Ann.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 09:36 PM

Yes I can. Prove he has done anything remotely worthy of being murdered over.

I Like Beer

08-14-2008, 09:36 PM

If one side decides to ignore the rule of law, what other choice does the other side really have but to fight dirty as well?

They drew first blood.

Thank you for answering.

I don't know what else to say except that if you have to throw out what you believe in, in order to achieve your ends, you're no different then the neo cons currently occupying the Whitehouse.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 09:36 PM

Saddam was executed, not murdered. And again, comparing him to Saddam is low. His poor family.

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 09:38 PM

Ann said:
Saddam was executed, not murdered. And again, comparing him to Saddam is low. His poor family.

YOU made the comparison, not me.

I was comparing the PEOPLE TALKING IN THIS THREAD, not SADDAM and the Democratic Party Chair.

Are you TRYING not to understand what I said?

Execution, Murder, both pre-meditated and carried out with intent to kill.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 09:40 PM

YOU made the comparison, not me.

I was comparing the PEOPLE TALKING IN THIS THREAD, not SADDAM and the Democratic Party Chair.

Are you TRYING not to understand what I said?

Execution, Murder, both pre-meditated and carried out with intent to kill.

Excuse me, but I was NOT the person who brought up Saddam. YOU are the person who is comparing the reactions to this with the reactions that occurred when Saddam was executed. That is twisted at best. One is an innocent man gunned down in cold blood and one was a mass murderer. Gee, yea, you think there might be differing responses?

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 09:42 PM

Yes I can. Prove he has done anything remotely worthy of being murdered over.

It's the Democrtic "party" hon, and the list of transgressions is so long, and so obvious that frankly, I don't feel the need to prove my point that this is a subversive organization with an agenda to remove my constitutional protections.

Democrats cosign every peice of crap legislation that removes the rights of individuals, right up to, and including The Patriot Act. ( without even reading the Patriot Act )

If that isn't reason enough to harbor ill feeling towards the opposition, then I don't know what else to tell you.

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 09:46 PM

Ann said:
Excuse me, but I was NOT the person who brought up Saddam.

I brought up Saddam pointing out PEOPLES HYPOCRISY regarding reactions to murder.....

YOU BROUGHT UP THE ACCUSATION that I was comparing Saddam to this DP Chair.

Hello?

AnnE said:
YOU are the person who is comparing the reactions to this with the reactions that occurred when Saddam was executed.

YES, congratulations.

AnnE said:
That is twisted at best. One is an innocent man gunned down in cold blood and one was a mass murderer.

Again, the innocence of both is the question..... you assume the DPC was innocent, while assuming Saddam was guilty.

I disagree with YOUR assumptions, and I have every right to.

Don't like it? Get in line with the rest of the partisan democrat and republicans. ;)

AnnE said:
Gee, yea, you think there might be differing responses?

I was the one pointing OUT the differing responses, to people who had the GALL to say "murder is murder" as if all murders were equal.....

They aren't.

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 09:50 PM

Um... we KNOW that Saddam was guilty. Link to any proof otherwise. Now prove that the this man was guilty. As for the rest of your post... meh.

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 09:53 PM

AnnE said:
Um... we KNOW that Saddam was guilty. Link to any proof otherwise. Now prove that the this man was guilty. As for the rest of your post... meh.

I think I will just give you an equal "meh" in return Ann.... ;)

Elrathin

08-14-2008, 10:11 PM

Again, the innocence of both is the question..... you assume the DPC was innocent, while assuming Saddam was guilty.

How was Saddam NOT guilty of mass murder?

And what crime did this DNC Chairmen commit that JUSTIFIES killing him?

You say you adhere strictly to the constitution, so what does the constitution say about presuming someone guilty and killing them in cold blood without a trial?

Buck Laser

08-14-2008, 10:30 PM

Let me say this.

I'm a libertarian, I value the human and civil rights, including those of people with whom I have severe political disagreements. The murderer had no more right to violate this man's right to life as he did to violate any of their rights.

-NC
NC, this is the division among the libertarians that bothers the hell out of me. I could foresee some kind of future in which an armed rebellion might be thought necessary by some: in the 20th century, the struggles of union workers and black people were met with armed resistance, sometimes against them, sometimes in protection. But this commonly bruited about readiness to kill the oppressors does not sound like America to me. Frankly, if these extremists were to take up arms, I might have to find myself on the other side. Os calls us "sheeple": I think he's not only wrong, but abusively insulting to use such language.

This may be one of the first times in my life I've thought someone to be carrying freedom of speech too far--but no, as a committed believer in the rights guaranteed in the First Amendment, it must be permitted. But if they're going to "kill the traitors," what's to keep them from deciding to number ME among the traitors?

AnnEsthesia

08-14-2008, 10:32 PM

NC, this is the division among the libertarians that bothers the hell out of me. I could foresee some kind of future in which an armed rebellion might be thought necessary by some: in the 20th century, the struggles of union workers and black people were met with armed resistance, sometimes against them, sometimes in protection. But this commonly bruited about readiness to kill the oppressors does not sound like America to me. Frankly, if these extremists were to take up arms, I might have to find myself on the other side. Os calls us "sheeple": I think he's not only wrong, but abusively insulting to use such language.

This may be one of the first times in my life I've thought someone to be carrying freedom of speech too far--but no, as a committed believer in the rights guaranteed in the First Amendment, it must be permitted. But if they're going to "kill the traitors," what's to keep them from deciding to number ME amont the traitors?

Very well said. That is the disturbing thing about this. Some of these very same people rant and rave about 'extremists' who kill over their ideologies... and yet are they not advocating the exact same thing here?

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 11:13 PM

Elrathin said:
How was Saddam NOT guilty of mass murder?

You assume I don't agree Saddam was guilty? I agree, Saddam seemed guilty from WHAT I SAW.

I disagree about the claim of innocence of the DP Chair who was killed.

I have cited in several threads all over this forum the many crimes of the Democrats as well as the Republicans. It should be obvious that I don't agree with the CLAIM of innocence used in defend of the DP Chair, don't you think?

Elrathin said:
And what crime did this DNC Chairmen commit that JUSTIFIES killing him?

-Being part and parcel guilty by association and complicity of the bi-partisan conspiracy to keep any and all 3rd parties out of the public spotlight, on ballots, in debates, etc.
-Being part and parcel guilty by association and complicity of the bi-partisan treason of constitutional process, their oath of office(s), and their duty to protect individual rights in the face of bi-partisan supported unconstitutional wars (Bush Jr., Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan, etc) and national policy that directly conflicts with the Law of the Land.

There are two..... and again, they don't "justify" killing him, as much as provides reasoning as to why one would.

Elrathin said:
You say you adhere strictly to the constitution, so what does the constitution say about presuming someone guilty and killing them in cold blood without a trial?

Again, I specifically mentioned I would have preferred due process bore out the same result. Due process of law, that is.

How can I expect a bi-partisan dominated system to find justice on accusations of bi-partisan crimes? What does that say of the damage done to due process by both parties and the complete absence of 3rd party representation, by design?

Again, I am not advocating or applauding the use of force....

I am celebrating that one more bi-partisan criminal is left to prosecute, if prosecution could ever be attained... which isn't likely, since criminals don't prosecute criminals of their own ilk.

Buck Laser

08-14-2008, 11:15 PM

So what's to keep from deciding I'm a traitor, Os? Given your bloodthirstiness, I truly worry about that one. After all, I gave some money to Obama's campaign. Does that make me a "traitor" too?

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 11:17 PM

Buck said:
NC, this is the division among the libertarians that bothers the hell out of me. I could foresee some kind of future in which an armed rebellion might be thought necessary by some: in the 20th century, the struggles of union workers and black people were met with armed resistance, sometimes against them, sometimes in protection. But this commonly bruited about readiness to kill the oppressors does not sound like America to me. Frankly, if these extremists were to take up arms, I might have to find myself on the other side. Os calls us "sheeple": I think he's not only wrong, but abusively insulting to use such language.

What you seem to dismiss is how Libertarians and others not of your partisan mindset find YOUR sentiment, statements and "terminology" offensive. Why should I care about your views if you obviously show the equal and opposite toward me?

Reap what thee sow.

Buck said:
This may be one of the first times in my life I've thought someone to be carrying freedom of speech too far--but no, as a committed believer in the rights guaranteed in the First Amendment, it must be permitted. But if they're going to "kill the traitors," what's to keep them from deciding to number ME amont the traitors?

What is carrying freedom of speech too far in this thread??!?

I hear people talking about how they would like Bush, Clinton or (insert name here) to "swing from a rope".....

This is no different.

I do have to laugh at all the feigned "PC" outrage though....

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 11:20 PM

Buck said:
So what's to keep from deciding I'm a traitor, Os?

The facts... are you working to remove my rights Buck? Supporting people who do?

That would obviously be a factor.... but who is advocating "KILLING"? You didn't see me voting for war, or for partisan shepards who do....

The bi-partisan crimes are as obvious as the nose on ones face once partisanship and patriotism are set-aside.....few are strong enough to admit it.

Buck said:
Given your bloodthirstiness, I truly worry about that one. After all, I gave some money to Obama's campaign. Does that make me a "traitor" too?

Show an example of my "bloodthirst".... what a joke.

Buck Laser

08-14-2008, 11:22 PM

You want to shoot the "traitors," right? Or is that just Milton?

Elrathin

08-14-2008, 11:23 PM

-Being part and parcel guilty by association and complicity of the bi-partisan conspiracy to keep any and all 3rd parties out of the public spotlight, on ballots, in debates, etc.
-Being part and parcel guilty by association and complicity of the bi-partisan treason of constitutional process, their oath of office(s), and their duty to protect individual rights in the face of bi-partisan supported unconstitutional wars (Bush Jr., Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan, etc) and national policy that directly conflicts with the Law of the Land.

Sorry none of those are proven and frankly, are laughable. This is why independents have such a hard time, because they blame others instead of the candidates they pick.

If the 3rd party candidates had more substance, then maybe they would be electable.

The comments directed by some so called "independents" here have done nothing but convince me these whack jobs should NEVER be allowed office and have almost convinced me to go back to being a Dem. I will vote against these guys for sure.

Again, I specifically mentioned I would have preferred due process bore out the same result. Due process of law, that is.

That's because no law has been broken. Show me otherwise.

Again, I am not advocating or applauding the use of force....

You may not be, but MB sure is.

I am celebrating that one more bi-partisan criminal is left to prosecute, if prosecution could ever be attained... which isn't likely, since criminals don't prosecute criminals of their own ilk.

Sure sounds like you are celebrating the death of the DNC Chairman to me. But if you aren't, so be it. MB is celebrating the death and has even said so.

NortheastCynic

08-14-2008, 11:25 PM

NC, this is the division among the libertarians that bothers the hell out of me. I could foresee some kind of future in which an armed rebellion might be thought necessary by some: in the 20th century, the struggles of union workers and black people were met with armed resistance, sometimes against them, sometimes in protection. But this commonly bruited about readiness to kill the oppressors does not sound like America to me. Frankly, if these extremists were to take up arms, I might have to find myself on the other side. Os calls us "sheeple": I think he's not only wrong, but abusively insulting to use such language.

This may be one of the first times in my life I've thought someone to be carrying freedom of speech too far--but no, as a committed believer in the rights guaranteed in the First Amendment, it must be permitted. But if they're going to "kill the traitors," what's to keep them from deciding to number ME among the traitors?Buck, I don't disagree with the content of your post [with some exceptions]...But you make it appear as though libertarians hold a monopoly on the militarist looney market. There are several other political ideologies that call for the eradication of an entity that those ideologues despise. Mainstream libertarians despise force; favoring assassination would be very un-libertarian.

-NC

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 11:38 PM

Buck said:
You want to shoot the "traitors," right? Or is that just Milton?

I am not going to re-iterate the thread for you.... try reading what I said before you call me out on it....

Elrathin said:
Sorry none of those are proven and frankly, are laughable.

To most die-hard partisans, they are laughable, hence the reason some people are forced to use force to have their rights recognized.....

“Find out just what the people will submit to and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”
-Frederick Douglas, Civil Rights Activist, 1857

“If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same [...] They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section [...] they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.”
-The US Code, Title 18, §241, "Conspiracy against rights"

Elrathin said:
This is why independents have such a hard time, because they blame others instead of the candidates they pick.

It seems you want to ignore the facts, so I won't bother you with them.

Elrathin said:
If the 3rd party candidates had more substance, then maybe they would be electable.

This coming from a supporter of those seeking to take away my rights through force of law?!? If you saw substance in a candidate I supported, it may bother me.

Elrathin said:
The comments directed by some so called "independents" here have done nothing but convince me these whack jobs should NEVER be allowed office and have almost convinced me to go back to being a Dem. I will vote against these guys for sure.

Is this supposed to offend me?

Those that support the overthrow of individual rights will get their just deserves in the end.... I can only hope I am there to cheer when it happens. ;)

Elrathin said:
That's because no law has been broken. Show me otherwise.

I won't bother, you obviously ignored everything else I posted on the subject of bi-partisan law breaking, so why should I believe you will pay attention now?

You act as though I have never said such things? LOL

Elrathin said:
Sure sounds like you are celebrating the death of the DNC Chairman to me. But if you aren't, so be it. MB is celebrating the death and has even said so.

To "celebrate" and to "advocate" are two different things.

I didn't say I wasn't celebrating.... I did say I wasn't advocating.

Buck Laser

08-14-2008, 11:39 PM

Buck, I don't disagree with the content of your post [with some exceptions]...But you make it appear as though libertarians hold a monopoly on the militarist looney market. There are several other political ideologies that call for the eradication of an entity that those ideologues despise. Mainstream libertarians despise force; favoring assassination would be very un-libertarian.

-NC
I hope you're right about mainstream libertarians, NC. Nor will I dispute that there are other loonies out there. We liberals had the Weathermen and the Symbionese Liberation Army. The wingers have the Klan, the Nazis, and lots of little play soldiers running around in the woods.

But we have at least two fringe libertarians here who think celebrating the death of a person because he was a politician is cool. If the gummint had a right to go after the Weather Underground and the Klan, why don't they have a right to go after the fringe libertarians???

Please understand, I am not advocating that. No way, no how. But in my heart, I'm glad the Weathermen and the Klan aren't major concerns any more. So far as I know, fringe libertarians haven't started shooting. Yet. But a couple of them right here in River City sound as if they're ready to.

Milton Bradley

08-14-2008, 11:43 PM

You want to shoot the "traitors," right? Or is that just Milton?

Where did I say "shoot the traitors"?

I said they deserve to die for their transgressions, and the oath of office that they take stipulates that very real possibility.

Can't handle the punishment, don't do the crime.

Osborn F. Enready

08-14-2008, 11:44 PM

Buck said:
I hope you're right about mainstream libertarians, NC. Nor will I dispute that there are other loonies out there. We liberals had the Weathermen and the Symbionese Liberation Army. The wingers have the Klan, the Nazis, and lots of little play soldiers running around in the woods.

But we have at least two fringe libertarians here who think celebrating the death of a person because he was a politician is cool.

Cool or not, its my right, my values, my opinion. I expressed it, and you didn't agree.

Whats your problem?

Buck said:
If the gummint had a right to go after the Weather Underground and the Klan, why don't they have a right to go after the fringe libertarians???

They have the right to when rights have been violated or if a conspiracy to remove rights is proveable.

Nobody here that I know of, fits that bill.

You supporting pre-emptive war now to Buck?

Buck said:
Please understand, I am not advocating that. No way, no how. But in my heart, I'm glad the Weathermen and the Klan aren't major concerns any more. So far as I know, fringe libertarians haven't started shooting. Yet. But a couple of them right here in River City sound as if they're ready to.

Many Americans are ready to start shooting when the bi-partisan promoted and passed legislation affects them.....

Even a mayor spoke out on the unconstitutional act of "no-knock warrants" recently after being a victim to his own party madness.....

Sadly, many sheeple wait until they have no choice, to decide to take action.

Thats how we get to the point of the necessity for violent revolt in the first place.
People don't trust their government, and for very, very good reason. Both parties sold