I thought Conservatives just LOVED the Constitution?

Bfgrn said:
Where do you come up with journalists that break the law? A journalist that robs a corner store?...J walks? What Yurt?

How is the Fairness Doctrine an attack on the Constitution?

You really are an idiot Yurt.
Click to expand...

maybe she is talking about this....

Obama threatens whistleblower journalists with jail time

youtube.com — Obama administration's tough investigative stance on unauthorized press leaks goes against the president's own election promises to bring back openness and transparency. Moreover, some journalists now accuse the Obama government of actually attacking press freedom. Jun 10, 2010

http://digg.com/news/politics/Obama_threatens_whistleblower_journalists_with_jail_time

and scotus has already said the fairness doctrine violates the constitution....you should really read up stuff before spouting off and looking foolish
 
Yurt said:
maybe she is talking about this....

Obama threatens whistleblower journalists with jail time

youtube.com — Obama administration's tough investigative stance on unauthorized press leaks goes against the president's own election promises to bring back openness and transparency. Moreover, some journalists now accuse the Obama government of actually attacking press freedom. Jun 10, 2010

http://digg.com/news/politics/Obama_threatens_whistleblower_journalists_with_jail_time

and scotus has already said the fairness doctrine violates the constitution....you should really read up stuff before spouting off and looking foolish
Click to expand...


The bold is pretty funny considering the link you provided directly above it.
 
Yurt said:
what does the fairness doctrine and scotus's ruling have to do with the other? they are unrelated. then again, you have the oddest sense of "humor"....
Click to expand...


You said that Zappa should "really read up stuff before looking foolish" while you posted a link to a non-existent youtube video.

I'm guessing that, in your quixotic quest to eliminate all traces of hypocrisy in the world, in reponse to the OP and comments thereto you did a google search for Obama journalist jail time and posted the first thing you came across without first reading up stuff. And you ended up looking foolish.
 
NigelTufnel said:
You said that Zappa should "really read up stuff before looking foolish" while you posted a link to a non-existent youtube video.

I'm guessing that, in your quixotic quest to eliminate all traces of hypocrisy in the world, in reponse to the OP and comments thereto you did a google search for Obama journalist jail time and posted the first thing you came across without first reading up stuff. And you ended up looking foolish.
Click to expand...

my post wasn't to zappa...ooops...i guess you look foolish. i remembered the story and did google it, you could do the same. and a dead video link does not mean the story didn't happen. lord almighty, a dead youtube video makes one foolish? lol. you have a warped sense of humor. and my response was not about hypocrisy. more foolishness on your part. bfgrn asked what illegal things could a journalist have done to be jailed.........so i link to a possible illegal activity that a journalist could be jailed for. had nothing to do with hypocrisy....fool.

i wonder how much more one could get wrong when posting about foolishness....lool...nice self pwn nigel.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
So much for Freedom of the Press...

From CPAC Saturday:

Ann Coulter said she thinks there should be more journalists put in jail during her appearance at the annual CPAC conference on Saturday.

Coulter's comments came during a response to a question from a woman in the audience. The woman initially asked Coulter why she and other Republicans had championed free elections in Iraq but were warning about them in Egypt.

"You don't go around disturbing countries where you have a loyal ally," Coulter responded.

"What is more important though to American values--being friends with israel still or knowing there are jailed dissidents and journalists [in Egypt]?" the woman asked.

"What do you mean knowing that there are jailed journalists?" Coulter said. "I think there should be more jailed journalists." This prompted a huge round of applause from the crowd.
Click to expand...

did you not know that the constitution only applies to conservatives and those that support the conservative agenda
 
Bfgrn said:
What is fascism?

Franklin Roosevelt said during World War II that the domination of government by corporate power is "the essence of Fascism" and Benito Mussolini who had an insider’s view of that process said the same thing. Essentially he said that - he complained that Fascism should not be called Fascism. It should be called corporatism because it was the merger of state of corporate power.

Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, said that America would never be destroyed by a foreign power but he warned that our political institutions, our democratic institutions would be subverted by malefactors of great wealth who would erode them from within.

Dwight Eisenhower, another republican in his most famous speech ever warned America against the domination by the military industrial complex.

Abraham Lincoln, the greatest Republican in our history, said during the height of the Civil War "I have the South in front of me and I have the bankers behind me. And for my country I fear the bankers more." ref

As a result Fairness Doctrine being abolished, six giant multinational corporations control all 14,000 radio stations in the States, almost all 6,000 TV stations, 80 percent of the newspapers, all billboards, and most of the Internet information services. News departments are corporate profit centers with their only obligations being to the shareholders and not to the public.

The press is protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson said: "I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion."

You folks on the right are truly ignorant.
Click to expand...
This is rich with irony.

Libertarianism has nothing to do with any of the things you posted here. You began with a false premise and then pretend you have knowledge that you do not. You then post about myriad other philosophies as your "evidence".

This would be equivalent to posting to a poster who has informed you of their dislike of chocolate that it is hot in an oven, heat is used in making chocolate, therefore you produce chocolate when the oven is hot and that means "you like chocolate"...

It's just nonsense. You are babbling.
 
Damocles said:
This is rich with irony.

Libertarianism has nothing to do with any of the things you posted here. You began with a false premise and then pretend you have knowledge that you do not. You then post about myriad other philosophies as your "evidence".

This would be equivalent to posting to a poster who has informed you of their dislike of chocolate that it is hot in an oven, heat is used in making chocolate, therefore you produce chocolate when the oven is hot and that means "you like chocolate"...

It's just nonsense. You are babbling.
Click to expand...

Funniest post this week!
 
Damocles said:
LOL.

You don't understand libertarianism at all if you think that government force applied in such a way would be something they should "support"...

That's utter garbage.
Click to expand...

So, I want to clarify this for all times, libertarians do not support any type of government regulations?
 
Rana said:
So, I want to clarify this for all times, libertarians do not support any type of government regulations?
Click to expand...
Yes we do. The Libertarian standard for government regulations is as follows.

Is there a problem? If so, is government the only option? If so what is the MINIMAL amount of government regulation/intervention needed to correct the problem?

Follow that flow chart and you have the essence of Libertarianism.

EDIT: ALMOST forgot! Does the proposed government solution violate the prior constraints on the government?
 
No said:
Yes we do. The Libertarian standard for government regulations is as follows.

Is there a problem? If so, is government the only option? If so what is the MINIMAL amount of government regulation/intervention needed to correct the problem?

Follow that flow chart and you have the essence of Libertarianism.
Click to expand...

thanks
 
Damocles said:
This is rich with irony.

Libertarianism has nothing to do with any of the things you posted here. You began with a false premise and then pretend you have knowledge that you do not. You then post about myriad other philosophies as your "evidence".

This would be equivalent to posting to a poster who has informed you of their dislike of chocolate that it is hot in an oven, heat is used in making chocolate, therefore you produce chocolate when the oven is hot and that means "you like chocolate"...

It's just nonsense. You are babbling.
Click to expand...

So freedom of the press and the dangers of malefactors of great wealth in our society have nothing to do with libertarianism? What does libertarianism have to do with Damo?
 
No said:
Yes we do. The Libertarian standard for government regulations is as follows.

Is there a problem? If so, is government the only option? If so what is the MINIMAL amount of government regulation/intervention needed to correct the problem?

Follow that flow chart and you have the essence of Libertarianism.

EDIT: ALMOST forgot! Does the proposed government solution violate the prior constraints on the government?
Click to expand...

Is there any allowance for human capital in your equation? Trivial crap like; do people die because of unregulated industry practices?
 
Bfgrn said:
Is there any allowance for human capital in your equation? Trivial crap like; do people die because of unregulated industry practices?
Click to expand...

re read the following....

Is there a problem? If so, is government the only option? If so what is the MINIMAL amount of government regulation/intervention needed to correct the problem?
Click to expand...
 
Superfreak said:
re read the following....
Click to expand...

Read THIS...that is a cop out.

How much human capital is considered vs. mammon? The answer is very little to none. The libertarian economic philosophy I see and read at sites like Lew Rockwell is based on the assumption that only the poor and middle class need to be suspected of malfeasance. It parallels the 'conservative' authoritarian beliefs that wealth = virtue.
 
Bfgrn said:
Read THIS...that is a cop out.

How much human capital is considered vs. mammon? The answer is very little to none. The libertarian economic philosophy I see and read at sites like Lew Rockwell is based on the assumption that only the poor and middle class need to be suspected of malfeasance. It parallels the 'conservative' authoritarian beliefs that wealth = virtue. I don't understand the concepts being discussed here, but feel I'm an expert on them none the less.
Click to expand...
Clearly you're missing a brain lego.
 
No said:
Clearly you're missing a brain lego.
Click to expand...

You're clearly missing any form of ethics. Altering my post and attributing words I didn't say to me is pretty slimy...I see your philosophy clearly...

Whenever the human factors of economics come into question, you 'faux' libertarian right wing authoritarians 'cut & run'...
 
Bfgrn said:
Read THIS...that is a cop out.

How much human capital is considered vs. mammon? The answer is very little to none. The libertarian economic philosophy I see and read at sites like Lew Rockwell is based on the assumption that only the poor and middle class need to be suspected of malfeasance. It parallels the 'conservative' authoritarian beliefs that wealth = virtue.
Click to expand...

LMAO... you are so far off base in your definition of libertarian that it would take years to correct all of your mistakes.

Your paragraph above is complete nonsense.

Not only did you completely fuck up the libertarian position, but your idiocy on conservatives believing 'wealth = virtue' is also complete nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top