Libertarians are getting cocky…
Natural Law?
The Constitution is vital for free speech…

Frances – I’m sure it was in relation to the FL Pastor.

OK libs you can wake up now, the ” real ” Americans are done speaking up on behalf of your rights. You know the rights that allow you to go back to relentlessly vilifying them again.

This would be much better if the three panellists just talked among themselves and Napolitano wasn’t there. Reason magazine has great writers working for them.

skoorbekim said:
Libertarians are getting cocky…
Natural Law?
The Constitution is vital for free speech…

I don’t think that any libertarians will argue that the Constitution isn’t a helpful tool, but you have the right to free speech because of natural rights. It isn’t granted to you by some government or because you belong to a certain group of people, you have free speech because you’re a human being.

Amusing how a liberal like Frances describes a panel of Libertarians as “high brow”, while just about all liberals have a good time telling conservatives how stupid they are compared to their Ivy League god, you know, the guy whose teleprompters are raised higher then normal so he can look down his nose at the masses.

Next week, “The Judge” will host a no-holds barred debate on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
“Natural Law” is a fictive device.
Because you are human, you have the capacity to speak. Period.
The RIGHT to speak must be granted, whether by an individual, a society, or a government.
You are ALWAYS entitled to speak to yourself, which should be of some comfort to you.
BTW, it’s nice to know Eddie Munster got a job after he grew up.

Joseph Glackin said:
The RIGHT to speak must be granted, whether by an individual, a society, or a government.

Wrong, progressive idiot. Things are either “granted” by others, or they’re “rights”. Rights can only be denied, not granted.

That woman says some pretty disturbing things although I like her message on love.

<a href="#comment-426247"Muslim woman said: “We are going to see more and more situations where rights conflict. So we constantly have to ask the question: “what is the greatest good for the greatest number?” At the end of the day, freedom is the greatest good for the greatest number because even offended Muslims still benefit from freedom of assembly and they are exercising that as we are going live right now, in holding a counter-protest to Terry Jones’. So I see that as they are using freedom and his freedom cannot be segregated from theirs. It is an indivisible whole. ” .

So the only reason that Terry jones cannot be shut up is that freedom of speech also benefits Muslims? Freedom of speech should only exist when it benefits Muslims

Sorry response to wrong article :/

David King said:
I don’t think that any libertarians will argue that the Constitution isn’t a helpful tool, but you have the right to free speech because of natural rights. It isn’t granted to you by some government or because you belong to a certain group of people, you have free speech because you’re a human being.

I only take issue with protection being somehow deserved because of “natural rights”
As a land of laws, the Constitution stipulates by law that we have those rights…

As my Conservatism took hold of me I was delayed by the likes of P Buchanan who wrote that this country is culture more than any paper document…
My brand of Conservatism requires that document and the concepts written there-in…
As soon as I hear that the US Constitution is not important I cringe…

winning said:
Wrong, progressive idiot. Things are either “granted” by others, or they’re “rights”. Rights can only be denied, not granted.

Wrong, whining.
You have the right to speak. It is part of your physical make-up. Part of what makes you “human”.
If you live in a society, your right to “speech” is determined by the arbiters of that society.
I’m sure you knew words you could not use in front of your mother. She controlled speech in your home.
You cannot yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater, (or a not-so-crowded one), because you want to. Society has controlled your speech.
You are arguing for anarchy or nihilism. If you can name a society where your “right to free speech” is absolute,
go there. Then the rest of us will hear some real whining.

“Amusing how a liberal like Frances describes a panel of Libertarians as “high brow”, while just about all liberals have a good time telling conservatives how stupid they are compared to their Ivy League god”

1-) The American Conservatives that transformed the word “elitist” in a profanity, not liberals.

2-) You hardly see prominent. Conservatives on the so called Conservative media. George Will only appears on ABC, the last time that I saw Andrew Bacevich was on Fareed Zakharia GPS.

my humble suggestion:
more posts with Libertarian philosophy becoming mainstream…

skoorbekim said:
my humble suggestion:
more posts with Libertarian philosophy becoming mainstream…

“Libertarian philosophy” is a polite way of saying , “I’m a selfish little brat. I want my way, and I want it NOW!”
With the end of the frontier in this country, libertarianism became an escape for the coddled rich and the egocentric middle class. “I’ve got mine and I won’t share! I don’t need anyone else! Where’s my Binkie?”
Any philosophy that denies the social needs of the animal called human is doomed to failure.
If you are all wrapped up in yourself, who else would want to schtup you?

black and WHITE said:
OK libs you can wake up now, the ” real ” Americans are done speaking up on behalf of your rights. You know the rights that allow you to go back to relentlessly vilifying them again.

Take a long walk off of a short pier this was not a very sophisticated discussion of freedom of speech at all, maybe for you it was but not to anyone really knowledgeable. The idea idea that the Civil War and the 14th Amendment caused the states to have to honor freedom of speech is factually wrong. That did not happen until Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925), It seems to be a conservative means to be just plain ignorant. It is amazing how little conservatives know about American history and oir system of government.

skoorbekim said:
my humble suggestion:
more posts with Libertarian philosophy becoming mainstream…

Libertarian philosophy will never become mainstream. Most Americans are not stupid enough to fall for such a naive, unrealistic and impractical view of the world. Only in redneck states where the education levels are really poor like Kentucky and Texas will ignorant cretins vote for libertarian candidates. You are living in a delusional fantasy.

winning said:
Amusing how a liberal like Frances describes a panel of Libertarians as “high brow”, while just about all liberals have a good time telling conservatives how stupid they are compared to their Ivy League god, you know, the guy whose teleprompters are raised higher then normal so he can look down his nose at the masses.

Libertarians highbrow. Libertarians are low level anti-intellectual morons. They cannot function in the real world. They retreat into a Hobbesian fantasy world in which they live out their delusional fantasy of seeing themselves against the world. What a joke! Libertarians as high brow. I have heard it all.

Joseph Glackin said:
“Libertarian philosophy” is a polite way of saying , “I’m a selfish little brat. I want my way, and I want it NOW>

Idiot! modern “liberalism” is the philosophy of the selfish brat. ” I want my free government health care, I want the rich to give me all their money, I want teachers to have more money as a reward for keeping America’s youth stupid, I want there to be a dept of education despite the fact quality of education went down since it’s creation in 79, I want everyone to pay higher taxes so it can be wasted on failed social programs because it’s the patriotic thing to do,

You’re a child Glackin, and a stupid one at that.

Resistance Is Futile said:
Libertarians highbrow. Libertarians are low level anti-intellectual morons. They cannot function in the real world. They retreat into a Hobbesian fantasy world in which they live out their delusional fantasy of seeing themselves against the world. What a joke! Libertarians as high brow. I have heard it all.

Good God, please tell me you see the irony in your post. I know modern “liberals” are blind to the obvious but God damn kid get your eye’s checked.

In short you and your kind are thugs and a thieves Glackin. Wanting what others have and resorting to using a paid off gang to get it whether it’s for you or someone else. I would have more respect for you if you went out personally and took it yourself.

illusive man said:
Idiot! modern “liberalism” is the philosophy of the selfish brat.

You’re a child Glackin, and a stupid one at that.

I deleted your “quotation” because it had nothing to do with me.
If “As you treat these, the least of my children, is how you treat me.” is being selfish, mea culpa.
Guess you don’t think much of the philosophy of the man from Nazareth.
“Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.” Too progressive for you?
Go argue with Churchill, or John Paul II, or Matthew 25: 41-46
As for your “insult”, thank you. Then read Matthew, 18:4

Joseph Glackin said:
I deleted your “quotation” because it had nothing to do with me.If “As you treat these, the least of my children, is how you treat me.” is being selfish, mea culpa.Guess you don’t think much of the philosophy of the man from Nazareth.“Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.” Too progressive for you?Go argue with Churchill, or John Paul II, or Matthew 25: 41-46As for your “insult”, thank you. Then read Matthew, 18:4

It had everything to do with you collectivist.
And BTW, using the bible to sell a point makes you a teabagger in the eye’s of your fellow progressives, prepare to be ostracized from the collective.

T13 said:
In short you and your kind are thugs and a thieves Glackin. Wanting what others have and resorting to using a paid off gang to get it whether it’s for you or someone else. I would have more respect for you if you went out personally and took it yourself.

And I would have SOME respect for you if you weren’t hidden behind a pseudonym and an avatar.
I wouldn’t want the sweat off your sorry @ss if I was dying of thirst. But you and your like only treasure life when it is the responsibility of a mother (in utero). The minute it’s born, you start cutting funding. Thugs and thieves steal food from children to give tax cuts to millionaires. And they call themselves “Patriots”?

illusive man said:
Idiot! modern “liberalism” is the philosophy of the selfish brat. ” I want my free government health care, I want the rich to give me all their money, I want teachers to have more money as a reward for keeping America’s youth stupid, I want there to be a dept of education despite the fact quality of education went down since it’s creation in 79, I want everyone to pay higher taxes so it can be wasted on failed social programs because it’s the patriotic thing to do,

You’re a child Glackin, and a stupid one at that.

And what social programs are you calling failed, social security, medicaid, medicare? I think not. The vast majority of Americans, over seventy percent disagree with you. Wake up and come out of your stupor.

Joseph Glackin said:
And I would have SOME respect for you if you weren’t hidden behind a pseudonym and an avatar.I wouldn’t want the sweat off your sorry @ss if I was dying of thirst. But you and your like only treasure life when it is the responsibility of a mother (in utero). The minute it’s born, you start cutting funding. Thugs and thieves steal food from children to give tax cuts to millionaires. And they call themselves “Patriots”?

yeah better just to kill them before being born, you tellem joe

illusive man said:
Good God, please tell me you see the irony in your post. I know modern “liberals” are blind to the obvious but God damn kid get your eye’s checked.

You are the kid. I notice you duid not contest, let alone try to refute anything I said. You find facts a little difficult to deal with huh!

Resistance Is Futile said:
And what social programs are you calling failed, social security, medicaid, medicare? I think not. The vast majority of Americans, over seventy percent disagree with you. Wake up and come out of your stupor.

just a question , what was the average life span in america when social security was signed?

illusive man said:
It had everything to do with you collectivist.
And BTW, using the bible to sell a point makes you a teabagger in the eye’s of your fellow progressives, prepare to be ostracized from the collective.

No @sswipe, you don’t use quotation marks for what you wish someone would say because it would fit
your meme.
Don’t think the Bible is anathema to Progressives. WE believe the lessons, not the myths.
When you have NO idea what you are talking about, SHUT UP!
If you get a fundamentalist or teabagger (your word) into a discussion of the PHILOSOPHY of the New Testament, without telling them the source or your arguments, watch them do a Linda Blair when you show them your source.
The only “collective” I know recycles trash. I’d be glad to drop you off there any time.

Joseph Glackin said:
If you live in a society, your right to “speech” is determined by the arbiters of that society.
I’m sure you knew words you could not use in front of your mother. She controlled speech in your home.

Private entities have no say in a person’s right to free speech. Persons who punish you for free speech do not have the power of the government behind them.

Joseph Glackin said:
You cannot yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater, (or a not-so-crowded one), because you want to. Society has controlled your speech.

Wrong. This old cliche is fun to throw around, but it has no basis in reality. You can be held responsible for what your free speech causes, but, if you were to yell “fire!” in a crowded theater and no one paid attention, you’ve committed no crime.

You’re obviously a stupid person, especially to put forth such a juvenile argument.

cjd ohio 1 said:
just a question , what was the average life span in america when social security was signed?

And just what did that figure encompass? In 1935, 440 infants per 100,00 died. The death rate for children 5-14 was 150 per 100,000. The rates in 2007 were, respectively, 30 and 15.
Those figures are part of the “average life span” calculations,
In 1935, many lived past 65. They were balanced out by those who never reached maturity.
If you are capable of learning, this is information.
If you are looking for talking points, it’s just another part of the “reality based world” Herr Rove so soundly rejected.

Joseph Glackin said:
And just what did that figure encompass? In 1935, 440 infants per 100,00 died. The death rate for children 5-14 was 150 per 100,000. The rates in 2007 were, respectively, 30 and 15.Those figures are part of the “average life span” calculations,In 1935, many lived past 65. They were balanced out by those who never reached maturity.If you are capable of learning, this is information.If you are looking for talking points, it’s just another part of the “reality based world” Herr Rove so soundly rejected.

avg 62, 16 workers for every retiree

cjd ohio 1 said:
avg 62, 16 workers for every retiree

Which proves what? Your love of cafeteria statistics?
Do you know the Social Security Trust Fund is over $1.6TRILLION in surplus?
Do you know that , if Reagan had not looted the Fund, it would be solvent forever?
That the argument today is that the GOP does not want to honor the IOU’s they put in the fund when they looted it to give tax cuts to millionaires?
That Ryan and the rest of the House GOP leadership authorized EVERY debt increase , unpaid for tax cut, and off the books war expenditure presented by W & Darth?

Joseph Glackin said:
Which proves what? Your love of cafeteria statistics?Do you know the Social Security Trust Fund is over $1.6TRILLION in surplus?Do you know that , if Reagan had not looted the Fund, it would be solvent forever?That the argument today is that the GOP does not want to honor the IOU’s they put in the fund when they looted it to give tax cuts to millionaires?That Ryan and the rest of the House GOP leadership authorized EVERY debt increase , unpaid for tax cut, and off the books war expenditure presented by W & Darth?

surplus of iou’s, never mind, you still believe your mom was drafted after facts prove that not possible, you can not be reasoned with

Joseph Glackin said:
Which proves what? Your love of cafeteria statistics?Do you know the Social Security Trust Fund is over $1.6TRILLION in surplus?Do you know that , if Reagan had not looted the Fund, it would be solvent forever?That the argument today is that the GOP does not want to honor the IOU’s they put in the fund when they looted it to give tax cuts to millionaires?That Ryan and the rest of the House GOP leadership authorized EVERY debt increase , unpaid for tax cut, and off the books war expenditure presented by W & Darth?

two choices. raised the retirement age or raise taxes

cjd ohio 1 said:
surplus of iou’s, never mind, you still believe your mom was drafted after facts prove that not possible, you can not be reasoned with

That, butthead, is called an ad hominem.
You cannot deal with numbers or reality, when they don’t fit your prejudice.
I do not care whether or not you believe the story of my mother.
She is no longer here, and your opinion means less to me than …anything I could imagine.
Anyone who chooses their own reality with so little concern for facts should be careful when laughing at others.
I don’t expect much reasoning when I trade comments with you.
But, It amuses me as to how juvenile you kids become when your make-believe universe is confronted with facts.
Once again, you come up all Emily Litella, “Never mind.”

cjd ohio 1 said:
two choices. raised the retirement age or raise taxes

RAISE TAXES! Go to the rates from 1992, when GHWB was Pres.
Then, attack the budget. Including “entitlements”. Including defense.
Rewrite the tax code. Shut down loop-holes, pork, and no-bid contracts.
As we are at (several) wars, institute a “War profits” standard that limits the profits to industry on the war effort.
We did that in WW I, in WW II, and Korea.

Joseph Glackin said:
That, butthead, is called an ad hominem.You cannot deal with numbers or reality, when they don’t fit your prejudice.I do not care whether or not you believe the story of my mother.She is no longer here, and your opinion means less to me than …anything I could imagine.Anyone who chooses their own reality with so little concern for facts should be careful when laughing at others.I don’t expect much reasoning when I trade comments with you.But, It amuses me as to how juvenile you kids become when your make-believe universe is confronted with facts.Once again, you come up all Emily Litella, “Never mind.”

you have one thing right its a STORY about you mom, not a fact which has been proven by the links, and your. line about so little concern for fact was so funny. but you make up your own facts so there is no use talking to you so, good nite, and when i make comments here please ignore them

social security tax 1990-2010…….6.2% matched by employers

Joseph Glackin said:
RAISE TAXES! Go to the rates from 1992, when GHWB was Pres.Then, attack the budget. Including “entitlements”. Including defense.Rewrite the tax code. Shut down loop-holes, pork, and no-bid contracts.As we are at (several) wars, institute a “War profits” standard that limits the profits to industry on the war effort.We did that in WW I, in WW II, and Korea.

social security and income taxes are two different things

cjd ohio 1 said:
social security and income taxes are two different things

Not when you let the foxes from the “income tax” side into the henhouse of the Social Security Trust(?) Fund.
You bozos keep telling us “money is fungible” when you want to de-fund PP.
When you rape the fund to pay for wars and tax cuts, that, too, is fungible funds.
You can’t have it both ways.

Resistance Is Futile said:
You are the kid. I notice you duid not contest, let alone try to refute anything I said. You find facts a little difficult to deal with huh!

You didn’t say any facts.
All you did was make childish accusations about libertarians.
And you are infact a kid.

illusive man said:
It had everything to do with you collectivist.
And BTW, using the bible to sell a point makes you a teabagger in the eye’s of your fellow progressives, prepare to be ostracized from the collective.

Nah, most of us on the left actually believe in Jesus’ teachings. You won’t hear anything negative from us in what Joe had to say.

Alice67 said:
Nah, most of us on the left actually believe in Jesus’ teachings. You won’t hear anything negative from us in what Joe had to say.

Thanks, Alice.
They have a problem with projection.

Joseph Glackin said:
Thanks, Alice.
They have a problem with projection.

I’m ellie btw Joe. Dumped my other account that was giving me tons of problems.

Resistance Is Futile said:
Take a long walk off of a short pier this was not a very sophisticated discussion of freedom of speech at all, maybe for you it was but not to anyone really knowledgeable. The idea idea that the Civil War and the 14th Amendment caused the states to have to honor freedom of speech is factually wrong. That did not happen until Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925), It seems to be a conservative means to be just plain ignorant. It is amazing how little conservatives know about American history and oir system of government.

I would have preferred more pictures myself, butt then I can’t blow smoke up my own ass like you can either.

skoorbekim said:
I only take issue with protection being somehow deserved because of “natural rights”
As a land of laws, the Constitution stipulates by law that we have those rights…

While I see where you’re going, you’re missing the mark here. The Constitution does not grant us rights. The Constitution prohibits government infringement upon our natural rights. it protects our rights, but it does not give them to us. You’ll recall this from the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Joseph Glackin said:
When you rape the fund to pay for wars and tax cuts, that, too, is fungible funds.

Would someone please get this fool a basic math class? YOU DO NOT PAY FOR TAX CUTS. EVER.

Thugs and thieves steal food from children to give tax cuts to millionaires.

This is weapons grade stupidity. Oh, and class warfare, very poorly executed.

Pablo said:
This is weapons grade stupidity. Oh, and class warfare, very poorly executed.

With progs/libs/dems it’s just like arguing with teenagers about why their allowance has to be cut. They just don’t understand the concept that when the money runs out, you just can’t “sh*t” more of it. The unicorn and skittles mindset.

Did I seriously just read someone post that Social Security has a 1.6 trillion dollar SURPLUS….? OMG, we have a congressional accountant in our midst — one of those magical la-la land people that puts an IOU in the ASSET column!!!!

Gee, if only I could spend myself into bottomless debt oblivion, stick a million dollar IOU in my checking account and tell my bank that all is well because, as they can easily see, I have a surplus! If that’s all it takes we’re all multi-millionaires!

conspiracygirl said:
Did I seriously just read someone post that Social Security has a 1.6 trillion dollar SURPLUS….? OMG, we have a congressional accountant in our midst — one of those magical la-la land people that puts an IOU in the ASSET column!!!! Gee, if only I could spend myself into bottomless debt oblivion, stick a million dollar IOU in my checking account and tell my bank that all is well because, as they can easily see, I have a surplus! If that’s all it takes we’re all multi-millionaires!

The left will never wake up to the fact that S.S. and all other “new deal” style entitlements are all “funded” by Maddoff style ponzi schemes….

Joseph Glackin said:
Next week, “The Judge” will host a no-holds barred debate on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.“Natural Law” is a fictive device.Because you are human, you have the capacity to speak. Period.The RIGHT to speak must be granted, whether by an individual, a society, or a government.You are ALWAYS entitled to speak to yourself, which should be of some comfort to you.BTW, it’s nice to know Eddie Munster got a job after he grew up.

You have that backward. The right to speak can be taken away by government or left alone by government. Free speech is the natural right they presented it as, government can only take negative steps with respect to speech. Read a little about the debate that surrounded the Bill of Rights.

What activity are we working with today fear, greed or blame?
If you watch enough politics and it takes considerable time, you will find there are two factions, one faction is the manipulator and the others are the manipulated.
Let’s start with manipulators, they are Super Rich, they indirectly choose the topic, (no, not the person doing the interviewing, he is just working for a living.), the real culprits may be back as far as a few different companies. Their influence requires others to work towards a final goal. Their motives of fear, greed and blame, depending on which objective they wish to accomplish at the moment. The manipulated just go with whichever way the wind blows, they are usually very sincere and sometimes naive. Those interviewed usually only get to addresses the agenda for which they were interviewed. Many times there is a hidden agenda within the visible agenda which is not totally presented to the person being interviewed. I hope all this makes sense it will help you understand what,” reading between the lines really means”.
Take for instance when the profiteers scammed the housing market, the securities market, the stock Market, the holding companies, and the Banks; Obama bailed them out to stop a quick dive into a Depression.
This caused our National Debt to skyrocket. This was a great opportunity for the manipulators to cause hype over the National Debt, then look for someone to blame it on. They chose Seniors; the people who gave their entire life through numerous wars, thirty years or so of hard labor while, at the same time raising families of children to fill their shoes when they are gone. After all this they want to cut their medical care and Social Security to cover the Debt they created scamming every market possible for huge profits.
We should all understand, years ago when a person was a millionaire, they were rich people. Not so anymore, recently someone offered $ 50 billion to buy out Face Book. I guess from this observation most agree the next step up is a trillionaire. All of America will end up in poverty trying to create the next trillion dollar person.
We need fair play legislation before America is at war with America.
There are two types of education, book learning and common sense.
One without the other is like putting a new suit on a bum. He’s still a bum

Pablo said:
This is weapons grade stupidity. Oh, and class warfare, very poorly executed.

Once again the uberreich wing is projecting its sins upon its opposition.
Class Warfare has been a staple of the GOP since Nixon’s “Silent Majority” and Raygun’s “Welfare Queen” speech.
When you live in a society, you accept responsibilities. All that “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” stuff, that is promised. The right is all for the “take, take, take” part. They want defense, clean water, safe streets.
They just don’t want to pay for it!
Ever notice how all the “Welfare States” are RED?
Gov. “I may secede” Perry, (R-Tx), now wants the feds to pay for his wildfires.
Gov. “We didn’t need the Klan, we had the White Citizens’ Council” Barbour, (R-Ms.), wants help with his tornado damage.
You can’t make this crap up.

If you’re fool enough to think we have free speech, look at what happens to an individual who asks whether Barak Hussein -0bama was born in the United States and wants to see proof thereof.

X-3 said:
If you’re fool enough to think we have free speech, look at what happens to an individual who asks whether Barak Hussein -0bama was born in the United States and wants to see proof thereof.

How many are in jail? Most of them just run for Pres.

Excuse my ignorance but what does being in the slam have to do with anything? The topic was free speech and I believe that right is accorded to those who are incarcerated. I could be wrong. If you’re implying that people who ask difficult questions or make absurd remarks, I don’t believe many who do are put in jail for having done so. Finally, and for what it’s worth, I believe ALL candidates for ANY public office should render full disclosure of pertinent details of their lives; it doesn’t have anything to do with -0bama, as a person.