Pilot's Political Orientation

Go he
http://www.libertarian.org/index2.html




"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

So now you have 'conservatives' running around talking about property
rights
and states' rights

Republicans have always supported States' rights, as that is the basis of
a
republic.

(originally created to protect slavery)

Democrats wanted the 3/5 law and Republicans were not willing to go to war
over it and as long as libertarins could control the purse everyone was
willing to leave things be for a while.

and protecting
large corporations while espousing populist principles.

The libertarian wing (once Federalists) of the Republican Party insistthey
address the issues of fiscal responsibility and a small central
government,
but libertarians are out of favor now due to their isolationist
tendancies.

And you have the
'liberals' running around trying to limit free speech and press,
disarming
the public, and supporting the worst thugs and despots imaginable in
other
countries in the name of 'diversity' and 'tolerance.'

Racism has always been the Democrats' product.

in article , Dave Stadt at
wrote on 4/17/04 7:11 PM:


"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
...
in article , C J Campbell at
wrote on 4/17/04 11:37 AM:

If Jefferson is mentioned in public schools at all, it
is
to highlight the shameful and oppressive past of the white male
dictators
that established the United States. That is all most modern grade school
kids know about Jefferson.

This must be a relatively recent develepment, because I for one can't
recall
ever being taught any such thing. You're basically just making this up,
aren't you?

You obviously have no idea what is being taught in the liberal run education
system in this country.

"If Jefferson is mentioned in public schools at all, it is to highlight the
shameful and oppressive past of the white male dictators that established
the United States. That is all most modern grade school kids know about
Jefferson."

Would anyone care to cite some proof of the above statement?

in article , Dave Stadt at
wrote on 4/17/04 7:03 PM:


"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
...
in article , C J Campbell at
wrote on 4/16/04 8:04 AM:


"BllFs6" wrote in message
...
Liberalism is Communism one drink at a time. - P.J. O'Rourke


If only it was even as good as that

Liberalism is more imprisoning than communism ever thought of being
while
hiding under the fake facade of true freedom.....

Its much better when poision is labeled poison, tastes like poison, and
everyone knows its poison.....rather than thinking and being told its
free
jelly doughnuts instead....


People still buy cigarettes.... How can anyone possibly explain why vast
numbers of people will continue to buy something that burns their mouths
and
lungs, makes the eyes sting, smells bad, makes food taste bad, is likely
to
burn themselves, their friends, and their possessions, and is deadly
poisonous to boot, and even claim that they 'enjoy' it? Perhaps
liberalism
is to politics what tobacco is to recreation.

Maybe JFK was right after all, when he claimed that he was a jelly
doughnut.
:-)

Okay, I was gonna stay out of this, but since people are comparing
liberalism to poison, cigarettes and other cancerous substances, it may be
time to remind everyone that our country was founded on some quite liberal
principles. Thomas Jefferson would likely be appalled to hear liberalism
likened to "poison".

C'mon folks, one of the reasons our country is so divided is rhetoric such
as this. Turn off Sean Hannity's rants for 10 seconds and get yourselves
together. Sheesh.

Jefferson would puke if he were exposed to today's so called liberalism.

Okay, nevermind. Back to Hannity.

"Judah" wrote in message
...

How, exactly, do the rich get richer without taking other
people's assets?


By creating wealth.

"Judah" wrote in message
...

What, exactly, then, do conservatives want?


Freedom.

"Otis Winslow" wrote in message
.. .
Go he
http://www.libertarian.org/index2.html

The Hoover Institute is the leading libertarian think tank in America and it
is very conservative. In fact, outside the Hoover Institute libertarians
have had little power in the US since FDR's Presidency began. Libertarians
inside the Republican Party were responsible for the "balanced budget" we
had a few years ago.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

So now you have 'conservatives' running around talking about property
rights
and states' rights

Republicans have always supported States' rights, as that is the basis
of a
republic.

(originally created to protect slavery)

Democrats wanted the 3/5 law and Republicans were not willing to go to
war
over it and as long as libertarins could control the purse everyone was
willing to leave things be for a while.

and protecting
large corporations while espousing populist principles.

The libertarian wing (once Federalists) of the Republican Party
insistthey
address the issues of fiscal responsibility and a small central
government,
but libertarians are out of favor now due to their isolationist
tendancies.

And you have the
'liberals' running around trying to limit free speech and press,
disarming
the public, and supporting the worst thugs and despots imaginable in
other
countries in the name of 'diversity' and 'tolerance.'

Racism has always been the Democrats' product.

"Dave Stadt" wrote in
:


"Judah" wrote in message
...
How, exactly, do the rich get richer without taking other people's
assets?

By applying themselves and earning what they accumulate. If you are
smart and work hard you win. If you are dumb and sit at home waiting
for the welfare check you lose.


Ahhh... So that's why my brilliant seventh grade science teacher is so
wealthy, and Mike Tyson, who can barely speak english, is so broke!

"Judah" wrote in message
...
"Dave Stadt" wrote in
:


"Judah" wrote in message
...
How, exactly, do the rich get richer without taking other people's
assets?

By applying themselves and earning what they accumulate. If you are
smart and work hard you win. If you are dumb and sit at home waiting
for the welfare check you lose.


Ahhh... So that's why my brilliant seventh grade science teacher is so
wealthy, and Mike Tyson, who can barely speak english, is so broke!

In fact Mike Tyson is broke. His current net worth is a couple of thousand
dollars. Tyson didn't sit home waiting for a government check although he
might well end up in that situation. If in fact the science teacher is
brilliant the opportunity to increase earnings is readily available.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
link.net:


"Judah" wrote in message
...

How, exactly, do the rich get richer without taking other
people's assets?


By creating wealth.



Ex Nihilo?

"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
...
in article , C J Campbell at
wrote on 4/17/04 5:25 PM:


"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
news:BCA7013F.D40EA%
Jesus was a liberal.

Then why do liberals hate him? Why don't liberals espouse the
principals
that Jesus taught?

Sheesh, every time they try to give to the poor, you accuse them of
redistributing wealth.


Where did Jesus go around with a band of Roman soldiers, robbing people
at
swordpoint so that he could give money to the poor? For that is what
so-called liberals do today.

I really don't understand this all this raving. Do you really believe that
people go around robbing other people at swordpoint?


If John and Peter get together and take money from Paul at gunpoint, we call
it armed robbery. If two thousand voters get together and decide to take
money from another thousand, we call it taxation.

Do you really believe that the collection of taxes is not backed up with the
threat of armed force? Try not paying your taxes. Ignore all letters and
demands for payment and refuse to move out of your home when it is auctioned
off to pay the taxes. Sooner or later gentlemen with guns will be on your
doorstep. If you continue to resist, they will kill you.

If there is a difference between a mugger and the government in this regard
it is that the mugger generally does not keep coming back and he does not
demand your absolute loyalty like the government does.

Traditionally liberals recognized that governments were a necessary evil
required to maintain order, provide for the common defense, and protect
property. The liberal idea is that government exists for the benefit of the
governed, not the government. In the days of monarchy and the divine right
of kings, this was a pretty radical idea. The goal of liberalism was to
provide a limited government with severely restricted powers. The governed
would enjoy most of the benefits of government without tyranny. The people
would be allowed to arm themselves in order to overthrow a tyrannical
government. The government was forbidden to interfere in the press and in
religious affairs in order to ensure that a voice other than that of the
government was heard. All well and good.

But what do we have now? Liberals using the government to silence dissent.
Liberals using government power for enforced redistribution of wealth.
Liberals using government power to seize private property. Liberals using
government power to interfere with the practice of religion. Liberals using
government power to intrude on family life. Liberals using government power
to disarm the public. Liberals using government power to promote pork barrel
projects. Liberals using government power to prevent competing newspapers
from providing an alternate voice. Liberals have become the tyranny that
they feared and sought to prevent.

A liberal education no longer means that you have been taught to think. Now
it means you have been brainwashed. The great liberal classics are no longer
even studied in schools. They are disparaged as the work of dead white
males. Mortimer Adler was perhaps the last proponent of a liberal education,
and he was basically a tombist and sell-out to the new Toryism.

Because that is what liberalism has become. There really are no
'conservatives' in government. George W. Bush is a liberal; his views differ
from those of other liberals only in degree and emphasis, not in kind. The
same goes for everybody else in government. Modern liberals have far more in
common with Tories than they do with liberalism. Having seized power, they
have become corrupted by it, entrenching themselves with a vigor that would
do credit to a Caesar.

It is not a new phenomenon. Paul described modern liberals fairly
succinctly:

1 THIS know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud,
blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent,
fierce, despisers of those that are good,

4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn
away.

6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly
women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

(2 Timothy 3:1-7)

Paul was far from alone in his view of what liberalism would become. George
Orwell, a liberal, shared the same misgivings. "1984" and "Animal Farm" are
not indictments of conservatism, they are warnings of what Orwell saw the
direction liberalism was taking. Aldous Huxley saw a similar vision of
ultimate liberal betrayal of liberal values, where government and society
were controlled by media conglomerates and personalities specially bred for
rule. All the liberal classics would be banned and society would be
controlled using sex and drugs. Frankly, Huxley's prescience in predicting
what would become of liberalism is both frightening and spot on.