Re: Why are over 80% of Dock Chatters Republicans
Originally posted by woodrat:<br /> hey 12, why don't stick to subjects that you know something about? What goes on in my world is not one of them!
<br />I'll stick to what <br />I choose ,when I choose it, with no input from you.<br />
Originally posted by woodrat:<br /><br />My definition of "anarchy" is completely different from yours, and I already noted that that is just a theory. I spend exactly ZERO energy trying to over throw the state. Libertarian is the closest real-world party affiliation I have ever been able to find.
<br />No need to explain.Your definition is meaningless to me.<br />You are an anarchist, according to your posts. The fact that you admit it, just substantiates that fact.<br />As for my definition of Anarchy ,it would be identical to that given by Meriam Webster's dictionary. <br />(as follows):<br />
<br />Main Entry:anarchy<br />Pronunciation:*a-n*r-k*, -*n*r-<br />Function:noun <br />Etymology:Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek, from anarchos having no ruler, from an- + archos ruler more at ARCH-<br />Date:1539<br /><br />1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government<br />2 a : absence or denial of any authority or established order b : absence of order : DISORDER *not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature Israel Shenker*<br />"<br /><br />For the life of me, I don't understand why you socialist, left wing, democrat,liberal,progressive,anachists cannot define what you are...Or when you do,try to change the definition of the word, or change what you call yourselves! It's
really strange.<br />What I'm getting at--- we conservative, right wing, capitalist, "neo-con" (i like that one. It makes me feel warm and fuzzy all over), hawkish republicans know what we are, tell you what we are, and even pick up on some of the "in-vogue" labels the left hangs on us, to define ourselves with pride.<br />By Webster's and my definition of "anarchist",(that would be:<br />
"1 : one who rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power<br />2 : one who believes in, advocates, or promotes anarchism or anarchy; especially : one who uses violent means to overthrow the established order", you are the enemy..<br />Just as I originally thought way back when you took offense to that.{Remember the "friend of my enemy is my enemy" thread? cant seem to find it...musta got poofed).<br />
Originally posted by woodrat:<br />In theory anyway, I AM an anarchist. (ooo, THAT will get some interesting responses, I'll bet!) Of course, I know that that just won't work in the big picture, because too many people can't control their worst impulses, and the result would be dangerous and unpleasant chaos. <br />But responsible self-government at an individual level is a good place to start.
<br />Governing ones' self without a governemnt is chaos and anarchy, which describes Iraq right now, with it's present power-vacuum...In other words, ANARCHY. It will not stand as long as those of us who care, maintain our resolve. And we will see a soveriegn ,self-reliant Iraqi government, or we will be there fighting the "insurgents" for that end-objective.<br /><br />But by declaring yourself an anarchist, you desire not only that the United States fail in the war on Islamic terrorism, but you want to see America fall like Rome!!<br />Not only that, but you prefer the present instability to even the rule of a dictator like Sadamn the sandman Huesein! Why? because he would represent a form of government. Granted, A tyranical one, but hey ---you're an ararchist!<br /><br /><br />
Originally posted by woodrat:<br />If the pyramid of power more more tilted towards local control, that would be moving in the right direction as far as I'm concerned.
<br />Why is a self-proclaimed anarchist making such a statement? I am now confused, because I agree with that 100%. It happens to be WHY we havent packed our military bags and brought the brave back home!(that would be America).<br />
Originally posted by woodrat:<br />Get your GD republican justice department off of state's backs!
<br /><br />Off topic. And no,we wont. "{our} republican justice department"
won in November. It will ride the "states' backs" like a redheaded stepchild on a sugar high!!! Like Sam Peckinpaw, riding that bomb.<br />Find a state, take all your comrads there, and
SECEDE! Just stay away from Florida, because we still have a militia.<br /><br />
Originally posted by woodrat:<br /><br />i've noted this here time and again and no one will ever answer it. If the conservatives are really in favor of more local control, why the heck does their justice department spend so much time and money trying to overturn state initiatives that they don't agree with? I would say that its pretty clear eveidence that the repubs of today anyway, are very much about strong centralized government, and they have been growing it bigger and more powerful everyday, while being cheered on by all you "freedom" loving republicans.<br />
What this "prooves" to me is, the left will LITIGATE THIER GRANDMOTHERS, to remove freedoms.<br />I've seen it happen too many times. Examples would be;<br />Remove the rights of the unborn,<br />remove the rights to unbiased promotions in the werkplace.<br />remove all reference to Christianity through the courts.<br />suing the Boy Scouts, to remove "God" and allow girls.<br />want more?<br />Get off the states' backs indeed!<br /><br />
Originally posted by woodrat:<br /> And as far as the value of me bringing up the bad to temper the good, you outright dismissed that other post of mine as lies of the democrats. I don't remember you having EVER been in favor of giving the neocon agenda a "proctological exam".
Yes, you're correct. I allways dismiss BS in favor of facts. And as far as being in favor of giving the neo cons a P.E., why would I? I agree with that agenda, and try to promote the good and complain about what is bad.<br />History will look back on the likes of me some day. I want the generations to come, to know conservatives fought for what was moral and ethical, in the face of a global war on Islamic terrorists.<br />How will history look-upon the anarchists of today?
<br /><br />Where Heaven is gonna be I do not know, but all I know is that that is where I wanna be...the alternative is a really hot subject...and, SHEESH!!! it lasts a loooooooooong time!!!!<br /><br />Ya know, I would hate to think I would be spending all my eternity with the likes of Hitler, Mussolini, Clinton...just kidding, I really have no clue WHO will go there, but I will take great pains not to find out...
