Racist in Chief

[carlfense]

The position demands and requires respect so that disputes can be resolved in an orderly, efficient, and largely fair manner. Do you really think that two people in a heated dispute would resolve their differences without someone who ensures that they play nice? (Since this summer I'm in court at least 3 days a week I'll answer that for you . . . 90% of the people there would be more likely to punch each other than they would be to reason with each other.)

 

It's very clear that you take a very philosophical approach to all of this. That's well and good so far as theories go. However, the real world doesn't usually fit into philosophical expectations.

 

 

Without respect for authority we'd have total anarchy... Who's going to take court or the law in general seriously if you could say "f#*k it" and do whatever you wanted without any fear of punishment?

 

Which is exactly what we do want? A society without rulers. You simply don't understand the definition of anarchy.

 

Please read Market for Liberty, or just peruse the anarcho-capitalism thread for a wide rage of solutions to what you deem would be a society that could say "f@ck it, without fear of punishment." No, freedom can't happen overnight, but it will happen and when it does the only way to ensure that it holds up is to be educated.

 

I am fairly well educated and read that book in college in my Poli-Sci 101 class as a freshman... I don't share the author's opinion, nor do I share yours... That doesn't make me uneducated, it's me exercising my freedom to think your opinion sucks. If you don't like that, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

The system we have has worked for many years. Yes, we desparately needed changes (ie Women/Minority Rights, flush out dirty cops, politicians, etc.)... If you think a government is corrupt then change it.. If you think a police officer or other public official wronged you, then complain...

 

And no, you shouldn't be able to obstruct an officer's investigation or tell a judge to "eat it" at will... If that were the case, it would be useless to have either of them, as no one would respect authority... It's not about respecting the man, it's about respecting the Law... The Law is what keeps most people on the civil side of the chaos we live in today...

Great argument. You disagree, so I am wrong. Nice!! And that's fine, you don't have to agree with anything I say, but for someone who's claims to be so educated you seem to lack both simple argumentative skills and a basic grasp of history.

 

What proof do you have that for many years the system has worked? I guess if you consider stealing from and enslaving the productive member s of society, engaging and funding war after war, piling up astronomical debt, debasing a currency and a deterioration of freedom to be success, then you hit the jackpot. However, since none of those characteristics constitute success, I think you better retool your thought process and your argument.

 

Aren't you a cop? Do you consider theft, fraud, coercion and murder to be crimes? If you do, how can you validate the existence of government? Maybe, as long as your paycheck keeps coming from the "real" workers of society's pockets, you can see past it or try to justify all those injustices, but as someone who values human life, property and freedom I cannot.

 

And as for THE LAW!! You really should read up on it!!

 

So far as your Bastiat essay goes . . . I little trust any supposedly academic work that ends 4 out of 5 sentences in the first paragraph with exclamation points. Nothing reasons like emotion they say.

 

And aren't you the king (on this forum anyways) of saying that your opponents' opinions are false and contradictory? It seems a bit hypocritical to chastise rawhide-jr for saying similar.

 

P.S. Apparently Bastiat thought the American government in 1850 was fine and dandy. Interesting.

[rawhide-jr]

That's pretty amazing. I too sleep well every night, knowing that I don't rob the people blind I claim to protect I also bought a new Tempur-Pedic... it works wonders!!

 

And actually it might even work for someone with your conscience.

 

While I know you're just trying to start an arguement with anyone who doesn't share the same opinion as you...

 

Yes, all that we peace officers do is rob everyone blind. We're all modern-day John Dillingers. I pay taxes, so aren't I robbing myself? I'd better stay on topic, I don't want to throw too much of my own opinion into anything. I'm sorry I had an opinion in the first place... Thank God there aren't anymore ignorant rednecks like me out there!

 

If I was a smart man, which apparently I am not, I would venture a guess that your head is securely wedged deep inside your colon. You calling me ignorant and unable to listen to another's opinion is like Hitler calling FDR evil...

[SOCALHUSKER]

The position demands and requires respect so that disputes can be resolved in an orderly, efficient, and largely fair manner. Do you really think that two people in a heated dispute would resolve their differences without someone who ensures that they play nice? (Since this summer I'm in court at least 3 days a week I'll answer that for you . . . 90% of the people there would be more likely to punch each other than they would be to reason with each other.)

 

It's very clear that you take a very philosophical approach to all of this. That's well and good so far as theories go. However, the real world doesn't usually fit into philosophical expectations.

 

 

Without respect for authority we'd have total anarchy... Who's going to take court or the law in general seriously if you could say "f#*k it" and do whatever you wanted without any fear of punishment?

 

Which is exactly what we do want? A society without rulers. You simply don't understand the definition of anarchy.

 

Please read Market for Liberty, or just peruse the anarcho-capitalism thread for a wide rage of solutions to what you deem would be a society that could say "f@ck it, without fear of punishment." No, freedom can't happen overnight, but it will happen and when it does the only way to ensure that it holds up is to be educated.

 

I am fairly well educated and read that book in college in my Poli-Sci 101 class as a freshman... I don't share the author's opinion, nor do I share yours... That doesn't make me uneducated, it's me exercising my freedom to think your opinion sucks. If you don't like that, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

The system we have has worked for many years. Yes, we desparately needed changes (ie Women/Minority Rights, flush out dirty cops, politicians, etc.)... If you think a government is corrupt then change it.. If you think a police officer or other public official wronged you, then complain...

 

And no, you shouldn't be able to obstruct an officer's investigation or tell a judge to "eat it" at will... If that were the case, it would be useless to have either of them, as no one would respect authority... It's not about respecting the man, it's about respecting the Law... The Law is what keeps most people on the civil side of the chaos we live in today...

Great argument. You disagree, so I am wrong. Nice!! And that's fine, you don't have to agree with anything I say, but for someone who's claims to be so educated you seem to lack both simple argumentative skills and a basic grasp of history.

 

What proof do you have that for many years the system has worked? I guess if you consider stealing from and enslaving the productive member s of society, engaging and funding war after war, piling up astronomical debt, debasing a currency and a deterioration of freedom to be success, then you hit the jackpot. However, since none of those characteristics constitute success, I think you better retool your thought process and your argument.

 

Aren't you a cop? Do you consider theft, fraud, coercion and murder to be crimes? If you do, how can you validate the existence of government? Maybe, as long as your paycheck keeps coming from the "real" workers of society's pockets, you can see past it or try to justify all those injustices, but as someone who values human life, property and freedom I cannot.

 

And as for THE LAW!! You really should read up on it!!

 

So far as your Bastiat essay goes . . . I little trust any supposedly academic work that ends 4 out of 5 sentences in the first paragraph with exclamation points. Nothing reasons like emotion they say.

 

And aren't you the king (on this forum anyways) of saying that your opponents' opinions are false and contradictory? It seems a bit hypocritical to chastise rawhide-jr for saying similar.

 

P.S. Apparently Bastiat thought the American government in 1850 was fine and dandy. Interesting.

Actually I try to provide evidence when I disagree.

 

I never said Bastiat was perfect(are any of us?), I just thought he had an interesting take on THE LAW!!

[SOCALHUSKER]

That's pretty amazing. I too sleep well every night, knowing that I don't rob the people blind I claim to protect I also bought a new Tempur-Pedic... it works wonders!!

 

And actually it might even work for someone with your conscience.

 

While I know you're just trying to start an arguement with anyone who doesn't share the same opinion as you...

 

Yes, all that we peace officers do is rob everyone blind. We're all modern-day John Dillingers. I pay taxes, so aren't I robbing myself? I'd better stay on topic, I don't want to throw too much of my own opinion into anything. I'm sorry I had an opinion in the first place... Thank God there aren't anymore ignorant rednecks like me out there!

 

If I was a smart man, which apparently I am not, I would venture a guess that your head is securely wedged deep inside your colon. You calling me ignorant and unable to listen to another's opinion is like Hitler calling FDR evil...

Actually I was somewhat kidding, and to be perfectly honest, I never referred to you as ignorant!!

 

I merely see "peace" officers as somewhat lacking in the consensual authority department (just my opinion). I sure as hell didn't have a vote in the matter, and wouldn't even choose to, but who cares anyways, right?? So to make the assumption that they demand respect is also only an opinion that you have, because I sure as hell don't.

 

And as far as Hitler calling FDR evil, doesn't he have right to (or not)??? Or does history not prove that he did a lot more to destroy humanity then the king of gas chambers ever did??

[carlfense]

After counting the negatives in your last sentence I think I can translate it: "History shows that FDR did more to destroy humanity than Hitler."

 

[rawhide-jr]

Yeah, I gave up a while ago. If he doesn't like cops, he can call a meth addict the next time he needs help...

 

And as for his prescious evidence... He always revert back to a book written by a professor or some random person like himself, never citing actual fact.

 

He's obviously been wronged at some stage in his life to be this heartbroken about authority figures, so I hope a government official gives him a lollipop or a cop gives you a sticker to make it all better.

[huskertim]

I am not surprised at all that the race card has been played here. I think it is absolutely f-ing ridiculous that people play the race card so quickly. Gates has some issues, but to call Obama a racist b/c he made a comment is going a little overboard. Should Obama stayed out of it? Probably or he should have at least chose his words better. Let's not forget all of the "logical" statements the previous president made.

 

 

I'm sorry to interupt this A/C thread with a take on racism but, to answer the question, no, I do not think calling the C in C racist was overboard. Clearly, he made his assumptions about the incident knowing only that his black friend had been arressted by a white cop, and llittle more. Seems to me his statement was reflexive rather than considered. That would seem a far better barometer of his motivations that a prepared speech. The real problem, as I see it, is that this validates a wide spread ideal in the black community that the cops are inherantly racist and thus ferments futhers racial division and distrust.

 

Good job Mr Gates, you got what you wanted.

[sarge87]

I am not surprised at all that the race card has been played here. I think it is absolutely f-ing ridiculous that people play the race card so quickly. Gates has some issues, but to call Obama a racist b/c he made a comment is going a little overboard. Should Obama stayed out of it? Probably or he should have at least chose his words better. Let's not forget all of the "logical" statements the previous president made.

 

 

I'm sorry to interupt this A/C thread with a take on racism but, to answer the question, no, I do not think calling the C in C racist was overboard. Clearly, he made his assumptions about the incident knowing only that his black friend had been arrested by a white cop, and little more. Seems to me his statement was reflexive rather than considered. That would seem a far better barometer of his motivations that a prepared speech. The real problem, as I see it, is that this validates a wide spread ideal in the black community that the cops are inherently racist and thus ferments furthers racial division and distrust.

 

Good job Mr Gates, you got what you wanted.

I agree totally with you on this one. I think he had a flashback to those good ole community agitating days.

 

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree when it come to Gates' daughter Elizabeth. I'll link the rest of the article, because it's too long to post. Here's a snippet attacking Crowley's 14 year old daughter. Note the subtle transition from condescension to pompous ass.

As our family rounded the corner to the White House library and I first caught sight of Sergeant Crowley’s lovely 14-year old daughter—who was wearing an appropriately heavy and charmingly untrained amount of green eyeliner on her lower lashes—we were instantly transported from the post-racial myth of America in 2008 to the reality of 2009.

My only question about the "Beer Summit" is: Who the heck thought it was a good idea to give Joe Biden a beer?

He says stupid crap sober. I hate to see what he says when he has a few in him.

[sarge87]

Bump

[carlfense]

Biden's beer was non-alcoholic.

[sarge87]

Biden's beer was non-alcoholic.

Thank the Lord for that!

 

For some reason, I can picture him playing keep-away with the nuclear football from the president after a couple Budweisers.

[huskertim]

Not to worry, Joe sits at the kids table when the grown ups need to tall.