Bruce gets political

[Zach95]

I have always hated Bruce's songs (besides Deirdre). Now I personally dislike him for his conservative politics.
I'm going to boooooo him to pieces during Disney Girls if I go see them play this summer.

That's incredibly rude and disrespectful, just as much as Bruce's comments were. I highly advise you to avoid such snobbery and enjoy the show.

[Heysaboda]

I think Carl Wilson was wrong for potentially alienating at least 50 percent of his audience by declaring Conscientious Objector status.

WTF??? Exactly what planet were you living on when he did?

WHOOSH!

 

 

[Dave in KC]

I believe Bruce is a control person and now red lights and whauga horns are sounding all around him. I am sure he is completely bummed at this point. He is on record for many years that he wanted no part of any reunion and so he reneges and is all in. Now look what happened. I'll bet when he puts his head down on his pillow tonight he'd wish he stayed with his original plan. Too late now.  I wonder what his sons think?

[Awesoman]

But for Bruce to disrepect the man is just uncalled for.  It's a comment that reflects poorly on Brucie.  Obama is a husband and father of two girls, and doesn't need the disrespect, even from an aging over-the-hill rocker.

 

Riiiiight...because no one *dared* try to disrespect George W. Bush when he was in office.  The left-wing loons (including 90% of the entertainment industry) took every shot at Bush they could get...whether it was deserved or not.  Hell, some filmmaker even made a movie where he gets assassinated.  San Francisco wanted to name a sewage plant after him.  Yet people on this board are getting their panties in a wad because some old geezer that wrote a Barry Manilow hit dare call Obama an a-hole.  What a pity!  

Hypocrisy...it's grand!

[Heysaboda]

   Sorry, why should one respect someone who, daily, is responsible for dozens of 'civilian' deaths in many locations around the world? Because he's a father!? Are you mad? Pretty sure it doesn't take much magic altruism to be a father. Because someone voted for the guy does not make him respectable. Peaceful and voluntary interactions are something I can respect. In what way is your demagogue peaceful or respectful to those murdered in the quest for empire?
   Remember how you used to hate those mean old wars of GWB? Why are you not on the street everyday protesting the current overlords' wars? There are more, not less, conflicts that 'Merica is involved with since the peace-prize-president arrived. Personally, I'd be ashamed to still follow leaders or believe that anyone other than me has my best interests at heart.
Clear the cobwebs folks.

Well, it's easy to sit on the sidelines and take potshots.  Obama has ended he Iraq War, the war started by Bush, based on 100% lines.  "But nothing's good enough for the likes of you, hmmm?" -- Basil Fawlty

"overlords" LOL is this the planet Cornball?

Plus, libertarianism is a cop out.

[DonnyL]

I registered as an (R) in order to vote for Ron Paul in the elections. Once it's all said and done, I'm re-registering as an independent. I'm a libertarian and support either eliminating or HEAVILY downsizing government.

I'm not going to argue over opinions on a message board. I think we're all better than that.

As far as the Ron Paul situation goes the truth is somewhere in between what the ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN/FOX conglomerate and the uber-right-wingers write and say. The claims that he's a moral leper stuck in the past may be relevant for his own personal viewpoints, but the fact that he wouldn't let his personal views dictate his policies is to be admired especially if you consider his voting record. The newsletter thing is a mess; he even admitted responsibility for it. I would ask all of the "he's a racist antisemitic POS" people why people of all races and religions support him. Must be a lot of self-hating Jews, Arabs and blacks in the Ron Paul Revolution!

I am certainly in agreement with him with regards to the benefits of limited government (if we can't eliminate the government, make it as SMALL AS POSSIBLE), free markets, sound money, a cooperative and non-isolationist foreign policy with emphasis on free trade, warm relations, and NON-INTERVENTION, and the concept of personal liberty. I am quite anti-democracy; democracy is such a bullsh*t movement and I still don't know how people can defend it, even when democracy leads to those people being oppressed. I support the right to bear arms and believe that all people should be uninhibited from acquiring them. The government and current policy make it easier for criminals to commit crimes (because as we know criminals have no regard for the law) than for average folks like us to defend ourselves against them; I also support Castle Doctrine.

Ron Paul is like this - he is who he is but he doesn't want everyone else to live according to how he feels we should. No other politician runs on that kind of "live and let live" policy.

I will concede that those are many good points about Ron Paul.  Too bad his policies didn't catch on circa 1980.  Also to his credit, he was opposed to the Iraq war.

To anyone who believes in 'peace and love', Ron Paul is quite clearly the best option.  For instance, he is the only candidate who would get us out of all of these wars.  It's pretty strange to see so many people who are against war support Obama.  Forget about what politicians are saying and look at their actions.  Ron Paul's record in Congress is 100% consistent with his policies and has always been.  I would encourage folks to take a deep look into their own spiritual and moral center and think about things in a different way.  It's a new world these days; things are not what they seem.  Bush was actually easier to deal with than Obama because it was quite clear that he was the figurehead of evil.  But the 'powers-that-be' learned their lesson ... Obama is a wolf in sheep's clothing.  The policies of his administration may appear to be different than Bush's on the surface, but the motivations are very similar.

We need to wake up!  We're brainwashed and the time in which we still have a chance to change things is closing in.  Another decade of this stuff and we're doomed. 

[GreatUrduPoet]

I have always hated Bruce's songs (besides Deirdre). Now I personally dislike him for his conservative politics.
I'm going to boooooo him to pieces during Disney Girls if I go see them play this summer.

If you don't care for Bruce's songs, more power to you. But if you're sitting in front of me 'booing' The Beach
Boys at the show date that I attend next month...I'll dump my beer over your little 'tolerant liberal" head.

[guitarfool2002]

I have always hated Bruce's songs (besides Deirdre). Now I personally dislike him for his conservative politics.
I'm going to boooooo him to pieces during Disney Girls if I go see them play this summer.

If you don't care for Bruce's songs, more power to you. But if you're sitting in front of me 'booing' The Beach
Boys at the show date that I attend next month...I'll dump my beer over your little 'tolerant liberal" head.

Better yet, buy a good beer to drink and buy a Pabst Blue Ribbon to dump...

[Heysaboda]

YES!

Should anyone need a break I recommend this thread:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,12970.msg275064/topicseen.html#msg275064

I promise no more Drunk Posting!

 

[grillo]

  Sorry, why should one respect someone who, daily, is responsible for dozens of 'civilian' deaths in many locations around the world? Because he's a father!? Are you mad? Pretty sure it doesn't take much magic altruism to be a father. Because someone voted for the guy does not make him respectable. Peaceful and voluntary interactions are something I can respect. In what way is your demagogue peaceful or respectful to those murdered in the quest for empire?
   Remember how you used to hate those mean old wars of GWB? Why are you not on the street everyday protesting the current overlords' wars? There are more, not less, conflicts that 'Merica is involved with since the peace-prize-president arrived. Personally, I'd be ashamed to still follow leaders or believe that anyone other than me has my best interests at heart.
Clear the cobwebs folks.

Well, it's easy to sit on the sidelines and take potshots.  Obama has ended he Iraq War, the war started by Bush, based on 100% lines.  "But nothing's good enough for the likes of you, hmmm?" -- Basil Fawlty

"overlords" LOL is this the planet Cornball?

Plus, libertarianism is a cop out.

Sit on the sidelines...bwah haw haw. Sorry that you think peaceful interactions are a cop out. You must be very violent in your everyday interactions with individuals...Oh, you're not? well why not? In your collectivist brainwashing you have forgotton or suppressed the obvious truth to yourself, that truth being collectivism includes the sacrificing of the individual to serve the collective, and the conscription of the individuals labor to serve the interests of the collective via coercive taxation under threats of violence, i.e. involuntary servitude.
 
Individualism (libertarianism to you), on the other hand, includes the protection of the rights of the individual to self-ownership, the right to be free from the aggression and intrusion of others (like the government), the sanctity of justly acquired private property (taxation=theft), and voluntary exchange, voluntary association and voluntary contracts.
Planet cornball. Nice ad hominem. What is the basis of your beliefs? Oh yeah, you have none. You have been successfully indoctrinated into the State. Congrats. Better not think outside the two party system. Better not consider the fact that the State cannot be fixed because it's entire existence is violence. Better not look at the gun in the room. Instead let's just pretend that voting for someone will make life better.
HAHAHAHAHAHA

[Mike's Beard]

Manson for President. 

[Heysaboda]

Manson for President. 

 

who's his VEEP?

[Heysaboda]

Individualism (libertarianism to you), on the other hand, includes the protection of the rights of the individual to self-ownership, the right to be free from the aggression and intrusion of others (like the government), the sanctity of justly acquired private property (taxation=theft), and voluntary exchange, voluntary association and voluntary contracts.
Planet cornball. Nice ad hominem. What is the basis of your beliefs? Oh yeah, you have none. You have been successfully indoctrinated into the State. Congrats. Better not think outside the two party system. Better not consider the fact that the State cannot be fixed because it's entire existence is violence. Better not look at the gun in the room. Instead let's just pretend that voting for someone will make life better.

Okay, point taken.  And, I apologize for my rampant snarkiness.

So, seriously and just curious, do you see individualism as EXACTLY THE SAME as libertarianism, or are they different?  I am honestly trying to learn something.

Also, in your view, is all taxation theft, or just at some (undefined) level it becomes theft?  Maybe this is a dumb question?

[GreatUrduPoet]

Manson for President. 

 

who's his VEEP?

John Waters

[grillo]

Individualism (libertarianism to you), on the other hand, includes the protection of the rights of the individual to self-ownership, the right to be free from the aggression and intrusion of others (like the government), the sanctity of justly acquired private property (taxation=theft), and voluntary exchange, voluntary association and voluntary contracts.
Planet cornball. Nice ad hominem. What is the basis of your beliefs? Oh yeah, you have none. You have been successfully indoctrinated into the State. Congrats. Better not think outside the two party system. Better not consider the fact that the State cannot be fixed because it's entire existence is violence. Better not look at the gun in the room. Instead let's just pretend that voting for someone will make life better.

Okay, point taken.  And, I apologize for my rampant snarkiness.

So, seriously and just curious, do you see individualism as EXACTLY THE SAME as libertarianism, or are they different?  I am honestly trying to learn something.

Also, in your view, is all taxation theft, or just at some (undefined) level it becomes theft?  Maybe this is a dumb question?

I too apologize for my snarkiness. it is awesome that you are interested in my ramblings at all!
To me, the individual is the only REAL thing that exists. In other words, groups are not real, instead they are made of individuals (real). It seems silly, but that is the main point. Seems that if one looks at people as belonging to this or that group it is easier to dismiss them as individuals who have needs that they are trying to meet.
   Now, the individuals who make up the government of any place on earth are still individuals, right? And like any person they have the right to be free of coercion, violence and theft, and they have no right to inflict those things on anybody else. No one can magically give someone a right that they themselves do not posses. I cannot tell my friends to go steal half of your money, nor can I and a bunch of my friends vote on how much of your money we want (even if it is a good cause). But somehow, because some lawyers who have been dead for 250 years wrote on a piece of paper that it was okay for Some folks who are elected by a majority of the voting population (which itself is a small minority of total people) to use violence and coercion to do what those voters want it is supposed to be valid. it, of course, is not.
   Basicly, the Declaration of independence should stop at "All men (and women and children) are created equal." Instead it goes on to say that we need to elect people who are outside of law but can use violence to gain whatever they want. Not too consistent with the first sentence, is it?
   We use voluntary interactions in 99% of our life and I think, without the State stealing from us and creating more and more laws (it's never LESS laws, is it) to regulate us humans would be able to come up with voluntary ways to have all those needs that state supposedly provides (School, roads, defense) met, only cheaper and better and without violence.
   Think of it this way, two hundred years ago if you were an abolitionist  folks might have asked you "how will the cotton be picked without slaves?" and the only honest answer would have been "who knows?" You see, it doesn't matter. What matters is that slavery is morally wrong. No one could have predicted that there would be giant metal combines that did the work of hundreds of slaves and you would have been laughed at for suggesting such a thing. But that doesn't mean slavery is cool.
I feel the same about the state, that it must end, peacefully, with people who, rather than being indoctrinated for 15 years of their life by mandatory state 'education', are raised peacefully and with respect to others. The state hasn't worked for at least 7,000 years, so I for one am ready to try something new. Multi-generational, but worth a shot.
PM me and I'll send you links of folks who have clear ideas about this if you are interested.

Thanks again for thinking!

[Jason]

Mr. grillo, you've just become one of my favorite posters on here. You nailed it. SMASH THE STATE!

[Heysaboda]

Mr. grill, you've just become one of my favorite posters on here. You nailed it. SMASH THE STATE!

Yeah, I thought it was quite well said too.  I am going to think further on the concept of "voluntary interactions".  That was nicely put.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

To me, the individual is the only REAL thing that exists. In other words, groups are not real, instead they are made of individuals (real). It seems silly, but that is the main point.

Not silly, but completely unclear to me. What makes one real and the other not real?

Don't get me wrong, as a social libertarian anarchist, I find the idea of abolishing the state a rather important end-goal but not if it means turning corporate power into unfettered tyranny as per Ron Paul's policies, and those who mischaracterize and misconstrue genuine libertarian values within the United States. In these cases, it seems that the interest of so-called anti-power libertarians are mostly simply interested in echoing the agenda of the wealthy elite --> taxation is theft (remember that taxation mostly harms the extremely wealthy which is why we're all supposed to hate it), legitimate private property, and so on. To me, the modern day US libertarian movement is nothing more than a huge gift to concentrated wealth and power wrapped up in a pretty masquerade of activism.

[endofposts]

Libertarians and anarchists, get off the roads.  I get sick of  people saying you don't use services and don't want to pay taxes when all you people do is use services, like roads. And public schools taught you to read and write, mostly likely.  You all will be using Medicare and Social Security when you're old, and I'm sure your parents and grandparents already have and do. Even Ayn Rand used Medicare and Social Security.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Libertarians and anarchists, get off the roads.  I get sick of  people saying you don't use services and don't want to pay taxes when all you people do is use services, like roads. And public schools taught you to read and write, mostly likely.  You all will be using Medicare and Social Security when you're old, and I'm sure your parents and grandparents already have and do. Even Ayn Rand used Medicare and Social Security.

Erm, did I not just say that I identified with the anarchist movement and had a lot of problems with the anti-tax platform of today's pdeudo-libertarians? Let's get this straight: those who place the taxation = theft issue as a priority are not genuine libertarians. Ayn Rand, of course, is nothing like a real libertarian. These are people whose hearts are in the right places but have had their natural activist impulses co-opted by a pro-corporate power party.

[Jason]

Libertarians and anarchists, get off the roads.  I get sick of  people saying you don't use services and don't want to pay taxes when all you people do is use services, like roads. And public schools taught you to read and write, mostly likely.  You all will be using Medicare and Social Security when you're old, and I'm sure your parents and grandparents already have and do. Even Ayn Rand used Medicare and Social Security.

What are you going to do if we don't get off the roads? Because our current system dictates that if we don't want to be threatened by a government agency we HAVE to pay taxes. So as long as we're paying into the system, we're going to use it. It's also under considerable duress since the road system in the United States sucks harder than the Secret Service in a Colombian brothel.

I also went to private school but you definitely have the state-sanctioned public school mentality. Cheers.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I also went to private school but you definitely have the state-sanctioned public school mentality. Cheers.

I would consider that an honor.

[?]

Manson for President. 

 

who's his VEEP?

John Waters

I would totally vote for this.  You guys are onto something.   

[Eireannach]

The percentage of our Federal income taxes (and the Federal budget) that is spent on roads is so small as to be irrelevant to this discussion.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_federal_budget#Total_outlays_by_agency  I think libertarians are bent because of the amount of money that is spent killing brown people, assassinating citizens overseas without trial or due process, furthering the military industrial complex.

I'll gladly pay more state taxes if we can stop the egregious spending at the Federal level.

[Bean Bag]

Sheeeeiit, foo, I be doin' dat shiiit too!  Don't be a hater and diss da peeps here, you dig brotha?

Peace out, Beaner Bag!

peeps?

Yep.  A rich elitist Conservative snob who writes wimpy music.  Who walks across the stage smiling and clapping his hands in his cute white shorts.

I'm not very impressed.