" ...so I must love them, too."

MUST be the LAW OF LOVE pulling on the thorn of the moral compass.



I hate thorns, too. Roses are part of the thorns, and so I must hate them, too? Otherwise, I would not hate thorns?

Must be the LAW OF HATE at work.

I love half-full glasses of musts.
I hate half-empty glasses of musts.

Love is comforting.
Hate is discomforting.

Optimists invent airplanes.
Pessimists invent parachutes.

Roses MUST be beautiful.
Thorns MUST be ugly.

Love must be the only law.
Love must be greater than law.

There shouldn`t be any surprises in this whatsoever. The 1957 Civil Rights Act signed by Eisenhower was opening a door. Since prejudice and racism were not the sole trademark of the Democratic Party, it became clear to Martin Luther King and many other leaders from the black churches that laws and rights alike are useless unless you are willing to act lawfully, knowing full well that the good ol` boys are going to put you in your place any way they can. LBJ`s Great Society is a good example of how to destroy the self esteem of a minority by making them depenent upon the state to support you; this effectively keeps them in their places of poverty and hopelessness. By creating multi generation welfare families, the outcome was that it created an entire group of persons who adopted an entitlement mentality which feels that because the white man has done this to them, they are owed. Never mind that so very few who escaped the poverty by obtaining an education and good paying proffessions never returned to their old neighborhoods to help lift people out of their situation. By then it was too late; interlopers like Sharpton and Jackson and Louis Farrakhan had succeeded in driving a wedge between blacks and whites that well educated productive members were called Uncle Toms or Oreos amongst many other racial slurs which said that they were no longer black, but that somehow they had become white. To this very day, the manipulation of blacks continues, but a lot of gains have been achieved also by those with the boldness to step through the doors of opportunity. The differences between Democratic and Republican principles is simple. Democrats believe that government can do a better job of taking care of people, while Republicans believe the people themselves are better off if they learn to take care of themselves and each other. Under Libertarian principals, there would be no reason for not re introducing slavery because what Libertarians believe is that unfettered competition justifies profit through any means possible.

In order to obtain a balance which prevents the strong from overpowering the weak, I`ll stick to my Republic. Having a complete knowlege of the fact that the wealthy are always going to despise and mistreat the poor; it is still a good thing to have restraints put on people which prevents them from gaining absolute control. As a small town non party aligned American, I can`t imagine Libertarians gaining the upper hand in government because it would end up even worse than the corporate threat in our midst today. More like Saudi Arabia where one family calls the shots and hires thugs to force their will on others. Right now I feel like the frog in a slowly heating pan of water; the slow ascent of government restrictions is going to cook me. Heh heh I`ve done lived in a much more free country than we`re apt to see in the future. A nice economic depression will cure a lot of that.

Self-ownership and non-aggression are the two core tenets of a libertarian society so there is zero chance of slavery being re-introduced.

The any means possible has to satisfy customers.

The consumer is King in a libertarian world.

Each of us is at once both a producer and consumer.

Capitalism is an economic method to bring goods and service to your door.

Social harmony of human being works best when individuals can rise to whatever heights their dreams and ambitions take them to.

In a world of anarcho-capitalism it is the individual who rules because there is no government to plunder anybody.

Frederic Bastiat long ago made the case that there are three choices.

1) The few plunder the many.

2) Everybody plunders everybody.

3) Nobody plunders anybody.

Without the law at their disposal, the wealthy will have to appeal to individuals to part with their hard earned wages.

Henry Ford, Sam Walton and Bill Gates did more good for humantiy than all the politicians that have ruled humanity put together since time began.

But now you are talking about those who lived under the guidance of the Holy Bible who bound themselves together under the title, "Friends". Libertarians and religious Societies have little in common; one holds to the idea of collective acts and decisions based solely on discovering the will of God in all matters, while the other places the value of the individual above all other considerations. In order to function as a Quaker, one must submit their entire self to the higher authority of God; in such cases, materialism takes a back seat.
"Not all men have faith", and even the Quakers have had splinter groups and divisions between them. What does one do outside Quaker groups when the violent resort to violence to settle the score? That`s only the first in a very long list of reasons for the need for government. Most Libertarian ideals are similar to the Socialist lie of building a Utopian society. In order to believe that, one must also believe that man is basically good, and has no capacity for wronging his neighbor.

I also read about the death of Pat Tillman from your link. It sounds to me like a situation the Army did not want to reveal to the relatives of the deceased. Don`t even go there. For all anyone knows about that, Tillman could have lost it, and a man with a rifle firing at you is just as badly in need of killing as your enemy firing at you. In a case like this, or any of a multitude of scenarios, the military takes care of its own. He also could have been murdered. Whoever did that would be in Leavenworth without much publicity either.

Michael Milkin,Arthrur Anderson, Ken Lay, Jeffery Skilling .....
... we could go on forever about honorable and dishonorable men in business, politics, religion or any aspect of human endeavor. The truth still remains that profit motivated people too often resort to harmful practices. Jim Jones, Charles Manson,Tony Alamo. The Archdiocese of Portland, OR (willfully covering up pedophiles in their midst) Richard M Nixon, Barry Bonds, Josey Wales... Slice the cheese Bours, you`ll certainly have a little savor to go along with the hot air you`ve presented for Libertarians.

"The consumer is King in a libertarian world."

And if Gator Ted were to inherit billions of dollars from a distant relative and buy up all the property in Burlington ... or if he were to win some lotteries and buy up all the property in Burlington ... or if David Rockefeller were to - on a whim - buy up all the property in Burlington, they could tell all the med pot users to "stay 30 meters from all businesses" to medicate.

"Consumer is King" is a sham. It's code for "property owner is King".

At least some democracies are real. All property ownerships are unaccountable tyrannies by design. Any accountability within them is given at the whim of the owner, to be withdrawn at another whim.

"From Why I am a Black Republican & Why Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.."

That isn't an anti-Civil Rights legislation argument. That's a pro-civil rights legislation, anti-Democratic party argument.

Once again, I ask you, can you find a black person who is against the Civil Rights legislation?

Nothing could be further from the truth. We aquire our morals and ethics first from our parents or whoever raised us. There are also a certain small percentage of psycopaths without the ability to understand right from wrong; to them, smoking a joint or slitting someone`s throat is the same, neither has more or less value, merit or evil than the other. At one time, 5% of criminals committed around 90% of crimes, and the rest were opportunistic or crimes of passion. Today I`m not sure what those ratios are, but it certainly seems like career criminals`(recidivists) numbers are on the rise. It simply does not take as much evil to bring down the house as some seem to think it does. Probation and Parole systems are designed for the purpose of verifying whether or not someone is capable of obeying laws(restrictions), or if they are going to have to be incarcerated/shaken down frequently.

I find life itself is a learning curve where people strive to become good or they strive to learn how to be better at being bad. There is also a larger group in the center who don`t give a shit one way or another, who depend on others to set the standards for them. An ideology is one such standard.

Ayuh! That was intended to insult you into the pragmatist world.