Pardon me.

I know I'm old, but not as old as that dino, and not as full of crap either. And if I was, I still wouldn't like folks doing their guzzling/muzzling under my tail.

There's no such thing as democracy. It's pure fantasy. Whenever that crap is sold to a nation, they're just being milked by someone who is a demagogue. Or in our case, by thousands of demagogues with lots of money. . . . . fascists in fact.

If you're going to try to empower government to solve any problem, you're going to just be disappointed.

The only way to build a worthwhile nation with human rights is to strip the government of as much power as possible, but while keeping a wary eye out for those who would "move in" on the power vacuum, so to speak. That's where an educated and self-reliant populace with sufficient personal arms is called for. Whatever power you give to "government" is going to be co-opted somehow.

Our American revolutionaries and classically-educated founders had a fortuitous combination in that they were able to set up a system that they hope would contain protections against power grabbers and yet sustained a substantial number of human liberties.

In the current context of corporatism, fascism, cartelism, and humbugism (so-called "news" and "education"), I think we need people to realize they've got to quit going along with it all.

Set up self-help "collectives" that can open up economic opportunities around the corporates, stop "feeding the tigers".

We need solid property rights that the government doesn't dare trample on, we need solid rights to barter/trade and provide for our needs without government regulations. We need the determination to just not do the business with our sworn anti-constitutionalist enemies like GE.

I guess I'll start working on building my own motorsfor my windmills/water generators, and pumps, or patronize some local craftsman, and make my own solar panels, and just get off the grid. But it would be orders of magnitude more do-able if there were one hundred of us with a variety of skills and knowledge, mayble "downsized" by our former corporate masters, who would each help the others. . . .

Eny time, enyplaze, Hunnychile! Dazza gud spot, tho, kuz it lookz eezy ta finez.

Wun time diz heea babe wuz tryin ta tellz me a plaze ta meetza--went sumthin likez diz: Goez down ta da konna, den takez a leff. Den goez 4-5 blokz, an takez a rite. Den goez ta da foth bildin down, an goez inna fron do. Den takez da starez up ta da sekkin flo, an goez down a long-azz hallway. Den goez down da starez, an out da bak do. Den takez a leff inna alley, an goez boutz 3 blokz till ya kumz ta a wino, sittin dare. Don givez hiz azz no munny, but takez a leff, an goez bout 4 blokz. Dare yo gunna runz inna a ganga thugz, so brangz yo sawwed-off. Afta yo throo wit dem, jizt keepz goin strate fo a spel. Den....

I sez: Awww, fogitz it Darlin....I aint nevva gunna finez it. Sidez, too much dam werk an munny. Imma waztez off a kuppo bukz on shotgun shellz lone, it sounz likez. Side-do Sally aint butta haf blok down da street, an I jizt happinz ta haz fo bitz, so I gunna meetz her inzted.

You're just plane wrong. This is what happens when you build up some ideal world and throw common sense to the wind. Democracy requires a moral and just citizenry.



The founding fathers used the power of government to do their bidding as they saw best. They understood government was a necessary evil and traded liberty for a strong nation and security. There was not a single founding father with power who did not use the government to shape the nation. Now we call them hypocrits and sellouts, when in reality they were pragmatists willing to keep up with the times.

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." (H. L. Mencken)

I'm talking in context of a republic, commie.

Democracy entails the root "people" and "rule". It is indistinguishable from mob rule, being that whatever the crowd is going after, there is nothing to stop them.

You're the one who idealizes just and honorable and principled people as having the right to rule, but you fail to recognize a sphere which pertains to their world. And you fail to deal with the idea of personal rights, or liberties. So is your democracy going to let you sit at home and drink while watching the Jazz lose on Saturday nights?

In a city with 51% Janadele voters? You might not even be allowed to eat chocolate. Such a scenario brings me back to "Paint Your Wagon", where the insight that was most persuasive in the gold camp was "There isn't anything more . . . . limiting. . . . than a genuine good woman."

So our forefathers could only accept a limited government, with narrowly defined government powers. They were stuck with the state governments having their claimed perogatives, and failed to end slavery and proscribe states from endorsing religion or otherwise meddling in a thousand aspects of life, or they'd have had no union whatsoever. But at least, with all the states coveting their perogatives, they did agree to limit the Federal powers.

The revolution we need is to dismantle all the Federal trappings and state offices as well, and make all those little tyrants go push hamburgers at Wendy's. Or turn up their front lawns so they can grow tomatos, and their backyards for potatos or something.

I guess if we really want to make the world a better place, we should grow our own weed and poppies, and let those subsistence farmers in Afghanistan grow the tomatos. The whole drug trafficking racket, just like in the sixteenth century, is only profitable because of government support of circumstances that make the market work, for the interested cartelists. If the government did not have a DEA to prevent wholesale competition, and laws that create a "Prohibition Counterculture" aura over use of the stupid stuff, kids would figure the "drug culture" is just going nowhere.

And without government subsidizing indolence as well, people would wake in the morning, roll out of bed, stir up some mush, and head out the door to do something worthwhile.

We might have a few bums hangin' out on the corners with a jug and a leer, but they'd just run outta drinks pretty soon, and they'd have to start cookin' up a new batch somehow..... but pretty much if we had liberty, stuff would be cheap, because there'd be nothing to support the lazy but their own enterprise.

With no power in the government offices, and no money to quibble over or for, most folks would just find something productive to do.

You owe me more respect than that, babe. I've already stated I'm talking in the context of a republic. There is no reason to revert to some basics TT Landish level.

I will give the rest the consideration it deserves after I sober up a couple days later.

I do see you sometimes, in different places on different subjects, saying inconsistent things which appear to be more in the line of attempts to provoke thoughts in sportfanz/hackz skulls. A pastime I could probably be accused of just as well. . . .

I'll review the notion that you deserve respect, but you just gotta know a plea like that sounds like something an exploited woman might say afterwards. . . .

Not that my manners don't need some makeover in various ways. For now I'll confess that my original impression of you had me figuring you for about ten years older than you are, and significantly more professional. I thought I had a real government honcho on the line. An unusual one, too, who could think.

Maybe I'm struggling to find a reason to feign respect anymore. Maybe if you come over to the Ron Paul revolution there won't be any need to feign it.