“Right” to Vote DENIED Again!
The last time I tried to vote, they refused to allow me to do so as a homeless man, despite their claims that homeless people have a “right” to vote too.
A couple of weeks ago, I attempted to register to vote again – this time putting down a home address on their form as they had begged me to do in the past. However this time I registered under my current name of Ian Freeman rather than my old slave name. I wanted to see if they would accept that name.
The good news is they claim they will accept the name, but the bad news is that they are rejecting my voter application because I wrote “All Rights Reserved” above my signature, on the advice of one Matt Mavrogeorge from the NH Attorney Genital’s office. Does their rejection of the application on this basis suggest that one is giving up rights by signing their voter registration form? I set out in an attempt to find this answer and left a message on Matt’s voicemail. He emailed back the following:
Dear Ian,
Thank you for your voice message regarding your voter registration application. Voter registration forms are set forth and required by RSA 654:7. Modifying the registration form by adding qualifying language, such as “all rights reserved”, to the applicant’s signature line is considered to be an improper change to the form’s required content. Again, than you for your inquiry.
Sincerely,
Matthew G. Mavrogeorge
Attorney
Civil Bureau
New Hampshire Department of Justice
33 Capitol Street
Concord, NH 03301
(603) 271-1222 phone
(603) 223-6243 fax
To which I responded:
Matthew,
That is part of my signature for government documents. Are you denying me the supposed right to vote?
If you are saying there is a problem with “All Rights Reserved”, I’ll need you to specify for me what rights one gives up when signing that form. I would like to be fully informed.
Thanks,
Ian
His reply:
This Office does not deny individuals the right or ability to vote. We simply explained our position regarding additions or modifications to the required content of the voter registration form. We do not have anything further to add concerning your inquiry.
My response:
Matt,
Would it be more accurate to say you have advised the Keene city clerk to deny me the supposed right to vote?
I’d appreciate an answer, thanks.
Ian
Hi reply:
Ian, That would not be accurate. I do not have any more to add to what I have already stated. Please feel free to speak with my supervisor, Associate Attorney General Richard Head (271-1248). Thanks. – Matt
I then called Richard Head. (Yes, Dick Tracy and Richard Head work in the same office. Insert your own jokes here.) Here’s the .mp3 recording of that call. As you can hear, he dances around the issue for ten minutes and refuses to answer any questions of substance.
Any ideas as to what to do now? It doesn’t matter what I do, these people refuse to allow me to use the system they claim they want me to use! Three little words seem to mean so much to them, but they won’t explain why. If you don’t give up rights by signing the forms, then what’s the big deal about writing “All Rights Reserved” there? If you DO give up rights, then what rights? As usual, they have no obligation to explain themselves, while they believe we have an obligation to continue funding them. Someday I look forward to testing their claim that we are obligated to obey and pay them, because I’m getting pretty fed up with their violence and their system.
I hope you’ll make the move to New Hampshire and help make this place free.
Comments
116 Comments on “Right” to Vote DENIED Again!
Ian, simply use “Ian Freeman All Rights Reserved” as your signature and no modification necessary. It changes the unauthorized modifications to the form to part of your signature, which is required by the form. Problem solved (that is if “all rights reserved” is something you use to sign documents…)
So you are saying to put it *after* my sig? I had written it just above it.
I highly doubt that will matter, but if you think it’s worth a try…
If this were a private actor, they would have the right to not accept your modified contract, even if the original contract was unconscionable. However, in that case the State would at least allow you to bring an action against the original contract drafter if any of your rights were infringed had you signed the original.
In your case, since the contract is with the state and deals with a privilege that must “constitutionally” be extended to all people equally you can expect that any modification would be rejected, to avoid constitutional claims that others are disadvantaged because you have some “expanded” rights that they were not granted. OTOH, if you sign the contract as-is, you’ll never be able to bring an action against the state on a theory of unconscionability – their courts will say that the extent of voting rights is a political question or that you have a generalized grievance, and not grant you jurisdiction. And don’t even think that the state would agree to have your rights dispute be privately arbitrated.
My (non-legal) advice would be to keep pressing them to allow you to vote after conceding that you retain all personal rights. At worst they keep refusing and you have a nice anecdote about how well “working within the system” actually works when you have a problem with the system itself and not just its results.
Put it all on the same line; incorporate “all rights reserved” as part of your signature. Better yet, put it inside your name and in quotes like its nickname. If they deny your form then there are legal challenges you make if you go down that road, appealing to the Supervisors of the Checklist and the Superior Court etc. Signatures aren’t unauthorized modifications to the form because they are required by the form, while they are modifications to the form, they have to be allowed because the form asks for it and the statute requires that the form be filled out completely to be accepted. Better yet show them other documents that have your signature with “all rights reserved” (if you have them) and file it with an affidavit declaring that its your signature.
What if you changed your name to “Rev. All Rights Reserved Jr.”?
That’s wrong that your signature has to be your name. It just has to be the same every time you use it. That’s why illiterates can sign “X”.
mackler, what’s your reasoning for this? A signature is someone’s mark. An illiterate likely would use an “x” because that’s the easiest thing for them to sign demonstrating a purposeful act of signing; its very direct. People don’t always sign using their name. I only sign with my first name and last name and omit my middle names; my signature doesn’t contain my full name, so is it wrong? What if i scribble something that is completely unintelligible and claim it as my signature? If someone wants to see your name they ask for your name. If they want your “mark” they get what your chosen pictograph representing you. Otherwise there isn’t any difference from name and signature.
(Ian)All(rights)free(man)reserved. “KICK IT RIGHT OUT”…”Attorney Genital”…”The whole consent thing”…
Don’t incorporate “A.R.R.” into your signature, because if you do so they will be able to claim that it adds no meaning to the contract, it is simply part of your mark. If your goal was simply to see those words on a gov’t contract, then feel free to sign their unaltered form with those words as your name, but the words would not be evidence of your retaining your rights, either in their monopoly courts or in the eyes of a private arbiter. To bind them they must assent to include the terms, and trying to play games with the formalities wouldn’t work to bind them in the eyes of any evaluator of the contract.
If you want to retain all of your rights, you can’t deal with the devil. If you try to change their terms, they will walk away and continue to admonish you for not “working with them”. There is not a “win” that you can gain from this aside from exposing the illegitimate nature of even the most basic democratic procedures that the State proclaims it provides.
Jesus H. Fucking Christ on a popsickle stick, IAN, you’re either the stupidest educated person ever, or else the most over-educated idiot to come bumbling down the pike…I’ll get serious next post…”Kick it right out”???…WTF???…
OK. Poor Richard Head. I think he did pretty good, considering what YOU, Ian, gave him to work with…First, you start out saying the call “may be being recorded”, when you know damn good and well that YOU’RE RECORDING IT! Why not just start out asking, “Mr Head, may I record this phone call?” I bet you he’d say OK. Instead, you jerk him around. Why not just be honest & clear to start with?…The question you asked, when you said “…kick it right out…” CONFUSED ME! AND I WAS LISTENING CAREFULLY TO THE MP3!…Then, Ian, you go on about “…us v. them…”, say “Attorney Genital” -(which is funny, but NOT business-like…), and, _AND_, IAN, YOU KEPT INTERRUPTING HIM, when he WAS TRYING TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS!…Then, there’s all the “you guys”, & “gov’t people” phrasing that you tossed out at him…Sure, if you’re trying to get good Radio Show material, that works, but if you’re trying to get a real answer to a real question, then, IAN, THAT AIN’T THE WAY TO GO ABOUT IT!…///…I tried to imagine myself in Mr. Richard Head’s place, dealing with you and your bullshit, Ian, but I don’t think I could have done any better! Actually, I’m gonna score this one as A WIN FOR THE BUREAUCRAPS, because IAN FREEMAN LOST BY DEFAULT TO LUNACY! Yes, Ian, I’m calling you a fucking stark raving mad lunatic!…I really like you, Ian, in a non-homo, platonic way, but I still think you’re being a fucking idiot here…You also posted a link to a similar episode recorded in freekeene*archives…re-read it…Somebody calling himself “elkfart” said that when he was homeless, he went to the Ward he’d(she’d???…)last voted in, explained the situation, and registered and voted in that Ward. Shit, Ian, do you want to register to vote, and actually *VOTE*, or would you rather just continue to act like an idiot, and *NOT REGISTER & VOTE*???…I don’t see how you can have it both ways!!!…So, either shit, or get off the pot…&I don’t mean the cannabis pot…I truly hope that somehow, Mr. Richard Head will actually read this post…I want to give him a brownie point & gold star for being so patient & forbearing with your juvenile, sophmoric bullshit! Sometimes, Ian, you can be such a fucking *MORON*…but, it was mildly entertaining…not as excruciating as watching Kangaroo-keene District Court videos, anyway!…
What does the actual document you’re signing say? Does it explicitly revoke any of your rights? I’d think “all rights reserved” is unnecessary, if the document you’re signing does not revoke any rights anyway.
Ian, Sorry… I am not fully understanding where you are going with this issue or what you were hoping to actually accomplish. I’m sure it’s just my problem, but can you please help me to further understand your thinking? Thank you very much. Wesley
II. Any person whose name is not on the checklist but who is otherwise a qualified voter shall be entitled to vote by requesting to be registered to vote at the polling place on election day. The voter may then vote at that election. The applicant shall be required to produce appropriate proof of qualifications as provided in RSA 654:12.
It’s too bad you refuse to use all the tools available to fight them, Ian, because sometimes, just sometimes, you can hang them with their own idiotic rules.
It says, in their own idiot tongue, that you are entitled to vote just by requesting to be registered to vote, not that you have to be registered or anything else.
Of course, if you aren’t willing to fight them on that using their own stupid legal system (with someone who is skilled in using that system), it’s not going to go anywhere real fast.
If “the law is the law” and “rules must be followed”, then the black robed man should have no problem looking at their own foolish language, apply common sense to it and admit they screwed up should they bar you from voting and then you sue the pants off them for cash you can use for more activism.
If you’re going to use one part of the system to fight the system, don’t limit yourself. Use all available methods or you’re wasting your time.
Paul is right. If a document is ambiguous, then the one who draws it up (the State) is at fault for any ambiguities. What rights would you specifically give up by signing it? By not signing it, you accepted it as your right for you to be a fool.
Now it’s foolish to not want to sign a government document, Steve? Those who wish to make their reservation of rights specific and clear are ‘fools’?
Here’s one. I think you are an asshole to make such a suggestion. How does that strike you?
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[sig] Ian Freeman
than put a large circle around it (must be closed polygon)
than the assertion of your rights is your sig.
LP,
While crass and annoying, Steve has a point. According to their own language, the bureaucrats consider voting an entitlement, not a right. This actually makes perfect sense when you know the truth about what they are and do vs the fantasy most people have in their heads.
In fact, the vaunted Constitution supposedly meant to keep the beast in check does not guarantee a “right” to vote:
…the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by “the People,” and who comprises “the People” has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld.
And as the “stepfather of the Constitution”, Michael Badnarik, would point out, most people don’t know the difference between a right and a privilege, especially government.
A right is a valid claim on something like “life” or “property”. It is inherent. While you can physically be prevented from exercising it, its still there, you’re just being violated. A privilege is something you ask someone else for. It is permission. So when they say that right can be withheld, they mean privilege.
Voting is an illusion. It’s candy for the masses. Let them eat cake. “Join the Army and get an education” (because it’s real useful when you’re killed in action). Buy the Crackerjacks and get the prize. It’s a propaganda move by government to instill a false sense of control “by the People”. Just obey their diktats, give them your money, your land and your life and yes, you too can control your fate with the ability (the privilege) to pick between asshat A and asshat B.
If your guy loses, awwww, try again next time. In the meantime, just do everything the guy you voted against says to do. “It’s the price we pay for an orderly society!”
So if Ian is asking for that privilege then of course he must satisfy their arbitrary rules. Of course, most of the bureaucrats don’t even know what those rules are so you can sometimes turn it around on them when they word it stupidly.
Bottom line here is that if Ian didn’t want to fill out a government document, he wouldn’t have.
Zeus,
They know who I am and will refuse to allow me to vote. They don’t care what their rules say. See the above video for proof where the vote checklist supervisors on camera deny me the “right” to vote because they don’t believe I am homeless.
I’m sure I could sue or something, but fucking hell.
Ouch, that one really hurt. Well, Lpviper, in order to vote, you have to be registered. In order to register, you have to sign the registration form. There are no specific rights taken away by signing the document. If you add or take away anything on that document, it won’t be the same one everyone else signed. Thus, unequal protection under the law. If you want to get the voter registration changed, work to do so. You can start by voting. To do that, you will need to register. You can’t put the cart before the horse. Or in your case, the jackass.
If you stapled a “Shire Society” facsimile to the form, you would have breezed through. It’s easy when you know how.
But Ian, you KNOW this already. This is not totally unexpected by you. This isn’t a surprise. You’ve been doing FTL for how many years? Average Joe and Jane American may not know it, but you do. You know that if you don’t follow their diktats, they can do whatever they want to you. Especially if you want something from them. Like picking between asshats. Or welfare or justice or protection or whatever. And they don’t have to give it to you.
Let it hereby be thoroughly established that governments are nothing but gangs of violent jerkwads with rules they don’t even know or follow but expect you to and who will take whatever you have and kill you if they feel like it.
Now what comes next?
Ouch, that one really hurt. Well, Lpviper, in order to vote, you have to be registered. In order to register, you have to sign the registration form.
Not true, Steve. As mentioned earlier, their own rules state you only need “request” to be registered.
Yes, Steve, I am a donkey. My wife and I sign all State documents with ‘Under Duress’ near the signature, when we feel like we need to sign one to do soomething we need to do. So I’m a ‘fool’ and a jackass, and so is my wife.
Go sign all the government documents you want, pal. Me, I’ll do it very reluctantly and in whatever manner I see fit.
Zeus,
Of course I know they do what they want. That said, I’ve signed things All Rights Reserved before. Even the city clerk acknowledged this on the phone with me, claiming she has never had a problem with it and that it was the AG guy who advised against accepting it.
So basically, they were grasping at straws to prevent me from registering.
Attorney Head did a very good diplomatic job at dealing with your questions 
Hey Ian, why don’t you stop being a complete d-bag and get a clue? They probably have that rule so that every schizoid, shit-for-brains, sociopath, and trailer trash sore loser in NH doesn’t write all over the form claiming non-person-hood, demanding evidence of citizenship, or screaming about the latest paranoid conspiracy theory. Look, they won’t let me write “resist the alien tyranny” on the wall of my padded cell! Therefore, Obama is a martian invader!!!
God you’re dumb. Who says this clown is “over educated?” Hasn’t Ian admitted to dropping out of some pathetic juco in Orlando? These Free Keene guys are libertarian fascists. They’ve read one or two books and a couple blog posts and they think it’s a political philosophy.
Ian, why do you even want to register?
You did sign the Shire Declaration, did you not? Once withdrawn from their society, why would you want to do anything that would bring you back in?
And Zeus, when you ‘request to be registered’ they will register you. And to register you, you need to sign the document.
Doesn’t anybody screen these calls?
Lpviper, look up the term duress. No one forced you to sign anything. Had they, it would not be valid. You used your own free will to sign or not to. If you didn’t want to go to Chicago, you shouldn’t have got on the train.
ian, when you say your “old slave name” do you mean the name that your parent’s gave you at birth?
Ian,
Well of course they did, you have quite a few adversaries in Keene — especially amongst the bureaucracy — that will do all they can to annoy and harm you even above and beyond their normal annoying and harming of individuals. This is not a surprise.
Also not a surprise is that the AG’s excuse is flawed. He doesn’t even know his own rules and that’s his job. But he works for the government so that’s par for the course.
So now that you know that “a qualified voter shall be entitled to vote by requesting to be registered to vote at the polling place on election day” according to their own rules, you can either use their own system to sue them (thus either proving even further that using their system is useless if you lose or getting a bunch of cash as a settlement to fund more activism if you win), continue pointing at their actions and being inexplicably surprised at actions you know they are capable of and likely to commit, refuse to fund them further thus stirring up the hornets nest so they come after you for taking away their sweet sweet honey, or do nothing.
My concern here is once you know what they are and how they act, where do you go from there? It seems like the answer more often than not is to keep “rediscovering” what we already know and acting surprised by it.
And Zeus, when you ‘request to be registered’ they will register you. And to register you, you need to sign the document.
Doesn’t anybody screen these calls?
Steve,
Whether they register you or not, whether you sign or not, their own law is specifically worded to state “you are entitled to vote” just by making the “request to be registered to vote”.
If they didn’t mean it like that, too bad. “The law is the law” after all. If we have to live by their infinite, arbitrary rules (or else), then they ought to live by those same rules or else its a farce (which we already know it to be).
If they are forcing me to pay for their system, I should be able to vote for Andrew Carroll.
Zeus, they will likely rest on the “qualified” word in your citation. If you don’t do exactly as they say, you are not “qualified”.
Agreed on both counts. Their rules are sufficiently vague enough and endless enough that there are any number of loopholes they could use to prevent you from voting even if you did what they said. And yes, if you don’t do exactly as they say (and often even if you do), they won’t give you what you want.
And they will do everything they can using the money they steal via taxation and by other means of coercion and force, to get you to want *something* from them. That’s what they do. Just try it once, kid, it’s free. The next hit will cost you though.
Get people addicted to what they can provide, force out competitors who could provide those things without violence and coercion, then milk them for everything they’ve got.
So we know that about them. It is firmly established. What can we do about it?
That is the key question.
i luvs ya, ian…inspired lunacy, and all…and, YO!, STEVE, *I* *SCREEN*THESE*CALLS*!…*YOU*GOT*A*PROBLEMO*W?DAT*???…i let *YOU* post here, don’t *I*???…BTW: I got lots of free coffee & 3( *three!* ) donuts today from Annie Kuster, who’s running for Congress, when she was at the Commons this morning, w/all those AFL-CIO firefighters…Ian, are you *SURE* you REALLY WANT to be registered to vote???…….////////…………………………………more from the “it takes one to know one department”…: quit_job_dirtbag on Tue, 31st Aug 2010 7:38 pm
(notice how our hapless blogger quits his job, *THEN* writes):::
“Hey Ian, why don’t you stop being a complete d-bag and get a clue? They probably have that rule so that every schizoid, shit-for-brains, sociopath, and trailer trash sore loser in NH doesn’t write all over the form claiming non-person-hood, demanding evidence of citizenship, or screaming about the latest paranoid conspiracy theory. Look, they won’t let me write “resist the alien tyranny” on the wall of my padded cell! Therefore, Obama is a martian invader!!!
God you’re dumb. Who says this clown is “over educated?” Hasn’t Ian admitted to dropping out of some pathetic juco in Orlando? These Free Keene guys are libertarian fascists. They’ve read one or two books and a couple blog posts and they think it’s a political philosophy…..////….<—dude, that part about Obama & the Aliens wasn't supposed to be publically revealed until *AFTER* the election. You were at the meetings. Now, maybe *NONE* of us will get paid. Asshole. I call "shotgun" on the Mothership. You had it last time, you dirtbag job quitter…
Uh, Zeus, sorry if this sounds all logical and is therefor hard for you to understand, but a qualified voter who asks to be registered to vote, is then registered to vote. And to do so, said voter must sign the registration documents. If I go up to the store and say “Can I have a 6 pack of PBR” they hand it to me and I walk out, I get arrested for theft. Even though I asked if I could have it, and they agreed by handing it to me. Man, things just aren’t fair. All them laws and shit. Where’s my PBR, and what the he’ll did it win a medal for, anyways?
on the advice of one Matt Mavrogeorge from the NH Attorney Genital’s office
I see what you did there.
The last time I tried to vote, they refused to allow me to do so as a homeless man, despite their claims that homeless people have a “right” to vote too.
If you are homeless, for whom would you be voting? In other words, the ballot you see is based on your geographic location. If I live in South Carolina, I’m not eligible to vote for Governor of NH.
No one has a right to vote. Only amendments saying that people can’t be barred from voting based on race, gender, and age. So yes you can be barred from voting if you don’t fill out the form correctly. The person looking at the form can wipe their ass with it if they don’t like it. You write “all rights reserved” above the name; they take that line as being apart of your name and toss it out.
I don’t see anything in the RSA that says it cannot be altered. I would challenge him on this. Send a tort letter to his office under the Voting Rights Act or Civil Rights Act. I would also contact his boss like he suggests.
Steve:
Uh, Zeus, sorry if this sounds all logical and is therefor hard for you to understand, but a qualified voter who asks to be registered to vote, is then registered to vote. And to do so, said voter must sign the registration documents.
While they may insist that to be the case, that’s not what their own law says, Steve. Not that it makes a difference what their laws say anyway since those laws are arbitrary and used solely to control the rest of us while they do whatever they want while pretending there’s a way for the Average Joe to change the status quo.
In reality — something you might have a problem understanding being a statist and all — there is no real outlet for Vox Populi other than avoiding the system as much as possible and refusing to cooperate. Voting is a sham and an illusion as has been proven time and time again. No matter who wins, we all lose.
Gabe:
If you are homeless, for whom would you be voting? In other words, the ballot you see is based on your geographic location. If I live in South Carolina, I’m not eligible to vote for Governor of NH.
Having a home or residence is not the same thing as being in a geographic location. Ian can be physically located in Keene, NH and wander around with no place he considers his “home” or “residence”. Additionally, the bureaucrats have their own definition of what constitutes a home or a residence which may or may not apply to where ever it is Ian is hanging out most of the time. Obviously, for the purposes of seeking permission to choose between asshat bureaucrats, their definition is what they’re going by and they can ignore their own rules if they want to hassle Ian and prevent him from doing so.
The irony is that statists are always trying to convince Ian into participating in the illusion of being able to change the system by participating in it and when he tries, they deny him that avenue much to their own detriment since that will backfire right in their smug faces.
After all, if you tell him to participate and then bar him from doing so, what’s his only course of action? That”s right, going back to very same kinds of activism that annoyed them in the first place. What a bunch of maroons.
I tell you what guys. It would really be for your best interest to drop the word “slave” from your vocab when playing your freedom fighter game. The actual oppression of the civil rights movement is an all to recent memory for many people in this country. Different water fountains, back of the bus, schools, restaurants, jobs, wages, you know what I mean, actual oppression.
I dont want there to be a rude awakening for any greasy jobless video game playing white boy that drops the term slave to someone whose dad had rocks thrown at them on the first day of school, then you’ll see real true passionate anger.
For the people that struggled and still struggle with civil rights here in our country and other real forms of oppresion all over the world have enough respect to bite your tongue. You’re not in the same class as the untouchables of India, as those who lived under apartheid, or even those who lived under our first 30ish presidents, so don’t pretend to be.
Equal slavery is not freedom.
“The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.” – Verbal Kint, The Usual Suspects (1995)
“I dont want there to be a rude awakening for any greasy jobless video game playing white boy that drops the term slave to someone whose dad had rocks thrown at them on the first day of school, then you’ll see real true passionate anger.”
You know, you’re actually right. What we have now is more like sharecropping.
“…the greatest mistake *GOD* ever made was allowing human freedom to include a belief in the independent existence of Satan…”-FREEDOM IS *NOT* “FREE”….~tKoK.
Way to miss (and muddle) the point, Kingy. 
Let me try it this way since I was too subtle before:
“The greatest trick the American government ever pulled was convincing the world its populace was free.”
“We’re the freest slaves in the WORLD!” – Ian Freeman, Free Talk Live
Zeus:
Having a home or residence is not the same thing as being in a geographic location. Ian can be physically located in Keene, NH and wander around with no place he considers his “home” or “residence”.
Thanks for your reply. According to the system in place, how many votes is each (eligible) person entitled to, in your view?
(Note: please do not construe this question as either an endorsement or repudiation of the voting system, or government in general, implicitly or explicitly.)
Why don’t you just fill out the form the way it’s supposed to be filled out?? You already knew your form was going to be rejected because of your childish attempt to get publicity.
Hey, look! I’m using Ian’s name! I’m violating his rights!!
Good thread, good conversations, even from the detractors on board. Let me say that although ‘slave’ might not be the PC word to use, part of what this movement is about is exposing the innate BS of PC, how perceived propriety ‘forces’ people to butcher the language, or not use the most desciptive phrase for an act or a person or an object.
If I have to work until June to pay the taxes that are demanded of me, on threat of violence, by the various governments, then I am indentured to them. I am their servant. I am their SLAVE. Nowadays one can’t even run away without some sort of ‘exit’ bureaucracy, wherein they want to steal even more of your wealth just for you to be able to LEAVE!
There is no disrespect intended toward the victims of the past. What we are doing, by using the word ‘slave’, is reminding people that slavery is a REAL concept, not ‘something that happened to black folk til my hero Abe the dirtbag Lincoln saved the world’.
There is no dishonor nor shame in using the most accurate term to reflect your current state of existence.
And it doesn’t matter how big the plantation is, when Massa is still headed your way with the whip.
Offended? Too bad. Go look up ‘cognitive dissonance’ in the dictionary and think about the state of YOUR liberty.
Yeah, modern slavery is nowhere near as bad as the slavery black people had to endure in the south. For one, instead of stealing all our labor, they only steal about half. Life is far less restrictive. They’ll still get you if you step out of line and disobey your lords, but it’s not like they’re hovering over everyone every minute of the day with a whip. You’re allowed to have a lot more leeway, possessions, etc.
It’s still slavery, to be sure (or serfdom if you prefer), but it’s not even in the same universe as far as brutality and oppression.
I think the term “chattel” slavery is a good way to differentiate. We’re not chattel slaves today.
Kudos to LVP for his metallo-testicular fortitude.
Thanks for your reply. According to the system in place, how many votes is each (eligible) person entitled to, in your view?
If you’re asking what I think is fair and just — and taking into consideration that voting is IMO just asking people their opinion — I’d say one vote per contest sounds about right.
Oh, what a comedic curse it would be going through life with the name Richard Head. This gentleman lives up befittingly to the name.
If you’re asking what I think is fair and just — and taking into consideration that voting is IMO just asking people their opinion — I’d say one vote per contest sounds about right.
I am asking it with respect to the conversation at hand, and the specific type of voting for which Ian attempted to register.
“registered voter”:
Had they accepted the form as they should have, there wouldn’t be much to publicize.
I don’t own my name, so why would I be upset about you using it?
Not supposed to be a poll tax either.
The whole process seems pretty taxing to me
#
Zeus on Wed, 1st Sep 2010 10:46 am
Way to miss (and muddle) the point, Kingy.
Let me try it this way since I was too subtle before:
“The greatest trick the American government ever pulled was convincing the world its populace was free.”
“We’re the freest slaves in the WORLD!” – Ian Freeman, Free Talk Live
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… RIGHT BACK At YA\’ ZEUS: * FREE* IS* NOT* FREEDOM*~tKoK.
…and I’m the FREE-EST KING In THE WHOLE FREAKIN(get it, “free keene=Freakin”)WORLD!…(any king or queen is also, by definition, a slave to the king(queen)dom…In other words, a king needs a kingdom. But, a kingdom doesn’t need any(particular)king…*AND*, any given king doesn’t need any particular kingdom…BTW: IAN!…In recognizance of your denial of ownership rights to your name, I hereby assert rights of ownership to the copyright rights inherent in “Ian Freemen”, therefore, before you can sign your “name” to register to vote, you must pay me *ROYALTIES* for continued use of “Ian Freemen” as your voter name…(BTW: I’m in training to become an undercover agent to spy on the bureaucraps, mostly doing counter-intelligence work…How am I doing so far???…If you’re still having trouble registering to vote, go see Patty Little at the City Clerks office. She owes me a couple of favors. I’ll see to it that she fast-tracks your voter reg., and citi-ZEN-ship…
K.C. on Wed, 1st Sep 2010 11:33 am:
“Oh, what a comedic curse it would be going through life with the name Richard Head. This gentleman lives up befittingly to the name.”
I don’t see why…
I’m a real judge somewhere. You got a problem with my name?
ian,
i would still like to know if “old slave name” means the name that you were given by your parent(s) or guardian(s). i am not trying to start a fight about the civil war, i would just like some clarification so when i read things that you write i understand what you mean. really, that’s all. for all i know very little about your life, and nothing of the life you have lived prior to the name that you are using now. i just don’t want to judge want you are writing without an attempt at understanding what you mean first. thanks.
Yes Max. Would “serf” be less offensive than slave? Either way, you are always owned by other men and women calling themselves governments. They are the new masters and taskmasters.
Gone are the men with horses and whips and in their place are men with cars, uniforms, and guns.
ian,
did you not read a word that i wrote. could you please reread it and understand my question? i’m not going to re-explain it. my intentions are what i stated and i a take offense to your reaction.
and it’s exhausting. why should i even try to understand what you mean if you are just going to turn around and judge me and assume what i am thinking?
then you should have clarified that, IF that was what you were doing.
Is this the answer, Ian: “Slave Name”: (as that term is used by Ian) : “Slave name” means the name on one’s birth certificate; the name one used before one became aware of one’s lack of freedom…” When you say “slave name”, Ian, I always *THOUGHT* that I knew what you meant. “Slave name” is the name you were *GIVEN* by others, not the name you chose for yourself. If that’s correct, doesn’t that answer max allisons’ qwuestion???…~tKoK.
BTW: Since we are all “owned by men & women calling themselves “gov’t”", aren’t those “gov’t men & women” *THEMSELVES* owned by somebody else???…So, if the “gov’t” *OWNS ITSELF*, then that means that WE the PEOPLE truly don’t own our gov’t???…Am I correct in my logical thinking here???…
Rereading the last several posts and Max’s reaction, I’d say you’re the one jumping the gun, Max. I didn’t find anything in Ian’s response to be hostile toward you. All he did was comment on the slave/serf thing. While not a direct answer to the actual question you posed i.e. “What does he mean by that term?”, methinks you read hostility in something that wasn’t there nor intended.
“Dick” is the diminutive or nickname of Richard. I laughed so hard yesterday when I read from Ian “Yes, Dick Tracy and Richard Head work in the same office.”
slave name. this could mean many different things. it could be the name given to him by his parents and/or guardians. it could have been a legal name change from his biological parents’ names. a complete legal name change without consent while a minor. in a case of marriage, another name change. or possibly not a change of name at all, but a reference of name- for example, a general identification like “cadet”.
and like i said, i know nothing about his life prior to the little i’ve been exposed to here. it could have been any of these things, or many more. but i went with the simplest. and i just wanted to clarify.
zeus, reread it again.
Yes Max.
An affirmative response addressing the target of his response. No hostility detected.
Would “serf” be less offensive than slave?
Query. Mistakenly thinks you are offended by his use of the term “slave” rather than asking a legitimate question or he has confused you with another poster.
Either way, you are always owned by other men and women calling themselves governments. They are the new masters and taskmasters.
Truthful statement. No hostility detected.
Gone are the men with horses and whips and in their place are men with cars, uniforms, and guns.
Truthful statement. No hostility detected. Case closed.
As for the question you *did* ask him and which he did not respond to, yes, he considers his birth name to be a “slave name”. I have no idea why, it seems like a fad since it’s the parents who name the children, not the government, but if that’s what he believes, its what he believes and only he can tell you why he believes it. Logically, I think its a fallacy but maybe Ian knows something on the subject that I don’t.
I do know he has issues with “legal names” but again, while the government may identify you by your “legal name”, they didn’t give it to you.
zeus
reread it again. all i wanted to know was what he meant by “slave name.” i just wanted clarification. his assumption that i need him to educate me is why i am upset. this is because i expained SO clearly that all i wanted was simple clarification. that is why i wanted you to reread again. you reread his response, did you reread my question? did i solicit an alternate name for slave? did i show offense? no, i was very clear with my intentions.
but, hey- maybe he was responding to me and someone else in a confusing way. and while just rereading how i did phrase myself, it was pointed which i probably should have worded softer.
“his assumption that i need him to educate me is why i am upset.”
You get upset too easily.
theodorelogan,
thanks for your opinion. maybe you can go offer unasked for advice to someone else now.
quit_job_dirtbag: there is no such thing as a libertarian fascist. It’s same as saying there is such thing as a peaceful war, or a productive politician.
I’m going to change my last name to Libertyperson. You can refer to me as Gabe Libertyperson from now on.
I wanted to choose a name that did not have any gender-specific assertions, so as not to imply that one gender was more free than the other.
I will also stop wearing underwear, as a show of my newly-asserted liberty. You may think this implies men are more free than women, but that’s just your fascist beliefs.
@Eiffudcm Oh yeah, you’re gonna lecture me. Pfff, right. Ian and the Free Keene gang ARE libertarian fascists. I came up with it, and it’s gonna stick. They’re political bullies pushing an unreasonable, radical political system that we must conform to, or else we’re the enemy and we’re criminals–”The government people,” Ian calls us. (Meaning everyone with a kid in the local elementary school, I guess.) That’s fascism. I’ve been listening and I chose my words carefully. Libertarian fascists are exactly what these guys are. Get used to it. As their bullying provokes a bigger and bigger reaction across the state, you’ll be hearing “libertarian fascists” again.
I sign everything with an appropriate clause. If nothing else, it has started a few conversations. I put a wp after my autograph and I consider it part of my signature. In my own mind, I am protecting myself from obligations that are not apparent by using “without prejudice” (checks, registrations, DL)
I use under duress and all rights reserved on court stuff.
The only time it ever caused a problem was when I put it on an attorney-client agreement. He saw that and refused to do anything until I signed a new copy without it.
Dirtbag guy,
What, specifically, do find ‘unreasonable’ about the ‘political system’ that Ian is supposedly ‘pushing’?
It can’t be nothing or you wouldnt have said it, right? So what is it?
@Lpviper The question ought to be, what’s reasonable about it? They’ve never indicated that their political demands are negotiable, or that they’re open to any kind of compromise. They want no government or bust. No public schools whatsoever, and no public property, no politics, politicians or public service allowed. Have you even listened to what Ian is actually saying? The Free Keene Gang is even ideologically opposed to the Keene town plaza!!!–They want it privatized or something. The town square is a 400 year old New England institution, a tradition that came with the colonists from Europe!!! THESE PEOPLE ARE CRAZY!
The question ought to be, what’s reasonable about it? They’ve never indicated that their political demands are negotiable, or that they’re open to any kind of compromise.
How is it unreasonable to refuse to compromise with a mugger?
They want no government or bust.
Depends on your definition of “government”. No, I don’t think one institution should be excepted from basic moral standards, and permitted to commit aggressive attacks and extortion on innocents with impunity.
Yes, I do think we should have and enforce rules in society, for example, rules against harming persons or property.
No public schools whatsoever
No extortion, if that’s what you mean. I very much like the idea of schools that accept all comers, with charitable support for the poor.
and no public property
What do you mean by “public” property exactly? I like the idea of public spaces, like parks, owned and run by community organizations.
, no politics, politicians or public service allowed.
You’re welcome to have politics and politicians if you want. You just can’t pretend that the fact that you elected someone gives them the moral right to do things that would be immediately recognized as outrageous and criminal otherwise — like attacking third parties.
You can even have full fledged democracy or a republic if you want. Just get together with your neighbors, and sign an agreement that whatever leader the majority of you support, will have the right to make decisions regarding all of your property and lives.
I think that’s a pretty silly agreement to make, but if you want to, have at it.
Just stop forcing everyone else to join in on the nuttiness.
And, real “public service” in my opinion means charitable work, not receiving a bloated paycheck with little or no accountability for actual performance.
Want to be a real “public servant”? Volunteer at the homeless shelter or the soup kitchen.
that we must conform to, or else we’re the enemy and we’re criminals
Yeah, not stealing stuff is such a burdensome requirement.
What Paul said.
Dirtbag Guy,
If you noticed enough of the debate on the subject, how pleased would you be to know that many of the activists or “Free Keene People” are just fine with gooberment having to compete against free market service providers?
That sounds more than fair in my book. Of course this means that if the state doesn’t have the goods and can’t actually go toe-to-toe with said providers on a level playing field, the Legion of Doom, has to close up shop. Have you ever considered that it is precisely because they lack both an incentive and a desire to be competitive that they create bad law to eliminate any competition? It’s as if they know already that they’ve got nothing.
Only someone with much to benefit from a system based on force, would have a problem with that. You got a problem with that?
no_job_dirtbag
No, I am not going to lecture you. I am going to correct you. You are wrong. There is no such thing as a libertarian fascist. If Ian and FK are fascists, they are not libertarians. If they are libertarians, they are not fascists.
Simply put, if you believe they are fascists, and their agenda is fascistic, that’s fine. You are entitled to that belief. However, if that is your belief then you must necessarily believe that they are not libertarian, by definition.
And, by the way, no_job_dirtbag, you should probably get a job, and maybe take a shower so you can change your user name.
I do like the term Libertarian Fascist. It’s a nice line that can be drawn between these guys and the Well educated honest, and well thought out libertarians I know.
Libertarian Fascist has a nice ring to it, and what’s great is its the most truthful term i can think of. That, and Libertarded. heh just kidding, but seriously.
Assassinating the English language is so passé.
The libertarians you know sound like compromisers, the kind of people who give up the Anne Franks of the world just because its the easier road. If that’s how you roll, far be it from any of us to deny you such associations but please pardon us when we arch the occasional eyebrow and glance at each other uneasily.
Gute nacht, Herr Auslieferung.
HA! HA
They aren’t compromisers, they are level headed. Please don’t compare your ‘party’ to Anne Frank. It’s not only ludicrous, its despicable. Your delusions of grandeur in martyrdom are getting malignantly narcissistic.
Libertarian Fascist. The National Impotent Liberty Movement.
You guys make zero impact on society.
I don’t have a “party”. And you still haven’t explained how *not* including us in your oppressive force-based collectivist system is fascism. You’re the ones who want to control others. We just want to be free of your control, to live our lives in peace doing our own thing. Tax each other, war with each other, assault, murder, rape, steal, and violate each other to your heart’s content. Just leave us out of it.
That isn’t martyrdom, it isn’t comparing us to Anne Frank, and it certainly isn’t narcissism. It’s telling you — without compromise — to get your hands out of our pockets, off our property and away from our bodies.
And that’s just pragmatic
Of course, you won’t do that because your system can’t survive without a sea of victims to exploit. Parasites always need hosts to drain so they can sustain themselves. The lazy and inept require the productive and competent or they perish.
To those using the word fascist. Would you at least define it first! Its the equivalent to calling someone a nazi or a racist in an argument. Pure drivel.
Zeus,
It’s pretty simple. If you don’t like the taxes and other things., work to change them. But someone has to pay for roads, bridges, schools, etc. And it won’t work if it’s all voluntary. You will never change the whole system by complaining that different parts of it are bad. If you want to chuck the constitution and all the laws on the books, it ain’t gonna happen. You’ll have better luck if you move somewhere that is more free. And that place is? Doesn’t exist. But stop your bitching and moaning that they are ‘stealing’. It’s called taxes. Yes, they suck, but it is the law that you must pay them. Do I think all the laws and taxes are fair? No. But it sounds to me like you guys are a bunch of whiners who just don’t want to pay your fair share. Sorry, nobody rides for free.
Ha ha ha LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS LIBERTARIAN FASCISTS!!! Get used to it!!!! That’s what you nuts are and you’re going to like it. FREE KEENE GANG!!!! LIBERTARIAN BULLIES!!! LIBERTARIAN BULLIES!!! LIBERTARIAN BULLIES!!! LIBERTARIAN BULLIES!!! LIBERTARIAN BULLIES!!! LIBERTARIAN BULLIES!!! LIBERTARIAN BULLIES!!! Boo hoo define your terms!!! Play fair, waaaa. I’m gonna play just like you: UNREASONABLE RADICAL FAR RIGHT EXTREMIST NUT JOBS WHO ARE SO NUTS THEY HATE THE TOWN SQUARE!!!!! UNREASONABLE RADICAL FAR RIGHT EXTREMIST NUT JOBS WHO ARE SO NUTS THEY HATE THE TOWN SQUARE!!!!! UNREASONABLE RADICAL FAR RIGHT EXTREMIST NUT JOBS WHO ARE SO NUTS THEY HATE THE TOWN SQUARE!!!!! UNREASONABLE RADICAL FAR RIGHT EXTREMIST NUT JOBS WHO ARE SO NUTS THEY HATE THE TOWN SQUARE!!!!! UNREASONABLE RADICAL FAR RIGHT EXTREMIST NUT JOBS WHO ARE SO NUTS THEY HATE THE TOWN SQUARE!!!!! UNREASONABLE RADICAL FAR RIGHT EXTREMIST NUT JOBS WHO ARE SO NUTS THEY HATE THE TOWN SQUARE!!!!! UNREASONABLE RADICAL FAR RIGHT EXTREMIST NUT JOBS WHO ARE SO NUTS THEY HATE THE TOWN SQUARE!!!!! UNREASONABLE RADICAL FAR RIGHT EXTREMIST NUT JOBS WHO ARE SO NUTS THEY HATE THE TOWN SQUARE!!!!! Ha ha ha, suck it bullies.
The town square is a 400 year old New England institution, a tradition that came with the colonists from Europe!!! THESE PEOPLE ARE CRAZY!
We advocate a peaceful evolution to a society where said town square would no longer be funded through the threat of and actual violence.
You advocate a society where said town square is funded through threats of violence and actual violence.
Of course WE are the crazy ones.
Well, I was going to have a conversation with you, dirtbag guy, but apparently you have lost your mind, as evidenced by the post above.
Tell me, if you can, what is so great about the idea of 30,000 people all ‘owning’ the same piece of property? How could they all possibly gain utility from it? That’s the heart of the ‘public’ property question. Ancillary to that is, what is my recourse if I can’t use the ‘public’ land in the way I want? I own it, too, right? So in the end, somebody has to decide how it is to be used. And if that somebody is not me, then my ‘ownership’ of the property is a joke, and to be treated as such.
I’m getting lazy. Paul pretty much covered the rest of it above.
It’s pretty simple. If you don’t like the taxes and other things., work to change them.
That’s the idea.
But someone has to pay for roads, bridges.
Roads are the stickiest wicket — I’d be quite happy if we could reduce government to the point where it just runs roads.
Ultimately, private/community roads would be a far better arrangement, however. You really should study this issue more. In fact, the first highway in NH, which connected Portsmouth to Concord, was a privately built toll road, constructed without using extorted money, and is now called route 4.
http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=93bd9fed-91bc-415e-8080-19d044fc0dbe
In fact, there were quite a few of these being built. As a percentage of GDP, the amount invested in these roads from 1790 to 1830 was greater than the total amount invested by all levels of government in the interstate highway system between 1955 and 1995. These investments produced at least 40,000 to 50,000 miles of road, and built many of the covered bridges we see today, without any government involvement at all. In fact, in New Hampshire alone, there were 51 turnpike incorporations during that period, representing more than 1/6 of all incorporations at the time.
Here’s what Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859), a French historian who visited the U.S., and recorded his observations, wrote regarding how our country used to work:
“If it is a question of taking a road past his property, [a man] sees at once that this small public matter has a bearing on his greatest private interests, and there is no need to point out to him the close connection between his private profit and the general interest. . . . Local liberties, then, which induce a great number of citizens to value the affection of their kindred and neighbors, bring men constantly into contact, despite the instincts which separate them, and force them to help one another. . . . The free institutions of the United States and the political rights enjoyed there provide a thousand continual reminders to every citizen that he lives in society. . . . Having no particular reason to hate others, since he is neither their slave nor their master, the American’s heart easily inclines toward benevolence. At first it is of necessity that men attend to the public interest, afterward by choice. What had been calculation becomes instinct. By dint of working for the good of his fellow citizens, he in the end acquires a habit and taste for serving them. . . . I maintain that there is only one effective remedy against the evils which equality may cause, and that is political liberty. (Alexis de Tocqueville, pp. 511-13, Lawrence/Mayer edition)
Here’s a couple articles and books I recommend:
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/klein.majewski.turnpikes
schools, etc
Schools would be far better, and far more efficient, if we actually had a choice. I guarantee they would not charge 18K per student per kid and waste most of it on administration and other B.S.
Free choice is necessary for any sort of real accountability.
I’m happy to pay for these things — but I have a right to choose. It’s the difference between paying for a meal at a restaurant when you choose to go there, and being sent a bill for restaurants you never have gone to and never intend to. Turns out, analogously speaking, when restaurants get to bill people whether they’re customers or not, they tend to overcharge and have crappy food.
And there are plenty of “serivices” the government provides — like blowing people up and bailing out billionaires, that I don’t want in any way shape or form.
And it won’t work if it’s all voluntary.
Why do you say that?
You will never change the whole system by complaining that different parts of it are bad.
Hopefully we can change one part at a time.
If you want to chuck the constitution
I like the constitution. I’d like to modify it, though, to make it much simpler. Here’s what it would read:
“No person nor any collection of persons, including a governmental institution, has the right to initiate violence or the threat of it against others, or their property”
If government would obey that rule I’d have no problem with it.
and all the laws on the books, it ain’t gonna happen.
I like some laws on the books. Ones against assault, murder, theft, etc. Although I do think the fundamental basis of the justice system should be restitution, with jail type arrangements reserved for the truly dangerous.
You’ll have better luck if you move somewhere that is more free. And that place is? Doesn’t exist.
You’re pretty much right there, although there are a few places with marginally more freedom in certain ways. Hong Kong is slightly more economically free, for example.
But stop your bitching and moaning that they are ’stealing’. It’s called taxes.
The fact that you put a different name on it doesn’t make it anything other than what it is.
Yes, they suck, but it is the law that you must pay them.
So? It used to be the law that slaves couldn’t escape from their masters too. The fact that something’s a law doesn’t make it moral.
Do I think all the laws and taxes are fair? No. But it sounds to me like you guys are a bunch of whiners who just don’t want to pay your fair share. Sorry, nobody rides for free.
I just want the choice.
Suppose I go around and mow everyone’s yard on the street. Then later, I send letters to everyone on the street demanding cash. If they don’t pay, the letters say, I will show up with guns and steal their home, or abduct them and lock them in a cage for a set period of time.
When they object, I simply say, “This service has to be paid for! I had to buy the mower after all. You just don’t want to pay your fair share!”
What would happen to me? I’d get thrown in jail. Before providing the service for a fee, I have to have an agreement with the customer. I can’t just provide what I consider to be a “service”, and then start demanding cash from anyone and everyone.
Maybe they want a different mower, who they believe will do a better job at a better price. Maybe they want to mow their lawn themselves.
WHO ARE SO NUTS THEY HATE THE TOWN SQUARE
Actually, as I said, I have no problem with a town square. In fact, I don’t even mind if the government runs it, so long as they fund its upkeep with donated money or subscriptions, rather than “taxes”.
Though I do think giving those who donate/subscribe some extra say in how the park is used would be wise, so as to encourage funding.
Libertarded Freedom nazis…Libertarded Freedom nazis…Libertarded Freedom nazis…///\\\…Nyah, nyah, nyah, neener-neener-neener…FREEDOM-NAZIS of the WORLD! – um, “dis” – unite….~tKoK.
no_job_dirtbag:
Thank you for going pop the weasel and revealing yourself for the empty-argument troll you are. You are the weakest link. Goodbye.
Steve:
It’s pretty simple. If you don’t like the taxes and other things., work to change them.
See Steve, that’s kind of a problem when the ability to change the system is an illusion. Look all the people who actually have affected great change. There aren’t many of them and most of them died or it took decades for their change to be seen. We should not have to spend every waking moment just to keep the bureaucrats and busybodies out of our pockets, off our property and away from our bodies. It should be a given in a truly free society.
But someone has to pay for roads, bridges, schools, etc.
Then let it be those who actually want and use those services and products. Let it not be provided by a group of people who forcibly take the money to do it from others, have no incentive to do a good job, and who subcontract the work to the lowest bidder or their buddies in business.
And it won’t work if it’s all voluntary.
And therein lies the flaw: The rapist can’t get sex without raping so rape is okay.
You will never change the whole system by complaining that different parts of it are bad.
I’m not complaining that different parts are bad, I”m claiming that its all bad and I want no part of it. Let those who want the system use the system and those of us who don’t be left alone so long as we aren’t hurting anyone.
If you want to chuck the constitution and all the laws on the books, it ain’t gonna happen.
Why not? Seems to have worked for the government.
But no, I don’t want to chuck all that, I just want nothing to do with it. If that’s your bag, groovy, but I don’t hang with that jive.
You’ll have better luck if you move somewhere that is more free. And that place is? Doesn’t exist.
Exactly. The governments have spread across the Earth like a cancer, slowly killing all the healthy cells. The Drug War, the War on Terror, and every other government program that doesn’t do what it was intended to and costs more each year with worse results are the tumors.
But stop your bitching and moaning that they are ’stealing’. It’s called taxes. Yes, they suck, but it is the law that you must pay them.
A law is demand written on paper and enforced by the barrel of a gun. I never signed a contract to obey those laws, I didn’t elect the people that wrote them and I want nothing from them.
Do I think all the laws and taxes are fair? No. But it sounds to me like you guys are a bunch of whiners who just don’t want to pay your fair share. Sorry, nobody rides for free.
The only “fair share” I need to pay is for the legitimate debts I incur and the products and services I use voluntarily. If you want to get together with your friends and live under a system that forces people to pay for things they don’t want and don’t use or they can be caged, beaten or killed, be my guest. I’m not interested in doing that.
And if you’re so concerned about people riding for free, then you should be with us condemning the parasitic bureaucrats who provide absolutely zilch and pay themselves extravagant salaries and pensions using your hard-earned cash.
Zeus, please. Stop making sense, OK???…you’re making it difficult for me to maintain my favorite, “wacko-nut-job” on-line, *COPYRIGHTED* literary persona…~tKoK…….—->beside, no_job_dirtbag doesn’t have a job. What, you think he pays taxes out of his monthly Social Security check???…~tKoK……….<—-
Do I think all the laws and taxes are fair? No. But it sounds to me like you guys are a bunch of whiners who just don’t want to pay your fair share. Sorry, nobody rides for free……That’s what YOU SAY, kiddo. I ride for free. I must be a nobody. I’d be glad to pay, if I had any money. But sorry, all I have are these “Federal Reserve Notes”, with pictures of dead US Presidents on them….They’re mostly green, with some red & black…they look like an African flag, or frogskins…Will that be acceptable to you, as payment of taxes?…If that’s not enough, I can always print more, can’t I???…But anyway, I still ride for free…..walk for free, too!.
All for the elimination of the public school system.
Zeus:
The libertarians you know sound like compromisers, the kind of people who give up the Anne Franks of the world just because its the easier road.
While I think I can appreciate what you are driving at here, your analogy is in poor taste, in my opinion. Although I strongly detest many of the things our current government is doing, it is nowhere near as bad as what my grandparents went through because of Nazi Germany. In fact, a big reason why I became a libertarian is because I don’t think anyone should have to produce “papers please”, or be persecuted because of their beliefs, or go through that sort of oppression ever again.
The “compromisers” were not the ones who gave up Anne Frank, anyway. The oppressors were. The compromisers were the ones who saw the cognitive dissonance between their personal opinions of right and wrong, and what was going on at the time, and decided not to just look the other way.
Compromise is almost never the “easier road”. It’s much easier to dig your heels in the dirt and refuse to budge. Trying to change things incrementally is usually more challenging, the way I see it.
I certainly agree that nothing happening today comes even close to the level and scale of abuse under the Nazis, or in southern slavery. That much should be obvious.
I agree with gradualism, but not with compromise, if that makes sense. So, Gabe, when you support changing things “incrementally”, I agree with you.
But, I don’t think we should tolerate any level of evil. Our ultimate goal needs to be the elimination of all aggressive violence, even if that goal can never be reached perfectly.
Gabe:
While I think I can appreciate what you are driving at here, your analogy is in poor taste, in my opinion. Although I strongly detest many of the things our current government is doing, it is nowhere near as bad as what my grandparents went through because of Nazi Germany.
And the Nazi Party of 1930 wasn’t as bad as the Nazi Party of 1945, either. Only *after* the atrocities have been committed and mountains of the dead have been built can we see in hindsight that it had to begin somewhere, that evil doesn’t sprout fully-formed out of the aether.
I assert that history repeats itself and many of the actions being taken by the government, particularly in the last decade but certainly over its entire existence as well, are echoes ringing the same terrible cacophony that has rung before in Germany, Russia, Italy, China and other countries over the centuries. A symphony of death that gets louder and louder over time unless someone stops it from ringing.
You’re right that it isn’t that bad yet. The key word is “yet”. Like a cancer, government will inevitably kill the patient if left untreated. The tyranny of now may be akin to apainful cyst on Uncle Sam’s backside — but left to its own devices, it will grow in size and intensity until it becomes infected or explodes.
Let it not be said that we did nothing when we had the chance, because by the time it becomes as bad as 1945 Nazi Germany, it will be too late.
In fact, a big reason why I became a libertarian is because I don’t think anyone should have to produce “papers please”, or be persecuted because of their beliefs, or go through that sort of oppression ever again.
Agreed. And that’s why we can’t turn a blind eye to it or think it will get better just by swapping the Cobra for the Asp or the Lion for the Tiger.
The “compromisers” were not the ones who gave up Anne Frank, anyway. The oppressors were. The compromisers were the ones who saw the cognitive dissonance between their personal opinions of right and wrong, and what was going on at the time, and decided not to just look the other way.
I disagree. To me, the compromisers were the Germans, Jews, Gypsies and others who gave up their friends and even their own family members to save their own necks. The ones who obeyed the orders of the Gestapo because it was easier to sacrifice another rather than take a stand. And little good it did most of them when the guns were turned on them.
Compromise is almost never the “easier road”. It’s much easier to dig your heels in the dirt and refuse to budge. Trying to change things incrementally is usually more challenging, the way I see it.
Again I disagree here as well. In my experience, most people do not have the fortitude to dig in and refuse to budge in the face of great harm or possible death, especially when it is coming from authority.
Trying to change things certainly is more challenging as you say — hence giving in and giving up are the easier path.
Zeus.
You have no idea how you would have dealt with the gestapo. No idea. I don’t know if you have kids or not. But ‘not compromising’ while an mp44 is pointed at your little girls head is easier said than done.
You guys really need to get into the real world and understand that idealism is stupid.
You’re right that it isn’t that bad yet. The key word is “yet”.
I never used the word “yet”, you introduced it.
Also, I’m still waiting for your response to my question above from a few days ago.
yeahwhatsthat:
You have no idea how you would have dealt with the gestapo. No idea. I don’t know if you have kids or not. But ‘not compromising’ while an mp44 is pointed at your little girls head is easier said than done.
Did I not just say most would give in to the fear of death? How sad it is then that the government cancer hasn’t gotten that bad yet and still people choose either to do nothing or they eat up the propaganda like Frosted Flakes while the country falls apart around them brick by brick.
Gabe:
I never used the word “yet”, you introduced it.
Yes, yes I did. See the conversation re: “The cancer ain’t at the worst possible stage yet so let’s just ignore it until we can’t do anything about it” scenario above.
Also, I’m still waiting for your response to my question above from a few days ago.
I looked but didn’t see anything I hadn’t answered so you’ll need to refresh my memory exactly on which question.
Zeus – this question:
If you’re asking what I think is fair and just — and taking into consideration that voting is IMO just asking people their opinion — I’d say one vote per contest sounds about right.I am asking it with respect to the conversation at hand, and the specific type of voting for which Ian attempted to register.
Given the situation Ian described, how many votes do you think each person should be given?
Yes, yes I did. See the conversation re: “The cancer ain’t at the worst possible stage yet so let’s just ignore it until we can’t do anything about it” scenario above.
That’s fair, but you’re mixing analogies. On one hand, you were implying that the current status is akin to that of Nazi Germany. On the other hand, you say it isn’t there “yet” but that we’re headed down that road.
I strongly disagree with the first assertion, because of the reasons described above, and that’s why I took offense originally. However, I would probably agree with the second assertion.
Given the situation Ian described, how many votes do you think each person should be given?
I did answer it. It’s even in your quote-block: “I’d say one vote per contest sounds about right.”
On one hand, you were implying that the current status is akin to that of Nazi Germany. On the other hand, you say it isn’t there “yet” but that we’re headed down that road.
Sorry you got the wrong impression but the only implication I meant and thought I’d made is:
1) that it’s not quite as hunky dory now as most people imagine,
2) it is inevitably going to get much, much worse over time on an accelerating basis,
3) all things have a beginning, regimes of tyranny and oppression being one of them, and
4) if nothing is done in the here-and-now before it gets to that level, if we stick our heads in the sand or play the same games they’ve fooled us into playing for decades, then it will eventually get to that level.
The worst case scenario will come to fruition and then it will be too late to do anything to stop it and those of us that survive it will sit there and wonder “How did it happen? Where and when did it all go wrong?”.
It is “The Death of a Thousand Cuts”. A law here, a law there, a pinch of propaganda, a period of acclimation, and it builds up over time until the victim bleeds to death or is too weak to stop the final blow.
Keep in mind that Hitler did not begin his rhetoric with “Kill all the Jews”. Instead, he preyed on the desperation of Germans in the wake of economic collapse and appealed to their hope and patriotism. He promised them greatness for Germany in a time of hopelessness. He made enemies for them to hate while he slowly took their freedoms away and absorbed more power.
“A lie told often enough becomes the truth.”
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
The entire quote is much more effective. Goebells was the greatest propoganda man ever,his work has been used by governments,business, and television. The man was truly a visionary. —bil
I did answer it. It’s even in your quote-block: “I’d say one vote per contest sounds about right.”
Who one votes for is determined by their location, from the governor, down to the representative, and to the county executives, down to the state representatives, and to the mayor. If no location is established for the person who is going to vote, what’s stopping them from casting more than one ballot in more than one location?
They are. They know who he is. They have all the relevant information needed. Their own ordinances and laws also allow for the homeless (including overseas veterans who have no other domicile besides the barracks) to vote so knowing the specific geographic location where he keeps most of his stuff or the place he hangs out at most of the time is apparently unnecessary by their own say so.
And even if it wasn’t, are you telling me that these wunderkinds that rule our lives and tell us what to do can’t come up with a way to determine whether or not he’s voted more than once? Because if they can’t figure that out, they can’t prevent voter fraud in any of its forms let alone handle one guy who doesn’t have an address to give them.
Since when did registering with an address stop people from voting twice? Or even more? Check the past two or three presidential elections.
Since when did registering with an address stop people from voting twice? Or even more? Check the past two or three presidential elections.
Not to mention “What’s to stop those very same election officials from hording up votes they don’t like and making them disappear?” which has been answered several times as headlines in the news. And those were just the incidents that have been reported on.
Post your comment below. Login in the far right column to get rid of CAPTCHA. If you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
Want to discuss rather than just comment? Visit the Free Keene Forum.
Supporters of FK
Recent Forum Topics- Free Minds Radio 02/05/2012 February 5, 2012
- HELP . . . Still unable to access . . . February 5, 2012
- Marijuana decrim bills up for vote February 5, 2012
- Episode 35 - Anarch-Elitism February 5, 2012
- HB 1533 -- fines for hurting legislators' feelings February 4, 2012
- HB 1494 -- "Your papers, please" February 4, 2012
- Legislation discussion? February 4, 2012
- What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 3, 2012
- Pet Doctor February 3, 2012
- Free Minds TV February 3, 2012 - EP 239 [S7E04] February 3, 2012
- Recent Forum Posts
- Re: Sorry, I misunderstood "Introduce yourself format" . . . Re-do, here we go! February 6, 2012
- Re: For the politically inclined February 6, 2012
- Re: Bearcat petition at city council meeting February 6, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 6, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 6, 2012
- Re: HELP . . . Still unable to access . . . February 6, 2012
- Re: Sorry, I misunderstood "Introduce yourself format" . . . Re-do, here we go! February 6, 2012
- Free Minds Radio 02/05/2012 February 5, 2012
- Re: HELP . . . Still unable to access . . . February 5, 2012
- HELP . . . Still unable to access . . . February 5, 2012