Notice how you consider a legitimate philosophical and political difference over the relationship between a citizen and society to be a crime.
One person believes that the individual owns his own life. The other believes the individual should be the property of the State, or society, or the People, or the Greater Good, or whatever other entity the collectivists happen to be wrapping themselves in. If the first wins the argument, nothing at all happens to the second. If the second wins, the first is enslaved. See the difference?
Not all liberals are socialist, and I have never said so. But enough of them are to threaten our liberty. I see a much greater likelihood in the future that many of my choices in medical care, sources of information, transportation, and other things will be taken from me in a quiet, orderly manner by the Left, rather than our country being suddenly overrun by theocratic Klansmen.
Right on, Tom, it's clear that a lot of conservative demagogues want to do a better job of suppressing liberals. All they need is a little more power, and they're so close they can taste it.
So, tell me: who is currently working hardest to slam heavy controls on who can own media, and what can be broadcast?
Current Events » in reply to re: No paradox at all.
re: No paradox at all.
The whole thread (31 posts)
- David Neiwert: 'The political and the personal'
- Is he really so clueless?
- Oh, yeah. A call for conservative moderation, tolerance and civility from the "Smirking Chimp" web site. (n/t)
