Powerful Essay in Esquire

[tpahl]

EXCERPTS:




Much More

I certainly do not think the guy is a immoral or bad man. He just is simply not a man who beleives in smaller government. He has increased spending like no other president in my lifetime. He has done nothing to stop gun control and in fact supports the renewal of the unconstitutional assualt weapon ban. He has increased funding to an unconstitutional department of education.

I beleive we need a man that respects the constitution. Badnarik is the man. The GOP is just another party of more government. If that is what I wanted I would just vote for Kerry. I want smaller government and urge anyone else who wants such, to reconsider whether Bush is truly giving them what they want. forget whether he is a immoral man or a bad man. ASk yourself is his policies the ones I support? if he is not, why support him?


Travis

 

[Annie]

I certainly do not think the guy is a immoral or bad man. He just is simply not a man who beleives in smaller government. He has increased spending like no other president in my lifetime. He has done nothing to stop gun control and in fact supports the renewal of the unconstitutional assualt weapon ban. He has increased funding to an unconstitutional department of education.

I beleive we need a man that respects the constitution. Badnarik is the man. The GOP is just another party of more government. If that is what I wanted I would just vote for Kerry. I want smaller government and urge anyone else who wants such, to reconsider whether Bush is truly giving them what they want. forget whether he is a immoral man or a bad man. ASk yourself is his policies the ones I support? if he is not, why support him?


Travis

Your loyalty is great. You are welcome to post what you like, but do not change the topic of threads. As you know this site has been very generous to you, letting you put links and issues out there, that need to be heard. You've been gone awhile, now things are heating up again. There are many here that would certainly look into your ideology.

However, you need to retrieve what you've already posted, so that there are not so many dup threads! I've noticed that you are again referring to links or the topic of links previously posted. If you need help with this, pm me, I'll be glad to give you a hand!

 

[tpahl]

Your loyalty is great. You are welcome to post what you like, but do not change the topic of threads. As you know this site has been very generous to you, letting you put links and issues out there, that need to be heard. You've been gone awhile, now things are heating up again. There are many here that would certainly look into your ideology.

However, you need to retrieve what you've already posted, so that there are not so many dup threads! I've noticed that you are again referring to links or the topic of links previously posted. If you need help with this, pm me, I'll be glad to give you a hand!

I am not changing the topic of the thread. Your post was about why so many people dislike bush (because they beleive he is immoral). I am just point out that there is another reason out there, so simply dispelling the myth that he is immoral is only half the battle. If you want to prove that he is worth voting for you also will have to show that he is not just a good man, but one that understand the limited government our constitution was set up for.

I am not sure how this site has been 'generous' to me. It has allowed me to post and I have posted on topic (Political Races in the USA). If being allowed to do what the forum was set up for is considered generous, then I thank the forum for its generousity.

Travis

 

[Annie]

I am not changing the topic of the thread. Your post was about why so many people dislike bush (because they beleive he is immoral). I am just point out that there is another reason out there, so simply dispelling the myth that he is immoral is only half the battle. If you want to prove that he is worth voting for you also will have to show that he is not just a good man, but one that understand the limited government our constitution was set up for.

I am not sure how this site has been 'generous' to me. It has allowed me to post and I have posted on topic (Political Races in the USA). If being allowed to do what the forum was set up for is considered generous, then I thank the forum for its generousity.

Travis

Actually the topic was why some very liberal folk, writer included, might be convinced to vote for Bush. I take it you didn't read the article? You twist the words Tphal, by generous I meant that you are able to get the Libertarian message out without cost. At the same time, all of us, posting 'free' need to use reason on what we are posting, duplicate threads are confusing if nothing else. The Libertarian stance on issues, you have posted thread after thread on, just pick on of them to reiterate your message. If you need help in locating, just pm me or any mod.

 

[tpahl]

Actually the topic was why some very liberal folk, writer included, might be convinced to vote for Bush.

yes and in doing so the writers one of his core arguements was "The people who dislike George W. Bush have convinced themselves that opposition to his presidency is the most compelling moral issue of the day."

In my opinion this is not correct. Many people who dislike him like him for such reasons but as my reply said was, "I certainly do not think the guy is a immoral or bad man. He just is simply not a man who beleives in smaller government."

This hardly seems off topic to me. It was a direct response to the article you wanted us to read.

I take it you didn't read the article?

No. i read it. I even responded directly to it. Also you may not recall but you got upset with me for posting articles on the forum rather than just links. is it now okay to post the articles directly?

You twist the words Tphal, by generous I meant that you are able to get the Libertarian message out without cost.

I was not twisting words. You are using generous in a very odd form. Typically when someone says they are bbeing generous to another, it is implied that they are treating them in a special fashion above their typical behavior. You however are treating me like everyone else. Unless there are some people that are required to pay money to post here? Is that the case?

At the same time, all of us, posting 'free' need to use reason on what we are posting, duplicate threads are confusing if nothing else.

No. Off topic threads with a bunch of insults back and forth mixed with a little bit of a good (yet off subject) posts are confusing. I simply took the off topic part that was worth reading (as opposed to a bunch of people calling each other names) and created a new thread where those that wished to actually discuss something of substance could go. If it is this boards policy to not make new threads when the subject has adequeately changed I apologize and will no longer do it. In fact I could even ask you for permission to start a thread before I do so if you would like.

The Libertarian stance on issues, you have posted thread after thread on, just pick on of them to reiterate your message. If you need help in locating, just pm me or any mod.

In locating what?

Travis

 

[Annie]

yes and in doing so the writers one of his core arguements was "The people who dislike George W. Bush have convinced themselves that opposition to his presidency is the most compelling moral issue of the day."

In my opinion this is not correct. Many people who dislike him like him for such reasons but as my reply said was, "I certainly do not think the guy is a immoral or bad man. He just is simply not a man who beleives in smaller government." Ah, but you did not say that. You posted your take of what the topic was about.

This hardly seems off topic to me. It was a direct response to the article you wanted us to read.



No. i read it. I even responded directly to it. Also you may not recall but you got upset with me for posting articles on the forum rather than just links. is it now okay to post the articles directly?No, as always you may post a quote of what the article is about, along with a link.




I was not twisting words. You are using generous in a very odd form. Typically when someone says they are bbeing generous to another, it is implied that they are treating them in a special fashion above their typical behavior. You however are treating me like everyone else. Unless there are some people that are required to pay money to post here? Is that the case?

You are able to use the Paypal, as anyone else is. It's a 'free' site, but it cost Jim a bit of change. Not treating you different, but boy you are squealing!



No. Off topic threads with a bunch of insults back and forth mixed with a little bit of a good (yet off subject) posts are confusing. I simply took the off topic part that was worth reading (as opposed to a bunch of people calling each other names) and created a new thread where those that wished to actually discuss something of substance could go. If it is this boards policy to not make new threads when the subject has adequeately changed I apologize and will no longer do it. In fact I could even ask you for permission to start a thread before I do so if you would like. Considering you were the only poster after my lead, that is a pretty strange twist!



In locating what? Your previous links to bolster your chosen candidate! See, not trying to curtail your message, just trying to make the site more coherent! That was the point all along, that you wish to ignore.

Travis

I've chosen to respond within the poster's own message. If there are further questions, take them to PM.

 

[tpahl]

In my opinion this is not correct. Many people who dislike him like him for such reasons but as my reply said was, "I certainly do not think the guy is a immoral or bad man. He just is simply not a man who beleives in smaller government."

Ah, but you did not say that. You posted your take of what the topic was about.

No, i said exactly that. You can look at the original post above.