Motorcycle Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Those of you who read this article and thought "right on," might wish to consider the words of warning given by our forefathers. A government powerful enough to give you everything you want is aslo powerful enough to take everything that you have.



Where exactly did the people grant the government the power to regulate private business? The answer is of course there is no LEGAL means by which "those that serve us" can regulate what a private enterprise will or will not offer it's customers.



This is precisely the kind of legislation that we who enjoy the sport of motorcycling should oppose. Don't forget that if the government can force insurance companies to insure us against their will at our behest, government can also force all of us to ride 5 hp motorcycles when those companies start squawking about insuring our "risky" behavior. VWW

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
gdrazek, The Commerce Clause in the Constitution was placed there as a check against State to State tariffs or boycotts on another States products. Please read up on your history. There are numerous letters and journals from the framers of our Constituion available to show what the true intent of what the Commerce Clause pertained to. Just because five black robed hacks on the "supreme" court claim that they have interpeted some vague "penumbra," not backed by any concrete evidence, it doesn't mean that it's constitutionally correct.



As for your worries about private enterprises selling crack to children, please see the Tenth Amendment which guarantees the right of the people of each State to decide if they wish to allow such activity or not. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
The very fact that federal regulators f#*ked this up so badly in the first place should give pause to anyone who expects them to straighten this mess up now. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #25 ·
Re: Thank you

If by "being pragmatic" you mean he is selling his soul for policical gain by totally ignoring his solomn oath of office which requires him to follow constitutional edicts and refrain from socialist legislation, then you're right K Paul. The country would not be in the mess it is now. The "mess" would be far greater. I will give him this though, at least he is upfront about his socialist proclivities, which is more than I can say for most other Republican polititians, whose actions in office seldom match their campeign rhetoric
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #27 ·
Re: Oh please

The planet I live on is one where people with the requisite gray matter to separate fact from propaganda offer cogent discourse when disagreeing on subjects of importance. A world that you are apparently alien to.

K Paul, you're ad hominem sniping offers substantial refutation to neither my question nor my postulation. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #34 ·
If ferb actually has a copy of the constitution perahaps he hasn't read enough of it to come to the part that allows for the LEGAL amendment process. It is in this context and only in this context that the framers allowed for any changes to be made to our paramount governing document. Our founding fathers were prescient enough know that some fine tuning of the constitution might be necessary so they carefully laid out a process that protected our republican form of governance. There was never any intent to have changes made by some government official deciding that today's needs required someone to reinterpet the clearly stated rules laid out in that contract with the people. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #36 ·
Mr. Brown, Limits on legislative authority are the exact reason that anti-federalist factions insisted on the inclusion of the Bill of Rights prior to ratifying the Constitution. It was specifically because of our forefathers fears that people like you would attempt to bastardize the original intent of the framers that we have the first ten amendments. Please read Articles Nine and Ten in particular.



BTW how dare you include the unconstitutional atrocity known as the Civil War in any discussion on constitutional rights. I would suggest that you give Tomas DiLorenzo's book The Real Lincoln a careful read prior to your next mention of the Civil War. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
seurzawa, if you're reminding me how the system of business patronage to government bureaucrats works, just to get that vein on my forehead to bulge out even farther, you've suceeded. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #48 ·
James, your utter ignorance of the issues that started the Civil War are inexcusable. If you actually care to educate yourself instead of spouting uninformed drivel, no doubt derived from your woefully inadequate education at which ever government subsidized idiot factory that you attended, I will again offer you the opportunity to peruse Tomas DiLorenzo's fully annotated work on the subject' prior to your making any more ill informed blatherings. Lincoln's much ballyhooed Emancipation Proclamation didn't even occur untill after the war was well underway. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #50 ·
kowalke67, your failure to grasp the salient, and obvious, point made in my diatribe ranks as a new paradigm in the annals of obtuse behavior. The fact that KPaul agrees with you should cause you to rethink your approval of governmental dictates. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
Let me get this straight. You are afraid that people that believe in a literal interpretation of the Constituion might sneak up on you, and do you harm, while you're at home in your jammies? You my friend are a complete tool!



It is no small wonder that we have an ever expanding Department of Home Security, with timorous souls such as yourself bleating for protection from imaginary hobgoblins. Hey, open the door. It's safe to come outside and play now. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #53 ·
Re: Are you afraid?

KPaul, let me put this in simple terms. If the government were to stick to it's duties outlined in the Costitution, big business would have little need to lobby for special legislation. Without government interference the free market laws of supply and demand would serve to regulate business in a way that would be more equitable to all. If you truely wish to educate yourself on this process you can start by loging on to www.mises.org . After you absorb some of the economic theory of Ludwig von Mises and his acolytes I will be willing to have further discussion with you on this subject. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #65 ·
Re: Are you afraid?

KPaul it is because of the deficit spending idiocy espoused by John Maynard Keynes, and followed by every administration since FDR, that we are in the sorry financial dilemma that we have today. The very fact that you lump Milton Friedman and Keynes together exposes your utter lack of economic theory. If you don't wish to at least glimpse at the Mises site that's ok, but without some study of the subject any comments you may have about it become uninformed prattle. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #66 ·
"All indications I have (not the least of which is your ringing endorsement) indicate that DiLorenzo's book is is about 25% substance and 75% crap."



All indications that I have show me that

(A) you haven't read the book.

(B) you are running your mouth off about something of which you know NOTHING about. (C) If I am slightly paranoid it is only because of simpering left wing whiners with unfounded fears about people who present a threat to their carefully constructed fantasy worlds, and want goverment stooges to protect them from those who would dare point out those fantasies for what they are. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #69 ·
Re: I am not lumping them in to the same cat you did Whacko.

KPaul I will have to admit some culpability in joining in this arguement in the first place. It was only my overwhelming hubris that led me to try and break through that log jam that surrounds what some may euphemistically refer to as your center of reasoning, after so many others have failed. The fact that you have a "minor" in economics from which ever state college that you attended, and still are unaware of Ludwig von Mises whose dicsiples include such luminaries as Murray Rothbard, and Lewellen Rockwell who's accumen far outweigh that of everyone involved in this thread and more, show that your minor was a hopelessly inadequate exercise in education. If you insist on believing that your knowlege of economics is complete, and you refuse to even give a cursory examination of the site dedicated to a man that many of the finest minds of the twentieth century consider to be the ultimate authority in the field of market economy, then I give up. You are right and I am an idiot for even entering this disscusion with a man of your obvious brilliance. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #74 ·
Re: I am not lumping them in to the same cat you did Whacko.

kowalke67, the plain fact is that I have never paid for nor attended any state or private instiution of "higher learning." My words like my thoughts are my own, and being a former Democrat (when I was too stoned to know any better), a Republican (when I foolishly thought that party was actually a separate entity from the Democratic party), and a former member of both the AMA, and NRA (prior to dicovering that both groups were more interested in mantaining their positions as lobbying organizations than standing up for their members rights) I have learned most of what I know the hard way. I do not read the dictionary unless I run across a word that I don"t understand, nor do I use a thesaurus. I will however admit to using a spell checker, as I have suffered from dyslexia since childhood.

If only educated people such as yourself would start to address the fundamental issues that plauge our country, such as the total faliure of our elected officials to follow the law, and disabuse yourselves of the notion that by supporting organizations such as the NRA you are actually doing your part to preserve our freedom, then and only then will we stand a chance of turning things around before it really is to late.

Those are my deductions and no one else's. I did not encounter the theory of Austrian economics nor web sites espousing Libertarian ideals until after my tribulations with the "conventional" parties and organizations, and my personal epiphany when I realized that by participating in mainstream politics that I was part of the problem, and not part of the solution.

You appear to have the nascent perspicacity to grasp what I am saying, so please forget about wasting that $25 this month on the NRA, and start reading some of the editorials on lewrockwell.com . I do apologize for boring you, but hey the truth isn't always exciting. VWW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #75 ·
Re: Excellent Post

The plain truth is that dispite NRA lobbying and campaigning for "pro gun" candidates we have continued to lose ground when "the evil gun baners have control of congress and the executive branch, and never gain any ground back when we follow the NRA's voting lists and put the "right" people in office. Hey their hand picked man G.W.Bush was ready to extend the "assault weapons ban" Sadly the NRA's efforts can only be descrbed as a continuing failure.

You are correct when you state that those commercials aren't preventing smoking. Conversely commercials sure sold a lot of cigarettes when they were still allowed. Perhaps the no smoking commercials are a failure because the ad campaign is managed by the government. They really aren't to efficient at much, are they? VWW
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top