crapistan

Gee, doesn't anyone remember during the early 90's when the big consumer catch was advertising products made with recycled materials? It is actually CHEAPER to recycle than to get materials from their source. There is plenty of incentive to be stewards of the enviornment I.E. higher profits and financial security. That is absurd to claim and it is even more absurd to accuse me of claiming it. How in the world did you get THAT out of my posts? As a matter of fact, selective cutting makes way for new growth. So cutting a few trees now (Yes, oh my gosh! They killed a poor defensless tree!) would spur the growth of new trees and undergrowth. (Undergrowth that is feeding everyone's furry little friends... the same ones I brutally hunt down, murder, gut, skin, butcher, freeze, cook, and finally eat... And its lots of fun...) NO! Most factories are on waterfront! http://www.gp.com/enviro/index.html Georgia-Pacific has won numerous awards for their enviornmentally friendly buisness. Once again, I never said that. What I have said is I believe the government needs to keep there nose out of everything and let the marketplace regulate itself. There really is not much different between a corporation and the government. They are both run the same way, but sometimes to different means. They are no less compatable than two corporations offering the same product. The governments main concern should be to protect the intrests of it's citizens, not to govern their actions. Welfare system? Moronic? Couldn't agree more! Its moronic we even have one! Its moronic to think we need one! Our free market system is too heavily regulated. In the ideal (and obtainable) system, there will be no need for charity. With that said could someone who opposes me please reply with substance? I tire of simple posts with hidden assumptions, accusations, and inaccuracy in what I said or meant. (Its easy to leave out sections to change meanings. Its all about perception)

Who cares? Do you not believe in self determination? It's not exactly America's fault that turd world countries are starving. Any claims that we are the plight of the earth better be backed by ligit sources. Not some college kid's website.

How else would you prefer to catagorize? On the major issues there are polarized views held in the two traditional modes of political thought. How would you define yourself? Enlightened? Progressive? Free Thinking? What is the criteria for such a label? What so wrong about me calling the same thing something different? If labels are an issue, why do we have language? Perhaps to convey general ideas and information? I know what a shoe is, does someone really need to tell me what exactly a shoe is composed of? With a set of blueprints? And a definition from a dictionary? Not really... I for one will continue with "Primitive" labels, it does a pretty darn good job of drawing a line between myself and my "Enemies". Doing away with generalized labels would be like trying to fight a guerrilla war against half the nation. I am simply making the observation that if rampant destruction of the enviornment by big corporations were true, My statement would be false. (Paper and lumber are HUGE industries in WI) Also consider my lack of immediate information concerning pre ice age tree populations in Wisconsin. Thus I could not make a statement claiming there were more trees before the last ice age. Forest fires that are of record sizes? Year after year? Very unusual. That is after all, what I was saying. Policies of extinguishing natural fires cause a build up of combustible material. There is no such policy of selective cutting either. It is like saying the whole forest must die because we cannot sleep at night (In our wooden houses) if one tree dies at our hands. Fire lanes? Whats that? Really now, only taking only exerpts from my posts is not very honest (Yes, I am scolding your values and morality). It is not that difficult to demonize someone that way. Just ask Michael Moore. (AKA "Mr. Cut n' Paste)

I apologize for some angry and poorly thought out comments by fellow rightwingers. Although conclusions have been jumped to, some on the left are guilty of such offenses. I don't expect a diplomatic apology, however those on the left who really believe in enlightened debate would gain respect to do so. Note to others who believe in conservative concepts: Your short-sighted comments are accomplishing the opposite of what you may wish to achieve. Try a well thought out, objective, reasonable, and most importantly DIPLOMATIC approach to debates. Accomplishing this will cause our enemies to spew the irate, illogical, radical, foaming at the mouth, comments that your being scolded for.

I've never been a advocate of any form of anarchy. It's illogical to expect humanity to follow such a policy, same as any social system such as anarcho-communism. However I am staunchly conservative, more government is bad but none at all is even worse. Don't even get me started on the pros/cons of anarcho-communism.

I've never been a advocate of any form of anarchy. It's illogical to expect humanity to follow such a policy, same as any social system such as anarcho-communism. However I am staunchly conservative, more government is bad but none at all is even worse. Don't even get me started on the pros/cons of anarcho-communism.

51% of the population could in theory enslave the other 49%. If America's elections were more based upon a popular vote (and with the lack of a senate), California, with a massive population could direct the feds agenda to for example: Ban dairy production in Wisconsin, causing an economic (possibly humanitiarian) disaster in my region. Then California with a majority population verses Wisconsin, would enjoy a monopoly on the dairy industry. Don't get me wrong, I would not enjoy being under the iron fist of another Stalin (I would be among the first to die in opposition). Above all I support equal representation of the states in the senate and I enjoy the rule of law, not of men. (what the heck was that quote?) True democracy would be the rule of the majority of people as a dictatorship would the rule of a single person. Neither concept has a foundation in basic rule of law. This is very dangerous... Remember how the Greek City States eventually went from a free thinking, artistic, scientific society to tyrranical, paranoid militaristic mob rule? LONG LIVE THE REPUBLIC!

51% of the population could in theory enslave the other 49%. If America's elections were more based upon a popular vote (and with the lack of a senate), California, with a massive population could direct the feds agenda to for example: Ban dairy production in Wisconsin, causing an economic (possibly humanitiarian) disaster in my region. Then California with a majority population verses Wisconsin, would enjoy a monopoly on the dairy industry. Don't get me wrong, I would not enjoy being under the iron fist of another Stalin (I would be among the first to die in opposition). Above all I support equal representation of the states in the senate and I enjoy the rule of law, not of men. (what the heck was that quote?) True democracy would be the rule of the majority of people as a dictatorship would the rule of a single person. Neither concept has a foundation in basic rule of law. This is very dangerous... Remember how the Greek City States eventually went from a free thinking, artistic, scientific society to tyrranical, paranoid militaristic mob rule? LONG LIVE THE REPUBLIC!

Government is simply a monopoly of force, how it came to be (Democratic or Despotic) is irrelevent. Anarchy is simply the lack of an entity with this characteristic. Social systems can be included in this. Anti-Government Communists? Still a government! Many will argue true communism is true democracy. But there is still a monopoly of power! Rule by an angry mob. Ever hear of the Two Cows bit on explaining world politics/economics? How everyone votes to take your cows or they will kill you? Hmmm... class warfare, somehow this sounds familiar. That sounds like the tactics of a recently failed canidate for the Dems. Aww shucks, I've already forgotten his name.

Government is simply a monopoly of force, how it came to be (Democratic or Despotic) is irrelevent. Anarchy is simply the lack of an entity with this characteristic. Social systems can be included in this. Anti-Government Communists? Still a government! Many will argue true communism is true democracy. But there is still a monopoly of power! Rule by an angry mob. Ever hear of the Two Cows bit on explaining world politics/economics? How everyone votes to take your cows or they will kill you? Hmmm... class warfare, somehow this sounds familiar. That sounds like the tactics of a recently failed canidate for the Dems. Aww shucks, I've already forgotten his name.

This was your qasi partner in crime, Keith. Very nice job on the Ranger, wanna try a nice heavy weight easton arrow with a heavy grain field tip? Achtung! I may be the "hillbilly" jg refered to but I resent accusations of possessing tainted genetic stock!