duovamp - have you always been a neo-con, or is this a new development?

I was referring to awlaki himself. the 'citizen" whose assassination everybodys pretending to be outraged over. as far as his son I don't think he was specifically targeted but that goes into what I said about unintended casualties in wartime

i'm not pretending to be outraged, it's completely insanely horrifying precedent that a president can assassinate a civilian that opposes him

just dont join al quaeda and youre in the clear brah

just don't join the communist party
just don't join the libertarian party
just don't join GLAAD
just don't join ____________

I have always been a neo conservative. God bless Ronald Reagan.

are you hitting on me

Its like the possibility a president they dont support will ever occupy the whitehouse never enters their mind.


http://forums.netphoria.org/wwwboard/icons/icon10.gif

my logic is if sarah palin were president and she wanted writers for the huffington post assasinated or something the DOJ in all likelihood wouldn't clear something like that. that isnt to say i dont have my own doubts but with awlaki thats really just another way of dealing with high treason. not some orwellian prelude

but while we're at it lets poke a little fun

http://images1.dailykos.com/i/user/2...06colorKOS.png

A nationless army requires a new strategy for combat imo. I never minded the killings if they're for protection, same as any war. Again, this is a huge wind down from the steps taken by the previous administration. How quickly we forget the Iraq Resolution.

btw i'm well aware of the many shades of leftism: anarcho-syndicalism, anarcho-communism, what have you. by planned economy i didn't mean much more than a general opposition of the majority of leftists to the rule of supply and demand and other such intrinsically "economic" as opposed to "political" ways of determining prices and such. leftism is usually allied to some form of justified and justice-evoking interventionism, be it via general consensus, an industry of utilitarian decision-making, authoritarian dictatorship or universal transcendental principles

i never mentioned the state btw

anarcho communism? what is that like "primitive humans are communal"?

i mean obviously even hardline marxism is essentially anti-statist, but that doesn't mean that most supporters of marxism historically and nowadays don't favour measures to collectively limit what is to them a pseudo-free market in capitalism

that's not what it is or all there is to it, but many many self-proclaimed leftists believe just that. have you read marx?

yes but it's been years

i'm familiar with the idea that humans are actually naturally communal, and I think that a lot of the communal societies of american indians can be retroactively be considered "communist societies" but that would be like how libertarians like to revise history to make it seem like the "Wild West" was actually libertarian paradise and pretend like they don't know what range wars are

it's more than that. marx's theory of history (the core of his philosophy and perhaps his most obviously hegelian side) includes the premise that primitive communism was once the natural state of mankind.

yeah this is coming back to me

property, it is theft comes into this. i remember some extra brownie points conversation with a professor about this very topic

i really should smoke less weed and read more

This is one of most fascinating vids I've ever seen. Partly because nothing like this is ever really shown on American TV. Nothing earth shattering is said or done, it's just in the subtitles of Putin and Obama's actions that speak volumes.


If you didn't know either guy for some reason, it would still be quite easy to see who has a Masters degree in Chess and a black belt in Judo and who is the glorified Junior College professor too narcissistic for his own good.

oeps, forgot I unretired Edgeboy for the moment.



anyway, Like I said in 2008:


Obama and Hillary went to the Bilderburg meeting in Chantilly that year and the buzz was that they proposed then who would win THE NEXT TWO elections. Obama would win in '08, Hillary was asked to step aside along with Romney so that McCain would be the fall guy for the '08 election only to have Romney return in 2012.

Obama would be a single term because it was known then the economy would take the big shit its taking now and that the right-wing austerity crowd would come in with Romney to REALLY FUCK UP the USA. Obama has done his part with Health Care and now the elites have that all important mechanism of control in place.


This isn't to say the men and woman who run for office don't play the game and fight the good fight. They do what they can but most importantly their puppets and they do what their told.


p.s.

The Bilderberg meeting came back to Chantilly, Virginia this year, which is not surprising considering it was held in the U.S. last election. And yes, the buzz is that Mitt Romney was secretly in attendance this year and the formality of him winning the Presidency was likely addressed.

.

what the hell is that guy doing to the rubber boot?

ya, the rubber boot. wtf? Such a bizarre circumstance, this luncheon meeting. I just get the sense Putin is sizing Obama up and he probably can't figure out how he became President. At least with Bush, it was in the name. Obama? errrrr...

Excellent. Entirely satisfied.

I mean if the people demand the government they created lean on the demand side of a market for their benefit... What's the problem here other than it violating a valueless ideal?

i can't respond to this thread until "supporter" is more clearly defined

it's also called a "jock strap"

so are you a "left rothbardian" now? can you explain to us what that means

I don't know what I am, in terms of a label (nor do I know exactly what a "left Rothbardian" is - sorry!). If I think over the past fifteen years of my political philosophy, I've probably moved across the spectrum and back - so it's kind of silly to say "I am this" now, especially to such a specific degree, as it will probably nudge again within two months. But the more I learn about the ideological left (not the American "left"), the more I think I agree with at least several of their basic premises. Those value-free aspects of austrianism/rothbardianism should be able to work within any ideology, and I don't find my views changing much there. I don't think my libertarianism is changing anytime soon, but four years in Europe working under one of the most influential Marxist historians left on the planet has certainly modified it.