Skip to comments.
Statement by Jim Robinson Regarding the State of our Free Republic
October 20, 2003
| Jim Robinson
Posted on 10/20/2003 4:53:35 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Edited on 10/20/2003 8:39:45 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,141-1,160, 1,161-1,180, 1,181-1,200 ... 1,261-1,271 next last
To: restornu
I didn't mind it, back then. In a way, it was better, in other ways, it was worse. I lurked for almost a year, prior to joining. Look at my sign up date and you'll see that I've been here rather a long time. LOL
To: Texasforever
Your from Texas and don't care for the 2nd amendment? Ok!
To: Texasforever
Silvea v Lockyear, if we get lucky.
1,163
posted on
10/21/2003 11:07:55 PM PDT
by
tpaine
(I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but Arnie won, & politics as usual lost. Yo!)
To: restornu
Your from Texas and don't care for the 2nd amendment? Ok! None of us in Texas do. We just own a pot full of guns.
To: nopardons
Look at my sign up date and you'll see that I've been here rather a long time. LOL Those days were like the wild wild west!:)
To: restornu
Yes, they were and the ASH ALERTS were just one part of them. :-)
To: Jim Robinson
The above is in response to the recent attacks on my character, my honesty and my devotion to principle. If anyone here really believes that I am dishonest, disloyal or unprincipled, then I wish you would resign from this website and leave us be.
Well isn't that something! It seems that my time away has left me out on a limb to some new, revolting developments. I don't care to know all of the details, but I'd sure like to wipe the cobwebs off of the old flame machine...
I will, however, continue to play well with the others.
G_d bless you and yours, as always
Phil
To: Jim Robinson
Jim,if all Senators were appointed by state legislators,John Tower would never have been a Senator and up until this year,because of Democrats hold in the House,Texas wouldn't have been blessed with 2 Republican Senators.
The Texas house was democrat for 130 years.They are not taking their loss well..They run to Oklahoma and New Mexico to avoid unpleasant duties.
1,168
posted on
10/22/2003 12:44:14 AM PDT
by
MEG33
To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
I got a good joke -
"Three musicians and a drummer walk into a bar..."
To: OWK
"At the end of the day, I have to still look forward to supporting the education and welfare of our fellow citizens" Go for it.
Have a great time.
But keep your fingers out of my wallet.
Thanks in advance.
Sorry, ol' bean but taxes are just another part of growing up.
You should try it someday. Might help make you look less silly.
1,170
posted on
10/22/2003 3:05:05 AM PDT
by
harrowup
(So perfect I'm naturally humble)
To: Sabertooth
No party has ever held 70 seats in the US Senate.Technically speaking I guess you are correct, but of course the 75th included 76 Democrats.
It isn't the numbers, son. It's the percentage. Get that tooth fixed.
1,171
posted on
10/22/2003 3:17:04 AM PDT
by
harrowup
(So perfect I'm naturally humble)
To: restornu
I am glad you never been on the recieving end of an intoleranced mob! Oh, I never said I hadn't been ganged up on by an intolerant mob before.
To: Texasforever
Chad you have me intrigued. You appear to be asserting that the country is no longer a representative republic On what basis do you make that assertion?Well, if you get a few people together, and yell real loud and scream and break things and start them on fire etc... you can get your way - witness the Rodney King-related riots in L.A...
We are moving closer and closer to becoming a "democracy" as more and more self-interest groups become more concerned with their own interests, no matter if it's bad for the rest of the country - we han't necessarily lost the republic yet, but we're on our way...
1,173
posted on
10/22/2003 5:52:52 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
(Francis Scott Key was a One-Hit Wonder)
To: harrowup
Technically speaking I guess you are correct, but of course the 75th included 76 Democrats.
D-oh! I stand corrected. More here.
|
1,174
posted on
10/22/2003 6:11:09 AM PDT
by
Sabertooth
(No Drivers' Licences for Illegal Aliens. Petition SB60. http://www.saveourlicense.com/n_home.htm)
To: Jim Robinson
I love my country dearly and do not wish to see it destroyed by any enemy, foreign or domestic, and this includes terrorists, socialists, communists, anarchists, nazis, liberals, democrats or anyone else. You forgot "progressives".
1,175
posted on
10/22/2003 6:18:42 AM PDT
by
Publius6961
(40% of Californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
To: Afronaut
translation: You must vote repulican or the democrats will win. Give it a rest.
Anyone who keeps trying to pigeonhole me with a label can pretty much count on being ignored.
If I thought tribal membership was an essential part of my political life I would move to Rwanda.
1,176
posted on
10/22/2003 6:21:53 AM PDT
by
Publius6961
(40% of Californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
To: Jim Robinson
Thanks Jim,
Now I know I'm not alone..
As indicated, I've had it "UpToHere"
To: tpaine
History shows that mandating virtue through prohibitionary laws foster contempt for social order. tpaine, there is no way to "mandate virtue" through prohibitionary laws. As I said, virtue cannot be compelled. Prohibitionary laws aren't really about mandating virtue any way, they are attempts at constraining behavior that usually prove to be counterproductive in practice. I don't think they foster contempt for the social order, though they may foster contempt for the law.
Plato's word for law was nomos, or customary law. Nomos is settled law that has been "time-tested" over the generations in a given society, to which the people give their ready assent because there is broad social consensus that the law secures the ends for which it is intended.
Nomos is thus rather the polar opposite of positive law, the itch to pass legislation to "correct" perceived problems on an ad hoc basis. (You got a problem? Well, we'll just pass a new law that will "fix it.")
A wise legislator understands that law making should be done sparingly, for it tends to disrupt the settled ways of the people, and "too many laws" or law that constantly changes tends to increase uncertainty and unpredictability in social life, and thereby may result in the people developing sentiments of contempt for the law and the lawmaker alike.
IMHO, legislation should be used very, very sparingly. It seems to me laws ought not to be regarded as instant fixes for each and every perceived social problem that comes down the pike. Rather, the law should provide for the basic security of individuals and, for the rest of it, just leave the people alone to handle their own affairs as they see fit. Virtue actually has a better chance of developing under nomos than it does under positive law, for more decisions are left to the people, and there is strong incentive to choose and act rightly when people aren't protected from the consequences of their own free choices. FWIW.
In a nutshell, I have a strong distaste for prohibitionary-type law. I don't think such law helps much, and paradoxically in most cases it tends to increase the very thing it seeks to constrain. Again, FWIW.
1,178
posted on
10/22/2003 7:12:58 AM PDT
by
betty boop
(God used beautiful mathematics in creating the world. -- Paul Dirac)
To: Texasforever
I'm from Txas and I agree with the Second Amd. So do most people I know.
1,179
posted on
10/22/2003 7:18:47 AM PDT
by
JFC
To: Senator Pardek
Q: What do you call a guitar player who just broke up with his girlfriend?
A: Homeless.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,141-1,160, 1,161-1,180, 1,181-1,200 ... 1,261-1,271 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson