Electrify I-40, I-95 and I-5

[Bret Cahill]

It's not just "winner takes all", but also in the smaller states your vote counts much more than in the larger states (especially
for elections for senate seats).

Some places like Wyoming it's "one man, two U. S. senators." Some
billionaire idiot recently lost 80 million trying to get a California
U. S. senate seat when, as some Einstein pundit pointed out, he could
have bought the entire state of Montana for that kind on money.

The U. S. constitution is only a few pages long. Someone should have
given him a copy.

One man one vote ? Not in the US....

With utmost respect, but why didn't the founding fathers install a "popularity vote" system like what is common in European
countries rather than copying the outdated British system ?

The U. S. constitution was based on Montesquieu's _Spirit of Laws_,
the freedom of small states combined with the security of a large
state using the framers' political breakthrough of an "incomplete
national government."

Somewhere DeTocqueville suggested Americans use the federal
constitution to strike down all the English common law in conflict
with the constitution. This has already been down to a certain
extent.


Bret Cahill

 

On Dec 19, 8:19 am, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 07:55:30 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill

BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.



And canoes.

Every publicly owned creek, pond, river, lake, bay and deep water port
is regulated with public funding.

Unless it's not.

You need to get a day job.

John

Nah... sozialadel?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_trap

Michael

 

[Bret Cahill]

Yes, by direct individual action, with results I can see. But not by
collective action, where a winner-take-all election system makes my
votes never count, and where resources are squandered and results
don't matter.

OT, but I agree.
The election system here is quite rediculous.
It's not just "winner takes all", but also in the smaller states your vote counts much more than in the larger states (especially
for elections for senate seats).
One man one vote ? Not in the US....

Until a hundred years ago (give or take) we didn't elect Senators.

With utmost respect, but why didn't the founding fathers install a "popularity vote" system like what is common in European
countries rather than copying the outdated British system ?

Because this is a country of states, not people. The states are
supposed to be superior to the federal government.

Interesting...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, ...."

The media, Hollywood as well as the "news" media, are really in the
hip pocket of corp. and other monied interests. Through saturation
brainwashing they have everyone believing the U. S. constitution
starts off, "I the Individualist . . ."

Many believe the words "individualist" Jesus "private sector" Federal
Reserve "public nudity" and "home invaders" all appear in the U. S.
constitution.

Geobbels would agree, saturation brainwashing works.

This is not limited to the right wing media.

The _NY Times_ for awhile had their readers believing Pat Robertson's
brand of fascism came over on the Mayflower. This is nothing short of
lazy thinking historical revisionism.

You can send a lot of posters to Wikipedia simply by pointing out that
at the time of the Revolution no less than seven (7) state
constitutions, many Southern states, banned ministers and priests from
ever holding public office.

They'll think you're making it up.

It got so bad Jimmy Carter himself eventually had to point out the
religious right wasn't a factor as recently as his campaigns.

Up until recently the _NY Times_ would also brand anyone a
"populist" [NYT code for Hitler, Stalin, Ross Perot, David Duke] if he
pointed out that the plain language of Art. I, Sec. 8 of the U. S.
constitution clearly provides for popular control of all national
economic policy.

Do a key word search of the _Times_ and Jefferson is rarely labled a
"populist."

Any biographer or political scientist will tell you Jefferson was a
populist.

That's why the media try to undermine Jeffersonian democracy every 4th
of July by hyping the fact that "Jefferson had slaves."

But I DO understand how this system worked well (practical) in the olden days, for a country as vast and 'decentralized' as the US.

DeTocqueville predicted what would happen in "How An Aristocracy May
Be Created By Industry" Volume II, Book 1, _Democracy In America_
(1933)

Like his other predictions including the Civil War and even the Cold
War, that's what happened in the late 19th century, although it seems
more like a despotism today than an aristocracy.

That's another lie put out by the main stream media: Political
science isn't a science.

_NY Times_ writers sound like Catholic nuns, "everything in politics
is a mystery."

As FDR pointed out, when something happens in politics, it isn't by
accident. Someone was working and planning to _make_ it happen.

They have spread sheets and acturials . . .

Even _I_ don't use XL in my political work.

I just feel (as John) that a popularity vote would much more 'fair' towards voters in the country.

The problem is a matter of free speech or lack thereof.

As Madison wrote in 1822, "a popular government without popular
information or the means of acquiring it is only a prologue to a
farce, or a tragedy; or perhaps both."

Problem of course is that by now it will be virtually impossible to change this system across the nation, because the current system
self-reinforces the power of the two-parties who's votes would both be needed to change the system

It _can_ be changed and actually _is_ changing because of the web.

Someone accused Obama, fairly or unfairly, of saying that the U. S.
constitution is a barrier to leveling wealth.

The problem isn't the U. S. const. but the fact that no one has read
it, the _Federalist Papers_, _Notes on the State of Virginia_, _Spirit
of Laws, etc.

No one has applied the First Amend. to anything except culture war
issues.

The U. S. has good people and a great const. The only problem is
the good people are ignorant of their great constitution.

And before cheap communications no one was going to tell them about
their great constitution either.

All that's changing now.

www.bretcahill.com


Bret Cahill


"This Constitution, which at first sight one is tempted to confuse
with previous federal constitutions, in fact rests on an entirely new
theory, a theory that should be hailed as one of the great discoveries
of political science in our age.

.. . .

". . . Clearly here we have not a federal government but an
incomplete national government."

-- Alexis DeTocqueville


"They're laughing at us in Florida."

-- Jay Leno struggling to think of something dumber than California's
recall process

 

[Bret Cahill]

The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. �You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.

And pretty much eliminates the "right to travel" for those who cannot
pay it.

And canoes.

Every publicly owned creek, pond, river, lake, bay and deep water port
is regulated with public funding.

Unless it's not.

Name one example.

Western Cameroon Parish allows Texans to fish on their side of Sabine
Lake. They don't have the funding to regulate the western end of
their county.


Bret Cahill

 

[Maximust]

John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 07:55:30 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
BretCahill@aol.com> wrote:

The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.

Adolf Hitler.

And canoes.

Every publicly owned creek, pond, river, lake, bay and deep water port
is regulated with public funding.

Unless it's not.


You need to get a day job.

John

 

[krw]

In article <d402abbd-3a8a-414b-aafd-f31945165446
@c36g2000prc.googlegroups.com>, BretCahill@aol.com says...>

The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. ?You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.

Silly argument.

And pretty much eliminates the "right to travel" for those who cannot
pay it.

The "right to travel" does not convey the right to the ability to
or the means of travel, just as the "right of free speech" does not
convey a right to have an article published in the local paper.
Your argument is sophomoric, to the extreme.

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 09:24:03 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
<BretCahill@aol.com> wrote:

The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. ?You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.

And pretty much eliminates the "right to travel" for those who cannot
pay it.

And canoes.

Every publicly owned creek, pond, river, lake, bay and deep water port
is regulated with public funding.

Unless it's not.

Name one example.

Pacific Ocean.

John

 

[Bret Cahill]

The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. ?You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.

And pretty much eliminates the "right to travel" for those who cannot
pay it.

And canoes.

Every publicly owned creek, pond, river, lake, bay and deep water port
is regulated with public funding.

Unless it's not.

Name one example.

Pacific Ocean.

There is pet theory that our most basic rights ultimately have their
roots in unclaimed land, very similar to the oceans today.

You could always "end run" the censor.

The land is now all claimed -- the famous economist Henry George
realized that 130 years ago -- but the rights were somehow preserved,
maybe with the constitution or by custom.

Or were they?

Anyway, in answer to your response, you must get past the Coast Guard
and port authorities to get to blue water.

Long Beach and LA won't let you burn 6-oil within 25 miles of the
coast.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

On Dec 19, 10:08�am, krw <k...@att.zzzzzzzzz> wrote:

In article <d402abbd-3a8a-414b-aafd-f31945165446
@c36g2000prc.googlegroups.com>, BretCah...@aol.com says...

The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. ?You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.

Silly argument.

What's the difference?

For that matter, what's the difference between rent and taxes?

Maybe there is a difference, maybe not.

And pretty much eliminates the "right to travel" for those who cannot
pay it.

The "right to travel" does not convey the right to the ability to
or the means of travel,

A indigent quadriplegic might have a "right to travel" to roll himself
over the land without the toll.

just as the "right of free speech" does not
convey a right to have an article published in the local paper. ďż˝

But it prohibits the gummint from placing a toll or otherwise taxing
that speech.

The issue was collective taxation being a precondition of the
individualist right to free speech with the public, not editorial
control over 3rd parties.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. �You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.

Adolf Hitler.

The "toll is not a tax" argument is one someone might use to argue in
_my_ direction, that taxation is a precondition of the individualist
"right to travel."

That's why it is easy to predict he has never done anything
interesting in electronics. If he isn't even functional or rational
enough to debate in his own favor on this matter how could he ever
apply Maxwell's equations?

Math is applied logic and this guy cannot even get to first base.


Bret Cahill


"Math is applied logic."

-- Nietzsche

 

[krw]

In article <b521a856-3ec1-4735-b779-
5a2483d50d4f@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, BretCahill@aol.com
says...

On Dec 19, 10:08?am, krw <k...@att.zzzzzzzzz> wrote:
In article <d402abbd-3a8a-414b-aafd-f31945165446
@c36g2000prc.googlegroups.com>, BretCah...@aol.com says...

The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. ?You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.

Silly argument.

What's the difference?

Not the point, but... A toll is a usage fee, based upon actual
usage. No use, no fee owed. A tax is owed regardless of usage.

For that matter, what's the difference between rent and taxes?

You are an idiot.

Maybe there is a difference, maybe not.

You are an idiot. You likely think there is no difference between
purchase and rent.

And pretty much eliminates the "right to travel" for those who cannot
pay it.

The "right to travel" does not convey the right to the ability to
or the means of travel,

A indigent quadriplegic might have a "right to travel" to roll himself
over the land without the toll.

What an idiot.

just as the "right of free speech" does not
convey a right to have an article published in the local paper. ?

But it prohibits the gummint from placing a toll or otherwise taxing
that speech.

Wow! What a genius! Note that it doesn't prohibit the "gummint"
from restricting that speech. You can't be taxed on speech in your
yard, either. ...though it can be controlled.

The issue was collective taxation being a precondition of the
individualist right to free speech with the public, not editorial
control over 3rd parties.

When you infringe on others rights, the "gummint" has every
obligation to restrict yours. Someone has to pay for roads. You
have no right (in theory) to their property.

--
Keith

 

[Bret Cahill]

The individualist "right to travel" and freedom of communication are
always 100% dependent on taxation.

There is no end run to this basic fact/law/truth.

Except for toll roads.

If you are paying a toll, then it isn't free by definition. ?You have
no right to travel on a toll road without paying the toll.

A toll is not a tax.

Silly argument.

What's the difference?

Not the point, but... A toll is a usage fee, based upon actual
usage. �No use, no fee owed. �A tax is owed regardless of usage.

If you agree a toll isn't a tax then no one has presented one counter
example to the rule/fact/truth that the _guarantee_ of the
individualist right to travel and the individualist right to free
speech is 100% dependent on the collective taxing individuals.

For that matter, what's the difference between rent and taxes?

You are an idiot.

Well don't keep us settin' on the edges of our chairs, Mr. Word Guy.
What's the difference?

We know the similarity: With both "you pay to stay."

Now we need to discover some useful distinction between the two words.

Maybe there is a difference, maybe not.

You are an idiot. �You likely think there is no difference between
purchase and rent.

Did you know that the words "rent" and "taxes" once meant the same
thing?

And pretty much eliminates the "right to travel" for those who cannot
pay it.

The "right to travel" does not convey the right to the ability to
or the means of travel,

A indigent quadriplegic might have a "right to travel" to roll himself
over the land without the toll.

What an idiot.

Speaking of idiots do you have any clues as to how all the GOP horses
and all the GOP men can put the Party of Gipper together again?

Maybe cutting taxes?

Maybe another patriotic quagmire?

Maybe bottom fishing for phundies and trailer bigots?

just as the "right of free speech" does not
convey a right to have an article published in the local paper. ?

But it prohibits the gummint from placing a toll or otherwise taxing
that speech.

Wow! �What a genius! �Note that it doesn't prohibit the "gummint"
from restricting that speech. ďż˝

Actually the First Amendment _does_ prohibit the gummint from
restricting speech on public property. Anyone can put a commie
newspaper showbox next to any establishment media showbox.

The case law is well settled.

You can't be taxed on speech in your
yard, either. ďż˝...though it can be controlled.

Talking to yourself is the trivial case, although that talking to
oneself now seems to be a rightard's only political option.

Again, how are rightards planning to get back in power?

"Karl Rove, watcha got cookin'?
Wag the quagmire just ain't workin'"

The issue was collective taxation being a precondition of the
individualist right to free speech with the public, not editorial
control over 3rd parties.

When you infringe on others rights, the "gummint" has every
obligation to restrict yours. �Someone has to pay for roads. �You
have no right (in theory) to their property.

Who's property? The gummint's property?

Anyway you dodged the issue, collective taxation being a precondition
of the individualist right to free speech with the public.

They have drugs for you rightards who cannot focus on issues.


Bret Cahill

 

[Richard The Dreaded Liber]

On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 09:07:18 -0800, Bret Cahill wrote:

For that matter, what's the difference between rent and taxes?

Rent is optional (as are toll roads), taxes are taken by force.

Hope This Helps!
Rich

 

[Bret Cahill]

For that matter, what's the difference between rent and taxes?

Rent is optional (as are toll roads), taxes are taken by force.

I don't see anyone holding a gun to anyone's head forcing him to
remain in the collectively acquired collectively defended territory of
the United States and pay taxes.

You can leave any time.

Call 1- 800 - FLY-4-LESS and book the next one way flight to Mogadishu
in low tax paradise Somalia.


Bret Cahill

 

[Richard The Dreaded Liber]

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:58:06 -0800, Bret Cahill wrote:

For that matter, what's the difference between rent and taxes?

Rent is optional (as are toll roads), taxes are taken by force.

I don't see anyone holding a gun to anyone's head forcing him to remain in
the collectively acquired collectively defended territory of the United
States and pay taxes.

You can leave any time.

That's not the point. I don't want to LEAVE America, I want to RESTORE
America to what the Founding Fathers intended, which wasn't a totalitarian
socialist state.

And, yes, there ARE people holding a gun to your head, forcing you to
turn over your hard-earned dollars to rich fat white bureaucrats.

What we REALLY need to do is kill all of the bureaucrats that are
chipping awaay at our Libertiy, slowly, but inexorably, like a metastizing
cancer, turning the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of
the United States into so much toilet paper.

It's the statists who don't believe in Freedom who need to get gone.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Bret Cahill]

For that matter, what's the difference between rent and taxes?

Rent is optional (as are toll roads), taxes are taken by force.

I don't see anyone holding a gun to anyone's head forcing him to remain in
the collectively acquired collectively defended territory of the United
States and pay taxes.

You can leave any time.

That's not the point. I don't want to LEAVE America,

And some don't want to vacate their apts but most don't claim they get
to stay for free just because they don't like paying rent.

So we're still waiting for a difference between rent and taxes.


Bret Cahill

 

[Eeyore]

Bret Cahill wrote:

For that matter, what's the difference between rent and taxes?

Rent is optional (as are toll roads), taxes are taken by force.

I don't see anyone holding a gun to anyone's head forcing him to remain in
the collectively acquired collectively defended territory of the United
States and pay taxes.

You can leave any time.

That's not the point. I don't want to LEAVE America,

And

You're still snipping the poster's headers so haven't a fucking clue what or whom
you're resonding to.

GO TO HELL

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Eeyore wrote:

Bret Cahill wrote:

And

You're still snipping the poster's headers so haven't a fucking clue what or whom
you're resonding to.

GO TO HELL

Bret is a troll, just like you. He does it to get morons like you to
reply, and you fell for it. How typically D.D.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy.

 

[Bret Cahill]

For that matter, what's the difference between rent and taxes?

Rent is optional (as are toll roads), taxes are taken by force.

I don't see anyone holding a gun to anyone's head forcing him to remain in
the collectively acquired collectively defended territory of the United
States and pay taxes.

You can leave any time.

That's not the point. I don't want to LEAVE America,

And

You're still snipping the poster's headers

Are there any ideas in a header?

Try to remember that only ideas matter anymore.

Names and personalities are no longer important.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

ďż˝ Bret is a troll, just like you. ďż˝

That does it! I'm going to organize the first annual Million Troll
March on Washington.

We'll have rallies with banners and sell t shirts with slogans and
give long windy speeches on the Mall.

You troll phobes will beg for mercy!


Bret Cahill

Treasurer
Nat'l Troll Ass'n

www.troll.com