spinsUndoing

- friends
1 link karma
2 comment karma
send messageredditor for
what's this?

TROPHY CASE

  • dust

Breaking! Colbert Rally is confirmed for October 30, 2010. Just announced by Jon Stewart! by yettobenamedin reddit.com

[–]spinsUndoing 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Not only did I donate to donorschoose.org, but I've booked my hotel and flight and will be in DC on October 29-31. I love DC. And I can't wait. RestoringSanity 2010! See you guys at the National Mall on Saturday morning.

This will restore your faith in humanity (pics) by gvoakesin aww

[–]spinsUndoing 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I was thinking the same. A little puppy is nothing. Anybody would save a puppy. A full grown person, panicking and arms flailing, I might hesitate. If only for a second. I would have to weigh the circumstances. Ask yourself, what if it were a drowning person being attacked by a school of sharks. Would you jump in? I might. I might not.

Idea: Sell the Arabic translation of the Bible to people who want to burn the Quran. by brejc8in atheism

[–]spinsUndoing -3 points-2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Are we trying to make a statement that Arabic speakers also read and appreciate the Christian Bible?

Or are we assuming that these people are so dumb they will mistake an Arabic translation of the Bible for the Quran, and burn it too?

Tom Woods: "When the federal government goes beyond its constitutional powers, the states are duty-bound to resist." by democracy101in Libertarian

[–]spinsUndoing 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Thanks.

Tom Woods: "When the federal government goes beyond its constitutional powers, the states are duty-bound to resist." by democracy101in Libertarian

[–]spinsUndoing 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'll just look around the Libertarian subreddit for some facts then because I'm apparently not getting any here.

If anyone is feeling generous to give an apparently lost soul some pointers, the only Libertarian intellectuals I can think of that are worth their salt are Thomas Hobbes, David Hume, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Joseph A. Schumpeter and perhaps Ayn Rand. Although, it would be helpful to read someone who hasn't been dead for thirty years. Do you guys follow Thomas Sowell? Or is this Thomas Woods the cat's pajamas nowadays?

Tom Woods: "When the federal government goes beyond its constitutional powers, the states are duty-bound to resist." by democracy101in Libertarian

[–]spinsUndoing -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Since you can't come out of yours long enough to detail what your arguments are, I guess we'll never know. That way you can go on feeling superior.

I am against government regulation of the Internet. That is why I am against Net Neutrality laws, and think you should be too. by Yornin Libertarian

[–]spinsUndoing 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That was a little offsides. I shouldn't have poured on the Sarcasm there.

I'm not positive what Our Founding Fathers would have thought about Net Neutrality, but I think they would be in favor of it.

The idea behind net neutrality is to have no filter. To have ISPs act as dumb pipelines, not filtering material either by its content or by where it's coming from or what type of content it is (beit jpgs, torrent files, or a PDF of a copy of the Consitution).

This is why I'm in favor of Net Neutrality. Because I think it's a good idea. And because I think Our Founding Fathers would think it's a good idea too.

I am against government regulation of the Internet. That is why I am against Net Neutrality laws, and think you should be too. by Yornin Libertarian

[–]spinsUndoing 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Are you sure? I'm pretty sure there's something in there governing the ability of Internet Service Providers and the government to restrict access to certain Internet content. I could be wrong, but think James Madison mentioned it once or twice. Maybe it was Thomas Jefferson.

I'll double-check and get back to ya.

I am against government regulation of the Internet. That is why I am against Net Neutrality laws, and think you should be too. by Yornin Libertarian

[–]spinsUndoing 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

  1. Right now it certainly doesn't work like the mail service with "priority routing". Do you want to pay money so your email gets there faster than the other guys?

  2. I don't think it's 6Mb vs 1.5Mb kind of tiered. It's that yahoo.com will be faster on your 6Mb than reddit.com on your 6Mb.

I am against government regulation of the Internet. That is why I am against Net Neutrality laws, and think you should be too. by Yornin Libertarian

[–]spinsUndoing 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Wait!? So you want a tiered Internet?

Here's an idea. How about not tiering the Internet? You know, like it is now, with the not-tiering.

I swear, some of you guys....

Tom Woods: "When the federal government goes beyond its constitutional powers, the states are duty-bound to resist." by democracy101in Libertarian

[–]spinsUndoing -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm pretty sure it is the job of the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of federal law. The court has changed a little in the last few years, but I don't think it's changed that much.

Tom Woods: "When the federal government goes beyond its constitutional powers, the states are duty-bound to resist." by democracy101in Libertarian

[–]spinsUndoing -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This video is pretty pointless. Parts 2 - 4 might help, but I doubt it. He yammers on for ten minutes placating a crowd who have already bought whatever he is selling. I just wanted to know what he meant by the "federal government going beyond its constitutional powers," but I guess the video cuts off before he gets to that part.

What constitutional powers has the federal government "gone beyond"?

I guess they mean to say that the tenth amendment means that if a law is not in the Constitution, the federal government can't enforce it.

Is that the argument?

Without taking any time to re-arrange or hide embarrassing selections, take a picture of your book collection and post it for all of Bookit to see. by bathroomfaucetin books

[–]spinsUndoing 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Like the collection, specifically T.E. Lawrence, Daniel Quinn