Fark em. Let the whole god damn town burn to the ground, and send in the lions to clean up whatever fundie nutjobs are left. They wanted their republican teabagging libertarian paradise, I say give it to them.

Colorado Springs, the Christian fundie mecca? How Christ like of them!

Job Creator: Libertarianism can never fail, it can only be failed.

Kinda Exactly like communism.

Funny, the anti-tax liberderpian agenda passed by wide margins, yet it seems when the shiat hits the fan, we can't find anyone who supported it...weird, kinda like how there weren't any Nazis in Germany circa 1946, it's almost like a discredited ideology is an embarrassment or something.

Live your ideals, morans

Isn't this the same thing that happened to Texas?

Lenny_da_Hog: dlp211: No, I think Weaver is in denial about what he believes and wants to believe. He is arguing from a "No True Scottsman" position even though what the people of CS did is exactly in line with Libertarian ideals, and when they fail they will ask the Federal Government for a bailout.

It's also in line with Tea Party and other misinformed populism. Why center on Libertarianism being the culprit?

Because the free market, capitalist ideals which have been espoused by libertarians for decades are directly to blame. Capitalism works when it is regulated and carefully monitored. It does not work when its future consequences are ignored.

This is exactly what we are seeing here, and why Colorado -- and the planet as a whole -- is burning.

I am increasingly of the opinion that humanity's long-term survival is dependent upon declaring and conducting a bloody war against free market capitalists.

Infernalist: Do I believe they have that right? Sure.

I'm not sure I would go that far and say they have that absolute right.

There are non-market and externality costs associated with suicide. Some level of regulation is needed. Now if a person/city would post a "bond" to cover those costs, then have at it. But until that responsibility is satisfied, then no.

Emrick: doyner: That the people living in Alaska then wouldn't be represented. I'm sayint that the umbrella of representation applies to land and people simultaneously.

I still don't follow you. The original point was that small population states have more political power because they are over-represented in the Senate. After I agreed with that point you mentioned that "Land has always meant representation in our system". I gave an example that shows that statement isn't true. Now you are moving the goalposts to say something else. What is your point exactly?

The original point is wrong.

Back when they were drafting the framework for the Legislative Branch, there was quite the stir about just 'how' the people would be represented.

Even then, the Founders knew that most of the nation was...well...uneducated. Uneducated and easily moved to riotous action.

But, they were still The People and deserved some representation.

There was also the fear that the masses would become a Tyrant in and of themselves. An oppression of the smaller populated states by the larger, more populated states.

So, they split the Legislative Branch into two Houses, one where the representatives were chosen by population. Larger, more populated states, had more representatives. This gave the majority their right to propose and pass laws from the House.

The Senate, however, was deliberately designed to give two representatives to each state. Representing that each state was 'equal' in the eyes of the government, in spite of population numbers. And seeing how the Senate could easily disarm and defuse and kill any bills that were written by the population-influenced House, it can easily be assumed that the 'all states are equal' thought was held in higher regard by the Founders.

mr lawson: dlp211: He is arguing from a "No True Scottsman" position even though what the people of CS did is exactly in line with Libertarian ideals, and when they fail they will ask the Federal Government for a bailout.

Are you arguing the Libertarian ideals, if they fail, include asking the Federal Government for a bailout?

No, but they do always fail and ultimately the personal responsibility mantra goes away and they demand that they be bailed out, and once they are bailed out, it's back to the personal responsibility mantra. My point is that there is no such thing as pure Libertarianism because it fails, ALWAYS.

Libertarianism doesn't work, neither does communism, socialism, nor capitalism, because ultimately, they are all flawed.

Lenny_da_Hog: dlp211: No, I think Weaver is in denial about what he believes and wants to believe. He is arguing from a "No True Scottsman" position even though what the people of CS did is exactly in line with Libertarian ideals, and when they fail they will ask the Federal Government for a bailout.

It's also in line with Tea Party and other misinformed populism. Why center on Libertarianism being the culprit?

Because when people want to hide from being a 'conservative' or a 'tea bagger', they hid behind 'i'm a liberterian'...they are all the same shiatsnack in a slightly different wrapper. That's why...you think libertarianism is not related to the populist ideologies of teabaggers? How's the view of the pyramids?

illegal.tender: I am increasingly of the opinion that humanity's long-term survival is dependent upon declaring and conducting a bloody war against free market capitalists.

I like the way you think.

Lenny_da_Hog: dlp211: No, I think Weaver is in denial about what he believes and wants to believe. He is arguing from a "No True Scottsman" position even though what the people of CS did is exactly in line with Libertarian ideals, and when they fail they will ask the Federal Government for a bailout.

It's also in line with Tea Party and other misinformed populism. Why center on Libertarianism being the culprit?

Because it is the ideal that is the influence of the others. It is the underlining ideology, twisted or not, that fuels these thought processes.

Infernalist: monoski: GAT_00: Seriously, why SHOULDN'T we hold these people to their principles? Why not make them stand up for what they believe?

It is kind of like the uninsured health care issue. As a society we cannot just let people who need medical attention die because they have no insurance or money. In this case we cannot let people be stupid or they will create a burden for all of us.

But, that would infringe upon our freedoms...Or so the flow of thought goes...

At which point do the needs and the importance of the individual become less important than the actions and needs of the whole nation? The whole state? The whole city?

Interesting dilemma? States repeal helmet laws for motorcycles (while requiring them for kids who ski) then lower required medical coverage to $5k on the same bike insurance policy. When does this become a burden on the citizens and how can it be fairly allocated without impinging on "freedom"

Ok, now it is time to get to the most important question. How is this Obama's fault?

ongbok: Ok, now it is time to get to the most important question. How is this Obama's fault?

Been there, done that. There was a thread yesterday blaming Obama for the fires because he cut the defense budget.

dr_blasto: Infernalist: dr_blasto: dlp211: gingerjet: Philip Francis Queeg: MyRandomName: Why are you fark libs so farking retarded? Fema and national disaster funds are paid for with federal dollars. Local taxation does not figure into the equation. Stop being partisan retards. The town was not withholding federal taxes.

They cut their own local taxes leaving them unprepared for the fire and you get to make up the difference with your federal taxes.I bet you are thrilled.

In addition - they started cutting off street lights but you could pay to have them turned on.

The funny thing is that the people were paying $300 to turn on street lights, $2500 to get the water turned on in their parks, and they could have kept all that and more for a measly $200 tax raise.

The really sad thing is some Hotel Mogul showed them how the could privatize a bunch of stuff. So they did, and guys who not only had great paying jobs with benefits got laid off and wound up with the same job in the private sector getting paid less but the town didn't save any money. Instead, somebody with capital is making a boatload of money and the middle class continues to suffer.

The point was that they didn't have to contribute to streetlights or parks for poor people. They are the Galtian overlords.

I wouldn't say 'poor people'. Not in their heads. In their heads, it's 'anyone but me and my neighbors'. And if that guy could have rigged it so that the lights only came on when he 'wanted' them on...Such as when 'he' was driving down the street or parking, then he'd do that in a heartbeat.

It's nothing less than simple human selfishness. It's the antithesis to 'community'. These are the people who tear communities apart for the sake of a dollar.

That's the problem in the end, right? People require a functioning society to create and maintain the wealth they have. That society makes it possible for them to have that house, bank account, car, botox and their ski trips. When they amass a certain amount ...

Indeed so. It's human selfishness taken to its ultimate endgame. And the rich do it, again and again and again, all through history.

We've seen the end results of that human selfishness time and time again, and yet they never learn from it. They always think that they can take and take and take and take and it won't come back to bite them in the ass. And it always does.

Either way, on point, my final assessment is to leave em to burn. Refund their last two years worth of Federal tax money, establish help-centers outside of town for anyone wanting to move out of the region, and leave em to figure it out on their own.

Consider it a vast social experiment. Televise it. "This is what happens when greed overwhelms better sense. Watch it. Learn from it, lest your own leaders take you down to ruin, too."

doyner: One little point of note:

They still pay federal taxes, soooooo...

More than half of them don't, according to the teevee.

ongbok: Ok, now it is time to get to the most important question. How is this Obama's fault?

All the federal money was given to Detroit to bail out the successful Democrats leading that state to success and equality for all!

I'm confused. I thought Norquist only wanted to shrink the federal government and his no tax pledge was for federal taxes. Why the FARK is a mayor signing that pledge? Isn't local (state) government "better" than the feds?

The Name: illegal.tender: I am increasingly of the opinion that humanity's long-term survival is dependent upon declaring and conducting a bloody war against free market capitalists.

I like the way you think.

I truly believe that 'greed' is a mental illness.

If we find someone who mindlessly hoards food, filling his house, every room from floor to ceiling with food that he'll never be able to eat, but he continues to collect it, day after day after day....We'd call him crazy and contact the local authorities to get him help.

If we find someone who does the same thing with cats...collecting them even to the point of doing damage to himself, we'd call him nuts and call the cops.

But, if we have someone who does the same thing with money, we are taught to emulate him, told that he's a hero and a success and worthy of admiration and worship.

Greed is a sickness.

GAT_00: Weaver95: Rev.K: This is what winning looks like for libertarians.

no, these people are kooky evangelicals. they're 'libertarian' in the same way that they're 'christian' - i.e. in name only. this is the home base for Focus on the Family after all...they're not exactly big on thinking things through.

They massively cut taxes, government spending and they expect the Federal government they abhor to come fix everything for them.

Sure looks libertarian to me.

This is what actually happens.

Libertarians don't want the Federal Government to fix everything for them.

Most libertarians I have met are very well prepared and accept responsibility for making their own decisions.

Colorado is a wealthy state, by the way. They will recover.

Infernalist: The Name: illegal.tender: I am increasingly of the opinion that humanity's long-term survival is dependent upon declaring and conducting a bloody war against free market capitalists.

I like the way you think.

I truly believe that 'greed' is a mental illness.

If we find someone who mindlessly hoards food, filling his house, every room from floor to ceiling with food that he'll never be able to eat, but he continues to collect it, day after day after day....We'd call him crazy and contact the local authorities to get him help.

If we find someone who does the same thing with cats...collecting them even to the point of doing damage to himself, we'd call him nuts and call the cops.

But, if we have someone who does the same thing with money, we are taught to emulate him, told that he's a hero and a success and worthy of admiration and worship.

Greed is a sickness.

That's because money doesn't crap in your living room.

hubiestubert: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: [i50.tinypic.com image 500x293]

They didn't pay their taxes, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em burn.

They wanted to Go Galt, and so I suppose by their standards, we should just let them burn. If they didn't have fire insurance, that's the market speaking, right?

The teabaggers can diaf literally and I couldn't care less. I would feel bad for the liberals that have to suffer for the teabaggers stupidity

cabbyman: Infernalist: The Name: illegal.tender: I am increasingly of the opinion that humanity's long-term survival is dependent upon declaring and conducting a bloody war against free market capitalists.

I like the way you think.

I truly believe that 'greed' is a mental illness.

If we find someone who mindlessly hoards food, filling his house, every room from floor to ceiling with food that he'll never be able to eat, but he continues to collect it, day after day after day....We'd call him crazy and contact the local authorities to get him help.

If we find someone who does the same thing with cats...collecting them even to the point of doing damage to himself, we'd call him nuts and call the cops.

But, if we have someone who does the same thing with money, we are taught to emulate him, told that he's a hero and a success and worthy of admiration and worship.

Greed is a sickness.

That's because money doesn't crap in your living room.

What if they're hoarding food? Books? TVs even?

Hoarding of any kind is a sign of mental illness, but hoarding money is okay by our social standards.

Money that you'll never be able to spend, money that you have no need for, no use for...Accomplishing nothing except to provide people with the feeling that they've succeeded at the game of life.

asmodeus224: Funny, the anti-tax liberderpian agenda passed by wide margins, yet it seems when the shiat hits the fan, we can't find anyone who supported it...weird, kinda like how there weren't any Nazis in Germany circa 1946, it's almost like a discredited ideology is an embarrassment or something.

Live your ideals, morans

[img266.imageshack.us image 640x399]

Also how there were no Bush supporters in '09.

doyner: While hanging them out to dry would be delightfully satisfying, it would not be as worthwhile as rendering assistance and then rubbing their noses in their hypocrisy.

This.

I'm not going to say, "Let 'em burn"; however, I will point out the hypocrisy and short sightedness of their anti-tax mania.

Obama should ride in on a white horse and then carpet bomb them with the appropriate campaign commercials in the fall.

make me some tea: That's really just sad, all around.

LOL...not it's not!!! :D

Yes, they still pay federal taxes... HOWEVER, how much extra is being picked up by Big Brother because of their local idiocy?

The best thing that can come out of this situation is a few minds are changed in regards to the usefulness of government. Maybe even pass a little property tax increase if it means your "priceless family heirloom" won't be smashed the next time it becomes Lord of the Flies due to a little nature kerfuffle

/Libertarianism looks great on paper.
//same way Communism does.

Pappas: Yes, they still pay federal taxes... HOWEVER, how much extra is being picked up by Big Brother because of their local idiocy?

The best thing that can come out of this situation is a few minds are changed in regards to the usefulness of government. Maybe even pass a little property tax increase if it means your "priceless family heirloom" won't be smashed the next time it becomes Lord of the Flies due to a little nature kerfuffle

/Libertarianism looks great on paper.
//same way Communism does.

Never will happen. These are the type of people that are too stubborn to change their beliefs even if those beliefs led to them losing everything.

Giltric: dr_blasto: Wouldn't it at least make sense to have a police force capable of actually responding, in person, to criminal complaints

Thats like saying 3k people died in the WTC because their weren;t enough cops and firemen to rescue them from the building.

Works great if you have a 9/11 event every day....costs a shiat ton if you only have a 9/11 type event once every 230 some odd years.

Hindsight 20/20 something something.


How was the crime rate in the Colorado Springs area affected by the reduction in force before the fire?

So you favor eliminating about 90% -95% of all military spending then?

Philip Francis Queeg: How was the crime rate in the Colorado Springs area affected by the reduction in force before the fire?

So you favor eliminating about 90% -95% of all military spending then?


Would cut down on wars

Deftoons: Most libertarians I have met are very well prepared and accept responsibility for making their own decisions.

And I'm sure their liberal next-door neighbors are, as well. But that doesn't make it okay when both of their houses burn down because the libertarian was too stupid/greedy to support essential fire-fighting services.

Philip Francis Queeg: So you favor eliminating about 90% -95% of all military spending then?

I have never gone that high....75% should be a good start

LordJiro: Also how there were no Bush supporters in '09.

mrshowrules: Sorta like no one ever voted for Bush on Fark. A few people will indicate that they voted against Gore or Kerry but none will say they wanted Dubya for President.

W was a progressive.

/someone actually tried to say that to me once...without a shred of shame