Thursday, February 21, 2013

A Progressive Agenda

Punk doesn't like the First Amendment any better than he does the Second.  [Read]

Any doubts what this tyrant-in-waiting would do if he didn't have any constraints?

4 comments:

Chas said...

That's their idea of banning guns - to remove the constraints.

Anonymous said...

Ferheavensake, ya can't have anonymous people posting unpopular opinions.

“The new constitution in its present form is calculated to produce despotism, thraldom and confusion, and if the United States do swallow it, they will find it a bolus, that will create convulsions to their utmost extremities."

~"PHILANTHROPOS" (an anonymous Virginia Anti-federalist)
Essay No. 7 – Adoption of the Constitution Will Lead to Civil War
Published in the The Virginia Journal and Alexandria Advertiser, on December 6, 1787

Bear said...

Ironically, The Daily Caller has "moderated" the comment I made almost 8 hours ago:

Silverstein, you might want to r/e/a/d/ get someone to read this to you:
http://www.lawrecord.com/files/37_Rutgers_L_Rec_36.pdf

Aside from the moral/legal/constitutional problems with this microcephalic moron's pissant proposal, there' are the _practical_ issues.


Say I (in NH) have a Blogspot blog (hosted on a distributed network across the world) and someone (in OH) factually points out on my blog that Silverstein's (IL) shoe size is greater than his IQ. Is Sentor Subnormal going to use his Illinois law to force this New Hampsterite to pull the Ohioan's comments from an international law? Is this New Hampsterite going to tell Incompetent Ira to piss up a rope and post the video on YouTube (answer: yep)?

Hmm. "IP address, legal name, and home address are accurate". I wonder -- purely rhetorically, mind you -- if N/e/d/ L/u/d/d/ Silverstein has ever heard the term "dynamic IP".

Will Silverstein _ever_ get laid, and stop trying to screw with everyone else?

Anonymous said...

At the title "punk" I imagined this was about Rahm-boy Emmanuel: close enough it's Illinois.