The Anti-State
 

Wouldn't it be great if we could just clear-out some land and let the Antis have their way. Then everyone would be happy.
They would have their paradise, there would be no:
Guns, alcohol, tobacco, work on Sunday, red dye # whatthafuckever, saturated fat, cars over three feet long and all of them would run on wheat grass drippings, fried food, schools would have no grades to hurt anyones feelings, cable TV, nudity, freedom of speech, there would be no bad language allowed at all (the stormtroopers would see to that), and anyone different would be taken out and "detained for their own good".
The rest of us could get on with our Constitutional lives free of harming them while they lived in happiness and bliss, huh?

TfD>You.

TPFD = life

no, > life.

rk, I think you're mixed up.

Red states (conservative repubicans) want to eliminate alcohol, work on Sundays, cable tv, nudity, freedom of speech, bad language, and detention. You might add political dissention, the choice to have an abortion, the choice to marry anybody you want, freedom of religion, science, and sex other than for reproduction. They would have the stormtroopers.

Blue states want to eliminate [hand]guns, tobacco, red dye # whatthafuckever, saturated fat, cars over three feet long and all of them would run on wheat grass drippings, fried food, schools would have no grades to hurt anyones feelings.

Maybe you can add your ideas to the viable third party thread.

I think his point is let the anti-ANYTHING people have their own little domain.

Anarchy is:

OH MY FUCKING GOD I FUCKING LOVE YOU HEADSPLICE

RANDY MILHOLLAND IS GOD, S*P > ANY OTHER COMIC. EVER. except maybe QC.


I miss Davan's old haircut.

<mr. burns>excellent</mr. burns>

Exactly, they are all the same.

Rockwell has a different opinion on Somalias "anarchy".Fifteen glorious years without a central government in Somalia! It was typically described as a "power vacuum," as if the absence of a taxing, regulating, coercing junta is an unnatural state of affairs, one that cannot and should not last.

Well, now this "vacuum" is being filled, with an Islamic militia claiming to be in control of the capital, Mogadishu.

But US officials may rue the day they hoped for a new government in this country. The dictator Mohammed Siad Barre fell in 1991. US troops went in with the idea that they would restore order, but thank goodness they did not. Bill Clinton's idea fell into shambles after 18 soldiers were killed by warlords. That seems like a low number in light of the Iraq disaster, but to Clinton's credit, he pulled out.

Since that time, Somalia has done quite well for itself, thank you (BBC: "Telecoms Thriving in Lawless Somalia"). But there was one major problem. The CIA couldn't come to terms with it. The US government likes to deal with other governments, whether it is paying them or bombing them or whatever. What makes no sense to central planners in DC is a country without a state.

So the US continued to talk about a "power vacuum" and secretly funneled money to its favorite warlords – a fact which the US officially denies but which has nonetheless been widely reported. Officials who have criticized the policy have been shut up and reassigned.

Of course this has little to do with r's point. We should probably start a gridlock party. Assess the situation each election cycle and support whichever option keeps the President, Congress, and Supreme Court at each others throats.

Wait a minute! Rk, aren't you anti-gun-control? :p

He's also anti-free market in energy, but nobody is perfect. ;)

Anti-gun control is not anti. It is for freedom. You can't be anti-anti.
And I have no issue with background checks, no felons, and simple firearm registration... but it stops there. No limitations on types of weapons, how many owned, or interpersonal sales, carry laws, etc.

Anti-free market?... you have me confused with someone else.

I believe in limited environmental regulation, not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination.