Post Archive
Region: Libertatem
Didn't see that. Whatevs I'll still run.
I believe I'm Independent, so I'll just stick with that
I'm 15.
Drinking laws do not logically (it might be in law, but it doesn't logically apply is what I'm saying) apply to everyone. Lawmakers make images up in their heads that ever teenage kid is going to drink themselves to death. It may be the case with some highschoolers, many dislike alchohol (who would blame 'em?). I've had a lot of expirience with various drugs, and know limits (especially with Alchohol). And I barely ever drink.
I'll have to read this, but I'm already forming arguements in my head. :p
For now (without reading the article), that's definetly not an arguement again egalitarianism. Wealth was almost non-existent until agriculture was discovered. With large amounts of food coming in, it devided tribes into two classes: Tenders of crops/hunters* and "Protectors" of the accumulated wealth. As wealth increased, this small devide enlargened. This is what killed, what can be considered, egalitarianism (one cannot forget patriarchy, small heirarchy, and competing men existed within these primitive communities).
*through time (at least in europe), hunting became a sport for the wealthy as every creature on his land was considered his property and if a peasant hunted, it would be thievery. *vomits at the thought of this*
Anyone here live in Michigan? We get hit with three and a half feet of snow, then 40 degree temps and rain... Crazy.
Do you, bruh. I personally think that being so involved in drugs at such a young age could lead to worse things. But, not my life, not my business.
I don't even do anything besides Marijuana and Alchohol.
[B]I WANT YOU TO JOIN THE RLP!!![/B]
The Reaganist Libertarian Party will meet in a convention after the new Board is sworn in. Topics that will be discussed and voted on are Party Leadership (Chair, Vice Chair, Political Director), Board caucusing, and most importantly, platform issues. Issues like foreign affairs, internal policies, and even our stance on the War! All very important topics.
But, you have to join first! The Reaganist Libertarian Party has always, and will always, be committed to what's best for this region and Her people. If you would like to be apart of this family of patriots, telegram me, Pevvania, or post on the RMB and you will be invited to the Convention!
I'll be honest, I was gonna drop out and go pure ACOP next month, but now I'm not going to do that.
The new and improved RLP:
http://www.nationstates.net/nation=humpheria/detail=factbook/id=332935
That's great!
What's the platform? Who's leading it?
- Repeal of Aticle 8
- The Ending of the war on communism
- More Cooperation with Fascist and Communist regions (Under Debate)
- The changing of the regional flag
- The ending of region beuacracy (Appointed posistions either eliminated or voted on)
I'm in my early 20s right now, but I remain a purely social drinker, and even then a reluctant one. I like to keep fit, and alcohol is a drug, potentially a very harmful one - the most dangerous, according to the American Medical Association.
So all stuff that I'm against. Cool. Well, I wish you the best of luck in this endeavor!
A question why are the ministers appointed and not elected.
If you say it's too much just use regional telegrams to do elections.
Because our government was set up to have the Cabinet serve with the President. We are not a direct democracy.
Representative is the best way to do it. You can't trust the people worth a darn.
Well yeah.
Electing all the officials that do stuff=/=Direct Democracy.
1. Never said that.
2. Welcome back Rot!
O and Since the NLP is a big tent we are going to run by direct democracy in the party. But there might be a decent facto leader of some sort.
DE facto*
Big tent? You only have three members.
Yeah. So far it's a little kitty-tent for three year olds.
It's really cute. It had Dora the Explorer on it and the party members decorated it with glitter.
I was here all summer, but since my break from the region, does it mean I have to wait for citizenship? Last time, I couldn't get it because of elections.
Ask Muh.
This Brown V. Ferguson makes me upset.
How so?
There shouldn't even be a case to begin with
Well how would that work?
Michael Brown was a thug, and assaulting police officers, and this is somehow the working of a dirty cop.
2,151 white people were killed by cops in 2013.
Media: "So what, they're white."
1 black kid is shot by an officer after robbing a store and reaching for his gun
Everyone: "OMY JESUS!!!!! RALLY MY BRETHEN MARSCH! MARSCH! FIGHT FOR OUR OPPRESSED BROTHERS!!!"
And Al Sharpton(I refuse to call him a reverend) and Jessie Jackson are there to tell us of racism and inequality.
Then the jury shouldn't indict him.
This should never have been a case to begin with, and there rioting up there in Ferguson, destroying businesses and homes.
Upon the request of Pevvania, and in concurrence with his position on the issue at vote, here is my opinion on the Attorney General's Act:
Attorney General's Act
Section I
Purpose of the Act
Subsection I
Reform the Office of the Attorney General
Subsection II
Establish Attorney General elections
Subsection III
Clarify Attorney General's Duties
Section II
Reform the Office of the Attorney General
Subsection I
The Office of the Attorney General will be henceforth referenced as the OAG in this legislation, not on an official capacity
Subsection II
The OAG shall be consist of the Attorney General, Deputy Prosecutor, and Deputy Policy Attorney
Subsection III
The Deputy Prosecutor shall be appointed by the AG and shall assist the latter in civil trials and suits and can hold any other office
Subsection IV
The Deputy Policy Attorney shall be appointed by the AG and shall assist the latter in defending existing, passed legislation and can hold any other office
Subsection V
In the case of a Conflict of Interest for either Deputies, they will be put on leave for the trial or case in which they are conflicted by interest
Section III
Establish Attorney General elections
Subsection I
The AG shall henceforth be an elected non-partisan official and can also hold a position on the Board
Subsection II
The election shall be held in the period of two days before the first of every three months
Subsection III
The third election months shall fall on the second month of the Presidential term (eg. Presidential Term: Sept, Oct, Nov - AG Term: Oct, Nov, Dec)
Subsection IV
The AG shall be term limited to three consecutive terms
Section IV
Clarify Attorney General's Duties
Subsection I
The AG shall defend all existing, passed legislation except in the case of the President directly ordering them otherwise
Subsection II
The AG shall rule on the legality of proposed legislation
Subsection III
When an existing piece of legislation's legality is challenged, the AG shall defend it, unless otherwise directed (see S. IV SS. I)
Subsection IV
The OAG shall report to the Office of the President, who is the executive supervisor of the OAG
Subsection V
The AG shall be responsible for structuring and prosecuting all civil suits and trials
Subsection VI
In the case of a conflict of interest, the Deputy Prosecutor shall serve as the Prosecutor
Authored By: Humpheria
Section I - I agree that the office of the Attorney General could use more specification in its role, and that perhaps this may even be achieved through House legislation, or (still better) by the Board and executive officers to whom which the Attorney General is a partner to. Reform being a radical change and duties and not simply specification, it is not needed. Likewise, the process by which this lawyer is selected should not change from how it stands (we have established a delineation of powers in previous debate and the argument stands for this one as well). There are separate spheres in government, and making the Attorney General subject to elections affords the House an intrusion into the executive's legitimate space.
Section II - If ever there was a clearer case of bureaucratic expansion, it would be found in Section II of this bill. The creation of additional offices is not necessary: if the Attorney General wishes to request help, he or she may form his own offices in an employment fashion without mandates from the State. Mandating the existence of positions in government has been shown in history (and in economic theory) to be inefficient. The object of the libertarian experiment of our government is to reduce its size, not increase it. Allow dynamic approaches to problems develop, and do not attempt to create more positions than are absolutely necessary.
Section III - Again, this reflects a violation of separate spheres. We are not Athens, and this republic is meant to have a federalist style government that distinguishes rights, duties, and privileges. The Attorney General is in the employ of the government; while it is reasonable for the possibility of his impeachment to exist, it is not (like the cabinet positions) so in the manner of elections. The point of electing certain officials is for them to make decisions on behalf of the populace, including certain experts in areas of the government, thus creating an environment of efficiency and functionality. The constitution is made of pragmatic principles, and violation of these surrenders the debate to immediate pragmatism over a principled approach to government.
Section IV - This section is perfectly acceptable but for the last subsection, in which reference to one of the new bureaucratic positions is made. It could rather be another member of the government, just as easily. Doing this would avoid bureaucratic expansion, inefficiency, and the bloating of the State in general.
Thanks
Their would be even worse rioting if there wasn't a case.
I am still disgusted with how they are handling it. What's worse is Barrack Obama told them to keep doing what they were doing
Because Obama doesn't care about this country. He wants racial division so he can keep the Democrats voting block paranoid.
Do you really believe that could get much worse?
All Fergusson is right now is senseless destruction that most of the people there don't even know the reason for. The only real reason anything's going on down there is because they're getting attention, and the case helps them get attention.
If they knew that the officer wouldn't be put on trial, it would give them a reason to destroy sh*t, calling for a trial.
Either way, they are all low-lifes who want to find excuses to steal, pillage, and be overall reckless.
It's just African American racial Nationalism.
If European Americans did the same it would be seen as racist by the media.
Yea. it doesn't help that the media likes to over blow the situation by finding reasons to strengthen the racial division.
I blame MSNBC and CNN.
The White Officer who committed this crime against the black community should be indicted and then given to thw hands of the Ferguson community to decide what happens to him next.
What annoys me is that Ferguson is the issue that has caused anti-police sentiment to explode. A cop shooting an aggressive thug is not worth all these protests. Where were the protestors after the killing of Kelly Thomas, or when a SWAT team permanently disfigured a baby with a flash bang grenade?
Fixed.
The Reason it's taken this long is because the Police and Justice are inherently racist to work against blacks.
Post self-deleted by Jordsindia.
Fixed.
Jordsinlandia
Stop Oppressing the Poor person.
I've been Oppressed by the Whites all my life. Are you a Black Nationalist too Warring?
No...
...
...
...
I'm an Equine-Nationalist
You wouldn't know the real struggle blacks had to face throughout history.
Being looked at the wrong way does not equate oppression.
But...
that doesn't exist...
Post self-deleted by Miencraft.
So you've been enslaved, then?
I want a nation ruled by Equines as a supreme species in it.
It's weird I know.
Get off my puppet y'all.
Ah, I suppose your country is in the alternate universe in which horses are somehow sapient.
However the hell that works.
Good god decide what goddamn nation you want to use.
I could very well use something like Minovdigon in a discussion if I wanted to screw with everyone. But I don't. Because that's generally not a good thing to do.
Sure.
They didn't indict the officer, riots will begin in 3, 2, 1....
The racists have already started rioting in nyc.
Why? And who are the racists?
Ferguson case, officer didn't get indicted, and now blacks are rioting.
Fixed.
.... "blacks"?
Thanks Mien, I know we have to be politically correct here.
Yes, the Black community of Ferguson
Well, no, I just wanted to put emphasis on the fact that they're stupid.
Oh, that too
They looted a shoe store............and not one pair of workboots was stolen.
...do you enjoy chatting with yourself online?
What's the point of looting? What did the property owners do to the protesters? This criminal reaction is barbaric.
Because they don't care about the actual case. They just heard that their was rioting and they all decided to trek to Ferguson and get some free goodies.
I am switching my running for seat 3 to seat 5. I will be running under the Libertarian Party with Lack There of being the leader of said party.
I would like to announce my intention to figure out what is best for all of us. I am willing to work with people from all different parties and hope to work closely with all members of the board and most importantly the people. I hope that all parties can embrace an ideology of friendship and that petty bickering will not seperate us. let us not forget the true enemy is tyranny, never eachother. At the end of the day we are Tatemites and I am proud to stand as a member among you. Regardless of the board outcome may we band together as a region and destroy the Bolshevik poison that plagues this earth.
I am glad the police officer went unindited. He acted in self defense.
I do however sympathize with the Browns fanily and am disappointed the protesters did not honor their wishes of non-violence and 4 1/2 minutes of silence before protests.
I however realize that the people who literally burnt part of Ferguson were not actual protesters, but were petty thieves and agitators who ran thw real peaceful protesters off.
Also. I'm no longer running for seat 5. I am challenging Humphries for seat 2.
Haha
Alright. Thank you and congratulations on your candidacy. Good luck!
REATO is officially declaring victory in CAPS. Speech on the matter incoming.
Okay...North Korea...is perfectly fine with the violence in Ferguson. I am just... I'm just mortified.
Mhmm.
Are ya shocked?
Yes I am.
It's North Korea
I feel like you have had ample time to realize that they are not saints.
I think if I didn't....their comments on Ferguson have exceeded what y'all told me to expect.
Woop Woop!
They aren't known for their civility, let alone their intellect. Apparently, the folks in NK like reenactments of "Planet of the Apes".
I do not like the current state of the police force in America and many other countries. Boiled down, their job is essentially to bully people around and unquestionably uphold unconstitutional, illegal laws. In the United States, they deal with people in a brutal and heavy-handed fashion that has resulted in countless unnecessary deaths and a growing culture of fear and resentment.
I commend any resistance against state violence and tyranny, and the almost military-like response to what were peaceful protests are outrageous. But the Ferguson protests, particularly the violent ones, are, for lack of a better word, dumb. There is so much that we don't know for anyone to really form a reasoned opinion on the matter. Did Michael Brown attack Officer Wilson? Did he try to surrender? We do not know, as eye-witness accounts have been conflicting and a full investigation is yet to be completed. And as we know from the relevant store robbery video, Michael Brown is not exactly the perfect martyr. The protesters, whose professed goal was to oppose state violence, have now soiled their reputation by looting the homes and businesses of normal people and destroying their property.
Anyway, where was Justin Kelly's riot?
[To self:] He doesn't know what he's saying Humph. He doesn't understand. Don't get mad.
On another matter: it is unfortunate that Secretary Hagel is resigning. He joined the Administration as one of the few more common-sense foreign policy voices in a sea of neo-cons. He has pushed for less intervention abroad and triumphed over the military contractors in cutting the budget of the Department of Defense. But alas, he has been sidelined and ignored by an administration of war hawks, intent on preserving the resurgent military-industrial complex created under Bush. His voice was not strong enough to overpower those of Obama, Kerry and Biden, so he has been pushed out.
Expect an interventionist to be nominated to the position.
What's your opinion on it?
Maybe I don't. I don't know too much about the situation. What's your view?
I believe the word of a sworn officer of the law and six impartial witnesses who claimed that he grabbed for his gun and was about to harm him over a violent group of race baiters.
There are cops, like soldiers, are not all perfect. But as a general rule, I have too much respect for what they do and the sacrifices they make, so I err on the pro-police side unless given substantial evidence. I have not been convinced. The opposite.
They have a habit of protecting their own, so I'm sceptical.
I think comparisons between soldiers and policemen are very unflattering to soldiers. I come from what you'd call a military family, and I know that people don't join the army "just to kill people", nor to uphold the laws of the government. They join to defend and serve their country. Some have been known to do bad things, but generally they're good people that do not like killing. The police, however, are a different body. People may join with good intentions, but by definition they must uphold unjust, tyrannical laws or face dismissal and ostracism. I know from firsthand accounts from former police officers, including my grandfather, that the police are incentivised to arrest people, seize their assets and revenue hunt through ticketing quotas and the like. The sad truth is that the only way you can move up in the police force is by being an asshole.
A good question. Why do people say Beastiality should be illegal because the animal can't consent, yet these same people support milking vows without their consent, taking eggs without consent, taking wool without consent, killing animals without consent and eating animals without consent.
That's actually... a surprisingly good point. But raping animals constitutes a form of parasitic and even sadistic physical abuse that's especially damaging to smaller animals, while taking eggs and whatnot is done for a purpose beyond some twisted form of pleasure.
*Fist bump for Beastiality arguments that hold weight*
Well we destroy entire habitats for corporate good. That has no real purpose but to give someone money. Would we let a rich person ho in and tear down a homeless person shelter that's still inhabited? It's for corporate good.
In a honesty you can't justify killing animals if you don't justify Beastiality. Both use the animals for human needs/wants. Both hurt the animals and both are done without consent.
Thanks man! I've taken a sort of hiatus. But I'll be frequenting this nice establishment a lot more often now.
There is quite a difference between taking an animal's eggs to feed yourself and sticking your reproductive organs inside the animal.
Welcome back Rot.
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.