Candor is something I value. No sense wasting anybody’s time. Especially since I really don’t have a price when it comes to the Declaration and the Constitution. Or when it comes to most things for that matter.

As to a good word with Mr. Soros? Thanks. That ought to be an interesting conversation.

As to not asking you to shoot yourself? It’s the least I could do (really), but since you decided to step out from behind the curtain for a bit and exposed yourself in a forum in which you surely must know you are generally loathed, it seemed only sporting. That took far more bravery than any of the criminals in Congress (or formerly/presently in the White House) have shown and many of them I’ve been just as hard on or worse. Quite frankly, I’m impressed that you had it in you.

That in no way, however, should be interpreted to me being willing to cut your minions any future slack. If they troll here, they will still get the pointy parts of the bear. I take defense of the downtrodden, the Declaration and the Constitution quite seriously. Much more so than the majority of American politicians from either graft-lame party. It’s the duty I owe my family as several have suffered (and in two cases died) defending the ideals Jefferson left for posterity in our founding documents. As ever, one lives to be of service.

Adieu,

BIL

Thank you for your candor and insights. I will speak to George next time I see him and put in a good word for you.

We usually get together 3-4 times per times per year and discuss issues. He is really a great guy, the right is far too hard on him.

Regards,

A.

Ps thanks for not asking me to shoot myself.

I’ve seen both your version of “equal time” and the quality of work your stable produces. Your claims to be nonpartisan are laughable. By the way, how’s that Sherrod lawsuit for defamation and libel working out for you? Been “uninvited” to any media functions lately? Finding your sandbagging tactics are harder to deploy now?

As to audience and disagreement? I get plenty of disagreement right here. You and your goons didn’t have a hard time finding me . . . just a hard impossible time defeating me.

As to my aggressive style? It is but one of many styles. Different tools for different jobs. The stone cannot hope to battle water.

As to conversion? That would assume my motive is conversion. Your assumptions – almost always bad – would be your undoing. Maybe my motivation is far more damaging to your agenda than simple conversion.

Maybe I simply love being a shit disturber and causing trouble for bad people?

Maybe my goals include seeing you and your organization completely discredited?

Maybe my motivation is leading by example – giving people examples of the tools of critical thought and language skills required to recognize the true enemies of their liberty, Constitutional rights and human rights and thus engendering in them the ability detect and destroy malicious propaganda for themselves?

I can educate and/or rabble-rouse at MoveOn or in another capacity for Mr. Soros – a man with whom I at least share common ideals if not always total agreement. What’s even better, I could do so without having to get into bed on a business level with people I consider enemies of the Constitution and of We the People’s best interests in retaining/restoring their rights and restoring the rule of law. Give a man a fish and he lives for a day, teach a man to fish and he lives forever. Being able to recognize truth through the haze of obfuscation and disarm the lies of your enemies is a pretty sweet fish.

Your job offer makes as much sense as hiring the fox to work the hen house. Unless, of course, one recognizes the reality that one often fears what one cannot control and offering me employ is simply a way for you to attempt to exert control. If you can’t break them, buy them. Speaking of foxes, did Rupert teach you that trick? That sly old baby-eating dingo! By working for you, I could only benefit you by creating the illusion you’re nonpartisan. An illusion you dearly need right now considering how you and your organization have been outted in the media as far right wing distortionists and propagandists. You need me a lot more than I need you. Unequal bargaining power sucks when you’re on the stinky side of the stick, doesn’t it?

Unless you can come up with baseball money – a seven plus figure guaranteed four year salary with an eight plus figure buy out – you don’t stand a chance of using money as a lure. And even then it would only be a lure because my needs and wants are simple and few. I’d plow almost every penny of that money back into undermining you and your corporatist bosses.

Mr. Soros, who could hire me for a lot less, would be getting a far better deal for his dollar and not have to worry that I was going to burn down the farm house, the hen house, eat all the chickens and possibly the farmer.

You can only guess at my motives, but I’ll tell you this for free: Anything to your or your masters benefit is antithetical to my motives.

Unless you can talk Rupert or whoever into making me the Derek Jeter of anti-propagandists (including provisions that no one exerts any kind of editorial control), we don’t have anything further to discuss. Even then, all you’d likely reap is discussion. I’m temptation resistant.

Mr. Soros, on the other hand, would find me infinitely more flexible in my bargaining. His people should contact my people. We could certainly work out a mutually beneficial arrangement. I’d love nothing better than to be set up as a counter-intel shop to your operations. It would be a job with a high degree of intangible satisfaction. I even have a couple of people in mind Mr. Soros and I might be able to get to come on board for that kind of project. Good people with demonstrable skills, respect for the rule of law, the rights of others, the values of the Declaration and undistorted framework the Constitution provides for a government by the people and for the people (as opposed to We the Corporate). Some are the very same people who have aided in frustrating your efforts here.

Please note that my conditions fall short of asking you to shoot yourself.

One lives to be of service,

BIL

I am sorry you feel that way. It could have been very good content with both sides of an issue given equal time.

Your audience at Moveon would consist of people who already agree with you. Your aggressive style would go to waste on people with whom you agree. And there would be no chance of converting people to your beliefs.

Granted you will get some hate mail, but you seem to tolerate it pretty well.

I wish you would reconsider. Is there anything I can do that would make you reconsider? Short of shooting myself.

I am really excited about the possibilities with you in our stable of writers, the sky is the limit.

Think of all the good you could do with the money you will make, do it for the children.

Regards,

A.

without taking sides (after all, I have no horse in this race as I know no one) I have yet to see anyone best The laughing Buddha on information and presentation of ideas.

Really not sure why people get so nutty about these things, but it sure makes for entertaining reading.

Let me get this straight . . .

You send your goons over here to disrupt the house of my friend(s) and malign the liberal ideals upon which this country was founded with incredible displays of vile behavior. Now that they’ve been routed numerous times and exposed as the propagandists they are, you wish to offer me a job? The old “if you can’t beat ‘em, try to hire them” ploy?

And you want me to “behave myself” as a term of employ.

Gonna do my a favor, are you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0n2vurSBIQ

In case you don’t like watching science fiction, here’s the salient part of the scene and you’d find my terms to be quite similar to Vir’s:

“I’d like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I want to look up into your lifeless eyes and wave like this. (waves) Can you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?”

That is, of course, hyperbole. No actual beheading or pike is required, figurative ones will do just fine.

If you want to “add a dimension that other pundit sites are missing”? How about adding dimensions that your site is already missing like honesty, respect for the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, integrity and a concern for people that extends beyond what they can profit you and your paymasters personally.

Now, that being said, if your primary antagonist in media messaging – Mr. Soros – has viewers or is a viewer himself in the Prof’s audience, I would gladly consider a job offer from him to work either at MoveOn or in any other anti-propagandist capacity that frustrates the manifestly destructive and duplicitous ideals your lot promotes. Mr. Soros may contact me through Professor Turley whom I trust to vet his identity before initiating contact provided of course that the Professor is willing to assist in that manner.

Thanks for the offer though, Andy.

It gave me a chance to illustrate that not all men have a price.

Mo and Gippers Ghost as you call them have an idea for a segment on our website (http://www.breitbart.com/), we would like to have you debate the issues of the day with Mo and/or Gippers Ghost (Charlie and Kurt). You are free to say anything you wish, except we would like you to refrain from calling them names or using foul language, other than that anything goes.

They have been searching around the blogosphere for someone of your caliber to bring on as an opposing point of view within our organization. We think it would add a dimension that other pundit sites are missing, namely a strong point of view from the opposing team. We feel (me, Charlie and Kurt) that your abilities will bring that added dimension to our content.

The discussion you had with Kurt was certainly enlightening and entertaining. Really good stuff.

If you are interested please call my office and ask for either Charlie or Kurt, just tell them it’s Buddha from the Turley Blog.
After you speak with them you and I can discuss terms.

Hope to hear from you,

A.

I’ll be glad to smack you down again.

GOTCHA.

(Sleep well, guys.)

Gotta run, big fella.

We’ll be back. For some more fun in a few weeks/months.

Keep the world safe in the meantime, you never know when those sociopathic/greedy/capitalists bent on world domination will show up.

rolfmao

Good night Captain my Captain.:)

Mo isnt very good at spelling with a few beers under his belt.

I’m thinking “DID” now. (You might know it as “MPD.”)

“Mike” is that you?

(Hey, have a good night breakin’ wind, big guy.

P.S. It’s “bored”, not board.

Well there’s your problem right there!

Your heads and hearts are made of wood.

The word is “bored”, you half-wits.

As to “screwing with me”? If you define “screwing with me” as “getting your asses kicked by me”, well then, that also explains a lot. Many sociopaths are masochists too.

Sociopathy!

It’s not just for sadists any more.

Capitalism = Life and respect for the individual.”

As an aside, this is why I use religious imagery when discussing certain peoples attitudes towards those who hold contrary political views.

http://bible.cc/romans/6-23.htm

Gipper and I are friends. We like to screw with Buddha. It entertains us for a few hours when we are board.

He never fails to amuse. Sometimes we get a group together and screw with him. We laugh our asses off. He is Don Quixote and we are his windmills.

I think if it weren’t for us he would wither and die, we give him something to live for. Protecting the world from the greedy capitalist hoard bent on world domination. ROLLING ON THE FLOOR LAUGHING OUR ASSES OFF.

He is the socialist equivalent of Captain America. (that was from Mike).

Trying to cover your tracks, but you can’t.

Well, anyway, Mo(e), where’s Curly? Lose him somewhere?

He is a douche. Probably uses too much vinegar.

I wonder if “his” muff aletta is really a sandwich?

Bakersfield and Rhubarb would have enjoyed this thread.

Bakersfield, Rhubarb are you around?

I told you that I would take care of this. It isnt your fun, go find someone else to egg on.

This guy is wound really tight, let me push his buttons.

Pardon. It’s hard to type while enjoying a muffaletta. A muffaletta I bought with money earned without exploiting or killing anyone I might add.

Bullshit, but preach on, zealot of greed. I’m not destroying your nonsense for your benefit. I destroy propaganda because that’s what I do. It’s my nature.

“How much more exploitative can you be than to ask a man to die for the state for no good reason?”

By asking them to die for your personal profit and then expecting to escape the consequences of their deaths.

“It is a sad trail of blood that leads to you and those like you. People like me and ekeyra aren’t even in the same league as you and your blood thirsty compatriots.”

You’re right about that. You aren’t in the same league. You’re not even playing the same game. The goal of my game is the betterment of all. The goal of your game is your own narrow and unenlightened self-interests and ego massage that tells you “you’re special”.

“All we want is for a man to keep what he makes by the sweat of his brow to provide for himself and his family.
You want the family of 4 making $50,000 a year to pay for the family of 6 making $40,000 per year. Yeah you are a real uplifting guy.”

You have no idea what I want in regards to taxation. I want the people you make more than $250,000/year to start paying their way in a proportionate manner to the benefits they reap. Or better yet, for everyone to pay the exact same percentage of income tax with a minimum threshold of paying taxes period. There are at least a hundred posts here where I’ve advocated that very same stance on taxation. I’m for tax equity. See what happens when you try to put words in my mouth? You end up choking.

“You are a joke and blood thirsty to boot.”

Yeah, we humanists are such a blood thirsty lot.

“How much blood is on your philosophical hands Mr. Uplifter?”

None. I don’t kill or exploit others for profit. It’s against my ethics.

“More gallons than I would want on my conscience.”

That would be funny if you had a conscience. Your economic defense of exploitation indicates otherwise.

And using equal signs in no way changes you are still making false equivalences – a logical fallacy. You can’t beat my arguments, so you shout louder. Learn that one from Glenn Beck?

How very ineffective you are at both argument and propaganda.

Well boo hoo, Mr. Propagandist.

Looks like you loose again.

One of the 2.

Not my job to pay for your house. Go talk to a charity that I give money to.

ooh that’s a real good counter argument. A guy making a 100k year in a small business is a sociopath because he only pays his part time high school help minimum wage.

Or Exxon is exploiting the public because they make about 25 cents profit on a gallon of gas but put hundreds of thousands of people to work. Your wonderful socialist government makes more on a gallon of gas than Exxon does and they don’t produce shit, except lazy pricks who couldn’t survive without the private sector paying their way.

The common man is cannon fodder for socialism, numb nut. Yeah socialism lifts the common man alright, right to heaven.

How much more exploitative can you be than to ask a man to die for the state for no good reason?

It is a sad trail of blood that leads to you and those like you. People like me and ekeyra aren’t even in the same league as you and your blood thirsty compatriots.

All we want is for a man to keep what he makes by the sweat of his brow to provide for himself and his family.
You want the family of 4 making $50,000 a year to pay for the family of 6 making $40,000 per year. Yeah you are a real uplifting guy.

You are a joke and blood thirsty to boot. How much blood is on your philosophical hands Mr. Uplifter? More gallons than I would want on my conscience.

Marxism is a bankrupt philosophy, as is socialism and its brother fascism.

Marxism = socialism = fascism = death.

Capitalism = Life and respect for the individual.

“you cannot have free trade except in a free market.”

So which is it that you object to? Constraint on free trade or constraint on free markets?

I have no issue with free markets – for certain markets. For most markets in fact. That is the nature of democratic socialism: some markets are free and some are not and the ones that are not are the ones that people can exploit to their personal profit at the expense of society – which costs us all and subsidizes your income. Screw your income. Your desire for profit doesn’t mean you can steal from people not involved in your free market transaction to subsidize the true costs of your transactions you are unwilling to bear as a consequence of your choices to exploit others. If you can’t find an honest living that doesn’t require you to abuse others and pass those costs along to the rest of us, you’re no better than a common criminal. Steal with a gun, steal with a pen, it’s still stealing.

I have an issue with people who want to hide their exploitation behind the term free markets when what they mean is they are for the anachronism of Montaigneian free trade: personal profits over all and damn the consequences. Those are the kind of people that caused the 1929 market collapse, years of abusive child labor practices, the Battle of Matewan and our current TARP induced debacle where criminals are rewarded for their failures and crimes with income subsidies that come from tax coffers – taxes most of them have spent fortunes avoiding paying in the first place.

Venal is as venal does. And venal people suck.

The bottom line is that you want the ability to exploit people without fear of being punished. You don’t care about free markets. You only care about yourself, your profits and avoiding the consequences of your actions. When you adopt the “let them eat cake” attitude, you open the door for the natural response of the exploited as seen in history: “Eat the rich.” Society is bigger than you and your personal desires. And like most animals larger than you, it will eat you or kill you if you piss it off. People have lost their heads over that kind of thing.

The shortsightedness, greed and self-absorption you demonstrate is a form of anti-social behavior hiding behind misuse of economic terms as rationalization and propaganda aimed at people too generally too uneducated to realize you want to exploit them for personal gain by intimating that their “freedom” is under attack when the only freedom that is actually under attack is their freedom to live free of abuse and exploitation, you know, like truly free people. The ideas of socialism don’t attack the common man – they uplift him by freeing him from exploitation. What the ideas of socialism do attack is your retrograde idea that exploitation is just fine as long as you can personally profit. Sociopaths don’t want to pay the price for their bad acts either. It’s part of the pathology. The entire universe revolves around them and only them in their minds. Too bad for you, that’s simply delusional.

he is right and you and “B” are wrong.

I don’t think he is an Anarchist either, he is quoting Von Mises. I haven’t seen him quote Rothbard yet.

I hope he/she isn’t an Anarchist because some government is necessary to protect individual rights and provide for the national defense. But that is about it.

Ekeyra is right about socialist states making war and unfortunately the US has been involved in war after war since the start of the progressive era which was sometime in the late 19th century. Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson?

Ever wonder about that or why? You blame it on fascists but they are actually socialists. You think a company that takes money from government is capitalistic? It isn’t.

We need to return to true liberalism which is respect for the individual and denies the state the means to make our lives miserable.

You support a morally bankrupt system because of your kindness and desire to help people. People will be helped more when they are left alone to pursue their own path in political and economic freedom with a consistent set of laws to address conflicts.

Capitalism is that system as ekeyra has been trying to tell you. I will assume you are religous and follow the teachings of Christ due to your dislike for capitalism? The camel and the eye of the needle and all that we are our brothers keeper stuff?

“I’ve no intention of converting anyone. What I would be interested in is showing you that the very systems you guys advocate lead to the problems you complain about.”

Right, you don’t want to convert me, just show me that you’re right and I’m wrong.

Like I said, I’ve been witnessed to plenty of times in my life. The thing about missionaries is they never want to have a dialogue. Since I do, I’ll leave you to your soap box Evangelizing for Anarchism. Too bad really, I like to talk to people I disagree with.

And just on a personal note, at least in my view, you are free to organize any society you wish. If you want a socialist mixed economy then by all means start one. I honestly wish you the best of luck. Just dont (a) tell me I have to be a part of it and (b) financially support it if i dont choose to be a part of it. Freedom is the freedom to make the wrong decisions and learn from them.

If you can think of a way to demonstrate that I knew exactly what I was saying, and that what I was saying had meaning that didn’t involve a discussion of grammar and definitions, I’ll try that approach. All of that was a response to:

“if your that confused about your own position regarding socialism and free markets theres nothing i can do to help you except maybe offer some reading suggestions.”

and

““Most free market exchanges” is a meaningless combination of words.”

For the record: I’m trying my best to have a conversation with you. I read and consider every word you type. I’m being far more polite and friendly than your abrasive attitude thus far has warranted. I’ve been witnessed too enough in my life that I suspect you came in here looking to preach to the heathens. The problem is, we heathens have just as strong of beliefs as you. So you’re going to have to work a little harder than you expected to convert us.

I’m always open to discussing new ideas. What I’m never open being preached too. You think I’ve got my definitions wrong, show me the right ones. Don’t just tell me I’m wrong. Finally, for God’s sake, don’t get mad when I defend my point of view. If we agreed the conversation wouldn’t be worth having.

in re gassing, I stand corrected. But I think you are right in that socialists love control. I haven’t figured out why, have you?

If you assign a value to a product or service you have negated market value and you have no objective value based on what the product or service is worth based on the billions of other transactions that enter into the value of your single product or service. Which is what ekeyra said above.

In re Byron:

Yep.

Makes me miss Byron. At least when we disagreed we had conversations instead of:

“Here’s the definition of a word.”
“No! You’re wrong socialism is evil!!!!!!”

Also for all your hot air you never answered my question about the minimum wage. Why not set it at 100 dollars an hour? Wouldnt that make everyone rich?

Gyges you and B can both shove your english lessons.

“Which is, an economy in which some markets are regulated or controlled, and others are free.”

The markets which are controlled and regulated will cause economic distortions throughout the rest of the “free” market. Hence any intervention eliminates a free market. For example lets look at drugs. The government insists it has the right to tell us what we can and cannot put into our own bodies, which gives rise to a black market because the government can interfere with supply but it cannot regulate demand, which is subjective. Therefore anyone wishing to participate in this market must subject themselves to the possibility of violence. From the government and from the suppliers who must use violence to handle any conflicts that arise because engaging in harmless yet illegal business means you cannot resolve disputes peaceably in a court of law. Just because i could purchase an illegal substance at an insanely inflated price from someone who may or may wish to do me harm is no reason to assume that it is a “free market interaction”.

Gip i dont think socialists have some natural tendency to want to gas people. I just think they have control issues. Thats why B hates money. It allows people to make decisions he doesnt agree with, like buying their kid a happy meal.

Also Bda and gip prices are subjective, not objective. Gip hit the entire matter on the nose. When you have confiscated tax dollars rolling into agriculture how do you know what the market value of milk is? You cant. That is the very distortion to basic economic calculations that socialism causes. Its not a bad idea because the nazis called themselves socialists and gassed people. It is a bad idea because it obfuscates the very real economic decisions people need to make to go about their daily lives.

you troll you, how do you know what with all the socialist subsidies given to dairy farmers?

You want a TV, you don’t need a TV and no one forces you to buy one, ergo, buying a TV is a voluntary transaction. You are 1) mistaking “need” and “want” and 2) mistaking free trade for free markets.

“Even a black market is not free because the seller and purchaser must weigh the risks of imprisonment or worse.”

You mistake the influence of circumstance on price as it relates to supply and demand with free market mechanisms.

“‘The economic value of a man’s work is determined, on a free market, by a single principle: by the voluntary consent of those who are willing to trade him their work or products in return.’

And that is what is distorted by socialism. Socialism reduces the value of a mans work so that no true value can be assigned to a product or service.”

That something is only worth what someone will pay for it is not a surprise. A true value can be assigned under socialist models but it is assigned so that any associated social costs are borne by those voluntarily involved directly in the transaction instead of allowing those costs to be passed on to the rest of society thus not publicly supplementing your income should you choose to engage in high cost transactions.

One need not spend money to have a good time.”

man do you have that right. It is too bad more people don’t subscribe to this form of entertainment.

I know, I know, three dollars and fifty nine cents

your only problem with that explanation is that you are wrong. You either have a free economy or you don’t. In our country there is nothing that is not taxed or regulated or illegal.

Therefore no transaction is a voluntary exchange between 2 parties. There is always some external factor that must enter into the decision to contract or not contract.

Even a black market is not free because the seller and purchaser must weigh the risks of imprisonment or worse.

“The economic value of a man’s work is determined, on a free market, by a single principle: by the voluntary consent of those who are willing to trade him their work or products in return.”

And that is what is distorted by socialism. Socialism reduces the value of a mans work so that no true value can be assigned to a product or service. The objective value is distorted due to the vigorish paid to government. Since no objective value is possible we don’t actually know what the price of a gallon of milk really is.

One need not spend money to have a good time.

“…there is nothing contradictory in saying that socialism can co-exist with free market or free market transactions.” It’s funny how you read the words you wanted to write instead of the words you wrote.

A meaningless combination of words would be “aca abad.” A nonsensical combination of words would be “goat green grape.” A combination of words with a meaning that you disagree with would be “most free market transactions.”

I think the part problem is that you’re diagramming that phrase incorrectly. Free market modifies transactions, serving as an adjective. It is not serving as a noun. It answers the question “What kind of transactions” (most answers the question “how many?”).

http://www.yourdictionary.com/grammar-rules/Examples-of-Adjectives.html

Now, one can disagree with the idea conveyed by the phrase, but saying that it has no meaning is clearly wrong.

The message (and underlying assumption) of the phrase is that is that individual transactions can be free market and still take place outside of a free-market economy. Which brings up the other part of our communication problem. A Free market is different than a free market economy (or market economy which is what I’ll use to avoid confusion). The two terms are not interchangeable. All markets in a market economy are free, but not all free markets need a market economy to exist. Thus the term… (wait for it)… mixed economy. Which is, an economy in which some markets are regulated or controlled, and others are free.

Once again, there is nothing contradictory to saying that socialism can co-exist with free markets. That’s what a mixed economy, by definition, is.

For my next trick, I’ll explain the difference between a blues and the blues.

how much did you say you would pay me to post trollery so you could respond to it?