Or ... or ... perhaps it is our system that has gotten completely out of hand? Perhaps the next election is only to choose our next lord and master?

-bucky

There ain't no trick to being all cocksure and sarcastic and condescending. Hell, anyone can do that, and walk away thinking they've said something and put some one down.

I don't vote for "lord and masters". I vote for representatives. It isn't "our system" that has gotten out of hand. It is the people who have controlled our system for far too long that have gotten out of hand. Throwing your hands up and saying 'let's call the whole thing off' - which is what you seem to be promoting - will accomplish nothing at all.

Have you read our Constitution lately, Bucky? "Our system" wouldn't be half f'ing bad if we would just do the work it will take to get us to a place that "our system" actually resembles what the Constitution, in black and white, says that it should.

Falling back into insult mode just makes my point.

-- shooter242

Shooter, you didn't and don't have a point to make.

Your attendance on this board thrives and exists in "insult mode". Most all of your posts are nothing but insults.

I'd call generation upon generation living near or at poverty level 'permanently poor'. If you are born poor, and you die poor, that's about as 'permanent' as it gets for those who are personally effected.

Your argument about the 'feds' helping the corporations perpetuate the coal mine situation does nothing to make your point or to diminish mine. I, nor anyone else who has discussed this with you on this board, have voiced any doubts that the government finds ways to smack down those of little voice.

So, I don't see where it is you think any of what you posted changed or altered in any way what we have been disagreeing with you on since the beginning of this discussion.

The crack by me about your rich friends was in regards to your hero worship of Hoppe. I, of course, have no idea who your friends are nor did I claim to know nor do I care. It has no bearing on this discussion. Just as writers in this thread having or not having college degrees - as was brought up by you - has no bearing on this discussion.

I read your 'feed' post after I posted my last post. I'm glad I posted that anyway, but I'll take to heart what you posted about feeding this empty pit of a troll.

What? When? What did I say?

I dare say you have someone else in mind. I do not care about degrees more than you could ever imagine.

-- bucky1

Upon some further investigation, it seems that I did confuse you with someone else who posted something along those lines.

My apology for the incorrect attribution.

@Karen M

Jonathan: fyi... I'm less likely to respond to Anonymous comments, too. Comments are not just assemblages of facts/opinions, but are also "voices" that are unidentifiable when they are nameless.

As I pointed out, that is a form of ad hominem. Deal with the post and not the poster is a rule of mine that I seldom break.

Why people should refuse to respond to an idea unless they know where or from whom it came confounds me.

Jonathan Hoag

It's not an ad hominem to not reply to an anon poster. There are reasons for not replying to a post an anon poster. Some of them are just out of practicality. I imagine that we all look for ways to get through the sometimes voluminous amounts of posts, post a few of our own, and have a life outside of this blog. We have to make decisions on where to cut corners. Anon posters might fall into one of those cut corners.

Karen didn't say she refuses to respond to an anon poster. She said she is 'less likely' to respond to an anon poster. And she has a point that previous posts by a poster with a name often times gives that poster's individual post a context that it wouldn't have without the familiarity of who poster is and what they are generally about.

Our posts aren't self edited, beyond a certain amount, and they aren't written out and then put aside for a couple of days so that we can better clarify our posts later. The result of this 'live blog' posting is that sometimes we fail to completely make our selves clear. That's where the familiarity can come in handy for context. If you know the poster's general voice it helps to fill in the blanks when they muck things up a bit in a single post.

One more thing. In my opinion, your having deceitfully posted as an anon poster was below the belt to begin with. I think I see why you chose to do it. I guess you thought it might alter the reaction you'd get from the regulars here. I suppose it did but, for what it's worth, the deceitfulness of your having done that doesn't set well with me, and I don't think your experiment was very helpful to you or to other posters. Like I said though, I am, of course, speaking only for myself.

No, you didn't miss something. Shooter's point is no point at all, and he is indeed ignoring and not replying to the obvious. Bush did nothing whatsoever. That leaves no leg for Shooter to stand on.

I/we call him a troll because he can't be stupid enough to try and stand up for Bush's do-nothingness, but he argues with us anyway about some other made up junk, which is...nothing at all.