The quote says gus are for defending yourself and defending the state. Some guys think guns are attacking the state or at least for attacking the Feds. This quote leaves the self in the strange position of defending himself from the state and of attacking the state at the same time. The only obvious solution is that we are not to defend self from or against state but to submit. In words even Jim K can understand don't point your gun at cops.

If guns are for these two purposes then what is the nonsense so often espoused that they are conversely to defend oneself from or against the state. If one is somehow at odds with the state personally he still comes under this phiosophical dictum to defend the state from himself.

You as usual are off topic. We are talking about Jefferson and bankruptcy. I have no idea as usual what you talk about. I am sure I have forgotten more of the Bible than you will ever know.

J how does excellence in my business and personal life have anything to do with my neighbor or anyone else. Social progress generally has something to do with people during things together, socially that is. If I keep just to my own business how is that being social.

Everone who Mike? Antarctic ice shleves are breaking away real time. Arctic ice mostly floats on the sea, the sea warms, the ice melts. Antarctic's main ice is sitting on land, the ice shelfs on the coasts are melting. You have stated the factors in the problem but you have not the mental capacity to anayse the factors properly. When ice expands it does so into the atmosphere, that is skyward, when it melts it slops all over everything. That is exactly the problem my friend exactly the problem, and you mis-analysed it full time. I am not surprised at your mis-analysis, not surprised at all. It is based on your false presumption that scientists are some kind of supersitious relgion and you know better than everyone else. The rule of a minority is certainly a form of dictatorship with the rule of just one the final and absolute end of the asinine phenomenon.

You blather on and on Mike. THERE WAS NO BANKRUPTCY LAW THAT AFFECTED JEFFERSON. HE THEREFORE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN BANKRUPT. HE DID NOT GET AWAY WITH PAYING LESS THAN HIS ACCUMULATED DEBTS AS FAR AS I HAVE READ. HIS ESTATE WAS SOLD UPON HIS DEATH AND HIS DEBTS WERE PAID. I have also read that he liked his wine and owed for that. If there were reverse mortgages in his time he probably would have availed himself of one. Your crap about the jubilee year and biblical bankruptcy has nothing to do with the Congress or the The Constitution. You are just blathering on as usual.

A littlte confusing but world is proving in Copenhagen that it has thrown off the mantle of tyranny and the bait and switch scams and BS of tyrannts and is moving into the full light of environmental enlightenment and leaving the bad and evil past behind us. Rejoice and again I say rejoice!

Yes and no man is an island or a Constitutional scholar unto himself.

I just read Article 1, Secton 8 Mike. You should read it again. It does not order Congress to do anything, but says Congress shall have the Power to do things. Thus Congress has the choice to exercise the Power or not. It exercised its power in 1800 and exercised its power again in 1803 to revoke the bankruptcy law. I am sure you are unaware my apparently very young friend that Congress does change laws from time to time. Again the Concise Encylopedia of American History says that there was no bankruptcy law between 1803 and 1820 when Jefferson died. You need to read and study more carefully my young friend.

Mike my rresearch is from the Concise Enclopedia of American History. It says that Congress passed a bankruptcy law in 1800 and that it was repealed in 1803. The fact that The Constitution gave Congress the power does not mean that it had to act. It apparently did not act until 1800 and then repealed in 1803. Jefferson was apparently a nice guy co-sigining for a friend. His friend failed to pay the debt and it legally fell to Jefferson. Jefferson died with debt. I am not sure but I understand that his estate and assets satisfied those debts. In any event he was never involved in any kind of bankruptcy. How about Democrats such as Warren Buffet? Got anything bad to say about him? You are BS about acts of bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is a legal under law methodolgoy of getting by without paying your debts. I have read nothing that says Jefferson tried or did get away without paying his debts.

Warren stay in a closed room or better yet smoking bar with a crowd of people without ventilation and see whether or not mans body heat and bad habits can make it a little bit uncomfortable. Then extrapolate (sorry for the big word which is probably over your head) to the earth with its' 6.8 billion people and industrial bad habits and you might (but I also mighty doubt your mental abilities in this regard) get a slight glimmer of the possibilty that man can create environmental degradation not only to water and land but also to the air. How else dear Sir do you explain acid rain, acidic sea water ad infinitem?

If a guy can write a novel and put words into a characters mouth and then the words can be quoted as some source of philosophical attitude of great import then I belive it is also okay for any and all to drivel or drool over it all they want. We nothing about the apparent fictional character who uttered these words, he may have been insane or on death row for all that we know. Warren thinks it is funny, some may think it sick, sad, dark or gallows humour. Warren certainly has no lock on what is funny and certainly not on what is scientific. Don't read my words Warren and you will then be much happier in your ignorance.

Mike you said that the Climate Change issue was and is pushed by government. It certainly was not pushed by the Bush government. It was and is pushed by The People, people from all over the world and by scientists. The Bush folk did not listen to the people. You must have been stoned out of your gourd when you wrote above Warren. I am sure you have never heard of Copenhagen either. Vindication blah blah blah, what he heck are you talking about. You are in the same class of folk who said around 1900 that the wild birds being killed in Florida for hat feathers for the fine ladies in NYC could never be hurt because there was so many of them. Well now they are all dead, never to be seen again. Or the folk that thought filling in the Everglades was a good idea. Elk of course was eliminated from the East and almost from the West, wild turkey was eliminated but restored in the last twenty yeas by a very successful and well managed and planned program. Can you like Mikey never learn from history? Even if the people of the earth err a little bit would it not be better to err on the side of the planet amd its environment than make the same foolish blunders time and time again. Wake up Mike you obviously have been asleep for decades! Either that or you are to young to have lived for decades. No one can be as unknowing as you are without one or the other possibilities.

Dah or is it duh? As all children know none of the three brances of the Feds are supreme. Even the Supreme Court is not supreme, they are Supreme in interpreting the Constitution but then the only true supreme that is The People can amend and thereby change The Constitution.

So Dave you think jail is fun, I think that is a very painful way to get your desire, funny I cannot understand exactly how it is that you think. J Carlton said nothing to answer the question that Bastiat begs: What the hell is Social Progress?

J B check again there was no bankruptcy law in Jefferson's time. There was one briefly around 1800 but it was overturned or voided. When Jefferson died he had approximately $100,000 in debt and $20,000 was from him being a co-signer for a friend who failed to pay his note. Jefferson had sufficient assets in his estate which was sold to pay off his debts after his death. As far as dissolution Jefferson was right on and we dissolve the entire house and 1/3 of the Senate every two years. Republicans may not bankrupt themselves but Reagan and the Bushies have tried to bankrupt the government by benefiting and cowtowing to their friends. Democrats like Warren Buffet, Soros and many others are far from bankrupt my friend.

Worst quote ever! He starts by caliming that he is for "Social Progress"? What does he mean by that? Then he attacks mans getting his desires by the "least pain possible", what is wrong with that? I think Bastiat writes a little like Mike, and that is what is wrong with them both.

Gore took an intererst and popularized the term "Information Superhighway". He supported and pushed the concept of the Internet. Who Mike to you think overseas, authorizes and pushes the military if not Congressional Committes. You are correct about the military and eventually the National Science Foundation. Gore was a supporter, a booster, and a facilitator. He has gotten many awards for his work. He certainly doesn't need YOU. You are an air head if you do not know that the Bush administration and his Republican friends in government and Congress denied or looked the other way on the Climate Change Issue. What is the BS you talk about above about "religious fraud" where the hell did you ever get that term. To take a line from the late not so great Soviet Empire, WE are going to bury you head in the sand, ignorant by choice, philosophical and political flakes, liars, and frauds!

Gore took the initiative to create the Inernet just like Eisenhower took the initiative to create the Interstate Highway System, I am sure there were also a lot of steamroller drivers that never met Eisehower also. The global warming issue was not and is not being researched or propagangized by government. As you should know or I should say everyone should know but probably not you Mike is that the US Government or Administration as we call it virtually denied the issue and the facts for eight years, so what is this talk about government. The evidence has been amassed for decades and studied by researchers and scientists for ever. How can you be blind to the history of what man has and is doing to the environment as we know it, every species range is being reduced, and extinctions occur virtually annually. There is more than ample examples that should make you appalled at what human beings are capable of doing through wrong headed or profit at any cost thinking. The filling in of the swamps and wet lands, the pollution of every stream and river in America because it was a cheap way of getting rid of industrial waste. Where is your sensitivity or sense? Now granted that filling the atmosphere with carbon is not exactly the same as filling the streams with garbage and is different than the other examples of mans inhumanity to planet and other animals but hell is it not worth the chance of even a little error to at least for once think twice and err on the side of protecting the environment than to err in destroying it. Again I published a lot of words about Al Gores internet awards and the work he and the government did in developing the Internet. This in response to Carlton;s earlier denials. He still apparently denies the truth because he dislikes Al Gore apparently only becaue Al Gore is a Democrat. He and you have got to get off your partisan horses and use your heads.

What would you think of Al Gore if he did not put his money into something that he believes in, I guess you would call him a hypocrite. He is not being sued for fraud that is just another ignorant loud mouth use of words by you guys. He is sued for his perceived failure according to some to debate. This thing has been going on for years, where were these so called debaters for all of that time. These world meetings and protocols are nothing new. The ice caps are melting. The science is obvious just like every knows they are killing themselves when they smoke and inhale or get drunk and drive. How or why can you guys be so dense and obstinate. All go gets scientific kudos every where he turns as in his Internet contributions. Hell you gusy don't even admit the truty about Al Gore's initiative in helping to create the internet, who is going to believe anything you say now about this scientific matter. Hey your credibility is showing and you just come acorss as lazy political hacks.

Some think it is alright to steal from other than your own caste or class.

Tell it to Archer, the self-appointed Czar of conformity on this site.

Yeah, J that you and Al Capone are in the same camp and think alike. He knew Eliott Ness to be a tyrannical unforgiving guy also. Sometimes I guess "tyranny" is a go thing! Just like Hitler who called Roosevelt the biggest tyrant and war criminal ever. Pick your sides man, for you I guess it is Capone and Hitler those two haters of bureaucratic tyranny.

Ken states the epitome of elitist Republican philosophy and why they are and always will be a minority party. They are really about looking down and sneering at others.If they become a bigger and bigger party they will have no one to look down upon. The smaller they are the more they will have to sneer at and look down upon, and that is what ultimately makes them happy.

Who is rich and who is poor is a relative thing. Every one in America is rich in comparison to some folk in the third world.