« you ask, "how will the europeans oppose the euro union policies on immigration?" i answer, "they cannot, as a practicable matter. simple as that." | Main | it is an amazing world when a country boy from n.e. oregon gets mentioned in the comment section to an article in an italian political blog ... »

January 10, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


The UDHR got it wrong. Believing lies, myths, and other falsehoods, especially those spread with malicious intent, will threaten the security of a society in various ways, threaten the constitutional state, and harm individuals. Anyone who tries to tell me, "You can't handle the truth," I would answer, "I NEED the truth - I can't live without the truth."

generic viagra

What limits on freedom are essential to maintaining life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?
A lot of people seem to think that limits on freedom is repressive. However, yelling that there is a fire in a theater when there is not a fire is a valid limit on the freedom of speech. What other limits do you think are essential?

buy sildenafil citrate

How many Democrats will stand up for freedom of speech when they try to enact the 'Fairness Doctrine"?
How many will stand of for our right to freedom of speech even though the views talk radio voices are not yours. Isn't freedom of speech more important than quieting the opposition?
Even Clinton was talking about it yesterday, saying it was a good idea.

The comments to this entry are closed.