Skip to main content

Obama administration takes rare pro-freedom stance ...

... on unlocking cell phones.

Comments

The Last Ephor said…
this strikes me as more of a populist move than a pro-freedom effort.
March 5, 2013 at 9:06 AM
kavips said…
I think his staff said, "hey, our phones are unlocked.... no one uses locked phones anymore"...
March 5, 2013 at 12:27 PM
delacrat said…

"President Barack Obama has the legal authority to unleash deadly force—such as drone strikes—against Americans ----on U.S. soil--- without first putting them on trial, Attorney General Eric Holder wrote in a letter released Tuesday."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/holder-yep-obama-could-kill-americans-u-soil-213059085--politics.html

You better keep your phone locked.

March 5, 2013 at 6:34 PM
Kool-Aid said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
March 6, 2013 at 5:49 PM
Kool - Aid said…
Why do you like to censor what people have to say? You are just like big government.
March 7, 2013 at 11:59 PM
Steven H. Newton said…
Jim
I don't censor people. I cut off trolls, You are a troll.

How is that different from big government? Simple: I own this blog. I make the rules because it is my property.

You have no inherent right to speak here, especially when you are not trying to communicate, but are trying to destroy.

Don't like it? Go start your own blog and see if you can attract an audience.
March 8, 2013 at 6:43 AM
Kool-Aid said…
First off son. My name is not Jim its Ed and I have every right to post here just like everybody else. You call yourself a Libertarian but act as a fascist. If you want to call me a troll then God Bless you. Since it seems to make you feel good to call citizens who don't agree with you trolls. And then you try and act like you know who someone is. It seems like you're favorite name to use is Jim. Well son I will be back to post or as you call it troll. And if you block my name I will just use a different name.
March 8, 2013 at 3:40 PM
Steven H. Newton said…
Whatever you say, "Ed."

You've got as much "right" to post here as anyone--which is to say whatever rights I give you. This blog is private property, and if you were actually a Libertarian you'd know that means I have the absolute right to do any damn thing I like with your comments.

Want me to leave your comments up? Then post something that has something to do with the post you are commenting on, and stop posting crap about other people that has nothing to do with them.

Otherwise go the hell away or quit whining. Your choice--just remember--when you piss me off it takes less time to delete them than it does for you to write them.
March 8, 2013 at 3:51 PM
Hube said…
My name is not Jim its Ed and I have every right to post here just like everybody else.

Sounds like someone didn't pass basic civics ...
March 8, 2013 at 4:29 PM
Kool-Aid said…
It seems to me that you are a troll.
March 8, 2013 at 5:23 PM
Steven H. Newton said…
It seems to me that nobody gives a rat's ass what you think, Jim.

(And if you are "Ed," stop using Jim's IP address.)

By the way, you are done for the evening here.
March 8, 2013 at 6:03 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...
70 comments
Read more

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...
32 comments
Read more

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more