Sunday, January 13, 2008

Thanks for the cigarette and my but isn't that blindfold rather ironic?

I'm I was in the dock!

The charge is was "siding with the state's thought control in the Ron Paul newsletter affair."

I find the charge interesting, given that the state per se hasn't weighed in on said affair, and that what I actually seem to stand have stood accused of is criticizing a personification of the state -- a member of the US House of Representatives, no less.

No doubt about the verdict [update: Had the court not adjourned back into the ether from whence it came], of course -- the self-appointed prosecutor, judge and jury is a devotee of the theory that the act of disagreeing with him constitutes irrefutable proof of his correctness. [1]

Dead man walking! Dead man walking here! Or maybe not.

1. Yes, that's a Hoppe-baiting oversimplification. Rather than try to explain "Argumentation Ethics," I'll defer to Kinsella himself, who identifies and links to the relevant sources in his defense of it.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Three Column Modification courtesy of The Blogger Guide
Some graphics and styles ported from a previous theme by Jenny Giannopoulou