oh my goodness, how excellent is this. thanks.

For providing confidential information to troublemakers! :)

well, let's just enjoy ourselves until the doors burst in.
hey, what the heck was that?! HEY! TH

:(

...which may be exactly what they want. (remember brer fox and brer rabbit...)
to give in to the forces of hate as winston smith did in 1984 is to become as they. rather beginning building already.
many secession movements are growing as are impeachment movements.
plenty of work to be done to go around for all.
i share your outrage overload, truly, but it is tempered by what i do or not do.

forcesofhate.mp3 1984 excerpt

that aside, again i say i empathize with the question.
and the one that follows.
what is everyone's tipping/breaking point, and how many such folks does it take to flip the static monolith.

http://zuma.vip.warped.com/wtfdit.png

Things are not that bad ;-)

two things that i never EVER imagined the good ole U.S.A would do

1)tell me who i can and cannot marry

2)tell me what i can and cannot read

The good ole USA has been telling people those things since it was founded. Now, if you just mean the federal government... well, that's slightly more recent. To my knowledge, most prohibitions on who you can or cannot marry were local or regional and, if not in law, then strongly culturally enforced. On the federal level, times of war have definitely influenced what you can and cannot read. At the local level, its been a constant struggle--school boards, etc. There's a reason we celebrate "banned books day."

I will agree that the current administration has made these two issues much more explicit and has involved the federal government more... but, to be honest, the USA as a cultural and political whole has, over its history, done quite a bit to regulate who can marry who and what is considered acceptable or allowable to read.

as long as the tools and materials are in the hands of lukewarm, impotent, spineless congressfolk. If the Democrats ever grow some teeth and grow the guts to bite back, things will change.

"Lord! What Fools these Mortals be!"

but it's so frustrating watching everything i hold dear, my personal autonomy and responsibility to self, erroding while nothing is being done. they tap my lines, prevent me from marrying, prevent me from doing harmful drugs, tell me to buckle up, tell me what i can and cannot read, prevent me from traveling where i want to go...i mean come on...we can't travel to cuba because daddy government says so....FCK THAT.

i am a human first, and just because i've had the misfortune to be born in the united states i therefore MUST abide by the laws of the land? even if the laws don't include me. i'm not a christian and personally only tend to care for those who are in need, not people who have a false sense of injury in the eyes of the law. my morals don't allow me to see their needs as real...therefore their laws do not apply to me morally or ethically.

which is why i encourage civil disobedience as being obedient to a cause that does not include me is beyond my comprehention.

my general feeling is...as long as i'm not infringing on anyone's rights...leave me the fck alone. stay out of my bedroom, stay out of my line of site. in other words, watch your lane...not mine.

http://zuma.vip.warped.com/page.htm#unbroken

with your hair on fire and your autonomy and sovereignty intact, you stand foursquare, my kind of guy. i appreciate this greatly.

watch your lane...not mine. rule #4, i can relate.

http://zuma.vip.warped.com/rules.txt

and you pointedly put first things first... like the sheer sovereignty of your own mind.

http://zuma.usmjparty.com/first_things.htm

i'm not being impartial or objective here, but noting points of partiality pointedly as i rarely come across such so specifically, and so salute you for whatever that may be worth.

"[T]he liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism. -FDR

that if we had more people like you here on earth, man what an awesome planet we could have!

thanks! we're here to spoil each other in my book.
(this is why i occupy my own planet. or so i'm told.)

took me on quite an interesting trip for most of the day yesterday. i felt so alive, and even started writing a book based on some of the things we corresponded about, and some of the links you provided.

i think i wrote about fifty pages before stopping to get some rest. then, last night, i had the strangest dreams about paranoia and socialism. i plan on writing those dreams into the book, as they were quite disturbing.

nothing better i like to hear.
in another open tab of my browser right now, i'm at cryptogon.com, a site i'd heartily recommend btw, where i'm reading a new news article (linked there above -and one that i've no doubt will shortly be put up on the newswire here by somebody) that will also make you cringe.
http://www.sfgate.com/...ED5OUPQJ7.DTL

i appreciate your comment gobs. very glad i helped to juice ya. i don't that lightly: tha's what we s'posed to do for each other... (as far as i'm concerned.)

a new diary for you :)

erm, the cat. we don't have a dog.
and they already took me away, remember?
...and there's a new alternet cannabis history bait piece for the stoners i hafta duly note in timely fashion on usmjparty or they'll never hear about it and learn why there's even these choo choo trains to hell now...
and it's damn serious to boot.
sigh. nothing cramps my style more than serious matters of actual, not to mention grave, import. (okay, well form does, but i digress.)
okayfine. lemme reboot first. and make some coffee. (somebody keeps hitting my pot in my alcove here, btw.) i am nothing if not untimely.

i've always thought bush will suspend the elections indefinately based on our ongoing war with iraq. maybe this will finally be enough to get john q public out of his armchair?

no hope of something like this going mainstream until it's already happened.

whatever will happen will likely be based on whether it enhances the pocketbooks of the powers that be or detracts from it, i think.

i posted that newswire piece as Tina urged and the reply i got got me thinking more about 'the iraq conundrum'; that the powers that be are running out of scams so to speak. i was thinking about the money aspect of it all and it occurred to me they may well be fiercely fearing (okay not so fiercely at that mayhap) a tax revolt.

is that ultimately the only practical response? maybe not, they may well try to figure out an alternative for us -*for* us... (or am i giving them too much credit?)

my outline of aspects of our contested liberty. just the idea of outlining at all may be food for consideration...

http://zuma.vip.warped.com/aspects_of_liberty.htm