This dude who crashed his plane is going to turn the press even more vicious against US styled libertarianism. This could effectively kill off whatever momentum there was for the movement.
The press will almost certainly characterize him as a “Tea Bagger” and say it’s the fault of Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin.
Whoo, we dodged a bullet then.
Are you joking, or do you actually think most people can tell the difference?
Who cares what most people think?
Read his suicide note. He’s an anarcho-communist.
If you care about educating people in an effective manner to make your life better, that would be one reason for a person to care. Or at the very least if you fear giving the left any more fodder to make your life even more miserable, that could be another reason to care.
Personally, I care mostly because I find the way people react interesting, and I find many people on the left aestheticly more obnoxious than the other side.
Yes, we all read that. It won’t make a bit of difference. Whether the press characterize this guy as a conservative or a libertarian is yet to be seen - but I guarantee you the press will never portray him as a leftist.
I guess I’m missing something because I didn’t draw that conclusion. Wouldn’t be the first that I’m wrong though.
LOL - Sorry, I just meant we all read the note.
He was a small business owner and I doubt he would have called himself any sort of communist, though some of the remarks in his suicide note do seem fit that label.
Now there’s two threads going on with this topic, I don’t know why,[:)] but what is troubling is the man discussed at length, I believe near the beginning of the note, about taxation. He centered his effort of freedom (the whole bit on how he was dying for freedom as others in the past had done, etc…) and even quoted “no taxation without representation”, then he goes on to crash the plane into the IRS building. To me this smells like the mainstream media will pounce on this guy as a tea-party member. Speculation, but how things are now-a-days doesn’t seem far-fetched. It’s very unfortunate.
The only bit, but I might be wrong, is he does attack capitalism, but capitalism anymore is commonly thought of as why the market failed, that whole bit. Whether this guy, seemingly very intelligent by the note, was using what has become propagandized as capitalism even as Bush would say ‘destroy the free market to save the free market’, does this man know of any other way to define the big business cronyism (which he mentions)? Does he only know to call it capitalism? Or is he using this attack on capitalism in the traditional communist manner? I don’t know.
So it’s either the way the man thought in his own semantic way, or he contradicts himself, or…
as you note he was a small business owner and seemed to be saying he liked it.