Rotten Statist Bitch vs. Austrian Paleocreep = Love
Feb 27, 05 | 7:17 pm by John SabottaThe person leaving comments here under the name of “Lefty” is actually rotten liberal/fascist bitch “Deb Frisch”. Although she pretends to disdain Hans-Hermann Hoppe, it’s obvious that secretly her loins must become moist when she thinks about the small, treacherous little Las Vegan professor - as their great minds think so much alike. Look here for an example of her Stalinoid approach to public education:
As George Lakoff and Mark Johnson showed, there’s a lot of truth in the metaphor “Ideas are food.” But there is good reason to allow the market to allocate food and the government to allocate ideas.
There is a difference between the choice between wheat and rye and the choice between evolution and creationism. In the bread case, there’s no truth of the matter. Different strokes for different folks works just fine. But in the case of evolution vs. creationism, there is a right answer. It is the kiss of death for a democracy to allow parents to send their children to schools that teach what the parents believe.
In general, it’s a good idea if school curricula are determined by educated people. Even if there’s a market for schools that have courses like NASCAR, Nintendo, creation science, Bible literature, etc. do we really want to allow our neighbors to “educate” their children that way? Isn’t teaching children things that are trivial or false a form of child abuse?
Does this not remind us of Professor Hoppe’s attitudes towards the time-preferentially challenged? (Note the Dawkinsesque suggestion that parents who dare to pass on their religious beliefs are practicing a form of “child abuse”. Perfect! “There are Christians down the street - call CPS!”) And, even more significantly:
I agree with dubya-squared that the controversy about putting warning labels on biology textbooks is related to the much larger issue of the increasing tension between reality-based Americans and faith-based ones. I disagree that the solution is to agree to disagree. This one needs to be duked out.
Duked out! Why not be honest, Deb - come right out and say that you think those evil Creationist parents ought to be beaten with rubber hoses and their “abused” children taken away by the State, you rotten liberal bitch? One, two, many Wacos!
Normally, I would end this post by speculating on the exact nature of the horrible mysterium conjunctus to be expected between our two ill-starred lovers - perhaps describing Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s applying his lying tongue to the inner recesses of Deb Frisch’s lushly upholstered ass. But that would be crude, and wrong. Instead, I note Frisch’s predeliction for atrocious poetry and respond in kind:
I see Deb and Hoppe
In a tree,
K. I. S. S. I. N. G.
February 27th, 2005 at Feb 27, 05 | 7:47 pm
Well sure - of course - I do think that people who believe:
there’s this guy.
his name is god.
he lives in the sky.
he had a son named hey seuss.
by a virgin named mary.
are guilty of child abuse if they try to shove this drivel down their children’s throat. Thanks for noticing!
February 27th, 2005 at Feb 27, 05 | 7:52 pm
So they should be thrown in jail, right, you worthless fascist bitch?
February 27th, 2005 at Feb 27, 05 | 7:55 pm
You Stoopid Cow: what you think of other peoples’ kids is perfectly irrelevent, because they’re not your kids. So, you get to shut the fuck up.
See how easy it can be?
February 27th, 2005 at Feb 27, 05 | 8:18 pm
I’d have to say that kidnapping children from their parents and throwing them in strange places is child abuse.
February 27th, 2005 at Feb 27, 05 | 8:28 pm
I believe it’s child abuse to shove the idea that the state can solve problems, down childrens’ throats.
See how that works?
February 27th, 2005 at Feb 27, 05 | 9:23 pm
The live ones always follow Sabotta home, don’t they? Personally, I think it’s his charmingly straightforward style that does it. And Frisch: you are indeed a worthless fascist bitch. Straight up. I’ll give you this much, though, you have your fangs out there for the whole world to see.
February 27th, 2005 at Feb 27, 05 | 10:15 pm
Speaking of “false and trivial”, I hope Deb is being proactive in keeping children away from her poetry.
Good grief.
And not even a picture. Two thought-crimes says she looks like Michael Moore.
February 27th, 2005 at Feb 27, 05 | 10:42 pm
Hey, I was trying to set her up with Hans-Hermann Hoppe.
February 28th, 2005 at Feb 28, 05 | 12:27 pm
You guys are kind of funny - Michael Moore look alike? I dunno. I’m a MM thinkalike, that’s for damn sure.
I’m the one with the vino:
http://www.azstarnet.com/ss/2004/02/24/11198-1.jpg
February 28th, 2005 at Feb 28, 05 | 2:36 pm
Hmmm. Now I’m almost sorry that I gave you to Hans-Hermann Hoppe.
Still, you are really just too evil to want to exchange bodily fluids with. I have a policy about that.
Well, kind of.
Besides, dear Karen would become jealous. And she has all those guns.
February 28th, 2005 at Feb 28, 05 | 3:44 pm
Nice house, cunt. Listen: I need some stuff, and all my pals have voted that your stuff belongs to me. Don’t even start pissing and moaning if I show up to claim the mandate, because I need it and we voted.
That’s it. You lose.
Have an ice day.
February 28th, 2005 at Feb 28, 05 | 3:58 pm
You guys are pretty funny. Can’t wait to check out where you debunk economics AND jdm. Who knew such cutting-edge research was right here at no-treason.com!
February 28th, 2005 at Feb 28, 05 | 10:06 pm
You drink alcohol in front of minors? Forget it, that’s kid’s coming with us for her safety.
March 1st, 2005 at Mar 01, 05 | 8:02 am
I appreciate the chance to share my feelings repeatedly since you keep responding!
The issue of child abuse is tangential. The real point is that Christians constantly bash gays, women, abortionists. But unbefuckinglievably, it’s still not kosher to talk about how judeo-christianity is nuts. Sorry Charlies, there is no guy who lives in the sky. Hey seuss’ daddy wasn’t god. His mommy wasn’t a virgin. It’s kooky to believe the abrahamic nonsense about the guy in the sky.
Being a Catholic priest is a huge risk factor for being a pedophile. So the Christians bash gays, but they are the ones having the most man-boy sex!
March 1st, 2005 at Mar 01, 05 | 9:01 am
If “science” tells us that children do better, become more productive members of society, when they grow up in homes with a mother and a father, isn’t it “child abuse” to imprison the poor dears in a single sex household? In light of the way nature works, isn’t subjecting a child to living in a lesbian household depriving that child of valuable knowledge and experience? Is not that deprivation, which may severely distort the child’s relationships throughout life, more potentially damaging than any religious instruction could be ? Doesn’t the state have an interest in preventing such abuse?
March 1st, 2005 at Mar 01, 05 | 5:15 pm
Mikey! Thanx for playing. To the extent empirical data has been collected on the relative well-being of children raised by:
a. one man and one woman
b. two women (or two men)
c. one woman (or one man)
I’m thinking that a and b are more alike than a and c. You see, Mikey, evolution designed women to have a very large investment (9 months plus) in every offspring. Evolution designed me to have a very small investment.
You might not know this, Mikey boy, but many men fuck and run - siring children but not staying around to raise the little bugger. You do understand that the problem of single mothers caused by guys who think with their dicks and don’t give a fuck about anyone but themselves is more serious than any deficits caused by having two moms instead of one of each flavor?
What is this place - a kooky kristian site? A generic republican asshole site? Where the HELL have I landed, Spock!?
P.S. If any of you limp-lobed pricks calls me a cunt again, I’m leaving your shit-filled pond. Unless, of course, I decide to stay.
March 1st, 2005 at Mar 01, 05 | 5:33 pm
“What is this place - a kooky kristian site? A generic republican asshole site? Where the HELL have I landed, Spock!?”
A market anarchist site. Soja was likely not seriously claiming he wants to remove children from lesbian parents, he was just giving an example of your “argument” turned around.
Armed now with the statistics you quote, do you have plans to remove children from single mothers and let nice couples (hetero or not) adopt them?
March 1st, 2005 at Mar 01, 05 | 6:19 pm
You do understand that the problem of single mothers caused by guys who think with their dicks and don’t give a fuck about anyone but themselves is more serious than any deficits caused by having two moms instead of one of each flavor?
Single mothers are caused by guys who think with their dicks?
Wow.
Okay. Really, though, the thing I was wondering, since we were allegedly talking about the great canvas of child abuse and religion’s place thereon, was where you might rate the state’s interest in enforcing other dynamics of the familial universe, ie. the gender makeup of the parental units. Would you rate growing up without a responsible male role model around more or less dangerous to tender psyches than attending church a few times a year, and learning “creationism”?
And now I gotta ask, if the state is going to get in the business of rooting religion out of everyone’s lives, are they also to get in the business of approving every sex partner a girl wants to have?
March 1st, 2005 at Mar 01, 05 | 9:31 pm
You people seem like a monkey house- a giant pit of screaming and feces-throwing. Personally, I think there is no god. But if people feel like teaching their kids that, it’s a-ok with me. Last time I checked, you had the right to think, and believe, what you wanted. The problem only arises when you infringe on someone else’s right to think or believe what they want. This argument stemmed from darwinism vs. creationism in school? Obviously teach the thing that has proof behind it. Obviously teach the one that isn’t FAITH based, since we have a seperation of church and state in this country (sort of). God, it’s all so simple.
March 1st, 2005 at Mar 01, 05 | 10:13 pm
Ah. So really you want to have government thugs take kids away, not because you care one way or the other about the snot-nosed brats, but because you hate their parents.
Lemme guess: you don’t have enough votes to get the Jehova’s Witnesses and Jews hauled off to the Zyklon-B showers, being born half a century and half a world out of your natural time, but you’re hoping to at least have the gub’mint take their kids away based on some flimsy pretext of “irrationality”. And that’s easily proved by the fact that you flat-out ignored Holmes’ inquiry into your alcohol-filled lifestyle that you’re pouring (perhaps literally!) down those impressionable young-’uns’ throats.
Any lie will do in order to kill, eh Frisch?
March 1st, 2005 at Mar 01, 05 | 10:15 pm
Maybe you need to check with Deb Frisch, here.
March 2nd, 2005 at Mar 02, 05 | 8:14 am
I would like to correct my Right Honourable Friend Mr. Lopez. I made no such inquiry. I observed facts that Madame Lefty admitted herself and wilfully provided evidence of. I passed judgment on such outrageous and unconscionable behaviour in accordance with all respectable norms of honest and decent society. Fortunately, there is yet a government in this land, and if its massive powers can be brought to bear on the issues of greatest import in our fair nation, none could be more important than to spare our youth the spectre of substance use and abuse.
(I swear to God, if I don’t stop reading these cases, pretty soon I won’t be able to write like a real person.)
March 2nd, 2005 at Mar 02, 05 | 9:49 pm
Fair enough, Holmes. (See, Sabotta told you that that lawyer stuff wasn’t good for you. Take care you don’t end up like You Know Who, huffing glue and loving Lew. That would be tragic.)
I’ll ask, then: Frisch, given that by any “reality-based” statistic avaliable, your boozing it up in front of the youngsters is orders of magnitude worse than religious folk indoctrinating their kids, how on God’s green earth can you *not* sanction CPS goon-squads breaking down the door of every vino-swilling leftist in order to take their kids?
March 2nd, 2005 at Mar 02, 05 | 11:46 pm
Raise your hand if you’re NOT a loser. Hello??
July 8th, 2006 at Jul 08, 06 | 9:53 am
Deb Frish does seem to have a “thing” for other people’s children.
July 8th, 2006 at Jul 08, 06 | 9:53 am
link:
[Code your links or use tinyURL.com. JL]
July 8th, 2006 at Jul 08, 06 | 11:38 am
I did initially code the link, but it was stripped from the first comment.
July 8th, 2006 at Jul 08, 06 | 2:25 pm
Deb Frisch does seem to have a fetish for young children… and causing them trauma… whether it be suggested molestation, or removing them from their parents alltogether because the parents believe something different than Deb does.
I think she may have had some kind of trauma during her formative years, which would explain her obsession with wanting those she disagrees with to suffer.
Also explains her psychology fixation, as well as her desire to prove her intellectual worth, and disprove everyone elses.
Since Deb has taken the yolk of being the athiest out to get those darn menacing Christians (monothiests) ask deb to simply prove, using logic and science, how at the beginning of the Universe… if there is no outside source (intelligent designer).. how Hydrogen could appear out of nothing.
It has been proved, by athiest scientists as well as christians, using observational astronomy , hubbles law, and radio astronomy.. that 1) the universe is expanding and 2) the Universe is made up mostly of Hydrogen.
Logically we can say, that if an object (the universe) is expanding, then at one point, the object had to be at a single point to expand from. You can’t move from point A to point B unless you are originally at point A… We can also logically say, that the trillions of tons of hydrogen needed to get the Universe moving…the “big bang”… had to come from somewhere.
As no scientist in their right mind would logically say that the “hydrogen was just always there”… nor could any scientist say that the “hydrogen made itself appear” at the beginning of the Universe. Nor could any logical scientist say that not only did it “appear without a catalyst” but also just happened to form into a perfect atomic, sub atomic, and sub-sub atomic structure….
For Deb to believe that something as complex as an atom, sub atom, and sub-sub atom form out of nothing is profoundly idiotic, and proves she has not sat down an pondered how the universe had to at some point COME INTO existance.
The only logical deduction that can be made, is that at some point, whether it was just one atom of Hydrogen that multiplied itself somehow, or whether it was trillions of tons of hydrogen…. at some point HYDROGEN had to appear out of nothing in order for it to be here now.
Therefore, logically, at some point… a greater than the universe catalyst had to make the hydrogen appear. I call that greater than the universe force a “higher power” by definition, as this power supercedes physical matter, thus putting it into an ethereal level.
To say an automatic NO to a higher power catalyst shows that Deb is only interested in HER God-a-phobic point of view, not the logical point of view.
July 9th, 2006 at Jul 09, 06 | 11:11 am
Typical dumbass religious argument. I could turn the argument at you and ask how could your god come out of nothing. Your reply would be, He always existed, to which I’d reply, So did hydrogen.
Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water, people. Deb Frisch is a psychotic, fascist bitch, but let us not get carried away with religious fervor here.
- part of H.L. Mencken’s Creed.
Religion almost inevitably leads to justification of government and agression, and the PaleoCreeps are but one example.
July 9th, 2006 at Jul 09, 06 | 11:34 am
I meant aggression
July 9th, 2006 at Jul 09, 06 | 12:15 pm
No problem.
July 11th, 2006 at Jul 11, 06 | 9:10 am
Deb Lefty Frisch is an unmitigated assface. Here she is demanding Jeff Goldstein take down a link to a picture she herself posts in a public forum because by linking to it, she claims he is “allowing” people to get personal information they can use to threaten her.
Amazing.
You TEACH PSYCHOLOGY?????
http://proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/20649/
July 11th, 2006 at Jul 11, 06 | 9:14 am
err… TAUGHT
Was that a Freudian slip? :-P
July 11th, 2006 at Jul 11, 06 | 11:51 am
Ahem…
I’ve been out of the loop for a while, though I have read your posts. I declined to enter any debate until an area of expertise, one that I have studied, came to this “arena”. And it has. I have a lot (I mean buttloads) of info on space, chemistry, computers, law, ancient civilizations. Maybe I read to many popular science, discovery, astronomy books, or watched to many history channel specials? Anyway, let’s put that aside and get to the meat and potatoes: The early universe and Intelligant Design.
———–
“Typical dumbass religious argument. I could turn the argument at you and ask how could your god come out of nothing. Your reply would be, He always existed, to which I’d reply, So did hydrogen.”
- You both are wrong, Hydrogen did not exist, nor any other elements for a significant amount of time after the big bang, because it was to hot and dense for anything to form, and infact, if I remember correclty the universe was not even transparant for 10,000 years…or was it 10 million..? I forget off hand, but the universe was a very strange place.
That aside, lets replace “Hydrogen” and just say “stuff” that was in the singularity. It is a problem, one science can’t explain, how something can come from nothing. More so, if there was a God, were was his origins? There is argument that the universe closes upon itself and repeats the process all over, but that would still not explain how the original one formed. There is argument about strings and membranes, but still, were does it come from?
I have concluded that it is above our understanding. Like telling a man born blind to describe the color red, blue, green. Or someone born deaf (totally) to describe music. It is simply above us.
The idea of a “prime mover” has been around since Plato invisioned it. I suscribe to that theory, about a year ago I read a book called “God’s Debris” by Scott Adams which although there is no evidence of, gave a compelling theory…
Assuming there is a god, he most be omnipresent among omnipotent. Thus, he would have to be inbedded into the universe itself. He is the universe. So the big Bang may be the result of god “blowing himself up”. I mean if your God, and you sundennly appeared out of nowhere, wouldn’t you want to add some spice by creatiing a little chaos? But would such a God know we really exist, much like the cells of our own body? I mean, there alive yet totally independent of “the creator’s” will. We didn’t even know cells existed until recently. Can the cells in our own body prove that they are subservant to ourselves? Thus if there is a God, we can imagine ourselves as “cells” in the complex body of the universe. Tillions of cells have come and gone in our life time, like trillions of stars and lives in god.
Anyway, specalation aside I think even a so-called atheist (there really is no such thing) can look around and tell there is more than meets the eye. Science may prove it yet…Dark Matter, Energy, and even the big bang give creedance, support to the Biblical accounts…Or maybe they were just twisted and interpeted that way…Remember, few scientist in the day wanted to acknowledge the Big Bang theary because it was to Biblical.
July 11th, 2006 at Jul 11, 06 | 3:36 pm
Positing God adds nothing useful to an explanation of where everything came from.
I’m pretty sure there’s such a thing as an atheist since I am one.
July 11th, 2006 at Jul 11, 06 | 11:13 pm
Nothing useful except hope.
And how useful is that, really, when this rotten world of hatred and despair still surrounds us at every turn?
July 11th, 2006 at Jul 11, 06 | 11:28 pm
It’s July 12th - happy birthday to Henry David Thoreau!!!
July 12th, 2006 at Jul 12, 06 | 3:11 am
Positing God adds nothing useful to an explanation of where everything came from.
I’m pretty sure there’s such a thing as an atheist since I am one.
———-
It is useful for me to tell you it is above our understanding, God or no God we cannot grasp the magnitude nor the mind bending reality.
Oh your an athiest? I’ve read many accounts of were an atheist is on his death bed and hopes and prays to God. All of us have a yearning to know our FatherYou can’t say tha you don’t feel God, or think sometimes about him.
July 12th, 2006 at Jul 12, 06 | 12:40 pm
Sure I can.
July 12th, 2006 at Jul 12, 06 | 12:44 pm
Sabotta,
You think an atheist can’t have hope?
July 12th, 2006 at Jul 12, 06 | 1:18 pm
So what do you think happens when you die…Is there a black screen with the message game over? Why do we have so many civilizations that believe in god (or gods)? Especially those that are independent from each other?
July 12th, 2006 at Jul 12, 06 | 4:10 pm
You’re gone.
Because anthropomorphism is a more or less natural attempt to explain.
Many civilizations independently arrived at a flat-earth model, but that’s poor evidence the world is flat.
July 12th, 2006 at Jul 12, 06 | 8:34 pm
I have no hope of a second life. That’s why this one is so important.
July 12th, 2006 at Jul 12, 06 | 10:07 pm
I guess I’m out of the nym loop… So, “An Observer” is Sabotta? In this case, I assume that so are all the nephites and the lungs?
Anyway - the debate of whether a god exists or not has been around since the beginning of time and will never be resolved. Everything that is to be said (on both sides) has been said numerous times, and no real headway can be made on this front.
I did find Sabotta’s disparaging reference to Dawkins interesting, though. The debate over the origin and evolution of religion is a lively and fascinating one, and Dawkins has given a very lucid, simple, and plausible explanation for its evolution and propagation. Understandably, referring to religion as a “mental virus” won’t win him many fans on the religious side, but he was never one to shy away from controversy anyway.
July 12th, 2006 at Jul 12, 06 | 11:58 pm
I think so. There’s a rule against using multiple nyms but obviously I’m not enforcing it with Sabotta. I will with anyone else though.
July 13th, 2006 at Jul 13, 06 | 1:14 am
I am no one - just a trick of the light in these haunted woods.
I seem to be slowly fading away into the background noise, however. Which, to be honest, is something of a relief.
July 13th, 2006 at Jul 13, 06 | 2:27 am
a = a
lung is lung
July 13th, 2006 at Jul 13, 06 | 3:25 am
Then again…
Catfights!
July 13th, 2006 at Jul 13, 06 | 11:11 pm
Deb Frisch is virtually indistinguishable from the overwhelming majority of the populance. Her main error in most everyone’s eyes boils down to a slight lack of verbal self-control. Virtually this whole nation advocates in principle crimes equivalent to the ones she contemplates in her famous comments, every time they set foot in the voting booth.
Of course, those aren’t “crimes”, they’re “the will of the people”. Not that the victims are any less dead.
July 14th, 2006 at Jul 14, 06 | 6:42 pm
To Charles Hueter:
I am hopelessly in love, now.
July 14th, 2006 at Jul 14, 06 | 7:27 pm
Ha, ha, ha! Deb Frisch is naught but My ghastly handpuppet! My Infernal Paw fits inside her very soul, and she must glorify My unspeakable Name! And now it is your turn, No-Treasonites! Bow before the Mouthless One! Bow, Kennedy! Bow, Staples! Submit, Lopez! You cannot escape My Cute Grasp!
Hello S. Kittay
July 14th, 2006 at Jul 14, 06 | 7:29 pm
back off, kittay.
no-treason is protected by lung.
July 14th, 2006 at Jul 14, 06 | 7:36 pm
Ha. ha, ha! Puny undifferentiated creature! What do you know of what breeds in the Spheres Beyond? Soon Yog-Sothoth will open the Door, Great Cthulhu will rise from R’yleh deep! And Hello Simon Kittay, Sanrio Creature With A Thousand Young, will rule over endless night of chaos and the void’s wild vengeance! First No-Treason, then Two–Four, then the world! Ia! Cthulhu f’taghn!. Tremble, little creature! You will be Our most abject slave! It begins!
SATOR
OPERA
TENE…
July 14th, 2006 at Jul 14, 06 | 7:38 pm
not so fast, kittay!
“OGTHROD AI’F
GEB’L - EE’H
YOG-SOTHOTH
‘NGAH’NG AI’Y
ZHRO!“
July 14th, 2006 at Jul 14, 06 | 7:41 pm
No! No! Aieeeee!
Not The Invocation Of The Descending Node!
PER ADONAI SATANAS, PER ADONAI ABRAXAS, PER ADONAI BELIAL TETRAGRAMMATON, METRATON…
No! NO! ARRRRRGGGGGHHHHH!
(phhhhhttt!)
July 14th, 2006 at Jul 14, 06 | 7:42 pm
h. simon kittay is banished to the outer spheres from whence she came.
no-treason and the world are saved, now.
donut?
July 14th, 2006 at Jul 14, 06 | 8:38 pm
Yoopie! I’ve been named in the same breath a JTK and JL! Does it mean that now I get editing and nym-switching priviliges?;)
July 14th, 2006 at Jul 14, 06 | 9:36 pm
it just means that lung saved you from a horrible fate
donut?
July 15th, 2006 at Jul 15, 06 | 12:27 am
Donut for Sam?
July 15th, 2006 at Jul 15, 06 | 11:31 pm
LLLLLLLLLLLL
July 18th, 2006 at Jul 18, 06 | 5:55 pm
Lopez, Kennedy, Sabotta, et al -
This blog is freakin’ dormant! Do you guys need some ideas for threads? Something to start up a lively discussion? Just say the word if you do - I have many voices in my head that would love to share! Please don’t bore me into reading the LvMI scum, it’s not good for my mental health…
July 19th, 2006 at Jul 19, 06 | 10:22 pm
Start your own blog, dood. It isn’t hard.
July 20th, 2006 at Jul 20, 06 | 2:11 am
I believe it’s spelled dude.
July 20th, 2006 at Jul 20, 06 | 11:31 am
Observer:
She’s taken. But glad to be of service!
July 21st, 2006 at Jul 21, 06 | 6:42 pm
Sigh. Well, that’s how it always goes, innit?
(she and lung would get along, I think.)