That's some pretty crazy world view filters you have on, there. Libertarian ideas expressed in simple terms (for simpletons, like you), often use "you own you" to explain how property rights flow from individual rights. Your most important property right is your body. That doesn't mean the libertarians you've met think there are no individual rights, just that you can't get out of your own bag enough to grok anyone else's viewpoint. So you latch onto some phrase so you can create ludicrous interpretations of what they say in order to justify your hatred of them.

Yes, it is. Which is why the very smart people who wrote the US constitution chartered the country as a republic, not a democracy. And a good thing, too.

Lol.

So, you'd be OK with him supporting mandatory labeling on all foods that contain DNA? Because 80% of the population says they support their government helping them out with that.

I'd never support a politician who says he'll do what the majority say they want. We don't need mob rule directly, or by proxy, either.

SquirrelMail has changed in the last 13 years?

You don't have much of an imagination, do you? Or pay any kind of attention to actual events, pretty much ever?

Escort aircraft can make observations and help with communications and recordings that can't be made any other way. One of the threats suggested the bomber was on board, implying the possibility that he might make demands which could include, possibly, making that aircraft into a weapon aimed at a metropolitan area ... which might require destroying the aircraft before that could happen. Fighters are routinely deployed when other aircraft stray from where they're supposed to be, cease communicating, etc. Which you'd know, if you paid attention.

I call bullshit. SquirrelMail rocks. Especially compared to the craptastic load of mega ass crap that is the OWA of 2002.

So requiring state education (a.k.a. banning home schooling and private schools) is the same as "doing away with education"? How does that work? You SAY "it's a question of degrees", yet you reject any notion of individual rights. You clearly want no compromise at all, and have no interest in limiting the authority of the state. That's why I called you a statist and it's clearly completely accurate.

Fascinating! So you can point to legislation that levied taxes to pay Verizon to put down fiber in places where they've chosen not to? If those appropriations actually specify deliverable services that they're not providing, that should be super easy for you to point out. Maybe not as easy as making up some "insightful" but completely misleading stuff about how it was taxes that Verizon funded FiOS and that they promised service at specific addresses that they've abandoned. Looking forward to your links.

Because, of course, the entire infrastructure of the carrier's network, peering connections, management, power, data centers, and all the rest is just "some wires."

Well according to Wikipedia:

So this is not a vaccine, unless you use a really lose (personal) interpretation of that definition to make it fit.

Regardless of your ludicrous biases, I am not an Objectivist or anything like it. There is a difference between having a government respectful of individual rights, and one that justifies enforcing every aspect of everyone's life because they by claiming every activity affects all the taxpayers. You can have things like taxes that pay for education, without telling everyone their children will be wards of the state every day for eight hours or you go to jail, or that no one can smoke a plant because somewhere down the line the state has to pay for the consequences.

WTF ever happened to personal responsibility? Dismiss that, and you live under tyranny.