Limiting Choices

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by bhunter

What "feeding frenzy?" Just about everyone is materiallly better off than they once were in the United States.

Obama is putting a medal on Bob Dylan. That was nice. Of course, Bob doesn't speak.

"What feeding frenzy?"----You need to get out more.

In the 1960s-'70s, my old man raised a family of NINE and put one through college on a single bluecollar income. Give that a whirl today and see how far you get.

Also,

Bob didn't refuse it either.

Dave

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by bhunter

Do you think that government bureaucrats are more moral—or better, without bias—than the market? Furthermore, I thought the left didn't like a moral compass, particularly that of the church, but is there an effective replacement? Moral relativism will also lead to anarchy.



Considering those rights of which you speak emanated from less centralized government and not more centralized government, I would think that small government, which really means decentralized government, would be supported by the left if they'd vanquish their desire to create preferential systems that treat individuals differently based wholly on perceived differences.



What "feeding frenzy?" Just about everyone is materiallly better off than they once were in the United States. BTW, the SC Citizen United decision is also applicable to groups on the left. Why arbitrarily limit any group of individuals from expressing their political interests based only on the organization's structure?

Obama is putting a medal on Bob Dylan. That was nice. Of course, Bob doesn't speak.

BHunter I respect you but your arguments here are full of shit. Let me finish my little bout of home therapy and I'll tackle your rebuttals, I just need to get some endorphins flowing. It would appear that my GP who's handling the pain managment aspect of my healing from surgery has an asinine notion that physical therapy has to make one miserable to work. I still can't grab my ass with both hands without 10 mg of vicodin. Back atcha in a few.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by bhunter

Do you think that government bureaucrats are more moral—or better, without bias—than the market? Furthermore, I thought the left didn't like a moral compass, particularly that of the church, but is there an effective replacement? Moral relativism will also lead to anarchy.

1) yes as bureaucrats are people- the market really has no morals as you know.2)Your thought is as repugnant and insulting as any I've seen spouted by you and chances are again you know this. Don't question my faith or insinuate that I lack morals. Check your Glenn Beck babble at the door, you only cover yourself in shit rather than any moral rightness by your words.

Considering those rights of which you speak emanated from less centralized government and not more centralized government, I would think that small government, which really means decentralized government, would be supported by the left if they'd vanquish their desire to create preferential systems that treat individuals differently based wholly on perceived differences.

Triplespeak or circular logic, take your pick or is it that simple to you?

What "feeding frenzy?" Just about everyone is materiallly better off than they once were in the United States. BTW, the SC Citizen United decision is also applicable to groups on the left. Why arbitrarily limit any group of individuals from expressing their political interests based only on the organization's structure?
I defer to Dave's example.
Obama is putting a medal on Bob Dylan. That was nice. Of course, Bob doesn't speak.

Blowin' in the Wind alone deserves the Medal of Freedom.

[historian]

The size of a candy bar is minor, those who say taking away the right to choose what they don't want grant the right to deny choices they do want.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by historian

The size of a candy bar is minor, those who say taking away the right to choose what they don't want grant the right to deny choices they do want.

Hey! Welcome to the funny farm historian. I think I agree but I'm stoned and a little drunk so take it with a grain of salt. Tequila anyone?

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by historian

The size of a candy bar is minor, those who say taking away the right to choose what they don't want grant the right to deny choices they do want.

So, I take it you advocate drawing no lines whatsoever, even if large numbers of people are making "choices" that are damaging to the nation as a whole?

Funny, how the people who advocate "small government" and decry heavyhandedness seem to have no problem at all being heavy handed when they decide to attack anyone they don't like.

But, you're a "historian", or at least you claim you are. If this is true, then you should be well aware of what a gigantic and utter lie the belief that the Republican Party is the party of small government truly is...........

[merrylander]

Geez is every new member here a friggin GOPer, which by definition means they are full of it. There was no law limiting the size of candy bars, the manufacturers just saw an opportunity to make more money.

As to government having more morality than the free market, of course it does since the free market has none whatsoever.

[piece-itpete]

Bob I'll take a few shots. It's warm enough for me to sleep disrobed on the tree lawn!

Why is Michelle a lackey for candy bar companies? What do they have on her?

Pete

[Wasillaguy]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Bob I'll take a few shots. It's warm enough for me to sleep disrobed on the tree lawn!

Why is Michelle a lackey for candy bar companies? What do they have on her?

Pete

I'd say they have 30 pounds in the thighs, and probably another 10 in back fat.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Wasillaguy

I'd say they have 30 pounds in the thighs, and probably another 10 in back fat.

You're getting into Budgetaudio territory there.

Regards,

D-Ray