Jump to content
no shit. I thought I was being nice and fluffy... and that it was obvious... Scott W... "W"... ok??
Scott Ford makes total sense and I mostly agree with him too, but I was talkin' about you, dumbass.
Why don't you run for City Council? ... or something.
You make more sense on a regular basis than anybody else on this blog.
Don't kid yourself that Republicans are the only ones who intrude into personal liberties.
Democrats are constantly after my guns, which have killed fewer people than Tad Kennedy's car. They supported the Patriot Act. They tap my phone, read my e-mail and look down into my yard from outer space and monitor my bank account. They use drones to kill americans without a trial.
Furthermore, they along with Republicans, are flooding the nation with slave labor which drives down my wages, runs up costs of social programs and dilutes my vote at the ballot box.
Democrats have repeatedly attacked free speech with things like the "fairness doctrine" and "hate speech" and "hate crimes" legislation. (a "hate crime" being nothing more than a THOUGHT crime and that should scare everybody)
They attack the constitution at every turn, calling it a "living document" and a bill of "negative rights". They sit idly by while a president legislates thru executive orders like some banana republic tin-horn dictator.
They have regulated entire industries such as timber, coal, nuclear power, etc, out of business out of the country. Then they bitch about the remaining companies who ship jobs overseas and hold cash reserves off-shore (as if they should be retarded enough to do anything else).
They use business license rules to chase little kids selling lemonade off the sidewalk. They have, with a straight face, feigned outrage that someone might be asked "Who Are You?" before they vote while defending the ultimate voter suppression law called abortion.
They raid guitar factories for using the wrong wood....
The complete list would wear out my keyboard.
Nor have they been anything other than spenders of our nations posterity. They have never met a debt, or an expense, or a program, or a rule, regulation or law which hurt family, country or business, which they didn't love.
$20 Trillion, Dan. That's where we are. At this stage it really doesn't matter what you favor using our money for... THERE AIN'T ANY...
I don't think comments should be removed so easily. People need thicker skin. The feminization of our culture is gonna' come back to bite us.
I love you, Scott.
There is less personal "agenda" in you (politically) and more broad consistency, and unmitigated predisposition to call balls and strikes, than anyone else I've ever associated with on a blog.
If just 10% of those in leadership positions showed as much earnest desire to get on with real solutions as you show in your comments we would all be way ahead.
Sounds like well-reasoned argument, but FAR from libertarian. Instead of defending the protectionism, a purely libertarian approach would be to demand the above regulations be lifted and the tide allowed to freely float all boats.. as many boats as want to sail in the race, period.
Don't get me wrong, I actually don't think more pot shops is a good thing. And, again, your arguments are compelling. But let's not kid ourselves as to what is fair business practices and "libertarian".
I agree with all your opening statements. In fact I would say that you completely had me all the way through the Republicans spending money like drunken sailors. Indeed they do, and along with stumbling into Iraq it has cost them a couple recent elections, as it should have.
Where we part is when you claim that one party "manages the economy" better than the other. There is NO SUCH THING as a good "managed" economy. An economy is only fettered, hampered and corrupted by politicians. There has not been a "good" centrally-planned economy in all of human history.
You and most every other progressive liberal lend credence to this by holding up the current argument that "the wealth-gap" is widening. Indeed it is. And it has done so in leaps and bounds for the last 7 years under our lord and savior Barack Obama's "hope in one hand and change in the other" managed economy.
Much of the crony-capitalism responsible for this intractable income inequality, which progressives now lament, is due in no small part to a big government (which you favor) cozying up to big business; providing it with innumerable special "permission slips" and ways to avoid "paying it's fair share". Empowerment of an ever-larger gubbamint has done absolutely nothing to improve this reality; indeed has made it worse. Even under this Democrat president who had full control of the entire congress for 2 years and the Senate for six.
Gubbamint manages nothing well. It is to set rules and let the teams play the game; nothing more.
"put the government in charge of the Sahara Desert and in 3 years there would be a shortage of sand." --Milton Freidman
And does anybody really, really believe that I have ever, ever drank $1,000 wine?? Seriously???
Not even if you added it all up.
OK, George. Thank you. I get it.
When I get GK smackin' me around I know I've took the game way too far. Sorry fellas.
And when I go off about taxes and other inequities I am NOT crying for my sake... not at all. I'm a little disappointed but none the worse for wear.
The reason I gripe and fuss so much is that I see this envy and redistribution game hurting our republic. And history shows that it always ends badly.
Ken, you say: "...who in their right mind would want a SC that is not in line w/their thinking?" This is a quite rational perspective.
The only problem with such a ball game is that you're paying not to see how the teams progress, but how the referee feels on that particular day.
Do we want referees who think "our" team ought to win? Or do we want referees intent on having the game played according to the pre-established rules?
Could it be that such power is sought, even worshipped, by the left because liberal progressives feel such power can be used to do good? And if such power were absolute it could eradicate evil entirely? All of human history says otherwise but will not likely erase the delusion.
The job of a good ref, like the courts, is to ensure that the rules have been obeyed. If he rules in favoritism or of his own personal will he not only defrauds the competitors, but the spectators as well.
To fix the game for money is called corruption; to fit the game for sentiment is called Liberalism.
This is EXACTLY why zoning ought to simply identify areas where "X" and "Y" are suitable and then get the hell out of the equation. Nobody's business on Council whether or not someone is making a bad business decision or not.
Time was the business person (in America, not freakin Russia) looked around and assessed the "need" or "market" for his product.
How absolutely arrogant and presumptuous can a group of people be to attempt to order the legal affairs of another?
It's a legal business or it is not. Good for goose AND gander or good for neither.
I wonder how a realtor or other city council members might feel (no offense, Bart) if the community decided to deny them the right to sell any more homes (or whatever their income entails) right now because we as a community just didn't think the market "needed" any more for sale right now? How absurd!! How utterly "San Francisco" of you!
Legalizing pot will go down in history as both a wrong and right decision.
Right because government has no damned business telling a free person what they can drink, eat, smoke, grow.
Wrong because any society that has as little grasp as this one does, on how it's being played like a $2 fiddle, doesn't need any more stoned people.
Last login: yesterday
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2015 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.