Or, as the LA Times would have it, “In about-face, Sen. Mitch McConnell backs ban on earmark spending.”
But I like my headline better.
related: In a stunning development, Glenn Reynolds fails to condemn McConnell for caving to unhelpful kooks demanding ideological fidelity to fiscal conservatism, even if that fidelity is largely symbolic.
All of which clearly validates those of the belief that JEFF GOLDSTEIN IS CRAZY DANGEROUS AND UNSTABLE! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!
****
update: Oh. And this is for you, happy. To stop you from worrying.
(h/t IP)
I’m not afraid. The police will surely arrive in time to stop the madman.
Gee, it’s almost as if they respond to pressure. Good thing that a few folks have been known to advocate that effective strategy.
OT: but I was reading the other day that my having launched “Corey Haim’s notes from the afterlife” was just like someone imitating me and telling you all that my son has bone cancer.
No, I’m not kidding.
I guess I’d blocked it out until now. Out of fear that considering such an argument might literally lead to retardation.
Wait, wait. There’s still time to be pragmatic and show that we can
compromise our principles awayreach across the aisle andget fucked up the asswork with the President.Wait…wait… I see the logi… Nope. Lost it. But now my fingers smell funny! Yay!
How is Corey these days?
I was thinking about checking in with him, Bordo, but I’m afraid doing so will convince people I’m not to be taken seriously.
And I’m all about appearances.
I’m sure there’s a death threat in this post somewhere, and I’m going to find it.
And the circular firing squad claims another victim. When are these “pragmatists” going to learn that executioners hit what they’re aiming at?
Well, Jeff, some people hear ‘tea party’ and reflexively put their dailty little pinkies in the air. Others hear ‘Tea Party’ and apply the warpaint.
I think most people know which kind hangs out here.
In other words: too late to appear proper.
I hear “Tea Party” and I think mmm… Long Islands.
My head is swimming from all the staunchiness…
Jeff G, did you threaten McConnell or something? By assenting to budget reduction McConnell is McConnell now violent too?
My God. I think the last thing we need to do is suggest intoxicating beverages to those riotous plebs, Ernst.
Pretty sure, that’s how country music, NASCAR, and lowbrow slapstick comedies got started in the first place. Don’t we have enough to cringe over?
Stupid commas.
I’ve heard that chicks dig crazy, dangerous, and unstable; all it’s ever gotten me is first in line for the morning meds.
“I’ve heard that chicks dig crazy, dangerous, and unstable…”
– They do. as long as you’re paying for everything….
I read that. I spent at least an hour trying to scrub the stoopid out of my eyeballs.
After having read far too many of Patterico’s Protestations, I think the guy has a problem with your style, and that what he thinks matters, somehow.
COMMANIST!
Not just me. Look at the common thread: those who weren’t willing to grant Obama is a “good man” were being unhelpful. Limbaugh not wanting Obama’s socialist policies to succeed wasn’t being helpful. The speakers at CPAC, who were fed up with politics as usual and launched into their dreams that conservatism become conservatism again within the GOP, these were NOT the KINDS OF SPEECHES we wanted representing “us.” And so on.
In every case, Frey depicts those who protest wrongs in a way he finds too unpolished as almost worse than the offenses they are protesting.
That’s good news I guess Mr. Jeff. Here is from the actual letter the CSM is talking about[PDF]…
I think it’s pretty clear these guys are responding to this from the other day where these goofballs said what they thought the Republican victory will stand for and part of their letter was the following…
That one was signed by Amy Kremer of the Tea Party Express. The careful reader will notice that these goofballs are full of shit.
I’d thought Amy at least had better sense than that.
If it comes to it I also will write a letter but I’m hoping it won’t come to that.
But I’m still worried. I’m glad I have lasagna in the microwave.
– I suspect that those on the “soft right” who have succumbed to Stockholm syndrome under the constant onslaught of Lefturd demonizing and Alinskyish bullying politics may recover after a few years of the healing atmosphere of real reality and common sense.
– Having to come to terms with another switch in mental processing can be very trying, as well as embarrassing.
– They apparently haven’t quite convinced themselves the third attempt at Socialism in America is on its last legs.
but about the post…
Team R should ask bumblefuck to join with them in cracking down on what remains of bumblefuck’s wasteful stimulus spending.
From Insty’s post:
I like that advice. Fiscal cons and social cons have worked together in the past (with considerable overlap, of course) and can continue to do so.
– You miss the point as usual ‘feets.
– Here it is in plain words;
– You want to do things in your own circles, fine. Just don’t expect the average American to give you approbation by giving up the things they believe in so you can preen and claim some sort of general sociatal acceptance at the expense of others.
– You want to do things, then do them, have the courage of your convictions and leave others to theirs.
Frey depicts those who protest wrongs in a way he finds too unpolished as almost worse than the offenses they are protesting.
Of course he does. In the other thread, somebody, don’t remember who, and not gonna take the time to look it up, said that he was well on his way to becoming a progressive. He’s not. Or not necessarily. What he is is a guy who’s sympatico with the idea that it’s wrong for the Left to want to control all of our lives, even though many if not most aren’t capable of controllng their affairs as well as someone else. So in order to run his life the way he pleases, he, like other would-be elitists is prepared to give you and me a bit more control over our lives, but not much, because he agrees with the progressives that we’re too stupid to take care of our own affairs without the (lighter or heavier) hand of government on our shoulders to steer us in the right direction.
And you know that he resents the hell out of the fact that we don’t appreciate his light touch. He has that in common with a lot of our “friends” on the right.
I for one am glad someone is monitoring those christian scientists. God only knows what mischief they’ll get up to if someone isn’t watching them.
But I don’t think I am missing the point Mr. Hunter. The point I think is you have one group of concerned letter-writing citizens saying Team R just won a mandate to “restore traditional moral values by passing laws that recognize the sanctity of life.”
You have another group of concerned letter-writing citizens saying no actually this was about the spendings and the individual liberty. They aren’t asking for approbations they’re asking the jag-off leaders of our failshit little country to please stop spending like crack whores with a winning lotto ticket.
You can imagine how confuzzled Mitch McConnell is these days trying to figure out what the election meant. I think the letter Jeff links today is helpful. The previous letter Hot Air linked is unhelpful.
Good. Earmarks are one of the more pernicious influences. If they can’t quit on their own, we’d have to stage an intervention…
That’s true bh,
I would counsel our friend, the little Pikachu from L.A., to recognize that even in the letter he found disconcerting, the order of priorities passed through both reducing taxes and the size of government before it ever got to any sentances that included the words “moral” or a derivative of it.
A lot of what social-cons purport to be government assaults on the family, etc., are the underwriting of lifestyles that they think the government enables by doing so. Get rid of thise transfer payments and that will stem a lot of their demands.
At least no small government types I know want to legislate elements of morality; and would reject efforts to do so-regardless of whether they coincide with our points of view.
Like Ric often says, if you give the statists the ability to sick goons squads on you for behavioral reasons that you find obtrusive, then ultimately those same abilities may be turned against you!
Even if they can quit on their own don’t mean they should be behind the wheel of the heavy machinery of the American economy, so we may have to go ahead with our intervenings in some of those cases anyway. Like, for instance, O-lympia in 2012 or Sister Lindsay in 2014.
– I think we all agree that, by far, the most pressing issues are government spending and growth, but underneath all of that is the idea that people should be free of governmental control of their freedoms, one of which is financial freedom, but they all are interlinked in some ways.
– In fact I’d go so far to sat that this entire spectacle of Progressive bullshit got started with the “living document” nonsense.
– So no, we don’t want to get sidetracked on other issues at the moment, but we also will need to clean up the special interests manipulations at some point.
Mr. Bob those ones say point blank they want Team R to pass some laws about “restoring traditional moral values.” These ones definitely want to legislate them some “elements of morality.”
Me I say hey you big stupids – that’s all well and good but you need to go out and get yourself a mandate for that shit cause that’s not what the election of 2010 was about. Nobody went and voted to restore the traditional moral values except for maybe some crackers in Iowa.
Mr. Hunter you are right about the freedoms.
happyfeet,
How many times do we have to tell you that no one is planning on outlawing abortion. I’m as Catholic as they come; crucifix in the house, pieces of last year’s palm on the wall, attend daily mass, etc; as God-bothery as they come.
Christ relied on people coming to Him, and God, through their free will, not be coercion nor statute. So while I’ll always be against abortion, and would counsel others to see the light-so to speak, I recognize also that it can’t be outlawed; those who see no problem with the practice, partaking or performing, should be able to do so safely and legally as decided on by society at large.
I just don’t want my tax dollars paying for it, nor do I want hospitals to be told they must make it available in order to perform other procedures paid for through medicare/medicaid.
Don’t go off the abortion deep end again muh man! :)
Paul Ryan makes for the best TV going today.
Fiscal cons and social cons have worked together in the past (with considerable overlap, of course) and can continue to do so.
Heartily agreed. It seems to me that the heart of the so-con complaint is that gov’t won’t leave them and their communities alone. If the village wants to have a prayer service before sending the h.s. sportsl team off to State Finals, they ought to be able to do so, the objections of the village atheist notwithstanding.
A decent respect for federalism means that there’s going to be places in this big country where you’re not going to want to live. And neither am I. Naturally, there’s going to be some overlap, but where we disagree, we agree to disagree.
Part of getting gov’t off our backs on “cultural” issues is gettting gov’t out of our wallets. With less money for nationwide mischief, I think we’ll all find that, however heated the local arguments get, it won’t leave all of us alternately burned and frosted.
I agree with the electric hamster, yet he makes me defensively take up arms for the other side of the argument, just because I can’t stand to stand next to him.
Given that he’s a professional marketer with mad skillz, one can only postulate that he’s really a social con trying to make it look like the better option.
It really comes down to spending, doesn’t it? If they cannot spend very much, they cannot do very much. The less the better, as far as I’m concerned. They could never cut back spending enough to please me, because all those entitlements are not going away, but they can certainly do better than they have been doing.
There are a lot of people who are going to be angry if real cuts get made, and that’s too bad, because somehow, cuts will be made, whether through cutting the budgets or freezing spending and inflating the currency even more than they have been. Cuts will have to be across the board, though, because if everything gets cut, people won’t be bothered nearly as much as when only some things get cut. The progressives created a massive dependency class, and Obama grew it even more. Either everyone has to bail, or the ship will sink with all hands.
Well hf,
As an example of enabling, how about we don’t encourage single parent families by paying Mom’s mo-money for each kid they have so long as they’re not actually married.
I know that some folks still will find themselves in that situation, but, others might think twice before shacking up with a baby-daddy that may just take a walk at such a time when he considered the situation to be no longer optimal.
Social Security used to give stipends to widows before welfare/TANF, but once those programs came along it was all good regardless of how the arrangement came about.
Is it legislating morality to say that folks should support their own children? I personally don’t think so.
More of Representative Ryan from this morning, talking about the political realignment underway.
Have you been to any Tea party events, happyfeet?
I will be back later I have to do New Girl stuff cause she’s still on maternity leave and there’s math and contracts and thanklessness involved.
I am very in favor of the government not paying people for to have the babies.
Alright, completely off-topic.
Is there a way to associate an avatar with a Protein Wisdom account? I set up a WP account and a Gravatar account, and got that working, but I can’t find a way to use that WP account on PW. Maybe my account from the Pub needs to be deleted or something, so I can login via WP?
I’ve seen progressives like Larry King flatly state that no one ever has babies to get more money from the government. Then I have my father, who told me a woman acquaintance of his said she was going to have another baby to get more money from the government.
Now, which do I believe is more likely the truth? I know no one argued against the idea, but if we still had trolls, they would.
Jim, did you use the same email address for your PW and gravatar accounts? I did, and I didn’t have to do anything for the avatar to appear here. The association was automatic. I also have a pub account, so that isn’t the problem.
Well, I hadn’t, cranky, because I had another WP account associated with it. But I just found a link to add that e-mail address to a certain account on Gravatar, and behold, it works.
Along with the aforementioned spending controls, I would love to see the House GOP take steps to crack down on the legalized forms of sexual assault being practiced by the TSA.
As long as it works, and it does, all is good.
Amen. Mike, don’t harsh my mellow, man. I was going to go apply for a TSA job later this week. For the perks.
Heh. I wonder if a body cavity search of Janet Napolitano would be considered a perk.
I suspect it would be creepily revelatory. NTTAWWT.
I think I may throw up.
Also, what’s up, kids? Long time no talky.
I’m stupid. Forgot to save my changes after changing my display name. I blame violent rhetoric and such as.
Hiya, BN!
Comment registration sure seems to have been a net plus.
Don’t know why our host hasn’t gotten down with the avatar thingy yet though.
– Maybe TSA could hire gyno’s and procto’s for airport security, cover two bushes at once.
He’s being OUTLAW!
oh noes
link
Hey Jeff. Looks like you’re still causing consternation amongst the Omega Theta Pi House. Which is awesome.
As far as TSA goes, we’re taking the kids to Florida in a couple months. If some POS rent-a-cop at the airport tries to feel up my three year-old daughter I might be absent from commenting here for a lot longer, if you know what I mean.
ahh, it works!
related to the TSA business, dave barry‘s gloss was fantastic.
also, good work on the comment registration jeff. I hope that your life is smoother as a result.
– Pffft…..those clingers just tuned in to make fun of her /sarc
DEATH THREAT ISSUANCE!
I’m getting a version of the Gadsden flag as a tattoo.
Once I do, maybe I’ll take a pic and use it as an avatar.
Completely off-topic, but the Adam Carolla audio rant (13:30-23:30ish) on the state of things in beautiful California is delightfully vulgar (as it should be), and had me LOLing… like a cat.
Sort of like Mark Levin, turned up a couple of notches. (No FCC for podcasts – yet!)
another opinion
link
Jeff’s afraid any choice of avatar could be misconstrued as threatening towards anyone viewing it. Personally, I think he’s very wise.
happyfeet posted on 11/15 @ 3:09 pm
hf, riddle me this … is being against using taxpayer money for abortion a social or fiscal issue? Is not penalizing married couples in the tax code (ie when Obama’s tax hikes take effect, individuals earning over 200,000 and married couples earning 250,000 will be hit) a social or fiscal issue? Is protecting the right of doctors, nurses, pharmacists, et al, not to be forced to engage in behavior they find objectionable (and doesn’t involve any legally protected group) a social or constitutional issue?
I know you try your damnedness not to understand, but there is no bright, wide line that separates “social” issues from fiscal or legal issues.
I am very in favor of the government not paying people for to have the babies.
oh good lord
There’s so much new here. I’m a tad overwhelmed.
The admin went crazy, didn’t she?
I think a picture of Jeff carrying a tree would be good till the tattoo gets done.
Jeff Goldstein
Have Tree, Will Travel
mr. jeff g. is like johnny appleseed planting the classlib ideas across the land
A bonsai with a correspondingly miniature noose.
No no no. This is the one, at least on special occassions
I think my name screws me there anyway – Ninjas were never known for putting fluffy-soft pillows under people’s heads as they went beddy-bye, unless those fluffy soft pillows were filled with instant, agonizing death.
But to make my shameful violent streak official, I will kill all of you. With wonderful cholesterol-filled goodness.
Guess that rules out traveling to LA anytime soon, seeing as how I’m a danger to myself and others, etc. etc.
Darleen you can tell what has their panties in a twist cause of they used the magic word traditional when they talked about marriage. That means they want to pollute the Tea Party Message with their evil anti-gay social con hateyness. We must be vigilant.
If they want to get rid of the marriage penalty, they should say hey we want to reform the tax code to get rid of any marriage penalties. And of course a sad brokedick little government like ours shouldn’t be paying for abortions. Not here. Not abroad. People have to take personal responsibility for to pay for their own abortions.
Doctors what don’t want to perform abortions can go work somewheres else … they’re not a protected class… if you get fired cause of you don’t want to kill a little baby fetus it’s just like if your boss fires you cause you smoke marijuanas.
– If you were planning Mayhem by cupcake it wouldn’t do any good. The resident staunchy pekachu would have them all eaten by the time the rest of us got off the plane.
You know something hf? That just might be the most idiotic thing you’ve ever posted here.
I am on restriction Mr. Hunter. Tonight I have to make the pepperoni brown rice salad for lunch at work tomorrow.
no it’s not Mr. Spiny at will employment is a cherished American free enterprise tradition
– Of course ‘feets. Only you could torture the ‘ole logic sequence into equating smoking pot with killing a child. Disgusting.
You’re not making it any better, hf. Seriously.
It’s harder to make fun of someone when they have a little yellow anime critter. It feels like child abuse.
no Mr. Spiny Darleen was adamant it was ok to fire people for smoking weed at home even if they don’t smoke it at work or come impaired to work – go read that thread I linked. Same with tobacco or alcohol. So if you want to make christers a protected class then we have to make muslims a protected class and potheads a protected class and so on. It’s like you have a slope right and it’s a very sturdy little slope and you put a pot of geraniums on it but then one day it sleets and what happens to the slope?
It gets slippery!
I’m not sure about what happens to the geraniums.
My God, the Redskins suck.
tsa screener material
I guess that was a bad example with the muslims cause religion is for the most part protected already so strike that one.
What the fuck is in those cupcakes!?!?
but the point is in America if you have a moral objection to your job you go get a new job it’s very simple
but none of that moral objection stuff was what the election was about, as the letter Jeff links articulates very well
– Child abuse comes in many flavors, Arbitrarily denying a child its entire life is probably as abusive as it gets. Being so insistently pro such an act is just obscene.
– Any decent thinking person would agree that abortion should be legal, safe, and rare.
unborn baby = marijuana joint
Yep, that’s some staunch conservatism right there.
gay marrigage = killing cells or sumthing
it’s at-will employment Mr. LaRoche! the principle is we don’t want the government telling us who we have to hire
That’s what we folks in the Party of Tea biz like to call a “small government” issue.
– So we need to have midnight practice sessions for HS football teams, to avoid conflict with Ramadan, but if a Doctor chooses not to perform certain surgical procedure’s, he has to pick up his pink slip.
– Gotta love “pro-choice”, it’s soooo selective,
From newrouter’s link at #64:
That is absolutely correct. Conservatives/classical liberals have no chance in hell of affecting any meaningful political change if SoCons are not part of the equation.
I don’t see what’s selective there Mr. Hunter… the federal government didn’t mandate the midnight muslim football – that was a decision made at the local level.
I went with the Clockwork Orange avatar for now.
I’m seriously thinking about calling in to Dancing w/t Stars and voting for Bristol Palin, just for the angst it will cause.
“but the point is in America if you have a moral objection to your job you go get a new job it’s very simple”
Happyfeet,
Have you read the hippocratic oath?
“If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God”
Mr. LaRoche the key part I thought was this:
“This election was not a mandate for the Republican Party, nor was it a mandate to act on any social issue.“
I think that resonates with a lot of people what are concerned foremost about the ungodly spendings.
That was a choice made by the coaches, not any kind of edict. Not that I have interest in aiding the dumb stump in his standard monosyllabic argument.
I do not understand Mr. Danger if I own a hospital and I need a doctor for to abort the wee baby fetuses and I hire somebody to help with that and then they decide they don’t wanna do the job I hired them for, why should I have to employ them?
I shouldn’t. They’re free to go get a job what they feel good about.
This is interesting(speaking of being vigilant). I think you would be wise to be more worried about these types, than limited government Constitution loving social con types.
Well it certainly was not a mandate to roll over for RINOs and others who would merely prefer to lose more slowly, whether against the ungodly spendings or the epidemic of inane political correctness that continues to plague the nation.
I could use a little Ludwig Van to accompany the mood I’m in right now.
– ‘feets, if you had an ounce of consistancy you’d be fighting for the Doctors peace of mind, not making excuses for people that hold life in such low esteem, and here I’m talking the breed of political animal that thinks baby’s are an insult to their freedom.
Don’t know why our host hasn’t gotten down with the avatar thingy
The hard-shelled marsupial is quite litigious about his image.
you won’t be “running” a hospital. you be “administrating it” for obamacare
babies rock! I heard Baby A on the phone today – he’s over 9 pounds and he’s very vocal about it. He just started on half formula half breast milk and NG says he goes into food comas now – she guesses the breast milk thing just stopped doing the trick.
Food comas are a very very welcome development in Baby A land.
– I used the HS example more to show how far we bend over backwards to accommodate religious sensitivities, but an unborn baby, just another potential mouth to feed.
– And ‘feets, Doctors are generally not hired specifically to do abortions, but interesting you view their duties in that very narrow way.
oh. Well whoever gets hired to do the abortions should either get with the program or quit.
Nobody likes a whiner.
On the other hand, after the insouciant flippancy of this:
Why worry about consistency, or rhetoric, or style or anything else that goes into reasoned argument?
Looks like Jeff has opted to refer to a certain mechanically enhanced citrus fruit.
I went with the Clockwork Orange avatar for now.
I’m glad you found the suggestion apropos. I’ve only seen that movie once. I hated it. I still do, but for entirely different reasons.
Off to watch my man Rick try to charm his way into Beckett’s pants. Rick gives us hope for a change.
that’s true. no gov’t money for abortion. let ’em raise it from cheap ass proggs.
no gov’t money for abortion
not now not ever
No, Ernst, BBH, and others. ‘feets is right this time.
If you are responsible for running a hospital, on whatever terms, you get to decide which medical services that hospital will offer — for instance, you might decide that an MRI machine is too expensive, so you won’t offer that sort of diagnostic imaging. Having decided which services to offer, you then hire people to actually provide those services; if they won’t offer to provide those services you don’t have to hire them, and if you insist that those services will be provided and they don’t care to do that they can look for employment elsewhere, perhaps across town at the hospital that doesn’t do that.
It’s the same for any business. If you run a circus, and somebody comes along who has moral, ethical, or religious objections to driving tent stakes in the ground, you aren’t obligated to hire him or her. Perhaps that individual would be better off as an elevator operator :-) And if it’s time to put up the tent, and your employee refuses to drive tent stakes, it is entirely appropriate to tell him to seek employment elsewhere.
If the hospital offers the full range of “reproductive health” services, including in vitro fertilization, egg transplantation, abortion, and the rest of the menu, a doctor with moral, ethical, and/or religious objections to any or all of those practices shouldn’t be working there in the first place. The hospital offers employment, with certain requirements and restrictions; the doctor offers his or her services, again with requirements and restrictions; if the two parties agree they have a contract. If either’s set of requirements and restrictions changes, the contract is broken and a new one must be negotiated, whatever the content of the changes may be.
And lost in all that is the main point, which is if the Government doesn’t own the hospital and can’t afford goons to enforce compliance, the issue is one of the consciences of the participants and the contracts they make with one another. Money always comes with strings, and however gossamer the strings may appear, when tested they are perfectly adequate material to make orbital elevators out of. No money, no strings. Get rid of the money, and most of the problems that concern you either go away or become soluble.
Regards,
Ric
– If you’re going to opt for a Clockwork Avatar, then you’ll need the requisite cod piece, matching plumbing pipe walking stick, and a skull with a rubber snake adorning your computer desk.
hah thanks Mr. ric… maybe I should get a stopped clockwork orange avatar
– Sorry Ric. Can’t agree on this one. What you put forth is, of course, generally true, but refusing to take a human life is not just an arbitrary consideration based on whim.
– And because it concerns at a much deeper level than simple preferences or whims, it deserves a special consideration as well. As pointed out the oath a Doctor takes literally forbids the capricious taking of a life, unless it meets certain conditions; ie. saving another life in the process, etc.
– I would imagine in practice Doctors are given a chance to decide at the time of hire, and not asked to take part in such proceedures if they object on a narrow set of grounds.
Part of the problem here is that people are talking about different things. Perfectly correct for a hospital to require an abortionist to actually do abortions, but a private doctor (ob/gyn) should not be mandated to perform the procedure in his office just because he takes medicare payments for other services.
A pharmacist who owns his own pharmacy and is not a corporate employee of Rite Aid or whatever should have the right to not stock the morning after pill just because he takes payment for Part D.
You don’t go to an abortion clinic to deliver a baby and you don’t go to the doctor who has issues and doesn’t offer this “specialty” either. Just find another doctor. Some Gyns don’t even deliver babies, they only handle women’s issues up til the pregnancy is determined. Is the government going to start mandating what services must be provided by each doctor?
Ric, I think there is much concern over the freedom of choice act, and it’s repercussions.
The concern is that doctors(and/or hospitals) will be deprived of the choices you take for granted.
“Is the government going to start mandating what services must be provided by each doctor?”
– That, and worse, will be the unhappy result if ObamaCare, and it’s crazed unworkable rules, are followed to conclusion. Death panels anyone?
He’s right because his premise was moronic. The idea that a doctor should be required to perform abortions is an altogether different matter from whether a hospital is within its rights to fire someone who had a change of heart after taking a job where that was a condition of their employment.
well the point is… contrary to what our friend Darleen suggests at #66 this is not a game where you try to twist square social con issues to fit into round tea party holes…
this election wasn’t about abortion and it wasn’t about writing laws for to defend the traditional marriage… it was about the goddamn spendings
simple as that
you want a mandate for your silly social con worries and troubles you get on with your bad self and go get yourself one
We’ll keep dinner warm.
Ric,
Except that is NOT how he originally stated it:
He’s claiming that if someone won’t perform abortions, they should not become a doctor. He didn’t roll in the “hospital” goalposts until a half-hour later.
Exactly.
Happyfeet,
You miss a bigger point; Most social cons would be ok with the results of a libertarian social and fiscally conservative government. No money for a liberal social agenda = no liberal social agenda because people that want to live a suicidal lifestyle will not be enabled by taxpayer dollars. Social cons will support fund charitable efforts that encourage people to live healthy and purposeful lives. Eventually everyone will be a social con cus the liberal cons will die off.
So if a doctor is self employed, and doesn’t want to perform on-demand abortions, he should be forced to seek another line of employment?
Are you sure this is a rational opinion happyfeet?
I mean, that’s the same as telling an independant carpentar if he doesn’t feel like building tables, well, then he just better find a different profession.
nah the so called “right” is taking the country back from leftoid losers like crist, spector, demorats
It’s not your message so much as the moron delivering it, happyface.
the feds passing out money ain’t “charity” its effin’ vote buying
i like how the anti abortion people don’t need some gov’t pittance to vote
So if a doctor is self employed, and doesn’t want to perform on-demand abortions, he should be forced to seek another line of employment?
I never said that I promise promise promise
“I never said that I promise promise promise”
Slippery slopes and unintended consequences is how we got where we are today.
– I’m not mindlessly against abortions, I’m against mindless abortion drive through windows at WalMart.
I tried a comment in the chat, but it is somehow less than completely satisfying, as if it lacked the permanence and stability of a blog comment or a tweet. Plus there is only one other person in the chat.
I’m against paying for random 14 year old girls abortions cuz the parents don’t have a right to know about their daughters pregnancy.
and he’s off arguing somewhere else.
– I’m not against same sex marriage, I’m against church’s being told they can’t decide their own services and rituals.
– In other words, I’m for freedom of choice in all reasonable social enterprises and associations, and against all forms of governmental/judicial social interference and “engineering” except at times of natural disasters or threats from within or without.
Back on topic: a certain “pragmatic” blogger made a monumental jackass of himself at the RS McCain post.
Da-yam.
Obama’s hand in your crotch
Same sex marriage is an oxymoron.
#141 – Well yes, but they have the right to call what they do anything they want to. They do not have a right to force their idea’s on others that hold a different view of things.
I’m on board with that BBH.
I’ll be very clear here.
-I don’t want the government telling private doctors or privately owned hospitals that they must provide abortions or risk having to turn away all patients who have medcare/medicaid insurance. Just because the facility owners choose not to provide abortions shouldn’t mean they can’t provide dialysis for poor folks or geriatric care for old folks; or won’t get paid under existing medicare/medicaid mechanisms because they don’t offer all the “services” the government demands.
-I don’t want the government telling churches they “have” to perform same sex ceremonies if it’s against the tenets of that faith.
-I don’t want same sex coupling arrangements to be known marriage in the public space, because marriage has a meaning already, one associated with the traditional heterosexual pair bonding, one that has proved to be a successful procreation strategy among humans, for the last, oh, say, forever!
Call it whatever you want, but not marriage. To do so not only draws a false equivalence but dilutes language and meaning.
Societal affirmation of the gay lifestyle will come naturally over time and should not be superimposed by the government on society.
Some outlaw goodness in this survey among self-selected non-leftists
but still the point is mostly just that the Tea Party is not the vehicle for to express those concerns is all
My favorite tea party issue is the spendings.
– feet’s , just a guess, but I would think if there’s a commentor who’s been on PW for more than a few seconds, they are familiar with your positions.
– OTOH, some of us are actually capable of chewing gum and thinking at the same time.
hey the button doesn’t say say it anymore
“Societal affirmation of the gay lifestyle will come naturally over time ”
Doubt it Bob. Check out the Folsom street fair in San Fransisco and get back to me.
– Wll, could be that means there’s a “hoochie filter” in your future, or it could mean absolutely nothing at all.
All of the things you are complaining about are examples of “strings”.
The doctor is “employed” by Medicaid, that is, the Government pays doctors to do things. If the Government says one of those things is providing abortion, the doctor is obliged to comply or seek remuneration elsewhere.
Again: All money comes with strings. The only way to get rid of the strings is to get rid of the money.
And — well, I don’t usually do predictions. But you saw it here first: the tea party initiative will fail, because of the Revolt of the Social Cons. They will insist that they will by God preserve the ability to beat up on people for immoral behavior or take their support and go home; the American people will say, “Ah, that’ll be door #2,” Barry O. will sail to re-election with a new Congressional majority, and things will continue in that vein.
You saw it here first.
Regards,
Ric
Lee, there is no doubt that the Folsom street fair, and indeed large parts of San Francisco, ar about as close as one get’s to Sodom and Gomorrah in the modern world; made that way by a large but vocal and demonstrative minority.
But perhaps in-your-face demonstrations such as that would largely ebb as gays become more mainstream, i.e. less counterculture; I mean, there’s really no heterosexual equivalent to the Folsom street fair that I know of.
I know…I know…Burning man and some Biker rallies, but those are by definition counterculture.
The United States is interesting on account of having been founded upon enlightenment precepts. Given the bivalent FOL that forms the epistemic basis of that kind of thinking, I would say, loudly, that attempting to conflate moral or ethical concerns into such a system is dangerous in the extreme. Hayak spoke of this very thing.
For me the most fundamental issue is the knowledge problem. We humans are constitutionally incapable of adducing the truth value of synthetic propositions a priori (or call them what you want.) Universals are a problem that we are, by our finite nature, incapable of addressing – at least given our current epistemic paradigm. In other words, we don’t know why we’re here and anyone who says otherwise is incapable of proving it empirically. For that reason, I’m tolerant and appreciative of good faith attempts to address this metaphysical problem. Catholic theology? I dig. Protestant of some stripe? Cool. Sacred Order of the Golden Dawn? I’m down. Jainism? We’re good. Atheist? Alright.
For that reason, I wish you were more circumspect regarding the characterizing of the Christians, happyfeet. When it comes to things beyond the scope of empiricism, it’s all turtles, so why the hostility? Darleen, for example, is a kind and good person. She’s a lot sanctimonious from time to time, but hardly an offense worthy of your constant snark I don’t think.
That said, I think feets is generally correct here. Government is no place for religion. Least ways it’s not if you don’t want bad shit to go down. The 20th century is an object lesson that mixing top-down enlightenment systems with someone’s sense of righteousness always ends badly. I’ll happily make common cause with Christians on politics; I have a great love for Christianity. But I’ll fight your fiat theological legal prescriptions forever. And I’ll do it with perspicacity and eloquence, because those are not the domain of faith.
The most profound moral prescriptions are the ones that don’t need to be advanced because they are evolutionarily developed. We don’t murder one another and it’s illegal to do so, not because of some theological prescription, but rather because civilizations that permit murder cannot thrive. Hayek Hayek Hayek! The fatal conceit applies not only to progs, but to anyone who would seek to impose their moral and ethical prescriptions through the apparatus of top-down government.
“but still the point is mostly just that the Tea Party is not the vehicle for to express those concerns is all”
You are right hf, but if you ever actually went to a TEA Party, you would find most of the people there are of the type that have those concerns. Keep telling them to shut up about what they are already keeping quiet about in favor of the spendings seems to be provocation, not help.
Lead by example why don’t you?
Mr. mal I think there’s a big big difference between Christians which I am one and they are cool beans I think and good Americans besides, and christers, who are tetched and see Ric’s 150
malaclypse the tertiary,
The schoolyard taunts, with #154 as an example, generate more attention, so it ain’t gonna happen.
Between this:
and this:
I was about ready to consider myself read out of the tea party movement and go make common cause with the Buchananites or some other paleo-con group, and I don’t consider myself all that socially conservative as a practical political matter.
But then I remembered the pickachu doesn’t speak for the tea-party anymore than does the Palin. And as much as he’d like to make this about him and his
prioritiespenchant for making the perfect the enemy of the good, it’s not. Everyone more or less agrees that the spending is the primary concern, even though they may disagree about why it takes primacy (more on that in a second), or believe that their are other concerns of almost as much importance. But because the fiscal problem isn’t the only concern that I and others have, you’d just as soon not have us in the game. Well then, fine. But don’t expect to get very far with most of us, lacking your pious fidelity to the single issue of your choice, sitting on the sidelines.You know, I wish you would just grow the fuck up. Or allow this pikachu provacateur you like to play to grow the fuck up. Because when you deign to be serious, you have some interesting insights, and the pikachu has about used up all the good faith it’s likely to be granted.
Maybe Ric.
I rarely disagree with you, but this will be one instance.
We would all agree that medicare/medicaid should be abolished. But even if starting tomorrow no new registrants were allowed for either, there would be a legion of folks that would remain on those rolls for at least the next 30 years. Doctor’s oaths require them to help the sick, that’s part of the reason hospitals are in financial problem in large cities; especially in the most bleak combat-zone neighborhoods where Catholic charity hospitals are often found. Between the charitable contributions and the medicare/medicaid payments these hospitals are able to minister to the poor who need their services just as well as in middle class areas. Without the medicare/medicaid money these hospitals would have close their doors and these folks would go without treatment. The public health problems would be unspeakable.
All I’m saying really is that it should not be an all or nothing proposal. If a hospital chooses not to provide abortions, or any other elective procedures, they shouldn’t go unpaid for providing otherwise covered necessary services.
Yes, these programs should be eliminated, a la Paul Ryan’s plan in Roadmap, but not at the expense of causing risk to others by a public health problem. And as long as they are in effect should either not penalize institutions that choose not to provide elective procedures or should simply not fund abortion at all.
Put me to some knowledge here, please, Mal. What do you mean by referring to enlightenment precepts as bivalent first-order logic?
I’m taking this to mean that the light of the enlightenment is Truth and that creates a system of True/False which is then hard to apply to non-True/False sorts of statements. Seems to make sense in context but I’m not entirely sure that I grok you.
(Always enjoy your comments.)
When I was a kid and our family would be traveling somewhere in the car, I used to occasionally lean over and whisper things to my little sister. Stuff like, “You suck,” “You’re smelly,” “You’re a fart-face,” and so on in that fashion. When I’d do that, my sister – not having been born with an internal volume slider – would absolutely lose her shit and start yelling at me, throwing things, etc. And she’d get in serious trouble every time.
From what I’ve gathered watching the Jeff-Pat thing unfold over the years (has it really been years now? Damn) it seems like Jeff is me and Pat is my sister. Only Jeff is way more in Pat’s head than I ever was in my sister’s. And I don’t think it’s possible for Pat to develop an internal brake on his OCD bouts of batshittiness like my sis eventually did.
Because good Scotch is sooooooooooo good.
+1
And the spendings aren’t “the problem” albeit they are the problem of the moment. The real problem is the size and scope of government and the relationship between that government and the citizenry of our republic. The gov’t could cost half as much as it does (like it did not all that long ago) and it would still be too damn big. That Time of Choosing/Rendezvous With Destiny speech of Ronald Reagan’s that newrouter likes to remind us all of is actually rather quaint, if you consider all the shit that government was doing in ’64 that was encroaching on our liberty hat we barely notice anymore.
On the other hand, Obama could start shitting gold and pissing oil, and we still wouldn’t be able to afford all the programs that we would desire.
This is triage. We’re bleeding money to death. But after we’re done stabilizing the patient, we’re going to find that our body politic is rife with tumours. You and I are going to disagree over which are malignant and which are benign. But if we succeed in stabilizing the patient, we’ll be able to consult and decide on the best course of treatment instead of having the berobed “death panelists” in the judiciary ignoring our opinions and telling us what the prescribed course of treatment is going to be.
It’s very hard to take you seriously without an avatar, Ernst.
You explained it in a manner consistent with what I was intending to communicate, bh. Godel and all that. It’s like the climate models – crap in, crap out. Enlightenment systems simply do what they’re programmed to do. They’re not moral systems. Morality is a human thing. Any system capable of addressing morality would likely need to be just as confused about metaphysics as we are in order to do so. I think this also explains Pat Frey’s behavior incidentally; he seems to have conflated ethics/morality with legality – two domains that have little overlap in their venn diagram.
“But you saw it here first: the tea party initiative will fail, because of the Revolt of the Social Cons. They will insist that they will by God preserve the ability to beat up on people for immoral behavior or take their support and go home”
Actually Ric, if the social cons go home, it will be because people like you and hf made them into enemies of the movement they started.
Careful of those self-fulfilling prophecy thingers…
But it won’t be a case of cutting off their noses to spite their faces eh?
Gotcha. Thanks, mal.
I don’t believe so. If SoCons are explicitly told their presence is not wanted, and they subsequently depart the scene, how is that being spiteful?
For example, say I am in a bar and the proprietor says I am no longer welcome and asks me to leave, and I then do so. Have I behaved spitefully by doing as he asked?
But it won’t be a case of cutting off their noses to spite their faces eh?
If the face is rotten with leprosy (I’m not saying it is, yet) what the hell does it matter?
You and I may disagree as to our particulars for believing that the country is worth saving, but we both agree that it’s worth saving. But if you loudly and repeatedly insist that your reason for saving the country is the only reason and that reason seems to me to be at best a prolongation of the suffering, losing more slowly as it were, then I’m not particularly motivated to help you, am I.
The reverse of course is also true.
hypothetically speaking.
“…of the movement they started.”
If this is true, it must have been the case that a hierarchy of needs was seen to require the movement. Or am I wrong about that? If the need to see to the apparent concerns of the Tea Parties outweighs the need to see to the distinct concerns of the social conservatives, then quitting the now needful movement would be counterproductive of the purposes for which it was created. Is the way I’d read that situation.
We’ve spoken of this before but isn’t the practical answer to this tension between competing goals/priorities purely methodological?
No one agrees on all of this stuff. So, we create some algorithms to follow, some processes to conform to that we all agree are fair beforehand. Then we follow them.
We don’t need to go hammer and tong on some of these issues because the real answer isn’t any particular outcome, it’s the collective agreement on how we’ll reach that outcome.
Mr. Feets, I won’t deny that I have encountered a good deal of rhetoric from those you might call “christers” that run along the lines of, “how could you believe in limited government and not be a Christian?!?” When I try to explain that I love Christianity and think it’s important, but I’m just not one, and that really those things are not mutually required, they say things like, “oh you’ll come around to Jesus.” They’re the same ones that generally have no compunction about jailing pot smokers without a lick of psycho-pharmicological knowledge, because they simply know in their hearts that it’s wrong. They have their scary anecdotes, so don’t trifle them with neurochemistry or personal liberty.
So yeah, that’s annoying and condescending, but it’s also philosophically consistent for them. I don’t think tetched is particularly enlightened way to describe that. You might like Ken Wilber if you don’t already know him. He points out that people and cultures are where they are. He says the integral state is where you have internalized that into your perception of others’ actions.
But maybe I’m missing something. Are you specifically referring to Darleen or someone else? Is there an antecedent story behind the imputation of crazy to a whole group of people?
And for what it’s worth, I sincerely appreciate the happyfeet character. I’m glad you’re here.
I’m not malaclypse, and I’m not easy with that terminology, but the problem can be approached from Jeff’s point of view, which we’ve all become familiar with, and which I now see as congruent, if not identical, to some of my theological bedrock. (I started as a Southern Baptist, by the way, as I suspect happyfeet did.)
You cannot prevent people from sinning. Not if you bound them hand and foot on a slab.
Intent is what makes it communication. What I insist on calling, in communications-theory terms, encoding is a mechanical process that’s necessary because we live in a physical world that requires intent to be made manifest before it becomes useful.
In exactly the same way, intent makes the sin — the working out of the physical act is merely a way of making it manifest. Once the person has intended to sin, the sin has occurred. Human beings need to see the physical, manifest act; God, not being bound by physicality, does not.
The Enlightenment makes this distinction between physical act and philosophical/theological basis, and concludes that the only thing the material world can work on is the manifestations, which are judged not on whether or not the intent of their author(s) fails to meet some ultimately immaterial standard, but only on whether or not they somehow affect the material society.
Communication is a matter among people; sin is a matter between soul and God. In that analogy, we are not the “receiver” and therefore need not concern ourselves with the intent of the sinner, only with the manifestation of the sin. That we can control, and it is all we should worry about.
Where I take it further than my Southern Baptist teachers would have is that, in my view, attempting to prevent sin is itself a sin. Trying to control people according to their goodness or badness relative to theological precept is claiming the power of God to distinguish and punish sin, which is hubris at best. The only thing we can do is to judge the effects of acts on the material world, and attempt to control (or not) on that basis.
Regards,
Ric
The car, let’s say, has (at least) two simultaneous problematic conditions. One problematic condition is that the engine doesn’t run. The other problematic condition is that the body wants a paint job and is in process of rusting away. So, do we fix the engine so the thing can do something other than sit in the front yard looking rusty? Or do we ignore the engine and get right to work with the sanding and chipping?
It’s very hard to take you seriously without an avatar, Ernst.
Gravatar hates my build of Safari. The crop box won’t load when I upload an image, so I can’t “crop and finish” or whatever it is I’m suppposed to do. And since I’m a dial-up dinosaur, there’s no way I’m fucking around with download firexfox.
The sad truth is that I’m an empty hollow shell of a man, so the cutout is weirdly appropriate.
But if you must have a notion of how I’d like to portray myself, here you go That hat and cigar is all me, although I prefer my scotch in a highball glass. And my jacket is way more rumpled than that.
If I ever figure out how to make Gravatar bend to my will, that’ll be it.
@LBascom: Actually, I think Martin Luther started this movement. Y’know, sola scriptura and all. He didn’t need the intercession of a priesthood to administer his relationship with God. I like that. I think we don’t need a priesthood of bureaucrats to administer our relationship with morality either.
Thank you Mr. mal…
hmm. I’m not referring to Darleen really except for the idea she put forth that Tea Party issues can be stretched in a way that foregrounds social con concerns. Beyond that all I’ll say about Darleen is I think she panders overmuch to a sensibility what is not particularly Tea Party.
Maybe tetched is unhelpful. It’s more basic than that, how I see it.
Most christianities find expressions what are consonant with classical liberalism, but some don’t.
The christianity what isn’t compatible with classical liberalism too often hides behind the skirts of the christianities what are I think.
We should want people to declare themselves. Isn’t that what’s central to the whole O’Donnell/Castle yimmer yammer.
Sorry if I can’t be more articulate I took my sleeping pills at 8.
THIS!
Cutting off noses and spiting faces cuts both ways; and should be avoided at all costs.
Look, it’s easy for folks to get their dander up with happyfeet doin his to-hell-with-the-christer-jesustard-cumslut-hoochie-the-hell-with-the-fetuses-let’s-all-give-big-smoochy-hugs-to-the-absolue-moral-authority-of-the-gay-marriage-advocates routine, or Ric recall the bitter battles with the sanctimonious moral majority types, many of whom did want to impose a system of morality on others via legal means, in the years after Reagan’s term via his dire predictions of Obama 2.0…
Folks don’t always responds well to what might be percieved as taunts or challenges.
But let’s get a grip folks. Let’s all work together to reduce the size of and reach goverment, cut spending drastically, adopt a fair flat tax system that will encourge prosperity (NO VAT!), and put judges on the SCOTUS that will actually enforce the Constitution instead of making it up as they go because of “emanating penumbras”…
And once state’s rights have regained their proper equalibrium in the Federalism-States rights tensor, we can move to states where they live the way we approve of, or, you know, can go at each other’s throats then. When we are out of existential danger…
yimmer yammer should have one of these ? thingers after it instead of one of these . thingers
I’m really wiped
mal, let’s you, me, and Jeff start a sect. You and Jeff can write sermons, and I’ll translate them into Hell and brimstone.
I’ll just add that I would like to at least briefly visit the time line upon which Robert Heinlein had the moral and physical courage to actually write The Sound of His Wings; think of it as the anti-Stranger. It would make it easier to see the essential identity of The Handmaid’s Tale and If This Goes On–, which are the same story from different viewpoints.
And with that I must seek my couch. G’night, all.
Regards,
Ric
Sounds like a plan for misbehavin’ to me.
Ahh, the old all the world’s a nail when you only have a hammer problem.
Ric,
Having been a geek most of my life, I’ve concentrated more on facts than fiction in my reading; although I’ve read what many consider “classics”. I’m completely unfamiliar with this Heinlein writer that you and others often refer to, something I may have to remedy in time.
And I meant you no offense earlier when including your prediction among things that may upset some folks. I just thought that characterizing most social-cons as spoiled children that would take their votes and go home if not appeased, and in doing so directly facilitate Obama II, was out of place and more reminiscent of the moral majority hair-pulling contests that occurred in the late 80’s and 90’s; which may well have been a factor in Clinton’s re-election.
As I hope you’re aware, I hold you and your wise opinions in very high esteem. But I have a more optimistic outlook for the social-cons and fiscal-cons getting the essential things done before divisive infighting starts.
And with that final quanta of “yimmer-yammer”, I’ll bid all here (Ernst?) a good night. it’s 0143 eastern, and I have an 0630 curtain call.
All the best
“If this is true, it must have been the case that a hierarchy of needs was seen to require the movement. ”
Absolutely. I’ll even say unequivocally that the T-Movement is exclusively about fiscal issues.
Also, I think the T-Movement has stayed remarkably focused on the fiscal issues of debt and taxes, despite the constant mocking from everyone not TEA Party. They are racists and dangerous to the left, chister bullies to the libertarian dopes, dull and unserious to the Republican blue bloods. Everyone trying to distract and label.
Tough to do to a loose confederation of local groups spread across the land though.
If you feel the need to isolate the social cons, you are the one nose cutting.
– I too agree the T movement is a sociatal response to what the body America perceives as an existential threat. The movement has proven durable thus far to every manner of “distraction” and attack. It confuses those that have every reason to fear it.
– The unified power that runs through it will either prevail, or it will not. Maybe I’m more optimistic than Ric, but just as I believe there’s a very real uniqueness to America, I believe it will.
– Night too all.
“Trying to control people according to their goodness or badness relative to theological precept is claiming the power of God to distinguish and punish sin, which is hubris at best. The only thing we can do is to judge the effects of acts on the material world, and attempt to control (or not) on that basis.”
This begs the question, who gave you the moral authority to amend the Laws of Nature?
Thus far the material world has amended the meaning of fetus as either ‘She has to the right to choose whether a fetus is life or a clump of cells depending upon whether She wants her pre-natal government care or Her abortion care’
Further; there is no such thing as a ‘union between yin and yin’ nature exist in the yin and the yang, sperm and egg; make-female (there is no other way the Laws of Nature can function) Amending the Laws of Nature in order to insist that yin-yin or yang-yang is equally exists in the Natural Law of yin-yang is a judgement which cannot be sustained by reason. To sustain such judgement as yin-yin is equal to yin-yang requires Laws of Man to dictate power over the Laws of Nature; in the material world this is how tyranny is created.
By the by; how are civil liberties being violated when heterosexuals are not allowed to marry another of the same-sex while homosexuals are allowed to enter a contract of marriage with members of the opposite sex?
When I try to explain that I love Christianity and think it’s important, but I’m just not one, and that really those things are not mutually required, they say things like, “oh you’ll come around to Jesus.” They’re the same ones that generally have no compunction about jailing pot smokers without a lick of psycho-pharmicological knowledge, because they simply know in their hearts that it’s wrong. They have their scary anecdotes, so don’t trifle them with neurochemistry or personal liberty.
I tell you – I grew up in an area where religion meant – usually – Catholic. There were a few other churches, but not many.
I’m out in the country now, and Christians are of a completely different temperament out here. It’s a bit off-putting to me. Catholics don’t often respond to life’s quandries with “Well, Jesus has a plan”.
What I’m saying, is some Christians (and by that, I mean Christian religions) are more inclusive of their religion into every aspect of their life. Some aren’t. I’m not really one to tell a grocery clerk “God Bless”.
Some Gyns don’t even deliver babies, they only handle women’s issues up til the pregnancy is determined. Is the government going to start mandating what services must be provided by each doctor?
And some specialize in fertility issues.
But, apparently abortion is the sacrosanct procedure that must be performed by all OB/GYNs.
“Catholics don’t often respond to life’s quandries with “Well, Jesus has a plan”.
From the information gathered by listening to Catholics, I am told by Catholics that their Church discourages Catholics to not read the bible therefore if Catholics do not read the bible then how would they know Jesus’s plan?
Sounds like some Catholics lied to you, Susan.
Darleen was adamant it was ok to fire people for smoking weed at home even if they don’t smoke it at work
Jaysus on Pony and I was watching my grandsons last night and here is griefer slandering me again. I point out the law and how the court has ruled and somehow that makes me an advocate even as I have on many occasions said the law is an ass.
Griefer is sure staunchie with that wanting to have the government mandate how each individual MUST conduct his or her career. — Doctors and Nurses MUST perform abortions. Vegetarian chefs MUST serve 100% angus beef burgers.
hf, you again prove you’re a fraud.
What Catholics would those be? And how does this discouragement happen? Are priests breaking into houses at night and absconding with NAB’s (which the US Conference of Catholic Bishops has been oddly publishing since 1970)? Are secret bible study groups broken up by Jesuit commandos in fetching purple jumpsuits?
Seriously, what Catholics told you that we’re not supposed to read Scripture? I like navigating to the source of old sterotypes.
Ric
Murder is an immoral behavior. Theft is an immoral behavior. Again, there is no bright, wide line between what “social issues” of morality and fiscal/legal stuff. Limited government arguments are as much about “How do we legally handle pharmaceuticals” as it does “How do we legally handle public creche displays?”
If a government is to ignore what choices an individual is to make concerning what drugs s/he ingests, then is it to ignore what choices an individual makes in his/her own vocation? Or if a local group wants to put a Christmas tree on the lawn of City hall?
And forcing doctors to perform abortions isn’t limited to just medicare or government money.
There has been a lot of talk about forcing medical schools to require doctors to learn abortions because of women’s “rights”.
There is a natural affinity between social cons and fiscal cons because they both believe in LIMITED government. The fiscal cons who believe in government enforced morality should examine their own premises before sneering at the social cons.
From the information gathered by listening to Catholics, I am told by Catholics that their Church discourages Catholics to not read the bible therefore if Catholics do not read the bible then how would they know Jesus’s plan?
Dang. Don’t tell my priest. I may get kicked out of the club.
[wonders to self what they do at the weekly bible reading group at church]
Sounds like some Catholics lied to you, Susan.
Of course, I’m sure they went to confession afterwards.
So it’s cool.
Lee, there is no doubt that the Folsom street fair, and indeed large parts of San Francisco, ar about as close as one get’s to Sodom and Gomorrah in the modern world; made that way by a large but vocal and demonstrative minority.
But perhaps in-your-face demonstrations such as that would largely ebb as gays become more mainstream, i.e. less counterculture; I mean, there’s really no heterosexual equivalent to the Folsom street fair that I know of.
Bob, I don’t think so — and I’ll make a provocative statement here, it is because Folsom represents unrestrained male sexuality.
I would hope that’s not the way they say it.
Susan,
I’m about as Catholic as they come; rosary sayin’, daily Mass atendee, outreachin’ to the needy, ministerin’ to adult converts-the full MaGilla. Trust me when I say we read the bible; some more than others, to be sure, but it is in no way discouraged, especially by the USCCB. In fact, as Carin alluded to, most congregations have bible study groups like Protestant Churches do.
Like the poor, the counter-culture you shall always have with you. What was counter-culture in the ’60s has become mainstream today, yet still the in-your-face demonstrations continue.
It’s a mistake to think the Overton window is infinitely elastic.
Vegetarian chefs MUST serve 100% angus beef burgers.
Scottish Highlander beef is better!
Uh-oh. That seems a bit top-down for the Tea Party. There’s enough problems with some new Senators seemingly ‘not getting the message‘. I’ll bet we lose half the Tea Partyers we elect to Washington’s aura, as happened after 1994 with Gingrich and crew.
‘feets, if you’d just lose three words from your vocabulary, I’d mentally restore you to a better place than you’ve come to inhabit. And send you a nice cupcake.
You make a good point about the Folsom street fair Darleen; perhaps it is more about unrestrained male sexuality than a demonstrative event intentionally meant to be shocking and provacative.
Kind of, “we’re here, we’re queer, and you can’t do anything about it”.
I alsways looked at it as a microcosm of the forced acceptance of that lifestyle choice, and the notion of it’s equivalence with heterosexual pair bonding, upon society.
But I may have ben overthinking things, it could just be all about the release.
A very good point McGeehee,
Although I also think that like the Folsom festival, many demonstrations more formally organized than in the 60’s.
Carin,
Heh. Yes, it can be offputting. Just remember that, however odd you may see them, those people genuinely wish you well. Around here we’re starting to see something called “The Cowboy Church”, whose theology I haven’t investigated but which is primarily a reaction to perceived elitism. Their parting greeting is “Have a blessed day!” without any specification of just what or who might deliver such a blessing.
#187 Susan — There is a difference between motals and ethics, and the larger and more complex the society the more vital that distinction becomes; our society is big and complex enough to make it paramount. Morals are the integrity of the individual, and (for believers) the individual’s relationship with God; ethics are derived from right structuring of the society.
Push people hard enough, and they will react. The measures you decry are reactions to attempts to impress moral standards upon an ethical system that won’t accommodate them. Homosexual behavior is sinful and therefore immoral. In a small, resource-limited society it is also unethical, and therefore punishable by mundane authority; in our larger society such punishment has no ethical basis — in Jefferson’s memorable formulation, it neither picks pockets nor breaks legs — and the society (if it is to survive) will move to counteract it.
The counter-movements very often result in overreactions, especially in cases where the confusion between morals and ethics is one of long standing and the enforcers of morality have their hands on the levers of power. Forces to correct the ethical error grow until they break through the opposition, then inevitably overshoot their goal. That overshoot inevitably leads to behavior that is both immoral and unethical, and that’s the case here. What I call the “bathhouse culture” is both immoral and unethical; it is an overreaction resulting from the release of unethical behavior constraints.
One of the things we are obliged to do as Christians is to avoid tempting others to their souls’ destruction. Placing unethical demands upon people, so that they overreact into deep sin when the pressure is released, is just such a temptation. This is one of the reasons Christ made the sharp distinction between what is Caesar’s and what is God’s, and the reason He healed the centurion’s slave but did not enlist the officer (and the swords at his command) to punish sinners. Paul tells us, in effect, that rulers oppress with the permission of God, and people often assume that this is a blank check for unethical and immoral behavior on the part of the ruler — and, since the “ruler” in a democracy is the People, that whatever the People vote for is approved by the Lord. Beware. Paul was admonishing Christians, not advising their rulers, and nowhere does he say that the ruler won’t end up in the Pit for his sins.
Regards,
Ric
Heh. Yes, it can be offputting. Just remember that, however odd you may see them, those people genuinely wish you well. Around here we’re starting to see something called “The Cowboy Church”, whose theology I haven’t investigated but which is primarily a reaction to perceived elitism. Their parting greeting is “Have a blessed day!” without any specification of just what or who might deliver such a blessing.
Oh sure. I know.
I’m currently reading a book entitled “A Renegade’s Guide to God – Finding Life Outside Conventional Christianity” by one David Foster. From the start, this concept is appealing to me. Chapter 2 entitled: “Jesus is cool, but Christians creep me out”, with this quote from Mohandas Gandhi: “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” There’s so much truth in that, it hurts.
I’m so in agreement with Mr. Foster, being a terribly backslid Church of Christer. But you’ll note, ‘feets, that I’ve never slagged any religion (I call that Islam is not a religion but more a warrior’s code written by a warrior for the purpose of taking a large region of sand and rock at the tip of a sword) because, for one, I have respect for believers. And overt atheists are dead wrong. Just look around you; life is purposeful for some reason.
I like Robert Anton Wilson’s formulation:
Ric,
What is the bathouse culture you mention? Is it the LBGT subculture?
I thought your discussion of morality and ethics eas concise and well presented. I have often personally wondered why so many self-identified Christians would seek to impose morality via legislation, when Christ never sought to do so during his time on Earth; there seems to be some disconnect between the accepted notion of individual free will, especially when it comes to accepting and embracing belief in God and Christian morality.
Oh, and the cheerful, “have a blessed day!”, construct is familiar to me from my time in Prince Georges county Maryland, where it was a usual and customary expression among the God-fearing, devout Baptist, black women that were a majority in that area.
The problem with that is, if Christians were all like Christ, they need not continue to aspire to be like Him, and could thus dispense with Christianity altogether.
The point of religion is not to be perfect, but to have something perfect to model oneself after. If Christians do a poor job of it, it just so happens they’re the ones who need the religion most. Mr. Gandhi could have been more understanding of those less perfect than he.
Also, and OT: is anyone else finding that they have to log in again every day? I got logged out by WP sometime within 45 minutes of posting one of my earlier comments in this thread.
Amen, Brother McGehee. Everyone is so unlike Christ. Otherwise, what was the point of Christ?
From the information gathered by listening to Catholics, I am told by Catholics that their Church discourages Catholics to not read the bible therefore if Catholics do not read the bible then how would they know Jesus’s plan?
We can read the Bible, but it’s chained to the altar. We worship a Goddess, graven images, and eat the “Death Cookie”. The Jesuits started the American Civil War. We have tails too.
All snark aside, That’s good old-fashioned anti-Catholic propaganda. I hear it all of the time out here in the sticks. It’s offensive and untrue and makes you sound well, not super smart. I think, if you ever took the time to look into it, you’d notice that there’s not a huge difference between whatever it is you believe and what Catholics are supposed to believe. That includes, by the way, that grown men diddling little kids is a bad thing.
From what I’ve seen, “cowboy church” is a style of worship more than a theology. I’ve traced the roots of various cowboy churches to different denominations, though all are Protestant and none of which were what might be called “mainline.”
McGehee – nope. I was unable to get a password, and Jeff had to email it to me.
I wonder who else may have had a similar problem? The emails just simply never showed up (yes, I checked my spam) – and I must have tried it about five or six times. But Jeff looked and I was registered.
I haven’t seen JD. Anyone else missing?
I’m not real clear on the Hindu view, but maybe a Buddhist could have helped Gandhi understand.
Carin, I didn’t have trouble logging back in, it’s just that I had to log back in. I too needed intercession by The Goddess of the Protein Wisdom Website, a.k.a. Mrs. Jeff, in order to access my original login account, but my PC remembers everything now.
I just wish it didn’t have to remember so frequently, is all.
there’s really no heterosexual equivalent to the Folsom street fair that I know of.
Berlin’s love parade comes to mind, but on the scale of depravity/debasement, I suspect it lies closer to Mardi Gras than Folsom Street Fair.
There is a natural affinity between social cons and fiscal cons because they both believe in LIMITED government. The fiscal cons who believe in government enforced morality should examine their own premises before sneering at the social cons.
That’s more or less my position as well.
All snark aside, That’s good old-fashioned anti-Catholic propaganda. I hear it all of the time out here in the sticks. It’s offensive and untrue and makes you sound well, not super smart. I
I had a friend whose husband didn’t like her hanging we me and another mom (the other was a mormon). Apparently we weren’t real Christians. The mormon buddy would get a bit teary at the accusation, but I just thought it was funny.
My sil is down in TENN and has the balls to actually attend some of the evangelical bible study dealos (she teaches in a coop for some baptist church). She’s done a bit of educating regarding what Catholics believe.
McGee – I was just mentioning the problems I had in case anyone else had similar issues.
But nope. I’ve been logged in since yesterday.
Is it true about the tails and stuff?
McGehee
I haven’t had any problems with it arbitrarily logging me out, but I did have a similar problem to Carin; I had to use an email address I keep for business purposes to regoster, as I never got a response to the personal one I first tried to use.
I presume you checked the “remember me…” box on the log-in screen.
Is it true about the tails and stuff?
I don’t have a tail, but then I’m a convert.
JD was here a bit on Sunday, before registration, but I haven’t seen him here since.
Yup. My own site is WordPress-powered so it’s one of those automatic kind of things.
They removed mine after they found out I got married in a Methodist church.
I still get phantom itch on the barbed end.
Perhaps if you progress up through the ranks, Carin, you’ll be allowed one.
OT: Has anyone checked out the far left tab on the new toolbar? Someone is online in what looks like Sao Tome in the Gulf of Guinea. Howdy, Sao Tome!
Darleen I don’t understand your point. When we were talking about people what smoke marijuanas at home and don’t even come to work stoned you were all like this:
But for doctors you say they have a right to be impaired at work with their goofy fetus fetishes to where they can’t even perform their jobs and nobody can fire them?
You don’t make no sense and also you’re very confuzzled as to what Tea Party issues are. Your fetus dilemmas? They have nothing to do with the Tea Party.
Simple as that.
My better half’s family is Catholic, so I made the pilgrimage to a Catholic Church, once. Now, remember, a Church of Christ sort is one who thinks all other religions are highways to Hell and any change to, or addition added on, to the bible is blasphemy (I remember the classes we had on Catholics and Mormons and the how’s to convert ’em so’s they could be saved too). I looked for a bible on the seatback in front of me (we had those, along with an a cappella songbook, and nothing else). I could not find a bible.
I never went back.
There’s a reason why it’s called the Imitation of Christ and not the Replication, you know. Or did you really hope you could be the Living Son of God? [insert emoticon here ––not part of the Schreiber style guide]
Happyfeet, do you really want to try to defend the idea that chemical impairment by THC is the same as a doctor following his conscience?
I don’t think that’s the truth serr8d is talking about.
I suspect it’s more along the lines of the “I hammered those nails” variety.
Serr8d,
Did you say the secret word?
Mr. McGehee in the dicussion about pot we were talking about people who were *not* impaired at work, but smoke marijuanas on their own time and the employer finds out
the principle of at-will employment pertains to both that pothead and the doctors
you don’t have to employ people in their terms it’s your business and you can run it how you like
When I was growing up in a Catholic home, we didn’t depend on the church to provide us with a Bible; we had one at home. If we wanted to have it in church we were perfectly capable of bringing it along.
In fact, on at least one occasion the Catholic school I attended offered each student a brand new Bible to take home.
Who knows whether someone is impaired, better than the employer who needs to judge the quality of the work being done? Sure as hell not you.
But we don’t allow employers, as a general rule, to fire people for exercising their First Amendment rights, which is where following one’s conscience has a lot of very serious protections.
you don’t understand McGehee – the point is that whether they’re impaired or not they can be fired – they’re employed *at will*
just like the doctors
It might be the perception of Christians that’s the hangup. Foster…
There’s the business of saving souls, a thing that business doesn’t do very well. Outreach isn’t something you buy at Sam’s and spread with abandon. It’s best, one-on-one, or so I believe. Remember the 13 disciples? None of ’em owned suits.
nobody has to employ somebody whose first amendment rights fuck with their private business
those rights are about being protected from the government not from random hospital owners
Not if that proposition you supported had passed. That’s the consequence of the positions you take: that the doctor can be fired because he has scruples against taking life, but the stoner can’t be fired when his morning toke makes his work sloppy and potentially dangerous to other people.
Mr. Ric explained it very well at 116 McGehee
Tell that to the Eric Holder DoJ.
I looked for a bible on the seatback in front of me (we had those, along with an a cappella songbook, and nothing else). I could not find a bible.
Catholics cover the main points of the bible in readings over three year cycles. The newletters give out weekly reading advisements.
Catholics are encouraged to read the bible, even if they don’t hand ’em out at the door.
Ecumenism is worthwhile. Just as with fiscal-cons and social-cons, Christians should concentrate on what they agree on instead of that which divides them, because believe me, the secular humanists, and militant atheists, are “out to get them”.
And serr8d, I mean no insult by pointing out that the King James Bible is really a truncated verion of the Catholic standard one. The reason you didn’t find one on the back of each pew in the Catholic church is because the liturgical readings from scripture are decided far in advance, and printed in the misselette that was surely there; as opposed to fundamentalist Protestant sects where the Pastor cites Biblical passages frequently as part of the motivation, or underpinning, of his lesson.
If a hospital can’t provide abortion services because a few of its doctors don’t want to perform abortions, it has bigger problems than a few dissident doctors.
Maryjane has various chemicals besides the THC wireheads so crave. But THC stays in the fatty cells for up to 3 weeks after a bong hit, and can affect a person’s thinking long after the ‘stoned’ phase is overcome. In this society, where lawyers are kept too-well-fed, it’s best for a company to deny it’s employees rights to smoke dope, and if it’s a condition of continued employment, to test for it if they desire.
As a red-blooded non-Catholic heterosexual male, married to a red-blooded Catholic heterosexual female, I can indeed confirm that Catholic females (at least “cradle Catholics,” see Carin, above) have tails. Back in the early 90’s I spent the better part of two years chasing the future Frau Schreiber’s tail.
And then she caught me.
There be punning in the OUTLAW! state
In fact, on at least one occasion the Catholic school I attended offered each student a brand new Bible to take home.
Not to mention that confirmation is a made-to-order opportunity for the gift-giving of a brand-new bible.
the important thing about the pot prop I think Mr. McGehee was that it was amendable later – so the flaws could be fixed as they became evident –
if you have to pick between the injustice what is caused by pot criminalization vs. the injustice caused by a stupid-but-fixable clause making it more difficult to fire people who smoke marijuanas, I think you can make a case that the pot criminalization is more costly and harmful to society, and the interest of liberty would have been served by the prop’s passage
“If you feel the need to isolate the social cons, you are the one nose cutting.”
I’m going to assume that this is another way of writing “If one feels the need to isolate the social cons, then that person is the one doing the self face spiting” rather than to take it as aimed at something I’ve written indicating I personally feel a need to “isolate the social cons”. However, in response to the idea there, what are otherwise plain vanilla Tea Parties sorts supposed to do when or if social conservatives begin to put their own defining issues ahead of easy or loose consensus Tea Party issues (namely, the “focused on the fiscal issues of debt and taxes”)?
Seems to me they’d naturally shuffle their feet a bit and maybe mention that said social conservatives were in process of pulling a type of bait-and-switch (if, again, some sort of reshaping of the emphasis of the Tea Parties concerns were perceived to be afoot), though I don’t imagine this would go so far as to tell the social conservatives they weren’t wanted in the interests of the national good (and probably to remind them that their own deep interests were also closely involved), but only that the Tea Party sorts thought the aims were awandering and to hope to get back on track soonest, as they perceive what it means to be “on track” with regard to the primary purposes for which the Tea Parties had arisen in the first place.
Since when is California interested in liberty?
it has bigger problems than a few dissident doctors
the point is that in America the state can’t coerce you to employ dissident doctors if you don’t want to
But the more bigger point is that no the election did not result in a mandate to make it to where the state *could* coerce you to employ dissident doctors if you don’t want to, contrary to the wingnuts what said the “Republican victory” meant that Team R should have
It’s interesting to notice i think that if you click on the letter that comes from you can see that it was signed by the chairman of the people who own Hot Air
Interesting, no?
Everyone is so unlike Christ.
Speak for yourself. Me and the guy in the Oval Office are pretty damn close.
Since when is California interested in liberty?
Prop 13, Mr. Pablo?
California is weird and fail and stupid and doomed but they get certain things right every so often.
Wasn’t Prop 13 effectively repealed a couple weeks ago?
#183 Bob —
There is almost nothing truly original in Heinlein; he was not an originator of philosophical concepts. He’s rewarding anyway, because he expresses some moderately deep s*t not as instruction, but as informing the behavior of his characters in smoothly-readable form. The very early stuff, call it pre-1952, can be a little hard to take because real technology did not go the way he expected, and at least two of his works (Sixth Column and Farnham’s Freehold) shine a harshly embarrassing light on the unthinking racism of the society Heinlein found himself imbedded in — as, in a way, does Rocket Ship Galileo. Many of his later works are considered by most fans to be the product of the “brain eater” and, if read at all, should be taken in the context of his earlier work.
It is the so-called “juveniles” written in the 1950s, culminating in Have Space Suit, Will Travel, and the related “adult” novels The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Podkayne of Mars, Glory Road, and Starship Troopers that are most rewarding.
My reference was to Heinlein’s “future history”, an outline he used as a framework for many of his shorter works. He later discarded it almost completely; If This Goes On– is the only novel (actually a novella) that truly belongs to it. The Sound of His Wings was a never-written novel belonging to that outline, in which one Nehemiah Scudder, charismatic Evangelical preacher extraordinaire, starts a Movement that ultimately results in converting the United States into a rather remarkably nasty theocracy. Stranger in a Strange Land, Heinlein’s most famous work, is closely related to that sequence but is not truly part of it.
The Handmaid’s Tale is not Heinlein; it was written by one Margaret Atwood. It has been both damned and praised, in both cases deservedly, but in this context it is important because it can be seen as another view on Heinlein’s future history and Nehemiah Scudder.
Regards,
Ric
Interesting coincidence, I just found out last week that there’s a stack of Bibles in the back of our Church free for the taking. (This being a Catholic Church, most of the people hang out in back, so if we want a seat on Sunday we always sit up front, but being hung over from Bingo at the Knights I was late and had to stand in the back with the Catholic High School kids.) My father always brought a Bible to Church, and my youngest two bring an Illustrated Classics version, which is cool and keeps them quiet.
And let’s face it, I’m not the greatest Catholic in the world, but like a non-religious ethnic Jew who gets upset at the blood libel, I get bent when I hear bullshit. I’m probably just a bit oversensitive because I lived next door to some Jack Chick freaks for five years who had no idea how offensive the shit they left in my mailbox was to a guy who’s father emigrated from Belfast and mother from Derry. And while I cannot abide the parents, I’m very good friends with their son, who is a pastor for a local Christian congregation.
So just ignore me.
Please bear in mind, folks, that Pikachu is some kind of super-skilled marketing ninja (no offense, Bacon), and so his deliberate antagonism of others should be viewed through that prism.
I’m an agnostic who retains a great fondness for the Church but no connection to it. I’m as close to Pikachu as it’s possible to be on these issues; or should I say, I’m as close to the values that a surface reading of Pikachu would have you believe.
As mentioned earlier, even though my beliefs are congruent with Pikachu in almost every way, I find myself deeply embarrassed to be associated with him. I find myself reflexively defending those he so maliciously and deliberately antagonizes, as he gives them the most crass bad-faith treatment.
With this in mind, I hope more of our regular commentariat will recognize that what the electric marketing hamster is really doing is forcing people like me to come around to the so-con side — to make common cause with them, ultimately giving them a lot more influence in the Tea Party than my low-level paranoia would ordinarily allow.
So cut the little yellow fucker some slack — he’s really doing you all a favor.
no Prop 13 wasn’t repealed – they made it to where we didn’t need a 2/3 majority to pass a budget – I voted for that actually – but you still need 2/3 to raise taxes, and Prop 13 would still have to be repealed
Or did CA limit itself to making it easier to tax you to death everywhere except property taxes?
My mistake then hf, I thought they made it easier to raise taxes as well.
they make it complicated Mr. Ernst and there’s always a lot of reading to do
No worries, Squid. I suck at marketing.
regarding all this Heinlein talk, it appears that this is the volume I want.
I wonder if it’s available on Kindle? And (bigger wonder) I wonder if I’m gonna get a kindle for Christmas.
sigh.
The entire Civil Rights Division at DOJ exists to enforce constitutional rights against private entities.
One may choose to argue that it shouldn’t be so, and I would join you there — but in a world where Christians are so unlike Christ, laws and policies have ragged edges that don’t conform to the oversimplified world views of certain individuals who think accusing someone of being inconsistent is a giant-slayer of an argument.
In the real world, a broad set of principles provides a starting point for addressing a real problem — but as one gets deeper into the specific question other, potentially contradictory principles may come into play. This is how our laws become so murky and complicated, and how the legal profession becomes so pervasive despite our better judgment as Americans.
I have had to tell a boss on occasion that I did not want to do a particular task he wanted me to do. In every case he chose someone else to do it, and gave me something else to do. He did not fire me. He was not a fascist.
Hospitals that fire doctors for not performing abortions, on the other hand…?
So I wonder then Squid, would that be coming over to the dark side, or, well, the white side?
And am I displaying unconscious racism by casting the choices in this, er, light :)
Forgetting for a moment about the individual doctors at the hospital, the larger question begged is should the hospital itself be required to perform elective abortions? Me? I say no, but there are many who disagree.
It’s one thing for abortion to be legal, another altogether for it to be dictated as a available, required, procedure lest a hospital lose it’s certification or it’s right to treat other patients enrolled in medicare/medicaid. The same is true for doctors practicing independantly.
If a doctor seeking a hospital jobs doesn’t wish to perform abortions that should be straightened out during the hiring process; to do any less risks a later confrontation that may not always go as well as the one McGeehee recounted.
“I’m going to assume that this is another way of writing “If one feels the need to isolate the social cons, then that person is the one doing the self face spiting” rather than to take it as aimed at something I’ve written indicating I personally feel a need to “isolate the social cons”. ”
Yes, thanks, that’s correct.
Indeed, and if performing abortions is a condition of employment it’s the prospective employer’s responsibility to bring it up.
As for the occasions I spoke of, I don’t deny the boss had the right to fire me if he wished — but I outsmarted him by being too good at the jobs I would do, for him to take that risk.
Also, he wasn’t asking me to kill somebody.
Bob: again, what we’re dealing with here is the cynical version of the Golden Rule: Him what has the gold, makes the rules.
All money comes with strings. If you don’t want the strings, you have to forego the money; trying to keep both at once is both dishonest and futile.
Regards,
Ric
Aaargh, darn fingers.
Trying to keep one while eliminating the other is dishonest and futile. Ignore the opposite-meaning clause in my previous.
Regards,
Ric
Well you’re right Ric, on the larger point, and I expressed my point upthread a ways. And perhaps this is part of a larger gambit on the part of the statists.
Because of private organizations like Catholic Charities are forced to close hospitals, ones that are usually located in the combat zone and minister to poor folks, then the door will be wide open and a justification presented Christmas like, bow and all, for the state to take over the hospitals in those same areas. Then-checkmate, drive through abortions all day long, all on our nickel…
So you’re right about getting rid of medicare/medicaid altogether, in the long run; hopefully replacing them with some of the market mechanisms Paul Ryan suggests. Perhaps I’m just too worried about the transition period.
The Past Through Tomorrow is a good collection of short stories. I’ve read a lot of Heinlein, and I agree that the “juveniles” are the most fun. I don’t know how many times I’ve read Have Space Suit, Will Travel. It’s a book I’ll pick up when I have a few hours to spend reading.
Most of my Heinlein paperbacks are pretty worn out. I started reading his stuff in junior high.
You steal the wealth I earn to support my family, and use it to support someone who is doing everything I believe is wrong with their life, yeah, I’m going to regret it.
Funny how when that happens to leftists they can make it stop with whinges about “church and state” and appeals to Walden Pond, though.
Gandhi was a racist, hate-filled POS.
Hold tight to that attitude, Crawford.
But remember: when fiscal cons tell social cons to remain calm, we are not saying that your concerns are unwarranted. What we’re saying is “first things first”, and the first thing is the money. One of the reasons that’s so is that if the money goes away, so will many of your worries.
Underneath all the posturing, a lot of what’s been going on in the last couple of decades is basically robbers arguing about the division of the loot. The money flow was taken as fixed and inevitable, and the dissension came, ultimately, from people demanding that their causes get funded and the other guys’ go hungry. If the Government teat dries up, a lot of that becomes moot.
Regards,
Ric
– The idea of “I don’t want my taxes going for this or that” is simply unworkable. The country is far to large for that at this point. Besides people of all walks of life pay taxes.
– That is not to say it isn’t a legitimate beef, but the most efficient way to limit gov meddling is to limit gov. The smaller the gov. the more common relief both so cons and fiscal cons will realize. So there is you common cause.
– As a physicist I was taught to always keep an eye on the edges of the prism, the marginal colors, in this case we’re talking about the social prism, so I’ll toss a fist full of M-80’s into the campfire.
– We’ve raised several generations of citizens, trapped in the cage of the public dole.
– Assuming the movement is a success, and the gov gets scaled back in a deep meaningful way. What will the response be from those dependent on the existing system be?
– Too many “be’s” in the hive. Count all the clouds in the sky. There be clouds.
What will be the response from those dependent on the existing system?
Let’s just say that if I’m a Korean grocer, I’m going to make sure my window shields, door locks, and ammo are easy to deploy.