View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From the news, via "the internet": If liberals are really pro-choice, why are they for banning so many things? They are totalitarians. Here are a few of the things liberal nannies want to ban: light bulbs, effective toilets, smoking, salt, trans fats, saturated fats, SUVs, guns, helmets, high fructose corn syrup, oil, drugs, meat, carbon dioxide, fireplaces, plastic bags, seat belts, school vouchers, social security, conservative (and even balanced) talk radio and TV, bonfires, gambling, religious jewelry, red and green cookies, Christmas carols, ANY display of religion, recycling (?), prostitution, polygamy, trade, speculation, price stickers, manger scenes, nutrition labels, coal, home businesses, predatory pricing, health insurance, fast food, soda, fertilizer, energy drinks, thermostats, black cars, roof colors, advertising, home sizes, family sizes, fuel efficiency, wages, spanking, foreign cars, genetically modified foods. I'd add profit, off-road vehicles even if used only on snow, airplane contrails, national defense, human comfort as it relates to heat and air conditioning, ANYthing that offends ANYbody, grades, performance awards such as trophies, a viable 9-month baby's right to live, parking beside the road to eat my own damned sammich, and MUCH more.
I'll take the GOP's stance of erring on the side of freedom any day. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17748 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The essential element to learning is to listen and pay attention. Isobars is a lost cause in this respect. California banned plastic bags, but the rest of his story is made up. What fiscally conservative "liberals" want is to have the price of products reflect the good, or damage, that they do. We subsidize sugar to give people diabetes, and the costs go to different levels of government and the insurance agencies. Ditto gasoline, cigarettes, etc. Education and taxes has had dramatic effects on reducing tobacco consumption, and is starting to work on sugared beverages. That's why the soda industry is pumping so much money into anti-tax campaigns.
But so called conservatives are gulled into hating on these things, not reading material outside the bubble--and paying the costs through their taxes. Ignorance is not bliss. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
wynsurfer
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 Posts: 940
|
Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2014 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
isobars wrote: | From the news, via "the internet": If liberals are really pro-choice, why are they for banning so many things? They are totalitarians. Here are a few of the things liberal nannies want to ban: light bulbs, effective toilets, smoking, salt, trans fats, saturated fats, SUVs, guns, helmets, high fructose corn syrup, oil, drugs, meat, carbon dioxide, fireplaces, plastic bags, seat belts, school vouchers, social security, conservative (and even balanced) talk radio and TV, bonfires, gambling, religious jewelry, red and green cookies, Christmas carols, ANY display of religion, recycling (?), prostitution, polygamy, trade, speculation, price stickers, manger scenes, nutrition labels, coal, home businesses, predatory pricing, health insurance, fast food, soda, fertilizer, energy drinks, thermostats, black cars, roof colors, advertising, home sizes, family sizes, fuel efficiency, wages, spanking, foreign cars, genetically modified foods. I'd add profit, off-road vehicles even if used only on snow, airplane contrails, national defense, human comfort as it relates to heat and air conditioning, ANYthing that offends ANYbody, grades, performance awards such as trophies, a viable 9-month baby's right to live, parking beside the road to eat my own damned sammich, and MUCH more.
I'll take the GOP's stance of erring on the side of freedom any day. |
As in freedom to rape plunder and pillage with impunity. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uwindsurf
Joined: 18 Aug 2012 Posts: 968 Location: Classified
|
Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2014 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Freedom to marry any consenting adult? Freedom to terminate a pregnancy? Freedom to engage in sex with a consulting adult of the same gender? Freedom to smoke a joint? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9300
|
Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
youwindsurf wrote: | Freedom to marry any consenting adult? Freedom to terminate a pregnancy? Freedom to engage in sex with a consulting adult of the same gender? Freedom to smoke a joint? |
So, you are a Libertarian! Yesss.
Slinky, what are you thinking dude? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588
|
Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bard, what about what isobars was thinking and saying? No doubt, both of you are avid talk radio listeners feeding at the same trough. Are you and him like two peas in a pod? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
keycocker
Joined: 10 Jul 2005 Posts: 3598
|
Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think so.
They differ on most issues in the posts I read here.
MiKe is all about his inferiority complex.
Bard don't like gov. sometimes.
Rest of the time he hates it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588
|
Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 1:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think that you're forgetting that they both hate President Obama with a deep passion and voice it here regularly. Moreover, what about their unquestionable dedication to right wing talk radio and the kind of nonsense that they spew? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
wynsurfer
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 Posts: 940
|
Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevenbard wrote: | youwindsurf wrote: | Freedom to marry any consenting adult? Freedom to terminate a pregnancy? Freedom to engage in sex with a consulting adult of the same gender? Freedom to smoke a joint? |
So, you are a Libertarian! Yesss.
Slinky, what are you thinking dude? |
Libertarian? No. I don't think big business should have the "right" to run roughshod over everyone and everything.
Rockefeller, for example, paid people with "script"a piece of paper only redeemable at the company store. The song "Sixteen tons" comes to mind. I could list many more examples, but I think you get the picture. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 Posts: 5180
|
Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
slinky wrote: | I don't think big business should have the "right" to run roughshod over everyone and everything...........I could list many more examples, but I think you get the picture. |
Please do give us some of those many examples of big business having the "right' to run roughshod over everyone and everything. In order to be relevant, please restrict your examples to this century. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|