Politics: A new beginning - Page 185

Not Me · 12-10-2003, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I was referring to a recent exchange on the FB in which Penske was busted for posting stuff that he found on Google as if he knew it off the top of his head.

Folic acid/neural tube defect link made big news in the mid-1990's. I thought everyone educated knew about it since it is such a simple thing that you can do to prevent such a tragedy and worth remembering.

Gattigap · 12-10-2003, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Wrong.

Without government, it's harder to enforce property rights.

Wrong.

Without government, 'tis true that it's harder to enforce property rights, but what you're really talking about is enforcing (through force, most likely) your current possession of property.

It's not really a right anymore, except in the sense that "might makes right." NTTAWWT.

Tyrone Slothrop · 12-10-2003, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Me
Folic acid/neural tube defect link made big news in the mid-1990's. I thought everyone educated knew about it since it is such a simple thing that you can do to prevent such a tragedy and worth remembering.

Yes. I do know about it. I think folic acid is such a wonderful thing that the government should ensure that we all eat more of it, even if that costs us money.

Hank Chinaski · 12-10-2003, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Yes. I do know about it. I think folic acid is such a wonderful thing that the government should ensure that we all eat more of it, even if that costs us money.

you're trying to pison our precious bodily fluids, like the whole flouride plot........

sgtclub · 12-10-2003, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Wrong.

Without government, it's harder to enforce property rights.

Exactly - hence the 2nd amendment.

ltl/fb · 12-10-2003, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you're trying to pison our precious bodily fluids, like the whole flouride plot........

I'm sure even libertarians will agree, the fluoride requirements are absolutely necessary, just like national defense. Have you seen the teeth of people who have grown up in places where fluoride is not put in the water? It is not pretty. It is unfair to subject those people to a life of unhappiness or the pain and expense of having all their teeth filed down and capped after they reach adulthood.

sgtclub · 12-10-2003, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I'm sure even libertarians will agree, the fluoride requirements are absolutely necessary, just like national defense. Have you seen the teeth of people who have grown up in places where fluoride is not put in the water? It is not pretty. It is unfair to subject those people to a life of unhappiness or the pain and expense of having all their teeth filed down and capped after they reach adulthood.

Your act is getting old. You can't be sarcastic ALL of the time. Pick and choose your spots, it's more effective.

Dr. Whoopie · 12-10-2003, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Oh shit -- Penske's back with a sock, and it's armed!

Sorry to disappoint, but I do not post under different monikers. I am the one and only Dr. Whoopie, card carrying member of NRA and a resident of one of the Red States of Bush Country.

The last time I tried using a sock was many years ago on the Infirm farm, when I posted as Yankee Doodle Greedy and explored my angry side.

I was not very good at it and gave up, but trust me dude, there are many of us patriots out here in Bush Country, and while I know nothing about him or her, I'm sure that this Penske character may be one as well. Just don’t fool yourself into pretending that there is only righteous man here with many socks.

There are many of us, legions, roaming your firm, living on your street, peering in your windows at night. Sleep tight.

From the Bunker,

Whoopie

ltl/fb · 12-10-2003, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
Your act is getting old. You can't be sarcastic ALL of the time. Pick and choose your spots, it's more effective.

I don't think that was truly sarcasm. I think it was more mocking. But I may be wrong.

Hank Chinaski · 12-10-2003, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I don't think that was truly sarcasm. I think it was more mocking. But I may be wrong.

actually movie line trivia whiff, but its a 60 movie so don't sweat it.

Tyrone Slothrop · 12-10-2003, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Whoopie
Sorry to disappoint, but I do not post under different monikers. I am the one and only Dr. Whoopie, card carrying member of NRA and a resident of one of the Red States of Bush Country.

The last time I tried using a sock was many years ago on the Infirm farm, when I posted as Yankee Doodle Greedy and explored my angry side.

I was not very good at it and gave up, but trust me dude, there are many of us patriots out here in Bush Country, and while I know nothing about him or her, I'm sure that this Penske character may be one as well. Just don’t fool yourself into pretending that there is only righteous man here with many socks.

There are many of us, legions, roaming your firm, living on your street, peering in your windows at night. Sleep tight.

From the Bunker,

Whoopie

Guns are fun. I like guns.

Hank Chinaski · 12-10-2003, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Whoopie
The last time I tried using a sock was many years ago on the Infirm farm, when I posted as Yankee Doodle Greedy and explored my angry side.

Go Go wolf was a sock right? was it commonly known whose?

Atticus Grinch · 12-10-2003, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Guns are fun. I like guns.

At the risk of making a Ignoble Trifecta (baiting trolls on guns, abortion, and race), I was thinking yesterday about the sheer rediculousness of the proponents of concealed-carry laws. The argument (as I understand it) is that random street crime will be deterred if a substantial portion of the population is exercising its R2KBA freedoms, and if the criminals don't know exactly which ones are armed. Under this theory, Snake won't hold up the Kwik-E-Mart because he's behind a Rawlsian veil of ignorance over whether Apu is carrying a piece.

Query: Isn't the far more likely scenario that, in a world where 10% of the populace might or might not be carrying a gun with them while on errands, and convenience store clerks have a 95% likelihood, Snake simply shoots Apu, Moleman, and Shary Bobbins before cleaning out the cash register? Every friggin' time? Won't all street crime simply be reduced to the armed equivalent of cold-cocking the victim and all bystanders? Even if there are a lot of guns out there, crack money doesn't grow on trees, you know.

Mostly I'm just posting this because it will be refreshing for Bilmore and I to agree on something. And both know that we agree, that is.

Say_hello_for_me · 12-10-2003, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch

I've previously said that the reason we can't overturn Roe v. Wade isn't because it's such a shining example of Con Law, but because we can't live in a country where folks in Louisiana and Oklahoma are cursing the baby-killers in Albany, Boston and Sacramento. Men and women in majority pro-life states will be elected to Congress on the platform that they won't allow federal social service dollars to go to states that permit abortions to be a matter between woman and M.D. Abortion will get re-federalized the same way drinking age and highway speed got federalized, which means the state's-rights people are full of shit when they say states are laboratories for policy, and we can all have different policies. Bullshit. Abortion is divisive now; it will be 1,000 times more divisive when the borders between states are viewed as demarcations of where babies are killed and where they are not. Do you have reason to disagree with that?

While lurking today I read a lot of stuff that I find hard to believe the respective posters' actually believed when they wrote it. Lots of throwaway lines blah blah blah. But this particular argument deserves a response.

Divisive? Maybe someone oughta write a compelling book about how abortion was 1,000 times more divisive before Roe. Oh, let met guess, that's not what you are even implying with the above quote. But that's not even the argument (oh the sky will fall!) that deserves a response. Rather, the refederalization is what deserves a response.

How will that happen? The pro-choice and pro-states-rightsers and many, many conservatives will find such a movement to be utterly extreme! Not to get all philosophical on your ass or nuthin, but both you and someone else here seem to take it for granted that (most/all/enough-to-refederalize-abortion) pro-lifers interpret abortion as absolute, 100% murder which they don't want allowed in their communities. Does anyone here want to admit to such a view, or are we a bunch of, ugh, liberals?

Anyone? Anyone?

I mean, is your argument that abortion is a matter between a woman and her M.D. solely, and that such a matter can't be disturbed by government? What happened to the voters?

This deserves conversation, but could you spell out exactly how your nightmare scenario plays out? Are you worried about congressional horsetrading or something? It seems unlikely given the size of the population that would be satisfied as long as abortion did not occur in their *community*

Seriously, could you spell out the nightmare scenario a bit better?

Hello

Tyrone Slothrop · 12-10-2003, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Under this theory, Snake won't hold up the Kwik-E-Mart because he's behind a Rawlsian veil of ignorance over whether Apu is carrying a piece.

Mostly I'm just posting this because it will be refreshing for Bilmore and I to agree on something. And both know that we agree, that is.

(1) Snake Pliskin is a good guy, the kind we want carrying guns -- even military arms.

(2) We can all agree that, with regard to Rawls, you are operating behind your own sort of veil of ignorance, if you know what I mean, and I think you do.