|
September 30, 2010
Let The Bidding Begin
There is quite a spirited discussion going on at They Could Never Lose about the relationship between social conservatives and libertarians. And of course the question is, "can it last?" I don't know. What I do know is that the social conservatives can't win nationally without the "Leave Us Alone Party". Of course the social conservatives say, "our way or the highway, after all, where else can you go?" Good question. So what is the other side offering? Social liberty (more or less). Not unattractive to us Leave Us Alone Party types. Now of course neither side offers a pure product. So we won't start in on that. So my social conservative friends. Time to start the bidding. How bad do you want me? As a sign of good faith I intend to vote and work against the current crew in DC. With the usual grumbling of course. I wouldn't be true to myself if I didn't indicate my concerns. So tell me. What social issues will you give up to attract me once the current crisis abates? And to my friends on the other side. I like your social credentials (mostly - watch out for that food and tobacco police bit though). What can you offer me in the way of fiscal conservatism? Any departments you would like to cut? I'm sure the DEA would be easy for both of us to agree on. To start. How do you propose to get the golden goose laying again? How will you keep the budget in line (some trust building would be required here)? So ladies and gentlemen. What am I bid? Cross Posted at Power and Control posted by Simon on 09.30.10 at 03:40 AM
Comments
OK, I'll bite. 1) You can have gay marriage, but only if the government will get out of the marriage business all together. No regulations for or against, no tax incentives one way or another for individuals or corporations that support marriages or any type. Changing the name to something else does not count. unions, cohabitation, partners, whatever. 2) Take all the drugs you want, any time you want. BUT get the government out of the drug business. Make them "recreational drugs" and that's it. No taxes, no regulations, but MOST of all NO way to turn it around and make ME pay for what you choose to put in your body. You can't have nationalized heath care and then expect the healthy to pay for the choices of the drug consumers. One I won't concede. Abortion: This is not politics in America, these are innocent human beings with no say. Part of the governments responsibility is to protect those people under its authority. Especially those that can't protect themselves. They're is WAY too much financial incentive for this to be about the "health of the Mother(tm)". Every attempt by the government to regulate is met with lawsuits. No one can seem to offer any reasonable (i.e. smaller Government) way to make it "Safe, Legal and Rare". It just becomes "Cheaper, easier, and more common" Mark · September 30, 2010 10:37 AM As head jefe of the Sinaloa Cartel, I offer you a billion dollars if you will run for Congress and use your power to help ensure that drugs remain illegal in the United States. We need more enforcement, increased penalties, more mandatory minimum sentences, more prisons, and more SWAT teams operating in the US! Joaquin Archivaldo Guzman · September 30, 2010 11:15 AM Mark, On your first two points I totally agree and have been agitating in that direction for years. On your third point, abortion, I have posted an answer. I do note that most abortion foes are not ready to apply the death penalty to such crimes. You know, premeditated murder with an accomplice "pulling the trigger". Most people are in the "misdemeanor murder and the woman goes free" camp. i.e. not the most serious crime. And of course you give the government power over all American Vaginas. Is it wise to give the government that much power in exchange for misdemeanor murder laws? M. Simon · September 30, 2010 11:28 PM Here is my answer on abortion: http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2010/09/my_abortion_pol.html With a quote from Samuel. M. Simon · September 30, 2010 11:30 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
September 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
September 2010
August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
My Abortion Politics
Solar power! Can "social" be separate from "state"? Let The Bidding Begin No, Classical Values is not "malware" If you don't agree with me, it's because you're selfish! Martha Coakley Puts Innocent Man In Prison For Life - The Movie They Could Never Lose Christianist wiretapping theocracy on the rise! I write to friends about creeping totalitarianism, and for my efforts my ISP accuses me of "spamming"
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Not sure about that - the left is into a lot of social engineering too - what to eat, drink, think.
The theocrats worry me, but so do the nanny-statists. I don't think there's much to chose between them. It's just WHICH freedoms you want to lose.