Stuff Republicans say.

[Dirty Penguin]

I can't wait for a Muslim organization to require women to wear a niqab or to require employees to bow to Mecca 5 times a day. I just wonder how many who are voting for this start singing another tune. If someone is going to be in favor of this, they need to suck it up and be in favor when EVERY religion takes advantage of the law.

Ind. Senate poised to allow hiring based on religion

Oh...but they already have.....

North Carolina becomes 7th state to ban Muslim Sharia law | Deseret News

 

[sun rise]

Oh...but they already have.....

North Carolina becomes 7th state to ban Muslim Sharia law | Deseret News

I just read that law - it's short enough to read. From what I can see it's totally meaningless except as a way of pandering to the fearful and angry.

 

[sun rise]

Meanwhile, back at the national looney bin, I don't think they've passed enough of those. They should pass at least one a day to keep up with recommendation for healthy passing of stools. If they really cared, they'd come up with a true alternative law rather than this reflexive idiocy.

House Passes 56th Anti-Obamacare Measure

 

[metis]

And Einstein define "insane" as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

 

[metis]

And then there's Dr. Rand Paul, who says he knows of many children who received vaccines who then developed serious mental problems, even though such claims through research have been proven false. But now he's saying he didn't say what he clearly said.

If I had him for a doctor, I'd be switching in one big hurry, let me tell ya.

 

[Revoltingest]

And Einstein define "insane" as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

The only sane thing to do is elect someone other than a Democrat or Republican.

 

[metis]

The only sane thing to do is elect someone other than a Democrat or Republican.

If I run as an independent or libertarian, would you vote for me?

 

[Revoltingest]

If I run as an independent or libertarian, would you vote for me?

Yes, but only as a Libertarian.
You'd have to join the party, learn the secret handshake, & sport the bumper sticker.
(The handshake is secret that they won't even show me!)

 

[metis]

Yes, but only as a Libertarian.
You'd have to join the party, learn the secret handshake, & sport the bumper sticker.
(The handshake is secret that they won't even show me!)

Because you can't keep secrets?

BTW, do you consider Rand Paul to be a libertarian, and if so, is he worthy of your admiration?

 

[Revoltingest]

Because you can't keep secrets?

BTW, do you consider Rand Paul to be a libertarian, and if so, is he worthy of your admiration?

He has libertarian elements, but I don't see him as one of us.
I can't think of any living politician I admire.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

He has libertarian elements, but I don't see him as one of us.
I can't think of any living politician I admire.

It's unfortunate you guys don't have candidates in these races. Beyond the platform I'd like to see some solid ideas from libertarians on how they were govern on a host of issues. Many of the opinions I've heard from libertarians strike me as republican-ish.. when it comes to taxes, regulation and social programs. On many social issues we seem to be eye to eye. But I do look forward to a viable candidate....

 

[Revoltingest]

It's unfortunate you guys don't have candidates in these races. Beyond the platform I'd like to see some solid ideas from libertarians on how they were govern on a host of issues. Many of the opinions I've heard from libertarians strike me as republican-ish.. when it comes to taxes, regulation and social programs. On many social issues we seem to be eye to eye. But I do look forward to a viable candidate....

Oh, no! Libertarians might agree with some on Republicans about some things? Oh, the horror! Unless you favor liberty in both social & economic areas, you won't want to be one of us. Dems & Pubs seem so weak in on all kinds of liberty....they're more about largess, cronyism, & power.

 

[sun rise]

The madness continues. They've become utter extremists with the same psychological makeup as ISIS although with different actions (at least so far).

Senator says restaurant employees shouldn’t be required to wash their hands

Senator says restaurant employees shouldn’t be required to wash their hands - The Washington Post

 

[Revoltingest]

The madness continues. They've become utter extremists with the same psychological makeup as ISIS although with different actions (at least so far).

Senator says restaurant employees shouldn’t be required to wash their hands

Senator says restaurant employees shouldn’t be required to wash their hands - The Washington Post

It isn't so mad if one reads the full comment on hand washing. He said that if employees don't wash their hands, the business should post signs saying so. I read this as a mirthful illustration of the idea that in regulation there are many ways to skin a lawyer.
Consider a practical application:
Lead in paint & plumbing of homes is dangerous to children. But the cost of mitigation is very very high. It's addressed by removing it in some cases (eg, renovation), & by full disclosure in others.
I always inform tenants of dangers both general & specific to the rental unit. They get all documentation I have on the property & a handy dandy handbook about the dangers of lead exposure so that they can make an informed decision about renting, & then conduct themselves safely while living there.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

The madness continues. They've become utter extremists with the same psychological makeup as ISIS although with different actions (at least so far).

Senator says restaurant employees shouldn’t be required to wash their hands

Senator says restaurant employees shouldn’t be required to wash their hands - The Washington Post

The Republican party has made the Onion's job damn near impossible.

 

[sun rise]

It isn't so mad if one reads the full comment on hand washing. He said that if employees don't wash their hands, the business should post signs saying so. I read this as a mirthful illustration of the idea that in regulation there are many ways to skin a lawyer.
Consider a practical application:
Lead in paint & plumbing of homes is dangerous to children. But the cost of mitigation is very very high. It's addressed by removing it in some cases (eg, renovation), & by full disclosure in others.
I always inform tenants of dangers both general & specific to the rental unit. They get all documentation I have on the property & a handy dandy handbook about the dangers of lead exposure so that they can make an informed decision about renting, & then conduct themselves safely while living there.

If there are government regulations and inspections to make sure that the sign is so large and says "warning: you take your life in your hands by eating here" along with fees to the establishment for inspection, then maybe I'd go along with that. That is if the people eating there also had to wear signs that said "I ate at a restaurant where employees did not wash their hands - beware of touch me" and if they did not have children who they could infect and if no one under age 18 could eat there (along with snoops to check on that) and so forth, then maybe.

My rant just shows how utterly selfish extreme libertarian positions are - we don't care what happens as long as we warned you in any way we felt like warning you with a total caveat emptor society.

That is utterly not the kind of world I want to live in. At all.

Which is not to say that I don't object to excessive government regulation and cronyism, but I do object utterly to extremist "toss the baby and the bathwater" arguments.

 

[Revoltingest]

If there are government regulations and inspections to make sure that the sign is so large and says "warning: you take your life in your hands by eating here" along with fees to the establishment for inspection, then maybe I'd go along with that. That is if the people eating there also had to wear signs that said "I ate at a restaurant where employees did not wash their hands - beware of touch me" and if they did not have children who they could infect and if no one under age 18 could eat there (along with snoops to check on that) and so forth, then maybe.
My rant just shows how utterly selfish extreme libertarian positions are - we don't care what happens as long as we warned you in any way we felt like warning you with a total caveat emptor society.
That is utterly not the kind of world I want to live in. At all.
Which is not to say that I don't object to excessive government regulation and cronyism, but I do object utterly to extremist "toss the baby and the bathwater" arguments.

Now, have you seen anyone actually push legislation to allow conduct which would drive Jerry Seinfeld nutso? No, of course not. But the philosophy of informed risk is a useful one as I pointed out regarding the lead situation, which was passed with a bi-partisan majority.
We libertarians are viewed as crazy extremists by normal folk, but remember that we're the ones (not the Dems or Pubs) opposing the surveillance state, endless useless foreign wars, unhindered police brutality, etc.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Oh, no! Libertarians might agree with some on Republicans about some things? Oh, the horror! Unless you favor liberty in both social & economic areas, you won't want to be one of us. Dems & Pubs seem so weak in on all kinds of liberty....they're more about largess, cronyism, & power.

Well, my comment wasn't so much about the "us vs. them"...

Personally I favor liberty but I'm not one that sits around talking about it and blaming those that don't. I get involved. There are many that don't. There are many that say they love freedom and liberty but beyond the keyboard and internet connection from their comfy desk chair, bed or sofa they're pretty much MIA.....

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, my comment wasn't so much about the "us vs. them"...

Personally I favor liberty but I'm not one that sits around talking about it and blaming those that don't. I get involved. There are many that don't. There are many that say they love freedom and liberty but beyond the keyboard and internet connection from their comfy desk chair, bed or sofa they're pretty much MIA.....

Don't dis us shut-in keyboard jockies!

 

[Dirty Penguin]

We libertarians are viewed as crazy extremists by normal folk, but remember that we're the ones (not the Dems or Pubs) opposing the surveillance state, endless useless foreign wars, unhindered police brutality, etc.

Actually many of us who aren't politicians do oppose those things but it's easy for people to say we don't......

We've have many discussions on these matters...and I'm not in favor of the surveillance state, the police state, I think there needs to be some serious cuts to the military industrial complex.....

I'm for a serious reduction in corporate welfare, consolidated government agencies/services....and a host of other initiatives.