Arkansas ACT 1235 (SB978) Shuts Down Online Sales
- Thread starter Painter_
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
On the Left it's about protecting the public. (from themselves)
On the Right it's a moral crusade
No thanks... to both.
The entire concept of left and right in the US has pushed both to the center. Impossible to distinguish between the two in either action or purpose.
Don't think Obama or Hillary were 'pushed to the center'. McCain, Bushs, Lindsay Graham, McConnell, Kasich, and scores of others on the "right", yeah, but not Schumer, Reed, Kerry, Frankin, Pelosi, Frank, Dodd, Kennedy, Boxer, and all the Senators that signed the 'letter' to the FDA.
And the center has been shifty with their anti-nicotine zealotry. I perceive the center as having shifted to the left on some issues and to the right on others.
The entire political spectrum shifted well to the RIGHT starting with the Reagan administration.
Clinton, and Obama have both governed to the right of MOST historic Republicans (Including Eisenhower, and Nixon) except for minor lip service on "Social" issues, and helping the "Middle Class"
To the right on economic issues, and to the left on social issues, with lip service re middle class.
I should have put quotes around those to indicate that I was stating the justifications that get used. (No need for the facepalm, I left out what you added on purpose, even though I agree with your sentiment)
Like (I assume) most Americans, when it comes to the government I generally just want to be left alone. In matters of PERSONAL choice I probably lean Libertarian. Let people decide on their own, what to do with their bodies, and in their homes.
On economic, and social issues, I'm a raging Socialist.
For nearly a decade I've told people that I'm like a Libertarian who believes in a huge safety net.
I'd buy that, for the Democrats. The Republicans created a monster, when Reagan courted the "Moral Majority" for their votes in 1980. Now the entire party seems to have been co-opted by people who want to turn the United States in to a theocracy, based on wrong-headed interpretations of both the Bible, and the Constitution, and a party "Leadership" that SHAMELESSLY manipulates them through their fears, and their religion. (See the Kim Davis incident for some PRIME examples)
While at the same time, there's a semi-Libertarian wing in the Republican Party and their supporters beginning to emerge, but there's been too much compromising among them and teaming up with social conservatives. I agree with you about Republican Party leadership.
I'd like to see more freedoms and a bigger commons than they have.
There was not much 'right' about Eisenhower and even less with Nixon. Reagan gave lip service to the Moral Majority but that's about it. Both Bush's were 'compassionate conservatives', bordering on RINO status - GW less so. And Clinton's 'rightness' was merely the first Republican Majorities in Congress - where John Kasich had more to do with balancing the budget than Bill. And Newt and company had more to do with reducing welfare than Clinton as well. Although it's back to the level before that congress took office now. I see nothing 'right' with Obama - unless you compare him to Bernie Sanders. One more giant socialist program along with a weakened military and state department blunders. 94 million without jobs and many of those on welfare or at least food stamps - at a rate that has remained constant, although climbing recently, while throwing trillions of dollars down that hole, where 'safety nets' become hammocks.
So you let people decide on their own what to do with their bodies - except when they use their bodies and their minds for work - ie economic issues. Then you want to intervene and tell them what to do and how much they can value their own work according to your standards rather than theirs. And you're proud of that. Interesting.
So you let people decide on their own what to do with their bodies - except when they use their bodies and their minds for work - ie economic issues. Then you want to intervene and tell them what to do and how much they can value their own work according to your standards rather than theirs. And you're proud of that.
Interesting.
There was not much 'right' about Eisenhower and even less with Nixon. Reagan gave lip service to the Moral Majority but that's about it. Both Bush's were 'compassionate conservatives', bordering on RINO status - GW less so. And Clinton's 'rightness' was merely the first Republican Majorities in Congress - where John Kasich had more to do with balancing the budget than Bill. And Newt and company had more to do with reducing welfare than Clinton as well. Although it's back to the level before that congress took office now. I see nothing 'right' with Obama - unless you compare him to Bernie Sanders. One more giant socialist program along with a weakened military and state department blunders. 94 million without jobs and many of those on welfare or at least food stamps - at a rate that has remained constant, although climbing recently, while throwing trillions of dollars down that hole, where 'safety nets' become hammocks.
< >
So you let people decide on their own what to do with their bodies - except when they use their bodies and their minds for work - ie economic issues. Then you want to intervene and tell them what to do and how much they can value their own work according to your standards rather than theirs. And you're proud of that.
We can all fight together against the war on vaping, because we all seem to be fiercely opposed to corruption, which is the key issue involved.
Consider it a comment about 'can't we all just get along'.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
