❝❝Within our borders, absolutely we should have Truth, Justice, and the American way.

Outside, no. We should be an inspiration, not a hegemony.❞❞

— NeoWayland

Tags: maxims ∙ 9-11 ∙ inspire ∙ require ∙ meddle ∙ United Fruit Company ∙ Hawaii ∙ Iran ∙ military intervention ∙ taxpayer funds ∙ Muslim ∙ 20th Century ∙ America ∙ honor ∙ Character ∙ hegemony ∙ reputation ∙ Truth Justice American Way ∙ Barack Obama ∙ Donald Trump ∙ alphabet agencies ∙ conservatives ∙ goverment ∙ culture ∙ liberals ∙ Obamacare ∙ passion ∙ Isaac Asimov ∙ Roy Moore

❝❝Pardon, but attacking their compassion may not be the best way to go.

I don't have an answer either, but I think if you asked most conservatives if abortion was more compassionate than taking care of unwanted and/or disabled babies, they would laugh in your face. You would hand them both the issue and the moral high ground.

---

First, those are different issues. Conservatives aren't a monolithic block. Not every conservative has issues with vaccines, and not every conservative thinks that autism is worse than death. I've not run the numbers, but I suspect the crossover with the pro-life crowd is pretty small.

Second, I'm not the one you'll have to convince. I have mixed feelings myself and it's one of those issues where I can see more than one side depending on circumstance. But when you tell most conservatives that "killing babies" is more compassionate, you've lost the argument with them and they will fight you to the end. It doesn't help that Democrats have defined abortion as their primary issue and practically THE only standard that matters for a Supreme Court justice. It doesn't help that Roe vs. Wade has no constitutional precedent and would be inevitably challenged as soon as the balance on the court changed.

This has always been a divisive issue. When conservatives look at Virginia, they see it as a call to action. This "slaughter of innocents" is something that they've been forced to accept for almost 50 years, and they are ready to fight back hard.

---

By your standards.

By their standards of compassion, they are saving babies.

And that "they" includes many women who do not believe that feminists, liberals, and Democrats speak for them. You can't win this issue if you dismiss those women as objects who can't think on their own and must be "saved" from the evil patriarchy.

---

I've my own issues with Christians.

But…

How is what they do that much different from what you just did? You just described a "come to Jesus" moment only with a different premise.

If faith means anything at all, it has to be freely chosen. That means that people are going to make choices that you don't like, don't understand, and don't approve of. You are no more entitled to judge their creed for them than they are entitled to judge yours for you. You can't win a battle of faith. Neither can they.

If you tell them that they are ignorant and living in fear and that everything they believe about their god is wrong, they have no reason to listen. All you are doing is feeding their perceived persecution. They don't believe they are victimized.

And not all of them are.

---

Please don't misunderstand. I'm not saying that they are right. And I am certainly not defending them. My own feelings on the subject are way too conflicted.

What I am saying is that in this case the liberal/progressive ideas of compassion and sympathy are completely different from the conservative ideas. You're using the same words but you are having completely different conversations. Attack them in the name of compassion and in their minds you just made their case for them and without realizing it.

The assumptions and perspectives are completely different. Your logic won't work for them, just as theirs won't work for you. Both of you are starting from absolutes for one thing, even if those absolutes are mostly opposite.

---

As a libertarian, I want less government than absolutely necessary. I'm not thrilled with idea of restricting rights, but I'm also not thrilled with the idea of government "picking up the slack" so to speak. And I oppose government interference with sex. But that doesn't mean I'm completely with the "left" on sex either. I don't think there should be government funding for private charities or other organizations. Which means Planned Parenthood shouldn't be getting grants or funding.

Or to cut through all the verbiage, rights good, government meddling bad.

I don't trust in the wisdom of government to "do the right thing."

---

See, my problem is that I see both major parties using government to interfere and push their own agendas. "For Your Own Good!" "For The Greater Good!" "Think Of The Children!"

Sex is mostly a voluntary act. I see abortion mostly and commonly used as the "contraception of last resort." A hook-up and regret after a drunken encounter is not the same thing as rape or incest. I think a case can be made for abortion because of rape or incest provided we accept that a case can be made for adoption as well.

We forget that charity used to happen outside of government. Marvin Olasky wrote The Tragedy of American Compassion. Although I don't agree with all of his conclusions, Olasky does point out that charity used to be a short-term thing, privately and locally administered, and above all intended to get people on their feet and responsible for their own choices. Instead of a faceless bureaucracy that measures it's "success" by "clients" processed and money spent, private charity measures it's success differently.

If people had to take responsibility, maybe abortion wouldn't be casual.

---

I'm not asking you to do anything else. I am saying that they have their own reasons which make sense to them. Their reasons are just as important to them as yours are to you.

Stars above, I get so very tired of the either/or dualism. It's never going to be winner take all. The longer we pretend that one side can decisively win, the longer the struggle will last. The people pushing hardest for either/or don't care which side wins as long as both sides are so blinded by the "righteousness" of their own cause that the never realize just how much they are surrendering to the "system."

All because somebody has to be in charge. All because we have to meddle in the lives and choices of others. All because we can't trust each other to make the "right choice" and take responsibility for that choice.

I'm not conservative. I'm not defending their position. I am not asking you to accept them on faith or anything else.

I'm saying that to really resolve this, we're going to have to sit down and talk through our differences. Smashing heads, pointing guns, and using the rule of law to declare one morality supreme above all isn't going to do anything for the long term. It will always be a holding pattern until the other side gets an advantage.

Think about all the passion we're giving away. There has got to be a better way.

ETA: I don't care who did it first. I don't care who did it more. I just want the whole mess over.

---

Pardon, but the liberal party also regularly proclaims that they are for the children. The last Democrat nominee ran as the "women and children" candidate. In 1996 a Democrat president proclaimed that the era of big government was over.

I don't think that government is the first, best, and last solution to our problems. I don't think politicos are qualified to decide what should be taught in schools, sex ed or not.

And here's the opinion that is not going to make me popular. If you can't afford children, you should rethink sex. People keep throwing in things like rape and incest, but most sex in this country is consensual. Mixing rape, incest, and consensual sex objectifies the woman and makes her not responsible for her own choices.

No, I am not ignoring the man in these cases. I am saying that rape and incest are the exception to the rule. Even under the ever changing definition of rate in today's culture, where some women do believe that regret equals rape.

At the moment, we're in a mess with both major parties wanting control over sex. You can blame the Republicans all you want, but thanks to #MeToo it's not the "patriarchy" that is collapsing, it's how we deal with one another and how we share sex.

I'm not going to make the conservative arguments for them. I'm telling you how they feel and how they are going to react.

Kavanaugh was asked about abortion. Most of the articles about Gorsuch speculated on how he might rule in abortion cases. And most of the concern about Trump picking judges gets coached in the impact it will have on abortion cases. Like it or not, this has become the standard.

The natural conclusion to the argument that if only a woman has the right to decide, then the man has no financial obligation to ending the abortion or paying child support.

Personally I don't think that tax dollars should go to any organization providing services, medical or otherwise. But that's not the conservative argument. I'll also point out what any accountant can tell you, if government pays for a certain class of services, that frees up funding for other things.

Government involvement in health care (all types) has raised the cost of "essential services." It's no accident that health care prices have skyrocketed since Medicare and Medicaid became law, boosted by every attempt to "control costs." It doesn't help that since health insurance became an employee benefit, people don't know what they are paying for.

If we're really going to have this discussion about solutions, one thing that has got to be on the table is removing government intervention. Yes, that means no government restrictions on abortion, but that also means no government (taxpayer) funded healthcare.

---

“The difference here being that Democrats support policies that help women, children, and families of all demographics.”

I'm sorry, but that is not true. For much of my life I've lived next to the Diné and Hopi. Democrat policies are very selective as to which groups get "helped" under which circumstances. I am not saying that the Republicans are better. I am saying that "public solutions" to social problems don't usually work, especially when they are administered hundreds or thousands of miles away from the actual problem. There are other reasons of course. Words matter, actions matter more, intentions don't.

Politicians are not qualified to determine curriculum, but neither are technocrats who don't live near the school and whose kids don't go to the school. Problems get solved when the people responsible for solving the problems have "skin in the game." Look at this. I say I don't believe that government is the first, last, and best solution and you're telling me why the Democrat experts are better. I'm not praising the Republicans. I'm criticizing the assumption that any Federal experts are better equipped to solve problems because they are Official and sanctioned by the appropriate authorities.

Responsibility for what one chooses to do is conservative? I know that is not what you meant, but it comes off as sex without consequences. Responsibility is important, and as long as sex is voluntary and consensual it's only adult to consider the consequences. Just as it's adult to consider before driving drunk, or stealing a protest sign that you don't agree with. Actions have consequences, the mark of an adult is the ability to make the right choice despite the threat of punishment.

Now I am not talking about not punishing people for their crimes or bad behavior. I'm saying that PIV sex is usually a choice and that, protected or not, might result in pregnancy. If you don't want kids, if you can't afford kids, the best time to think about that is before the moment when the hormones start carbonating.

I've never disputed that women have human rights. What I pointed out was the standard for a Federal judge has become their opinion on abortion. That's become one cornerstone of Democrat policy. Regardless of if I personally believe if abortion is right or wrong or if a women's choice should govern if abortion happens, I do find myself agreeing with those who say that the only way abortion could be made legal nationwide is through judicial declaration and not through the democratic process. Small d there. Throw in public monies and suddenly a right becomes a privilege.

I'm pointing out the logical fallacy of claiming it's a "woman's right" until it comes time to pay the bill. Choice without responsibility usually gives us spoiled brats, no matter what the gender or orientation.

The unregulated world is a charitable one. It's when charity becomes part of government that it becomes Somebody Else's Problem and Americans stop paying attention to what is needed. Americans voluntarily give more to charity than anyone else on the planet. Whether it's a child fallen down a well or a hurricane flooding New Orleans, we're there. More times than not, it's the Official™ charity and relief that gets in the way.

There's a good reason for that, and It is something I touched on earlier. Charity is supposed to be short term. When you tell someone that they will have government health care no matter what or that they will have financial aid to help pay the monthly bills no matter what, what incentive do they have to do for themselves? When you say someone needs government help, aren't you really saying that they are not good enough to do it on their own?

I'm not the first one to point out that the rising costs in heath care drastically outpaced inflation starting right after Medicare and Medicaid became law. Or that continued attempts to "fix healthcare" keep causing prices to go up and availability to go down. Think about it. The relative costs of Happy Meals, pocket calculators, cell phones, and bathroom towels have decreased while the availability and selection has gone up. That's not true with medical care, one of the most regulated industries out there. The disparity in pharmaceutical costs alone should make you wonder.

Removing government from the solution does work even if the government experts and the experts who depend on government tell you it won't. There's a couple of dozen special interest groups right there, all of them greedy for power and money. Somehow the accepted solution is always more government.❞❞

Tags: Christians ∙ compassion ∙ conservatives ∙ moral authority ∙ vaccine ∙ autism ∙ abortion ∙ Democrats ∙ Roe vs. Wade ∙ Virginia ∙ feminist ∙ liberals ∙ patriarchy ∙ faith

Tags: video ∙ guest content ∙ Lauren Chen ∙ Alyssa Milano ∙ sex ∙ sex strike ∙ Georgia ∙ Ohio ∙ feminist ∙ abstinence ∙ conservatives

❝❝You're making unjustified assumptions.

Is the climate crisis a thing? To some (like most pagans), yes. To others like (not conservative) me, no. It's an article of faith, not far removed from monotheism or forgiveness of sin. The issue is that because of the alarmism, those who believe in the climate crisis don't tolerate dissent because of the "urgency" of the problem.

At their best, American Christian conservatives are extremely community minded. A child lost in the woods? They are there looking. Death in the family? Somebody is bringing meals by. The problem is who they identify as being part of the community. Something that is not helped by some like pagans setting themselves outside the acknowledged community.

Most claims of conservative racism are because the conservatives involved didn't see any reason to grant special privilege when people already had rights recognized by law. It doesn't help when conservatives are routinely accused of white supremacy simply for being the wrong skin color regardless of their words and actions. There is a vast difference between not supporting the claims of groups like BLM and being racist. Because conservatives (and libertarians too) see rights as individual and not collective, the idea of identity politics is repugnant. You have rights because you are human, not because you are Hispanic, female, wore a pink hat in a march, or consider yourself non-binary.

What's more, the idea that only "whites" can be racist because of something that was done in their great-great-great grandparents time just doesn't fly. Racism comes in all colors. I've seen casual racism my entire life. I've also seen most people reach out for no other reason than someone else needed help.

Finally, judging people by label is a mistake. The label has no inherent vice or virtue. It's the individual who makes the label mean something through their words and actions, not the other way around. Power from victimhood depends on the pity of others and will make you less than you are.

---

Here are some of the demands for privilege I've seen during my life.

The idea that one skin color and one skin color alone can decide what is and is not racism. I still know people who try to convince me that a "black" minister saying "Hymietown" is not racist.

The idea that inner-city poverty is a more important than reservation poverty.

The idea that a person whose family came from Nigeria two generations ago has a claim on the success of a person whose family came from China five generations ago.

The idea that skin color should trump evidence in a crime.

And as long as we keep qualifying the legal definition of who is and is not allowed to marry, that problem will not go away. Previously I've pointed out in discussions on this site that somehow in the call for marriage equality poly marriage wasn't even a consideration. That selectivity is a consequence of defining rights by group instead of individual.

---

Pardon, but the bit about how some threw poly people under the bus should be stressed. Because the "struggle" wasn't about marriage in whatever form it could take between consenting adults, it was about "gay marriage."

It wasn't about rights. It was about privilege for some taken at the expense of others.

No, there wasn't a "polyamorous community" fighting to be recognized. I had some LGBT activists tell me emphatically that poly people didn't deserve marriage because they hadn't fought for it.

That is where my issue is. I'm perfectly willing to fight for equal rights. But I hear demands for "black" rights, Hispanic rights, women's rights, gay rights, and for all I know rights for people with ingrown toenails. Not to mention Christian rights, pagan rights, Muslim rights, atheist rights, and pastafarian rights. That doesn't even count the constant efforts of government to define government powers as rights (police rights, Congress has the right…). It seems that everyone wants to carve out their own piece but no one is willing to help carve out a piece for any group but theirs. Especially if they don't agree with other groups.

It's not about rights. It's about privilege for some taken at the expense of others.

Oh, and by the way, "white" cis males are guilty for all the troubles in the world. Especially when they don't abase themselves to the demands of self-identified victims-of-the-week. No matter what they personally have done or said, "white" cis males are undeniably and collectively guilty. Or so I am told. Again and again and again.

How that is not racist is beyond me.

Meanwhile "people of color" tell me that they are fighting for the rights of the victimized. And they are. But not if those victims live almost invisibly and don't advance certain causes. And definitely not if those victims have different politics. If there is an oil pipeline that gets TV coverage, the "champions" are all over it. But every day poverty on Amerindian reservations, well, that just isn't important enough.

So tell me, when is it reasonable when some victims are deliberately overlooked? Maybe it's not about rights. Maybe it's about privilege.

Human rights are the only ones worth fighting for. Maybe we should worry about the rights we share instead of a place in the pecking order. It's not a right unless the other has it too.

---

“I still wouldn't characterize them as privileges.”

I know. That's what's so frustrating. Human rights get moved to the back seat, then to the bicycle with a flat tire thirteen rows back.❞❞

Tags: maxims ∙ unjustified ∙ assumption ∙ climate crisis ∙ article of faith ∙ American ∙ Amerindians ∙ reservation ∙ Christian ∙ conservatives ∙ community ∙ racism ∙ privilege ∙ rights ∙ label ∙ marriage ∙ gay marriage ∙ polyamory ∙ people of color ∙ victims ∙ overlook ∙ human rights

❝❝I know people don't want to hear this, but I am posting it anyway.

Maybe the fault isn't in the "Right" or "Left," but in the idea that other people's behavior must be controlled For Their Own Good and For the Good of Society. Rather than teaching people that freedom comes with responsibility, we condition people to obey the duly delegated Proper Authority for the sake of perpetuating the institution.

Politicos want problems they can stage-manage.

Personally I find progressives more intolerant than conservatives. Conservatives, once they accept the idea, are willing to live and let live even if they don't approve.

It's not conservatives telling me I can't watch a pretty girl. It's not conservatives telling me that I have to get permission before I can touch another. It's not conservatives who tell me my every personal interaction is subject to approval, ex post facto if political advantage can be had.

I know you personally don't think politics should be separated from faith, but when do I get to practice my faith without being subject to politics? Do I really need to consider the intersectional implications when I greet the dawn? When I see people whimpering in their safe spaces, why can't I tell them about the strong ones who gained power overcoming adversity? Do we really have to examine the psycho-sexual implications of a cup and dagger before using it?

---

I probably wasn't clear. When I was speaking of 'live and let live," I did not include the "leadership." I was talking about the people on the street. That's not to say that I don't encounter plenty of Christian conservatives who are determined to control everyone else because "God told them so." It's just that these days, there are more progressives convinced that they know what is best.

It's one reason why I annoy conservatives and progressives both. I don't accept that either has the Wisdom of the Ages and I don't think people should be controlled For Their Own Good.

On this site I tend to be more critical of liberal ideas because that's mostly who is here. I could point out that Wilson was responsible for the drug wars, that Obama took the surveillance state far beyond what his predecessor did, and that certain high profile politicos and celebrities (most of them Democrat) took sexual advantage while claiming to be feminist allies.

Or I could just point out that power corrupts, just as freedom without responsibility does, and that it's in our best interest to make sure that government and the self-appointed elites have as little power over us as possible. No matter how much we agree with the politico of the day, government power will be used against us.

If you can't trust your worst enemy with government power, why in the name of all the gods do you think you can trust your best friend?❞❞

Tags: maxims ∙ for your own good ∙ intersectional ∙ psycho-sexual ∙ for the greater good ∙ intolerance ∙ progressives ∙ conservatives ∙ cross posted ∙ live & let live ∙ safe spaces ∙ tweeted

Tags: guest content ∙ video ∙ Owen Benjamin ∙ same goals ∙ America ∙ commonality ∙ PragerU ∙ conservatives ∙ liberals ∙ leftist

❝❝You see, I've done this before. When True Believer Christians told me I was damned and a mortal threat to their children. When conservatives told me that only one way could save the country and anything else threatened their children. When progressives told me that capitalism and individualism were dead and should stay that way for the sake of the children. When well-fed third wave feminists in designer clothes told me about how they were oppressed by the patriarchy and wouldn't have children. When pagans lectured me on the evils of monotheism and how love would save the world. Always, always, ALWAYS the pattern is exactly the same. In the absence of understanding, triviality dominates. The enlightened demand sacrifice from everyone else. "For the children" is for those living and in charge. Anyone who offers an absolute won't brook dissent. Experts are uniquely qualified to fuck the situation up beyond any hope of repair. Government is not your friend.

So you have a chance here to change your behavior, change your pattern and accept responsibility. Your choice.❞❞

— NeoWayland, from the comments of The Climate Change Watermelon Juggernaut & The Prescience Of Michael Crichton

Tags: maxims ∙ true believers ∙ Christians ∙ mortal threat ∙ children ∙ conservatives ∙ one way ∙ progressives ∙ capitalism ∙ individualism ∙ third wave feminism ∙ well-fed ∙ designer clothes ∙ evil ∙ patriarchy ∙ monotheism ∙ pagan ∙ love ∙ save the world ∙ understanding ∙ triviality ∙ enlightenment ∙ sacrifice ∙ for the children ∙ absolute ∙ dissent ∙ experts

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Tags: Boy Scouts ∙ Uber ∙ Ivy League ∙ liberals ∙ conservatives ∙ patronize ∙ minorities ∙ text messages ∙ tax ∙ California ∙ yellow vest ∙ corruption ∙ Donald Trump ∙ Nancy Pelosi ∙ Chuck Schumer ∙ Oval Office ∙ green new deal ∙ Capital Hill ∙ IPCC ∙ Poland ∙ climate change alarmists ∙ Jamieson Webster ∙ anxieties ∙ religion ∙ record public officials ∙ media ∙ military spending ∙ Project Veritas ∙ EPA ∙ environment ∙ activists ∙ Ted Lieu ∙ First Amendment ∙ Venezuela ∙ Citgo

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Tags: Intelligo ∙ privacy ∙ trusted ∙ employees ∙ background checks ∙ Jews ∙ tech companies ∙ EU ∙ copyright ∙ World Wide Web ∙ Emmanuel Macron ∙ France ∙ prohibition ∙ alcohol ∙ climate ∙ Intervene ∙ taxes ∙ Bill Clinton ∙ Hillary Clinton ∙ Les Gilets Jaunes ∙ deep state ∙ secrets ∙ United Nations ∙ climate summit ∙ DJIA ∙ stock market ∙ women ∙ workplace ∙ taxpayers ∙ stadium scam ∙ Camden ∙ New Jersey ∙ insect ∙ disease ∙ DDT ∙ global warming ∙ Donald Trump ∙ G20 ∙ poker ∙ pop culture ∙ conservatives

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Tags: caravan ∙ Gallup ∙ Central America ∙ U.S. ∙ Republicans ∙ ballot box ∙ House of Representatives ∙ Gab ∙ Pennsylvania ∙ subpoena ∙ DNS provider ∙ Women's March ∙ anti-Semitism ∙ DNC ∙ Democrats ∙ health care ∙ Barack Obama ∙ energy independence ∙ Facebook ∙ George Soros ∙ Donald Trump ∙ inmate ∙ justice reform ∙ Nancy Pelosi ∙ Speaker of the House ∙ Federal Reserve ∙ Jerome Powell ∙ Amazon ∙ Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ∙ conservatives ∙ universities ∙ climate alarmist

Will they tolerate similar "resistance" from conservatives?

Tags: progressives ∙ conservatives ∙ alt-right ∙ Democrat ∙ leaders ∙ Bill Clinton ∙ election ∙ 2000 ∙ 9-11 ∙ flyover country ∙ repressed ∙ campaign finance reform ∙ Bush League ∙ gun control ∙ political correctness ∙ gender issues ∙ global warming ∙ Portland ∙ rule of law ∙ KYFHO ∙ neighbors

“I don’t give a s**t if that is a crime.”

Tags: Jamal Khashoggi ∙ Elizabeth Warren ∙ DNA test ∙ Room 101 ∙ Google ∙ China ∙ smart house ∙ surveillance ∙ goverment ∙ snitch ∙ Venezuela ∙ capitalists ∙ puppicide ∙ police ∙ Facebook ∙ purged ∙ Washington Post ∙ tech workers ∙ Silicon Valley ∙ TSA ∙ biometrics ∙ censorship ∙ Portland ∙ civil liberties ∙ social media ∙ conservatives

We “refuse to be silent any longer”: magic as self-care after Kavanaugh

It's junk like this that makes me angry at the posers calling themselves pagans.

They don't want justice. The want attention. They don't know the least little thing about magick. But they know how to put on a show.

Exactly what is it that either Trump or Kavanaugh have done to threaten them?

It all boils down to putting conservative judges on the bench. Eighty-four so far.

The implications are terrifying. It means that most progressives know that they only way they can have a progressive society is by controlling the judiciary. Not by getting people elected, but by having a moral authority with the final say.

I don't like conservatives either. But the actions of the progressives are driving me away.

And progressives still can't point to one thing that has been done and say, "Look, here is the threat!"

It's about who is on the bench. Not about what was said. Not about what was done. But about who sits in judgement.

That is tyranny.

Tags: Brett Kavanaugh ∙ Donald Trump ∙ poseur ∙ pagan ∙ justice ∙ attention ∙ judges ∙ conservatives ∙ progressive society ∙ tyranny

❝❝What I do know is that sometimes I wander in where I am not wanted and give truthful answers. I'm the pagan that tells Christian conservatives that they don't get to dictate what others worship or how others worship. I'm a male who tells feminists that not all men are guilty. And I'm the libertarian who tells the climate crisis crowd that the climate models don't work.

I appreciate the warning, but I've been troublemaking for a long time. It's one of Coyote's gifts and I'm honor bound not to squander it.❞❞
     — NeoWayland

Tags: maxims ∙ truth ∙ answers ∙ pagan ∙ Christian ∙ conservatives ∙ worship ∙ male ∙ feminist ∙ libertarian ∙ climate change ∙ climate models ∙ troublemaking ∙ Coyote

❝❝I promise you this, the second after America starts exiling, imprisoning, or permanently disenfranchising people for political opinions, conservatives will be kicked out the same as progressives. That "solution" depends on who controls the politics. What makes you think it will be people you trust who trust you?❞❞
     — NeoWayland

Tags: maxims ∙ conservatives ∙ progressives ∙ exiling ∙ imprisoning ∙ disenfranchising ∙ political opinions ∙ trust

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Tags: internet sales tax ∙ Obama Administration ∙ DoJ ∙ illegal immigrants ∙ Facebook ∙ conservatives ∙ New Jersey ∙ taxes ∙ Parkland ∙ deputy ∙ Keystone Cops ∙ Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School ∙ budget deficits ∙ diversity ∙ gun control ∙ secret deals ∙ government ∙ obesity ∙ surveillance

Tags: China ∙ censorship ∙ debt ∙ YouTube ∙ conservatives ∙ liberal ∙ libertarian ∙ DCCC ∙ Laura Moser ∙ Parkland ∙ gun control ∙ victim disarmament ∙ drought ∙ snow ∙ Obamacare ∙ states ∙ Tenth Amendment ∙ NRA boycott ∙ virtue signaling ∙ assault weapon ∙ California ∙ Seth Rich ∙ free internet ∙ China ∙ censorship ∙ nomination ∙ Chuck Schumer ∙ racism ∙ Marvin Quattlebaum ∙ schools ∙ Google ∙ guns

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Tags: Delaware ∙ gender ∙ Brussels ∙ taxes ∙ CNN ∙ Florida ∙ banks ∙ bailouts ∙ school shooting ∙ R.S. McCain ∙ Jeff Sessions ∙ FISA ∙ tech companies ∙ conservatives ∙ jail ∙ FTC ∙ ISP ∙ net neutrality ∙ progressives ∙ Arizona ∙ Obamacare ∙ rape accusation ∙ Texas

❝❝There comes a time when the only way to win is not to play.

---

Just pointing out again that if you don't like government power, maybe the real answer is taking the power away from government.

---

At that point I'd have to stand and say no.

You can't exile someone because of what they believe. It's what they want to do to you. That doesn't make it right.

We need to have our ideas challenged by people we don't agree with. If the ideas are good, they will stand on their own merit.

---

Maybe it's time the libertarians (small l, not the party) were in charge. We could start by abolishing any political party, reducing the total amount of taxes to ten percent and making the politicos pay for anything government spends above that amount.

Then we can talk about who is allowed to have influence.

---

And organizing everything from the words anyone is allowed to say to the calorie count of a pizza slice, just how well is that working out?

The problem isn't who is calling the shots. Experience has shown that no matter what promises someone makes, as soon as they have power they will be just as tyrannical as the opposition. Look at this discussion. You are literally writing about who is and is not allowed to have influence. And making sure that capital L Libertarians are on display, but not allowed to influence policy. That's better for people how? We are supposed to trust in the benevolence of conservatives?

The answer is massively reducing the size and scope of government. Let people make their own choices.

---

Can you do that without pointing a gun at people?

Do you have enough courage in your convictions to do it without force?

---

And I am not convinced that conservatives can be totally trusted. As I rule, I trust conservatives more than I do progressives, but I don't trust you that much.

It's not easy to do it without a gun, but it's possible. The thing is, progressives don't start with guns. They start by establishing Moral Authority. You can do more by taking that away than you can with guns. Hurting them or killing them just makes martyrs to the "cause."

The Left doesn't like it when I do a lot of things. That doesn't stop me much.❞❞

Tags: goverment ∙ power ∙ exile ∙ believe ∙ challenged ∙ ideas ∙ libertarian ∙ political parties ∙ taxes ∙ spends too much money ∙ tyrannical ∙ conservatives ∙ progressives ∙ gun ∙ Left

Tags: Barack Obama ∙ water shortage ∙ New York Times ∙ print journalism ∙ ∙ Federal abuses ∙ vodoo ∙ vodou ∙ California ∙ Catholic school ∙ lesbian ∙ teacher ∙ parents ∙ campus ∙ groupthink ∙ San Francisco ∙ police ∙ stolen car ∙ Donald Trump ∙ civil service ∙ progressives ∙ conservatives ∙ bias ∙ West Virginia ∙ contributions ∙ Commonwealth

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Tags: FEMA ∙ rent control ∙ Hillary Clinton ∙ George Soros ∙ Brexit ∙ #MeToo ∙ women ∙ corporate accountability ∙ Senate ∙ budget ∙ nutrition rules ∙ Congress ∙ goverment ∙ government spending ∙ government accountability ∙ Lee E. Goodman ∙ FEC ∙ regulation ∙ Drudge Report ∙ internet ∙ Nunes Memo ∙ Grassley-Graham Memo ∙ Christopher Steele ∙ FBI ∙ FISA ∙ Barack Obama ∙ Rose McGowan ∙ New Orleans ∙ strip clubs ∙ Ivanka Trump ∙ Democrat ∙ conservatives

Sometimes, you're wrong.

Tags: truth ∙ either/or ∙ solution ∙ progressives ∙ conservatives ∙ corruption ∙ ideas ∙ person ∙ life or death

““Conservatives say the government can't end poverty by force, but they believe it can use force to make people moral. Liberals say government can't make people be moral, but they believe it can end poverty. Neither group attempts to explain why government is so clumsy and destructive in one area but a paragon of efficiency and benevolence in the other.””
     — Harry Browne

Tags: Harry Browne ∙ conservatives ∙ poverty ∙ force ∙ moral ∙ government

❝❝When it comes to sex, conservatives want to deny choice and progressives want to deny responsibility. I want a world with both.❞❞
     — NeoWayland

Tags: maxims ∙ choice ∙ responsibility ∙ conservatives ∙ progressives

Headlines that don't merit their own entry

Tags: Anthem ∙ Google memo ∙ speech wars ∙ diversity ∙ Eric Schmidt ∙ Disney ∙ tolerance ∙ moral ∙ courtesy ∙ Nevada ∙ Facebook ∙ conservatives ∙ civil forfeiture ∙ Georgia ∙ Obamacare ∙ 17th Amendment ∙ Senators ∙ ICE ∙ appeals court ∙ press ∙ Vanity Fair ∙ Republicans ∙ Donald Trump ∙ voter dissatisfaction

Competition drives the free market, to keep customers companies have to make things better than their rivals and better than what they themselves did yesterday.

Competition is what the "single payer" eliminates in the name of efficiency, yet over time competition means that products and services will be better, faster, and cheaper.

There is no incentive to improve under a government controlled system. There is overwhelming incentive to pay off legislators and technocrats for favorable treatment.

---

I'm usually correct.

Except when I'm wrong… *grins*

Jokes aside, you probably agree with me on economics, smaller government and (most) individual rights. We won't agree on religion, personal morality, and sexuality. I hope we can agree on honor.

I hang out here to keep me honest and so I can see how conservatives think. And occasionally to keep you honest *wink* and keep you from taking yourself too seriously.

---

I just get very tired of watching people who should know better lump all members of a group into a monolithic block who is out to destroy their way of life and must be Stopped for the Good of Humanity™

The ironic thing is many of the people who complain loudest about it being done to them are only too willing to turn around and do it to someone else.

I've seen pagans do it to Christians, "blacks" do it to "Hispanics," Republicans do it to Democrats, and women doing it to men.

And vice versa.

You know what? It's not the label shouting and doing things, it's the individual person. Until you deal them as individuals rather than as a subset of a label, you have walled yourself off.

Not them. You.

---

Thinking about it just now, that raises a fascinating question.

Which is worth more, a moral code handed to you or one earned through personal experience?

---

I'm not asking you to follow my code.

I'm not even asking you to allow me to follow my code.

I'm telling you that I won't follow your code just as you would tell me that you won't follow mine.

Now we could find what we agree on and work from there, or you could spend effort telling me why your enlightenment requires my sacrifice.

I think the former would be more productive, but I would enjoy your frustration at the latter too.

Tags: competition ∙ make things better ∙ rivals ∙ yesterday ∙ incentives ∙ government ∙ economics ∙ smaller government ∙ individual rights ∙ religion ∙ personal morality ∙ sexuality ∙ honor ∙ honest ∙ conservatives ∙ monolithic block ∙ Christians ∙ pagans ∙ blacks ∙ Hispanics ∙ Republicans ∙ Democrats ∙ women ∙ men ∙ moral code ∙ enlightenment ∙ sacrifice ∙ Crux Files