Why liberals are not hyprocrits - by Ann Coulter

[MrFun]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The difference between conservatives and liberals is actually quite simple. Liberals want to regulate business. Conservatives want to regulate individuals.

I suppose in terms of legislating morality laws, such as to "protect" marriage that conservatives want to regulate individuals, but other than that, conservatives are AGAINST government intervention except in the form of corporate welfare, and so on.

[chequita guevara]

You forget that conservatives also like to outlaw drugs and homosexuality and such things.

[MrFun]

I was referring to anti-homosexual laws with the "protection of marriage" bullsh*t.

[MrFun]

So with conservatives legislating morality laws, then why are conservatives so quick to label liberals as the ones who favor government intervention??

Seems like both groups favor government intervention -- in different forms, for different reasons though.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MrFun
I was referring to anti-homosexual laws with the "protection of marriage" bullsh*t.

It's more than just the "protection of marriage" bullsh*t. It's also the outlawing of sodomy, forbidding gays from adopting, etc.

[MrFun]

Yes, I know.

[Straybow]

Round 2, part 2

Berz' defense of his drug war diatribe ,part 2

Electro-shock "treatment" was well -established too.

What does that have to do with "gateway behavior?" Nothing—except to evoke the image of eeevil to mask the lack of any real argument. I refer you to lesson #2 ignoratio elenchi ad baculum. Btw, electro-shock is still used.

The combination of desensitizing and sociopathic pleasure are hard for some people to resist.

That isn't analogous.

'Scuse me? It is exactly what gateway behavior is. Desensitizing is a major factor, perhaps even the predominant one. Sociopathic pleasure, which would include the allure of the illicit, is also another factor. You are correct, there is a claim that pot specifically excites the same receptors as heroin. Perhaps that is the "clincher" in public debate because citing medical data is a more effective argument than behavioral jargon.

Tell me Stray, given that 10's of millions of people have used pot, why haven't the same 10's of millions used heroin?

Because gateway behavior isn't deterministic. And btw, heroin use among teens is the latest hip thing. 20/20 or somebody did a segment on that a few months ago.

Btw, addiction rates in this country were much lower before prohibition.

Citations, please? If Auntie was hooked on a patent medicine laced with opiates who would report it? If some vagrant or other undesirable died on the streets of no apparent foul play, who would care if the had been addicts or ODed?

How thorough was reporting of addiction to uncontrolled drugs? How thorough was reporting of alcoholism by comparison? How thorough was criminal forensics, esp autopsies (often the only contact addicts would have with doctors)? Don't just throw assertions out and expect me to buy them.

18) Continuing that argument, has decriminalization of pot led to a decrease in narcotics use? Obviously the gateway effect can't be explained by illicit status in that case, or by lack of supply of pot, so both arguments fail.

Illicit status in that case is meaningless. Pot hasn't been made legal.

Sorry I forgot to quote your citations of other countries where various drugs have been decriminalized or legalized and the use or addiction rates didn't skyrocket. I can't remember where you said it, but you know you did.

That's when traffickers who were involved with pot were given the incentive to traffic in more concentrated, more easliy hidden drugs like cocaine and heroin which led to crack.

Crack is just a processed form of cocaine. Discovery was accidental. It doesn't matter why they were experimenting with different processing techniques.

The word "location" does not appear in the definition of freedom. I don't use drugs so I don't have this incentive. But the next time you complain about a government policy infringing upon your freedom, supporters of that policy can simply tell you to get the hell out of dodge if you don't like. That's the kind of response a hypocrite deserves.

No, the freedoms I'm most concerned with are the ones specified in the Constitution, not some mythical freedom to get high.

20) Death and taxes. Get used to them. Find somewhere with less if either gets to you.

Would you tell people being extorted by the Mafia they can simply move if they don't like it? Your responses are devoid of any sense of morality, no wonder you think the drug war is fine and dandy.

That's odd, I thought you didn't want the police to intervene against organized crime, just make their activity legal and the problem goes away. People want to be protected, and the Mafia wants to protect them. Supply and demand, just like drugs.

No, I'd tell them to move only if they complained that things were more peaceful when the Mafia was allowed to run things without interference from those pesky law enforcement folks.

"Communism" get real. Barbarians rule by force of arms, civilized man rules by force of law. Choose one or the other.

Communistic. The belief that the state "owns" us and can order us around is communistic, a belief you share when you're among those giving the orders.

No, that would be serfdom. Communism is state ownership of the means of production. Get an education.

No, I just happen to agree that narcotics should be illegal, and distribution and use of narcotics should be policed aggresively. You are accusing me of agreeing with the abuses, whereas I have never said I do.

22) $7+ trillion IIRC (a figure closely matching the federal debt) in the "war against povery" and we haven't "won" that one either.

If you were consistent, would you support that failure too?

No. It isn't criminal or immoral to be poor. It is immoral and criminal to push or use narcotics. Debate the extent of that immorality if you wish. Debate the criminal codes if you wish. But as I (and many others in many arenas of debate) have said, law enforcement isn't about "winning" the war. There will always be those who chose crime.

Complaining about the cost of law enforcement (a primary role of government) and not comparing that to the cost of military (another primary role of government) and entitlements (not a primary role of government) is not a compelling argument for dismantling the drug policies.

Given your repeated inability to respond to what I've said, much less offer refutations, your opinion that I'm wrong is: a non-sequitor

First, the spelling is s-e-q-u-i-t-u-r. Second, I have responded on topic to your every point, except where your points were off topic. You don't agree with me, fine. But don't accuse me of not responding to your arguments.

Care to take a poll of others in this thread?

No, I doubt many in this thread have read either your massive whine or my response too carefully. Most of us here are more interested in saying something witty than debating facts and politics.

Btw, did Jesus tell you to imprison millions of people for using pot? Just curious

Ah, the ad hominem again…

[Whaleboy]

Is there any particular reason why this thread hasn't been closed yet?

Liberals are good. Conservatives are good. I am a liberal.

Any comments?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by elijah
Liberals are good. Conservatives are good.

You both suck!

[Whaleboy]

I'll go for that!

[Ned]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Ned - We have Direct and Hughes receivers but I'm not sure what kind of cables we have running from the satelite to the receivers. I know one TV has an S-video cable connected to the receiver and regular cables for the other TV. We're thinking of getting a plasma TV so I guess I'll have to inquire about DVI.

Well, you certainly will want to upgrade your STB for a DVI output. Your new TV should be HDTV and should have a DVI input. S-Video is about the same as composite, better than your coax.

When I first got my TV, I set up all connections and switched between them to see the differences. The differences are noticeable. DVI is the best, but RGB is very good.

[Dis]

I want to gang bang Ann Coulter with 7 midgets

[Whaleboy]

*elijah dreams of the day when he will be a mod*

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Dissident
I want to gang bang Ann Coulter with 7 midgets

Therapy, Diss. Intensive therapy.

[st_swithin]

A methanol molecule has one carbon, and ethanol has two. They both have the same functional group, though.