Republicans are suppose to support less intrusive government??

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
At least the Republicans [allegedly] have a cohesive ideology. I'm still waiting for one from the Democrats.

Why? The strength of the Dems is their lack of an ideology. I'll take a government of ad hoc improvisers over a government of ideologues any day of the week. After six years of Bush, I suspect most Americans feel the same way.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Sorry. Seeing a conservative claim he supports smaller government amuses me.

I'm glad you and I agree that government has no business legislating morality on sexual lifestyles involving consenting adults.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Elok

Originally posted by alarmist bozo
The issue is not sex, it is not death and it is not morality. It is, rather, the fact that you and I have certain rights, chief among them the right to be left alone if we're not bothering anybody. But conservative lawmakers, the same people who think corporations should be left alone in matters of pollution and public safety, seem to think they have a perfect right to break down the bedroom door of some schmoe romancing a blow-up doll.

No, they don't. Possessing/using sex toys is still allowed, he said. The government is not "breaking down doors" in Alabama, unless they're the doors of sex shops which lock up and refuse to open for a warrant. The examples cited in that article include two incidents in Texas (which isn't a state so much as a state of mind, it seems) and that absurd Schiavo fiasco.

Plus this great injustice to, uh, people too ugly to get laid and too lazy to drive outside of Alabama to purchase their "manufactured lovers." Oh, and it's a cruel blow to small-business owners seeking to fulfill the American dream by selling dildos and butt-beads in the nation's armpit. Alas for the many potential ball-gag billionaires thus cheated of their chance to prosper! I'm going to go lie down for a while...and laugh.



It's hypocritical, but it's not worth caring about.

Come on. You can't be THAT obtuse as to fail to see the larger picture, or the larger issue at stake.

Whenever federal or state governments try to legislate morality regarding sexual lifestyles of consenting adults, it threatens our civil liberties.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Why? The strength of the Dems is their lack of an ideology. I'll take a government of ad hoc improvisers over a government of ideologues any day of the week. After six years of Bush, I suspect most Americans feel the same way.

Frankly I don't think you can pin anything coherent to either party, but I don't see how a complete lack of vision is anything but a short-term advantage for the Democrats.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MrFun
I'm glad you and I agree that government has no business legislating morality on sexual lifestyles involving consenting adults.

My desire for a limited government isn't so limited, Mr False Advertising.

[Drake Tungsten]

I'll take a government of ad hoc improvisers over a government of ideologues any day of the week. After six years of Bush, I suspect most Americans feel the same way.

The problem with the Bush Administration is that they're ad hoc improvisers, not that they're ideologues. Their time in power has been marked by tendency to just make **** up as they go along, not a well-planned and consistent advancement of the conservative agenda.

[Elok]

Originally posted by MrFun
Come on. You can't be THAT obtuse as to fail to see the larger picture, or the larger issue at stake.

Whenever federal or state governments try to legislate morality regarding sexual lifestyles of consenting adults, it threatens our civil liberties.

I acknowledge that this is a nonsensical law, a clumsy attempt to push morals on the populace. What I don't see is how this involves any doors being broken down. They're making it illegal to sell a certain commodity. Presumptively any shop which breaks the ban gets a fine, or something like that. There are no jack-booted death squads dragging perverts off to Gitmo, as the alarmist tone of this piece, and especially the bit I quoted, would imply. That particular fear is too ominous to be invoked so lightly, especially over something so stupid and trivial as the manufacture and sale of sex-toys.

They're not even banning possession here, they're just driving that particular form of business out of their state. Hey, it's their economy; if they want to hurt it, that's their choice. Not that I imagine they'll succeed in doing so. I predict an increase in the number of Alabama shops selling "vibrating back massagers" and "kids' tickle sticks." Good luck proving in a court of law that the owner was trying to sell them as sex toys.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
My desire for a limited government isn't so limited, MrFun.

Where did I say that this would be your fullest extent in a desire for limited government?

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I liked California when I was there, but now I find myself hoping for the day it slides into the ocean.

HEY!!!!!!!

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MrFun
Where did I say that this would be your fullest extent in a desire for limited government?

It seems to be the fullest extent of yours.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Sorry. Seeing a liberal complain about Big Government amuses me.

Dinodoc overlooks the fact that this country was founded by liberals, who then drafted the Bill of Rights to keep big government off our backs and out of our lives.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Dinodoc overlooks the fact that this country was founded by liberals, who then drafted the Bill of Rights to keep big government off our backs and out of our lives.

Z conveniently overlooks the fact that is completely irrelevent to the political positions of today. That's not an arguement you'd want anyway.

[Zkribbler]

Remember Polytubbies, don't third-person a fellow Polytubbie unless you're willing to have him third-person you back.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Apocalypse
It's weird he randomly stuck Schiavo in.

Kinda random and it hurts credibility.

Considering the husband was verbally abusive, which led to her becoming anorexic, which led to her medical condition.

None of which really make it a Federal issue at all.

[Gatekeeper]

This is Your "Nobody," Drake ...

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
A nobody, then. Glad I didn't waste time googling him.

Leonard Pitts Jr. has also earned a Pulitzer Prize for writing columns — specifically, his column immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks:

An Address to the Terrorists

By Leonard Pitts Jr., Miami Hearld

Published: Wednesday, Sept. 12, 2001

It's my job to have something to say. They pay me to tease shades of meaning from social and cultural issues, to provide words that help make sense of that which troubles the American soul. But in this moment of airless shock when hot tears sting disbelieving eyes, the only thing I can find to say, the only words that seem to fit, must be addressed to the unknown author of this suffering.

You monster. You beast. You unspeakable bastard.

What lesson did you hope to teach us by your coward's attack on our World Trade Center, our Pentagon, us? What was it you hoped we would learn? Whatever it was, know that you failed.

Did you want us to respect your cause? You just damned it. Did you want to make us fear? You just steeled our resolve. Did you want to tear us apart? You just brought us together.

Let me tell you about my people. We are a vast and quarrelsome family, a family rent by racial, cultural, political and class division, but a family nonetheless. We're frivolous, yes, capable of expending tremendous emotional energy on pop cultural minutiae — a singer's revealing dress, a ball team's misfortune, a cartoon mouse.

We're wealthy, too, spoiled by the ready availability of trinkets and material goods, and maybe because of that, we walk through life with a certain sense of blithe entitlement. We are fundamentally decent, though — peace-loving and compassionate. We struggle to know the right thing and to believers in a just and loving God.

Some people — you, perhaps — think that any or all of this makes us weak. You're mistaken. We are not weak. Indeed, we are strong in ways that cannot be measured by arsenals.

Yes, we're in pain now. We are in mourning, and we are in shock. We're still grappling with the unreality of the awful thing you did, still working to make ourselves understand that this isn't a special effect from some Hollywood blockbuster, isn't the plot from a Tom Clancy novel.

Both in terms of the awful scope of its ambition and the probable final death toll, your attacks are likely to go down as the worst acts of terrorism in the history of the United States and, indeed, the history of the world. You've bloodied us as we have never been bloodied before.

But there's a gulf of difference between making us bloody and making us fall. This is the lesson Japan was taught to its bitter sorrow the last time anyone hit us this hard, the last time anyone brought us such abrupt and monumental pain. When roused, we are righteous in our outrage, terrible in our force. When provoked by this level of barbarism, we will bear any suffering, pay any cost, go to any length, in the pursuit of justice.

I tell you this without fear of contradiction. I know my people, as you do not. What I know reassures me. It also causes me to tremble with dread of the future.

In days to come, there will be recrimination and accusation, fingers pointing to determine whose failure allowed this to happen and what can be done to prevent it from happening again. There will be heightened security, misguided talk of revoking basic freedoms. We'll go forward from this moment sobered, chastened, sad. But determined, too. Unimaginably determined.

There is steel beneath this velvet.

You see, the steel in us is not always readily apparent. That aspect of our character is seldom understood by those who don't know us well. On this day, the family's bickering is put on hold.

As Americans we will weep, as Americans we will mourn, and as Americans we will rise in defense of all that we cherish.

Still, I keep wondering what it was you hoped to teach us. It occurs to me that maybe you just wanted us to know the depths of your hatred. If that's the case, consider the message received. And take this message in exchange: You don't know my people. You don't know what we're about. You don't know what you just started.

But you're about to learn.

Hmm. Yes, he's certainly a "nobody," Drake, a "nobody" who's done more than you or I have when it comes to contributing to the public discourse on just about everything terrorism- and war-related since Sept. 11, 2001.

Gatekeeper