Though I read Sully and RCP daily, LOOG is my home daily read. I've followed you all since you were spawned from C11. However, in the context of this post what am I to make of the fact that it's a group of bloggers instead of a singly heart throb?
I think I'm probably closest to E.D.'s position. I don't want national health care. I want more freedom to develop State solutions without interference. Going for a national system requires too many compromises with too many interests. Now Freddy can cry, "Sure, in the NW, you'll have a great program but what about all those people in Georgia?" Well, being true to Freddies sorrows, I don't care. Let Texas try the free market. Let Cheeks demand that his doctors be educated at Bob Jones. Let everyone find their personal hell and then figure it out from there. Yes, there will be casualties, but the end solution will be better. I'm willing to admit to accepting those casualties.
As long as you're talking about the federal government, I'm with you. I'd like to see states craft their own policies so their was more experimentation. Same for the military.
The problem that conservatives should deal with is that the US system isn't the most cost effective. When you have companies moving to other countries because its cheaper to take advantage of national health care than to fund private accounts, you know you have a problem. Unfortunately, the US has a phobia of looking at other models and what actually works. Instead, we get talk of death panels.
I would have thought it was the place of the church in society, education, private land holdings and all. Looking back those were the things that were rid of first. It doesn't seem much to do at all with the after life and everything to do with get out of my life in this world now. I suppose it will depend on who we consider the classical liberals to be.
Really? I thought it was business interests that want to trash the US labor market, or those pesky conservatives that don't want their property taken without due process.
Personally, I'm with you but I find it odd that you want to blame everybody else. Why didn't W get the job done? Because he wasn't interested.
Yeah, so? It's not their problem. Do you think they should build an East German Wall to keep their people in? They secure their borders that keep out those they want out. Why blame them for our own incompetence? It's our problem. If we want to secure our borders we should do so, without trying to shunt of the blame on others.
Yup, that's the argument. I'm not sure how silly it is. Through our shortsighted prohibition we fund Afghan, Mexican, Colombian, and US drug lords. At what cost? We devote billions of our own money to the cause and deprive thousands of Americans freedom who will be further economically stunted by their incarceration. Better that we bankrupt our enemies through legalization, save money on the prison industry, and tap into the tax possibilities of the largest economic sectors of many states. Why do we take on these costs? Because we're afraid some shaggy teen somewhere is getting stoned.
In the context of this post, let's just say that even if religion can at some point find an uneasy truth with modernity, it's not necessary or helpful to modernity. It's not exactly as if Christianity or any other major faith is helping the process. And yes, Islam is even further behind with honor killings and all.
Oh, Republicans could continue to counter the Dems on health care. But, they could also vow to repeal part D as part of their election strategy for '10. With such a good faith effort they might regain credibility.
Why would Dems against part D place the Republicans in a pickle?
Why not clean up one's own mess before worrying about the someone elses mote? That would seem like taking personal responsibility that would be consistent with a conservative perspective.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “love and blogging”
Though I read Sully and RCP daily, LOOG is my home daily read. I've followed you all since you were spawned from C11. However, in the context of this post what am I to make of the fact that it's a group of bloggers instead of a singly heart throb?
On “America”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQCUDqKNl1s
On “healthcare reform and the appeal to emotion”
I'd also love to throw my support behind most of JBs proposals for my region.
"
I think I'm probably closest to E.D.'s position. I don't want national health care. I want more freedom to develop State solutions without interference. Going for a national system requires too many compromises with too many interests. Now Freddy can cry, "Sure, in the NW, you'll have a great program but what about all those people in Georgia?" Well, being true to Freddies sorrows, I don't care. Let Texas try the free market. Let Cheeks demand that his doctors be educated at Bob Jones. Let everyone find their personal hell and then figure it out from there. Yes, there will be casualties, but the end solution will be better. I'm willing to admit to accepting those casualties.
On “one casualty”
As long as you're talking about the federal government, I'm with you. I'd like to see states craft their own policies so their was more experimentation. Same for the military.
"
The problem that conservatives should deal with is that the US system isn't the most cost effective. When you have companies moving to other countries because its cheaper to take advantage of national health care than to fund private accounts, you know you have a problem. Unfortunately, the US has a phobia of looking at other models and what actually works. Instead, we get talk of death panels.
On “Happy Thanksgiving”
I thought Thanksgiving was last month?? Hope you all have a good holiday. Thanks for the work you do on the site. It's one of the best.
On “Glenn Beck – hero or villain?”
Unless it's circular like a clock instead of linear. Then you can have center 6:00 or center 12:00.
On “Today’s Must Read”
And yesterdays
http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/the-fall-of-mexico/
On “In Defense of Industrial Agriculture”
Federal Ag subsidies are as maddening as bank bail outs.
On “Glenn Beck – hero or villain?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fuk_5Mi-uQ
On ““The Fall of Mexico””
Thanks for the post Roque. I feel like I gained another layer of understanding. This is what's so great about the webs.
On “The Unprincipled Conservative.”
Really? I mean between medicare and the military what's left? What entitlement spending are you talking about?
On “Modernity, Christianity and Islam”
I would have thought it was the place of the church in society, education, private land holdings and all. Looking back those were the things that were rid of first. It doesn't seem much to do at all with the after life and everything to do with get out of my life in this world now. I suppose it will depend on who we consider the classical liberals to be.
"
Isn't anti-clericalism pretty much the bread and butter of classical liberalism?
"
Franco?
On ““The Fall of Mexico””
Really? I thought it was business interests that want to trash the US labor market, or those pesky conservatives that don't want their property taken without due process.
Personally, I'm with you but I find it odd that you want to blame everybody else. Why didn't W get the job done? Because he wasn't interested.
"
Yeah, so? It's not their problem. Do you think they should build an East German Wall to keep their people in? They secure their borders that keep out those they want out. Why blame them for our own incompetence? It's our problem. If we want to secure our borders we should do so, without trying to shunt of the blame on others.
"
How is the border Mexico's problem? Wouldn't the border be our responsibility? I think Mexico does a decent job on their southern border.
"
Yup, that's the argument. I'm not sure how silly it is. Through our shortsighted prohibition we fund Afghan, Mexican, Colombian, and US drug lords. At what cost? We devote billions of our own money to the cause and deprive thousands of Americans freedom who will be further economically stunted by their incarceration. Better that we bankrupt our enemies through legalization, save money on the prison industry, and tap into the tax possibilities of the largest economic sectors of many states. Why do we take on these costs? Because we're afraid some shaggy teen somewhere is getting stoned.
On “Modernity, Christianity and Islam”
The Christians in Rwanda used machetes for the most part.
On ““The Fall of Mexico””
How could the costs possibly be higher than we're paying now?
On “Modernity, Christianity and Islam”
In the context of this post, let's just say that even if religion can at some point find an uneasy truth with modernity, it's not necessary or helpful to modernity. It's not exactly as if Christianity or any other major faith is helping the process. And yes, Islam is even further behind with honor killings and all.
On “Meanwhile, at True/Slant…”
Oh, Republicans could continue to counter the Dems on health care. But, they could also vow to repeal part D as part of their election strategy for '10. With such a good faith effort they might regain credibility.
Why would Dems against part D place the Republicans in a pickle?
"
Why not clean up one's own mess before worrying about the someone elses mote? That would seem like taking personal responsibility that would be consistent with a conservative perspective.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.