Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I would think that those who do are being lazy. I would suggest that the average liberal is more open to change than average conservatives however; they're much more mentally active; less prejudiced.
I think your bias about conservatives being less open to change is the fact that conservatives don't think the federal government is always the answer. Perhaps since conservatives trust the individual, free markets and state's rights more than the federal government, it may look to liberals as laziness since conservatives wish to engage federal government less than liberals. The fact that most state legislators are predominately republican would seem to buttress my position since republicans (conservatives tend to vote republican) center on state's rights. Ironically, conservatives wish to overhaul the government into a smaller entity which of course would be a bigger change (the opposite of lazy) than anything the left has suggested.
Do you still want to restrict marriages between same sex couples? Yes
Do you still want to restrict a woman's reproductive rights? Yes
Both are matters that are addressed at the state level.
So much for your "smaller government"...unless you mean small enough to fit in the bedroom, the church, the doctor's office...
Pre ACA passage: If you like your health plan you can keep it.
Post ACA: You will be getting a better plan.
The answer is obvious.
This is his bill so don't give me that he didn't know bs.
Wake the fuck up America. Vote Republican or independent and insist that this disaster gets overturned.
And yes fake Jake I know it's the law of the land FOR NOW
I think your bias about conservatives being less open to change is the fact that conservatives don't think the federal government is always the answer. Perhaps since conservatives trust the individual, free markets and state's rights more than the federal government, it may look to liberals as laziness since conservatives wish to engage federal government less than liberals. The fact that most state legislators are predominately republican would seem to buttress my position since republicans (conservatives tend to vote republican) center on state's rights. Ironically, conservatives wish to overhaul the government into a smaller entity which of course would be a bigger change (the opposite of lazy) than anything the left has suggested.
Do you still want to restrict marriages between same sex couples? Yes
Do you still want to restrict a woman's reproductive rights? Yes
Both are matters that are addressed at the state level.
So much for your "smaller government"...unless you mean small enough to fit in the bedroom, the church, the doctor's office...
the problem with those reproductive rights is you are taking about them after the rights of another living individual becomes involved. up to that point your rights should be what ever you want them to be. but the minute another life becomes involved its no longer about just your rights.
When it was suggested that insurance pay for medicine, it wasn't due to any ideology suggesting it. Which ideology embraced it? Which one calls it a "slut"
Do you still want to restrict marriages between same sex couples? Yes
Do you still want to restrict a woman's reproductive rights? Yes
Both are matters that are addressed at the state level.
So much for your "smaller government"...unless you mean small enough to fit in the bedroom, the church, the doctor's office...
the problem with those reproductive rights is you are taking about them after the rights of another living individual becomes involved. up to that point your rights should be what ever you want them to be. but the minute another life becomes involved its no longer about just your rights.
Noted.
But the question is about governmental philosophy strictly speaking. The proponents of so-called "smaller government" are quite happy about government intrusion in some cases; just not ones that involve heterosexual men.
Quick question...what is the primary demographic of conservatives?
Protestant
Heterosexual
Men
Another question,
What is the voting block that is reducing in both size and importance most rapidly?
Protestant
Heterosexual
Men
If you guys ever lose the House, you'll be the Green party; better put the ol' gerrymandering machine into OH-VER-DRIVE
I would think that those who do are being lazy. I would suggest that the average liberal is more open to change than average conservatives however; they're much more mentally active; less prejudiced.
liberals are only open to change when they can dictate what changes.
When it was suggested that insurance pay for medicine, it wasn't due to any ideology suggesting it. Which ideology embraced it? Which one calls it a "slut"
I would think that those who do are being lazy. I would suggest that the average liberal is more open to change than average conservatives however; they're much more mentally active; less prejudiced.
I think your bias about conservatives being less open to change is the fact that conservatives don't think the federal government is always the answer. Perhaps since conservatives trust the individual, free markets and state's rights more than the federal government, it may look to liberals as laziness since conservatives wish to engage federal government less than liberals. The fact that most state legislators are predominately republican would seem to buttress my position since republicans (conservatives tend to vote republican) center on state's rights. Ironically, conservatives wish to overhaul the government into a smaller entity which of course would be a bigger change (the opposite of lazy) than anything the left has suggested.
Do you still want to restrict marriages between same sex couples? Yes
Do you still want to restrict a woman's reproductive rights? Yes
Both are matters that are addressed at the state level.
So much for your "smaller government"...unless you mean small enough to fit in the bedroom, the church, the doctor's office...
Rhetorical question....Pre ACA passage: If you like your health plan you can keep it.
Post ACA: You will be getting a better plan.
The answer is obvious.
This is his bill so don't give me that he didn't know bs.
Wake the fuck up America. Vote Republican or independent and insist that this disaster gets overturned.
And yes fake Jake I know it's the law of the land FOR NOW
the problem with those reproductive rights is you are taking about them after the rights of another living individual becomes involved. up to that point your rights should be what ever you want them to be. but the minute another life becomes involved its no longer about just your rights.
Noted.
But the question is about governmental philosophy strictly speaking. The proponents of so-called "smaller government" are quite happy about government intrusion in some cases; just not ones that involve heterosexual men.
Quick question...what is the primary demographic of conservatives?
Protestant
Heterosexual
Men
Another question,
What is the voting block that is reducing in both size and importance most rapidly?
Protestant
Heterosexual
Men
If you guys ever lose the House, you'll be the Green party; better put the ol' gerrymandering machine into OH-VER-DRIVE
you are making one very critical mistake. trying to relate validity of political decisions to religion. sexual preference and sex. right now you have decisions being made by the growing demographic that are going to have catastrophic long term effects on our country.
another mistake your party of preference has already made is exposing its true intent in regards to second amendment rights. that one will cost you in 2014. gun owners are much more than a few gun fanatic rednecks and a handful of neo Nazi's. and it is a lot more than a gun issue you try to make it out to be. your parties actions have galvanized and unified an ever growing group, including a vast number of traditional democratic voters. last year alone there were 20,000,000 new requests for gun permits. this isn't more gun nuts buying more guns. this is new gun owners buying their first gun. you are at risk of losing the senate.
I think your bias about conservatives being less open to change is the fact that conservatives don't think the federal government is always the answer. Perhaps since conservatives trust the individual, free markets and state's rights more than the federal government, it may look to liberals as laziness since conservatives wish to engage federal government less than liberals. The fact that most state legislators are predominately republican would seem to buttress my position since republicans (conservatives tend to vote republican) center on state's rights. Ironically, conservatives wish to overhaul the government into a smaller entity which of course would be a bigger change (the opposite of lazy) than anything the left has suggested.
Do you still want to restrict marriages between same sex couples? Yes
Do you still want to restrict a woman's reproductive rights? Yes
Both are matters that are addressed at the state level.
So much for your "smaller government"...unless you mean small enough to fit in the bedroom, the church, the doctor's office...
Conservatives want a smaller FEDERAL government so that local citizens are given more freedoms and power to decide which laws to pass and where their money goes. Nothing you said refutes that, even if you happen to disagree with some of those laws.
Liberals' depiction of conservatives' "small government" is a huge straw man.
Small government doesn't equal no government.
Protecting the life of the defenseless is perfectly consistent with small government.
But liberals will keep propping up that straw man.
Noted.
But the question is about governmental philosophy strictly speaking. The proponents of so-called "smaller government" are quite happy about government intrusion in some cases; just not ones that involve heterosexual men.
Quick question...what is the primary demographic of conservatives?
Protestant
Heterosexual
Men
Another question,
What is the voting block that is reducing in both size and importance most rapidly?
Protestant
Heterosexual
Men
If you guys ever lose the House, you'll be the Green party; better put the ol' gerrymandering machine into OH-VER-DRIVE
you are making one very critical mistake. trying to relate validity of political decisions to religion. sexual preference and sex. right now you have decisions being made by the growing demographic that are going to have catastrophic long term effects on our country.
Ohhhkay...
another mistake your party of preference has already made is exposing its true intent in regards to second amendment rights. that one will cost you in 2014. gun owners are much more than a few gun fanatic rednecks and a handful of neo Nazi's. and it is a lot more than a gun issue you try to make it out to be. your parties actions have galvanized and unified an ever growing group, including a vast number of traditional democratic voters. last year alone there were 20,000,000 new requests for gun permits. this isn't more gun nuts buying more guns. this is new gun owners buying their first gun. you are at risk of losing the senate.
Gun control isn't a factor.
The Dems should lose the senate in 2014 because it has more seats that are up for grabs. That was, however, true in 2012 but the TEA party torpedoed the GOP candidates in a few contests.
Liberals' depiction of conservatives' "small government" is a huge straw man.
Small government doesn't equal no government.
Protecting the life of the defenseless is perfectly consistent with small government.
But liberals will keep propping up that straw man.
It's also why you consistently lose general elections. And the politics is only part of it...its the demeaning, demonizing treatment of women who choose to exercise their rights/demonstrate for greater access to contraception which is why it such a kookie political move;
it's just plain mean and has nothing to do with protecting anyone.
you are making one very critical mistake. trying to relate validity of political decisions to religion. sexual preference and sex. right now you have decisions being made by the growing demographic that are going to have catastrophic long term effects on our country.
Ohhhkay...
another mistake your party of preference has already made is exposing its true intent in regards to second amendment rights. that one will cost you in 2014. gun owners are much more than a few gun fanatic rednecks and a handful of neo Nazi's. and it is a lot more than a gun issue you try to make it out to be. your parties actions have galvanized and unified an ever growing group, including a vast number of traditional democratic voters. last year alone there were 20,000,000 new requests for gun permits. this isn't more gun nuts buying more guns. this is new gun owners buying their first gun. you are at risk of losing the senate.
Gun control isn't a factor.
The Dems should lose the senate in 2014 because it has more seats that are up for grabs. That was, however, true in 2012 but the TEA party torpedoed the GOP candidates in a few contests.
gun control is a factor. the only successful recalls have been because of gun control. liberals attempted numerous recalls over labor and unions but failed.
people are becoming disenchanted with both democrats and republicans. the tea party is the only party in a growth mode
Liberals' depiction of conservatives' "small government" is a huge straw man.
Small government doesn't equal no government.
Protecting the life of the defenseless is perfectly consistent with small government.
But liberals will keep propping up that straw man.
It's also why you consistently lose general elections. And the politics is only part of it...its the demeaning, demonizing treatment of women who choose to exercise their rights/demonstrate for greater access to contraception which is why it such a kookie political move;
it's just plain mean and has nothing to do with protecting anyone.
There are some people on the right who go too far.
I am simply pointing out that it is incorrect to claim that protecting the unborn is inconsistent with small government.
Feel free to accuse of us whatever vile thing you want. That still won't make it the case that advocating on behalf of unborn children contradicts the principles of small government.
Ohhhkay...
Gun control isn't a factor.
The Dems should lose the senate in 2014 because it has more seats that are up for grabs. That was, however, true in 2012 but the TEA party torpedoed the GOP candidates in a few contests.
gun control is a factor. the only successful recalls have been because of gun control. liberals attempted numerous recalls over labor and unions but failed.
people are becoming disenchanted with both democrats and republicans. the tea party is the only party in a growth mode
Gray Davis was recalled due to gun control? Who knew?
Exit polling (and common sense) will show you to be wrong tomorrow and in next November's contests as well.
Students in San Jose, Calif., can no longer hold car washes to raise for money for school events because city officials say they endanger the environment.
Cheerleaders at Lincoln High School had to cancel a scheduled Oct. 20 car wash after a visit from the city's Environmental Services Department, the San Jose Mercury News reported Friday.
"Anything that is not storm water or rain water is considered a pollutant," said Jennie Loft, the department's acting communications manager. "If it goes into a storm drain, that pollutant will harm wildlife and habitats in the creeks."
Loft said school groups could still hold car washes if they were conducted under certain conditions. Those include washing vehicles over grassy or gravel areas, ensuring wash water doesn't go into the street, gutter or storm drain and leaving no soap stains on the ground.
The same rules apply to cars washed by their owners.
Cars can be washed with a solution that requires no water, but the concentrate costs $159 a gallon.
