Previous 11 - 20 Next
Is that Mohler or Moher? Proof Reader! My Kingdom for a Proof Reader!!! (It's Mohler, by the way)
In response to:

For Thanksgiving - Pass the Civility

bigbill10 Wrote: Nov 23, 2014 3:07 PM
We need to avoid the Death Spiral of charge and counter-charge that is so typical. If your dinner partner makes a statement that implies that you are hateful or intolerant, it doesn't pay to hit him back with a similar charge. Try to move the conversation to a more specific example, one that you can argue intelligently about. Ask such a person about THEIR life experiences and opinions rather than trying to define you. Tell them of your opinions and experiences, rather than trying to define them. Ultimately, you may simply have to agree to disagree. It sounds trite, but it's true. Remember, it you can leave them just a little bit more open to thoughts from the opposing side, you've succeeded, in some measure. You don't have to win every political sword fight, but you do need to know how to parry the more obvious blows and to offer some of your own. Then, after you've both had some thrusts and parries, you can both back off and realize that the battle goes on....and will go on...long after you and your opponent have left the field of battle. Keep it clean, keep it honorable, but keep up the fight.
In response to:

Taking the Crony Out of Capitalism

bigbill10 Wrote: Nov 23, 2014 2:48 PM
We should never NEVER assume that any persons who say that they favor free-market capitalism are necessarily truthful or accurate. They might simply favor an economic system that protects them and their friends from an overdose of freedom. Statists don't like the free market because they can't control it (and usually don't understand it). Ditto for crony capitalists-unless they are already the ones in control. Freedom can be very scary, especially to those who might suffer consequences from its implementation. The promises of "protection" and "security" are Siren calls, whether they come from the Progressive Left or the Crony Right. Reject both. It's always about power and control-pure and simple.
In response to:

Ferguson—Michael Brown Got Justice

bigbill10 Wrote: Nov 22, 2014 10:03 AM
This case, perhaps more than any other current case, firmly establishes that people see mostly what they want to see and hear what they want to hear. Eyewitness testimony is a very poor source for truth-always has been-and yet, it's looked on by our justice system as largely reliable. If ten people see a shooting and six see Mr. A attack Mr. B, while four see Mr. B attack Mr. A, that does not mean that we should resort to democratic majority voting processes to arrive at the truth. The truth may or may not be represented by ANY of the testimonies. There is a definite momentum to go with the "populist" version-whichever "truth" is accepted by the most people is selected. That's happened a lot in the past and has resulted in more than one lynching or other miscarriage of justice. It used to be that a person suspected of a crime would have the benefit of the doubt on his side. Although that has resulted in some people "getting off", it has largely worked over the last two-plus centuries. I hope it keeps working-however imperfectly.
In response to:

Ferguson—Michael Brown Got Justice

bigbill10 Wrote: Nov 22, 2014 9:31 AM
Thank you, Karl. Where ya been?
Taxing businesses on their profits (and then taxing the remaining dividends as they are distributed to the business owners) is a way to hide the impact of taxes on all of us. Whether a business has to pay a higher tax or a higher heating bill is simply an added cost that is, ultimately, passed on to its customers-it MUST be. Taxing the business simply hides the tax from the public eye. When he pays a sales tax that is listed on his bill, the customer knows that he has been taxed. When he pays the same amount to cover a business tax, he simply complains about the excessive charges that the business has imposed on him. In the first place, he rightly blames the greedy government. In the second place, he incorrectly blames those greedy capitalists. Guess which tax policy most governments want to impose most?
In response to:

Yes... Ezra Klein is Still an Idiot

bigbill10 Wrote: Nov 21, 2014 7:48 PM
Gentlemen!, Gentlemen! No fighting in the War Room!!! No Politics in the Congress! Politics is now and always has been the preferred less-destructive alternative to murder and mayhem. See Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim iI Sung, etc. Political war is ALWAYS preferable to actual war. It stinks, it smells, people get sick hearing about it and it always leaves an unsatisfying taste in the mouth. It's like watching hogs getting slaughtered-not pretty-but necessary if you want a ham sandwich. This idea that there is, somehow, a preferred alternative to politics is a delusion. The only alternative to political war is real war with real guns and real death. There is no Heavenly path for man to follow this side of Heaven. But, people need to be honorable in the midst of political war. Dishonorable behavior in political war turns it into real war....real quick.
In response to:

Gruber Flap Reopens Not-So-Old Wounds

bigbill10 Wrote: Nov 21, 2014 7:34 PM
Somehow, I missed the extensive congressional and senatorial hearings in Obama-care where all sides were given a fare hearing. Can someone please direct me to the appropriate web site where I can see these? OH NO! It Crashed and there's no backup!!! Oh, well.......
I WILL NOT tolerate intolerance!! But I do reserve my absolute right to define intolerance-it's anything I don't like. And if you don't accept my right, you're being intolerant......Got That?
In response to:

In Defense of Russell Brand (Sort Of)

bigbill10 Wrote: Nov 21, 2014 3:56 PM
Mass-murder does not disqualify one from the Liberal/Progressive Hall of Heros. In fact, it might be a membership prerequisite. I'm thinking of Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, to name a few of the more notables. Moral blindness is a universal symptom of self-deception-and that's for both/all sides of the political spectrum.
If rights are special privileges that the government gives me, can the government also take them away? Do I need to vote for the "right" person in order to make sure I keep those rights? Do we live in a government of laws or a government of men?
Previous 11 - 20 Next