Also, shame on you for making me defend MADD, the morons responsible for raising the drinking age to 21. I can always count on right-wing nut balls to compel me to run to the defense of people for whom I have no sympathy.
Defending the Bills and MADD... damnit, man, now I have to shower.
I cannot stand MADD. Imagine I formed an organization CAPA: Children Against Priestly Abuse, and we succeeded and banning children from being altar boys in Catholic chuches.
Yeah, we all hate child abuse, but child abuse doesn't only happen in Catholic churches, or any sort of churches. Nor is it common enough to warrant such a heavy-handed response that has nothing to do with the actual problem.
Our drinking age of 21 has encouraged a culture of illicit binge consumption, and I have no respect for a bunch of emotionally charged individuals dictating legislation.
Oh and the way they did it was so slimey. They had to go state by state to raise the ages, because it's a state's right to control for things like drinking age. So they got lazy and went to the federal government, who came up with a perpetual system of extrotion, whereby federal highway funding is only granted to a state if their drinking age is over 21, as well as other restrictions such as speed limits.
All on Reagan's watch.
I think that was the death of one of the great Republican ideas: state's rights as a sort of experimental testing ground for new ideas at the state level. There's also Republican opposition to California's efforts to legalize and tax cannabis, which is a shame.
Is it any wonder I have so little respect for conservatism, when the American example provided in my lifetime has been nothing but one horrible decision to abandon a valued principle after another?
Oh the oppression of private individuals being able to control what goes on within the confines of their private property...
This from the committed statist who is always obsessing about the abuses of private security guards (while kissing cop ass)! Now you're suddenly defending "private" tyranny? Hey, whatever non-arguments work for you at the moment, I guess.
And most major league sports teams are subsidized in one way or another with public funds.
Nikk, when I'm arguing that private security is not the answer to police brutality, my point isn't that private security shouldn't exist. I'm not "all or nothing." The world has no dichotomies, only limited possibilities that come from focusing on the debate between artificial polar opposites.
For the record, I think they should be able to drink, shoot heroin into their eyelids, run naked through the parking lot, whatever doesn't physically damage someone else or their property. But I'm also stuck acknowledging that if the Bills want to be douchebags under the veil of "preventing drunk driving," while actually only increasing their in-house alcohol sales... well, that's their choice.
And forget sports teams, college and high school sports leach away tens of millions of federal funds away from education.
Hassled? Seriously? Oh the oppression of private individuals being able to control what goes on within the confines of their private property...
ReplyDeleteBesides, the guy gets to stay, so long as he stops serving liquor.
Damn control and power! Now people will have to drive home sober!! Oh the horror and humanity of it all!!!
Also, shame on you for making me defend MADD, the morons responsible for raising the drinking age to 21. I can always count on right-wing nut balls to compel me to run to the defense of people for whom I have no sympathy.
ReplyDeleteDefending the Bills and MADD... damnit, man, now I have to shower.
I would, personally, not go against MADD. The only problem with them is they preaching to the choir.
ReplyDeleteYou take a lot of showers because of me. At least you're clean.
Also.
I would not want to be a Jehovah's Witness ringing your door bell.
I cannot stand MADD. Imagine I formed an organization CAPA: Children Against Priestly Abuse, and we succeeded and banning children from being altar boys in Catholic chuches.
ReplyDeleteYeah, we all hate child abuse, but child abuse doesn't only happen in Catholic churches, or any sort of churches. Nor is it common enough to warrant such a heavy-handed response that has nothing to do with the actual problem.
Our drinking age of 21 has encouraged a culture of illicit binge consumption, and I have no respect for a bunch of emotionally charged individuals dictating legislation.
Can't disagree much with that logic.
ReplyDeleteOh and the way they did it was so slimey. They had to go state by state to raise the ages, because it's a state's right to control for things like drinking age. So they got lazy and went to the federal government, who came up with a perpetual system of extrotion, whereby federal highway funding is only granted to a state if their drinking age is over 21, as well as other restrictions such as speed limits.
ReplyDeleteAll on Reagan's watch.
I think that was the death of one of the great Republican ideas: state's rights as a sort of experimental testing ground for new ideas at the state level. There's also Republican opposition to California's efforts to legalize and tax cannabis, which is a shame.
Is it any wonder I have so little respect for conservatism, when the American example provided in my lifetime has been nothing but one horrible decision to abandon a valued principle after another?
Oh the oppression of private individuals being able to control what goes on within the confines of their private property...
ReplyDeleteThis from the committed statist who is always obsessing about the abuses of private security guards (while kissing cop ass)! Now you're suddenly defending "private" tyranny? Hey, whatever non-arguments work for you at the moment, I guess.
And most major league sports teams are subsidized in one way or another with public funds.
Subsidized pro sports teams is retarded.
ReplyDeleteDid the security guards tase them?
ReplyDeleteNikk, when I'm arguing that private security is not the answer to police brutality, my point isn't that private security shouldn't exist. I'm not "all or nothing." The world has no dichotomies, only limited possibilities that come from focusing on the debate between artificial polar opposites.
For the record, I think they should be able to drink, shoot heroin into their eyelids, run naked through the parking lot, whatever doesn't physically damage someone else or their property. But I'm also stuck acknowledging that if the Bills want to be douchebags under the veil of "preventing drunk driving," while actually only increasing their in-house alcohol sales... well, that's their choice.
And forget sports teams, college and high school sports leach away tens of millions of federal funds away from education.