Thomas Sowell was explaining that Pres. Obama may be more correctly referred to as a fascist (gov't control over private businesses) than as a socialist (gov't ownership of businesses). Interesting article.
2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
"Any insurance company that rummages through a patient's distant past to look for an excuse to decline life-saving treatment is a company that ought to be immediately nationalized, and its boards of directors jailed."
It's possible that Pres. Obama might agree with billgrr. A well-worded excerpt from an article by Thomas Sowell:
"Government ownership of the means of production means that politicians also own the consequences of their policies, and have to face responsibility when those consequences are disastrous -- something that Barack Obama avoids like the plague.
"Thus the Obama administration can arbitrarily force insurance companies to cover the children of their customers until the children are 26 years old. Obviously, this creates favorable publicity for President Obama. But if this and other government edicts cause insurance premiums to rise, then that is something that can be blamed on the "greed" of the insurance companies."
Slide,Bring anything you got to the table.Have your 3 partys agreed on who to run.Tick Toc,Tick Toc,Times a running,Better hurry up.Goinpeace
1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Isn't the entire Republican party made up of war criminals, tax-duckers, thieves, quislings and bigots?
2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
wasent bill a democrat and monaca
3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
i find it sad the attention that is given to this matter, most of these people that think they are gay are just looking for 5 minets of attention. now if we doent give it to them they will look for it some other way
2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Will you please stop complaining about Republicans having the dirtiest minds as if Democrats NEVER showed dirty thoughts?
Why just gay marriage? Open the door people..sibling marriage, polygamous marriage. Everyone is brought to you by god and he has said that you may marry but you will never ever be able to procreate
Next thing you know, the gov will pass legislation to re-institute slavery.
Too late, already has done it, done deal. It's called the Affordable Care Act.
'You will pay us as much as you can afford to let us rob you of what you have and vie have our vays'
If not, it will be off to Auschwitz and then to Siberia, just for good measure. After a long stay at a FEMA facility first.
Why should the gov have any kind of influence on who marries who?
If the persons want to marry each other and are of the same sex, far be it from me to stop them. I could care less and the gov should have the same opinion.
Their lives belong to them, not the govs.
There are Mormons out there with multiple wives and what can the gov do about that?
4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Now, this is such a logical transition. I am wondering why everyone else did not think of it? "If it is ok to have legal marriages between 2 people of the same sex, then it should be legal to own people too."
If it is ok to have legal marriages between 2 people of the same sex, then it should be legal to own people too. Both black and white people can be enslaved to eliminate any possibility of racial discrimination and bias towards one group.
It might take an act of Congress, but maybe Obama could issue an executive order and re-establish the slave trade. It would be a boon for Wall Street, so he will probably consider it.
Let's re-legalize, re-open the slave trade and make a killing on the stock market with the SLVE ticker symbol.
Plenty of unemployable people that could fill some positions as indentured servants. They would at least earn their board, be charged for room, be kept in debt and forced to continue their indentured servitude.
Just because they have no worth doesn't mean they don't have value.
The executive branch and legislative branch should consider a law allowing legal gay marriage with legalized slavery attached to the legislation.
2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Not all men are created equal.
Like Abe Lincoln said, 'dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal'.
They are not.
If you were a black plantation owner with slaves in the Antebellum South, was it ok to own slaves?
White plantation owner, bad, black plantation owner, good.
"According to the federal census of 1830, free blacks owned more than 10,000 slaves in Louisiana, Maryland, South Carolina, and Virginia. The majority of black slave-owners lived in Louisiana and planted sugar cane."
A question for you non Christian folks... where would you be if the Christians had not fought the Crusades to stop the spread of Sharia Law? And even at the current time what would you do to stop the spread of Sharia Law? Or do you want Sharia Law? None of us would be alive if we voiced our opinions like we do that is for sure.
I would say that there are millions of parents who wake up and say, I really love my child. And they look up and say--- "God made my child and he doesn't make junk" Now on the other hand, he allows people to turn into junk, kinda like Rushslide.
4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
God, I'm proud my kid is gay.
"If "marriage" were solely for those who can reproduce, would that mean that steril men and women cannot marry?"
Let me be clear: I don't care who gets together, and because words evolve, I won't care anymore if they want to call it "marriage."
I gave the word history of the word "marriage" which originally meant the marriage act, as between a man and a woman. I also said that a "traditional marriage" of a man and a woman "potentially" results in having children, not that it "should" result in having children.
I am still curious: the man and woman in a traditional marriage, who might have babies as a result of that marriage, what will they be called? "Breeders?"
2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
"Are you pleased when they come and squat on the pisspot???"
In this day and age who uses this kind of language? You are disgusting!
landslide2014 -- What do bathrooms have to do with marriage!? Wow.
3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
ND may be a bit behind the national trend but it's inevitable. Actually I am surprised it's as close to half and half as it is! If "marriage" were solely for those who can reproduce, would that mean that steril men and women cannot marry? It's rediculous to contemplate and to compare to ***********. I grew up believing that America was the place where you could live as you want as long as you don't infringe on the rights of others. Live and let live and start worrying about more important issues.
5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
The word "marriage" itself has as its origin the consummative act, the verb itself equaling the noun.
"Figurative use (non-theological) "intimate union, a joining as if by marriage" is from early 15th century."
If "marriage" means the act itself, traditional marriage has, as one of its expected or natural outcomes, the potential of children.
"Gay marriage" is a misnomer, if one considers the word history of "marriage." But words can and do evolve: "gay" is also an example.
What happens between a man and a woman might take on a new word. I've already heard traditionalists referred to as "breeders" by some non-traditionalists. (Hope that's not too risque for this forum.)
3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
"...encouraging barely literate mental cases to vote..."
The cases come in all political stripes, by the way.
Call me unimaginative, but I can't see how removing the restrictions on gays to marry could possibly have any worse an effect on American society than encouraging barely literate mental cases to vote has had.
Landslide says: "Stupidity ... has no bounds on earth anymore..."
Which nicely sums up what Landslide has to say, on any given topic.
4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
301 4th St SE , Minot, ND 58703 | 701-857-1900