rehmwa

this is silly - let's make it very simple, since it really does seemed aimed at very simple idiots with violent egos "Don't attack others first, period - grow up. If someone physically attacks you,then you can defend yourself." ((I do think there is a big gap there, though, that doesn't address deadly threats outside of the initial physical contact.)) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I think it's less of 'pride' and more of just a social facade about people that think too much technology is a bad thing. I put it in with the same people that state "I don't have a TV in my house" - it's just another social statement they think makes them look better than others to suck up to whatever crowd they are trying to impress. I suspect that of the people that state they don't know how to use a computer probably a huge chunk are educated environmentalists as well as backwards people that haven't had the exposure the rest of us enjoy. it's all just masks ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

There's no such thing as not exercising a right Not owning a gun, not speaking, not practicing a religion, etc etc etc - IS exercising those rights. Because it's your choice. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'd like to use that as a quote if you don't mind. I'm sure it will come in handy sooner or later ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

So what if you don't believe in a 'creator'? How exactly did the big bang give rights? I know you are being funny, but that particular gambit is such a crock (when others are serious when they use it). If you believe in a creator, fine. If you don't, then use it as a euphemism for natural law, common moral ground, or societal necessity. (frankly, my agnostic view just means that the 'useful' parts of religion had evolved as an expression of those anyway) Pretty much, "rights" = those behaviors that respect the individual and his ability be self determinant rather than dominated unjustly. Founding fathers simply acknowledged that those rights are things we should acknowledge that everyone has that no one has to 'earn' them. Everyone starts out with them and everyone has to respect that and live by that code. And when people don't, gov has a duty to step in and protect the people that can't protect themselves from those that ignore the social contract. (apply it to any right, but in terms of arms, we take guns away from those that abuse them in a way that violates other's rights, but we leave everyone else alone to make their own decisions. We don't stifle speech for those that use it well, but we will if they abuse it in a way that harms others by taking away their rights, etc etc etc) Even more simply for the slow people "We don't tolerate bullies of any kind. Nor will we allow our government to become a bully" Kind of makes simple sense considering the bullying behavior from England at the time. Pretty much violations by the left and the right all along has been about government overstepping its bounds and bullying segments of the populace and couching it as the 'good of the people'. All the partisan crap here is infighting over who's view of what abuse "they" prefer should be dominant - while the outrage in the partisan crap is all about viewing the other team's bullying while ignoring their own team's. The FF's had it pretty correct for the time - erode the rights = erode the society we wanted. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

This is my position - The government did not write the Bill of Rights to 'grant' these rights. We have them already, amongst so many others too. these 10 were specifically put down to represent our cultural foundation which needs protecting. Government should be actively protecting these rights as pretty much its basic function, not debating how much they should be whittled on or whether they are necessary anymore. It's so opposite of what's right it's ludicrous. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

That sounds like a challenge, sir. I'm betting the US or Oz can up their game shortly. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Added to this, Canadians are slightly more free than their Americans cousins, though it is debatable as to how free Canucks really are. perhaps, but you have an unusually high weighting constant in the "frequently rolls naked in the snow after hot tubbing with mooses" category of the 'freedom checklist assessment form'. I think it's highly biased. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

The clue's in the name dude - it's a plow made of snow.

This is likely true. Yet, in true 'moron' fashion, they then attack exactly the wrong thing in trying to fix what's really bugging them and which, in execution, will once again make the base problem even worse. No group in history has ever had as uniquely poor a track record of making things so much worse with just about EVERY SINGLE decision, than the PC crowd. If I was driving at 80 MPH at a brick wall, and I had one of these idiots in my car, I would fully expect him to advise me to speed up to 120, aim for the center of the wall, and then talk earnestly about how important it is to use this technique in order to not crash into the wall right until impact, which is also very important as well. (though I never neglect the possibly of it just being ANOTHER group of PC idiots, unable to connect cause and effect, looking for about any cause just to try and feel important) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

This is not surprising. Both are demonstrating, then, exactly the underpinnings of how they chose to live. My issue is what is already noted above - philosophy should not cross into science. And science should not cross into philosophy. (Facts and symbolism are not supposed to have any overlap, subjective and objective should not overlap, though I tend to lean heavily to the science and facts side of the house, I acknowledge that for many, possibly most, operating in the philosophy/symbolism space may work better for 'them'. And, frankly, all people live in a mix of both, it's just a matter of the proportions.). ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Decent actor. Not surprising that a very creepy man was successful playing very creepy roles, though. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Wierd. I assumed it was D. A. Vaginal Ohnsterhaus ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

The primary reason for spitting is to maintain ability to taste. If you're doing a lot of different tastings in an afternoon, you need to spit or the second/third dozen will start to taste like "wine." Aside from that reason, I think it would be atypical to find spitters. I've never seen someone spit/drink their way through a glass of wine. Gee Gosh Perfessor - thanks for the definitions. I must have been totally mixed up when I said taste and 'tastings'. If I had known what they were, I would have said something different, like 'taste' or 'tastings' ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I don't think you can speak for other people - we're all different. For me you are likely on message though FWIW: I like the taste of the FIRST beer on a hot day. For any taken after that one, I agree with you. Wine - Almost always would rather have the taste of a soda. I agree with you there.. (for me) Hard Liquor - pretty much tastes ok, but the intent is to get the affect without all the carbs and the full feeling. Easier to sip on a single shot for a couple hours than to drinks mixed drinks or beer and get that overfull feeling. I'm with you here too. other people may have totally other reasons - I know a lot that really like to taste wines. And they hate the effects. They like the tastings, where it's ok to spit it out. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Good Bar Names... "Yes dear, no, I spent the evening at ....": "The Church" "The Library" "Soup Kitchen" "An AA Meeting" ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

"LEEEEEEEEETTTT"SSSS GET REAAAADDY TO ......." i dunno, slap fight? girl fight? cringe? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I think it's great. As a business decision, and pre-emptive of any government requirement. They recognize a customer base that will appreciate this and are making a market move to see if it pays off. AND, they are doing it as a business, and voluntarily. NO GOVERNMENT MANDATE. If restaurants would have done this - we would have a mix of no smoking restaurants and smoking restaurants, and people could choose where they dine and enjoy a smoke free atmosphere, or one where they could smoke without worrying about the non-smokers. Instead, so many cities and states have made laws that forced ALL restaurants to go no smoking. Enough smart businessmen would have made their restaurants non-smoking in the first place, then the laws wouldn't have materialized and they would have had an advantage which is now normalized and gone. On the otherhand - I think it's silly. Selling or not selling a product that isn't used immediately doesn't really affect me while in the store. Maybe I don't have to stand next to the addicted smokers that stinks so bad even from 10 feet away. Maybe they aren't smoking RIGHT next to the front door of the place while I walk in and out. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Your friend "stumbling down" while walking then biking 'good'.... And Regulator "I concentrate better"..... I don't care, both are impaired and should stay away from the car or bike (or sled) until they cleared up - seriously, this the crap that forces laws to be written because they are NOW crossing that line to endangering others. This would be true if the impairment was from booze, pot, prescriptions, a knock on the head, or a habit of holding their breathe until they pass out for fun.....(or dizzy from being sick, etc etc etc). ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Again, Illinois with a law that is way too tactical. (and another back door attack on private property rights) Restriction of gun use due to impairment of judgement, etc is practical. But the reason that causes the impairment should be generic and not focus on anything specific. Why single out pot or alcohol specifically when the list of things that impair driving is huge, and any of them could make a person dangerous behind the wheel? Do what you like with your body - no matter how stupid. But if your dumb habit puts others in danger, that's where you crossed the line. (It's like making "cell phones" in cars illegal. It's stupid to single out one thing specifically. What should be illegal should be crappy and dangerous driving - whether it's caused by cell phone use, eating, putting on makeup, reading,....is really beside the point) DavJohn's post is most appropriate of the bunch. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Agree with this part too. (all the posts really do agree in the effect that things that bother us to this extent involve the government becoming even more intrusive in various areas - we want to be self deterministic. Don't take my property, don't control what I own (including guns), don't tell me what to think or believe in. It's pretty clear to identify those that have the opinion "Don't touch something sacred to me, but if someone has different priorities I refuse to respect or even acknowledge that." Seems silly when they all follow the same underlying theme.) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'd think it would be if the government decided to take private accounts for the good of all (example, "since your 401K is for retirement, then we should take it for social security and share it with everyone") that would signal a pretty blatant move away from individualism and any semblance of private property rights - though we've been trending in that direction for some time, I'd don't think even this government would cross that line in my lifetime. and, as said elsewhere - even if they would do it, it would be stealthy and too late for me to leave anyway. though I do believe there are many that post here that think it's a fine idea, I trust the huge majority clearly don't. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

absolutely - hell, if we gave out housing, and food, and clothes, and skydives, and cars, and televisions, and internet, and ..... I'd probably decide to not work either. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

That's a great idea. And, since everyone needs a checking account, maybe we can pass legislation to require everyone to have a post office checking account. AND, If someone doesn't have money to open a checking account, the government can subsidize an account. The website to apply will be open in 6 months. It should be flawless. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

nicely done - pretty much every simple minded smug PC cliche all written up in a single post. it's a work of art for the children ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants