trafficjamgate

[Topper]

So you still don't really believe in gay rights, but you are playing along out of concern for other rights?

And what does this have to do with fiscal policy?

I don't believe in anything. It is not a matter of faith.

It is an intellectual exercise of consistency. If I am to demand personal liberties, I cannot be intellectually inconsistent by disallowing any particular liberty. It would be intellectually inconsistent to fail to support the expansion of this liberty desired by others. As a straight, I have no need of this liberty. But as I a libertarian I must support the reasonable expansion of personal liberties for all persons desiring to excise liberties from the state.

Emotionally, I have no investment in this cause, take no credit or blame for its expansion but it is reasonable to expand all liberties at the expense of the state.

Fiscal policy and monetary policy speak to a minimalist state where personal liberties are maximized.

[Topper]

I am shocked that someone I have known these many years and known to be very thoughtful would make such a simplistic statement. I know for a fact I think the judge was out of line taking on himself the power to make such a decision.

I also know I have come to the point I don't give a shit whether gays marry or not. So opposing the judge does not equal opposing gay marriage. There still is a stance called neutral in this world.

I am totally opposed to people calling those who disagree with them names. I am in hopes you haven't come to your stance because of the pressure that comes from the "bright and enlightened" class. As a whole they aren't as bright or enlightened as they think.

You have to look at the context of my statement. IT is as reasonable as his calling me a sexist for opposing Hillary.

Context is king.

[Topper]

I am not a pragmatist. I believe there is value in order.

In politics, there is only power and winning. Losers have no power unless they continue the fight, but they must fight effectively. The only truth of politics is retaining power and winning.

[Pelado]

If you say so. You split a fine hair by arguing you don't like the means to the end, but you like the end. Politically most pragmatists relish results as opposed to the process.

As you are aware, judicial precedence can yield undesirable future results, even if the means led to favorable results in the short-term.

[Topper]

As you are aware, judicial precedence can yield undesirable future results, even if the means led to favorable results in the short-term.

It has the potential to do so, if that precedent is followed in other cases. However, courts often issue a more case specific ruling which they do not extend to other cases in order to avoid unpopular extrapolations and extensions to other scenarios.

In reality, many decisions are not as circumspect as law professors would have students believe. There are power cycles within even our vaunted judiciary.

[Moliere]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/09/politi...html?hpt=hp_t1

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Thursday said he was "embarrassed and humiliated" by the conduct of "some people on my team" over an unfolding political scandal, saying he knew nothing of their activities to apparently punish a local mayor by creating traffic jams in and around his community.

Sounds like he governs a bit like Obama.

[byu71]

You have to look at the context of my statement. IT is as reasonable as his calling me a sexist for opposing Hillary.

Context is king.

Somebody called you sexist for opposing Hillary?? I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

[Pelado]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/09/politi...html?hpt=hp_t1

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Thursday said he was "embarrassed and humiliated" by the conduct of "some people on my team" over an unfolding political scandal, saying he knew nothing of their activities to apparently punish a local mayor by creating traffic jams in and around his community.

Sounds like he governs a bit like Obama.

[cougjunkie]

I don't believe in anything. It is not a matter of faith.

It is an intellectual exercise of consistency. If I am to demand personal liberties, I cannot be intellectually inconsistent by disallowing any particular liberty. It would be intellectually inconsistent to fail to support the expansion of this liberty desired by others. As a straight, I have no need of this liberty. But as I a libertarian I must support the reasonable expansion of personal liberties for all persons desiring to excise liberties from the state.

Emotionally, I have no investment in this cause, take no credit or blame for its expansion but it is reasonable to expand all liberties at the expense of the state.

Fiscal policy and monetary policy speak to a minimalist state where personal liberties are maximized.

This is the post of someone trying way to hard to sound smart.

[TripletDaddy]

Don't lecture me, living in your one horse town with all those emptry freeways criss-crossing the blasted landscape.

There are several horses in my town. And my commute here is worse than it was back home, unfortunately. Not worse than when I drove up to LA, but definitely worse than when I stayed in OC.

Some locals here will point out with pride that SLC was built under divine inspiration, citing wide streets as an example of some sort of civic soothsaying. Why couldn't Utah receive some divine inspiration when laying out its freeway system, or lack thereof? It takes me a minimum of 12-15 minutes every day to get to the freeway from my house. If you have weather or construction delays, it can take 30 minutes.

Utah needs more freeways.

[cougjunkie]

There are several horses in my town. And my commute here is worse than it was back home, unfortunately. Not worse than when I drove up to LA, but definitely worse than when I stayed in OC.

Some locals here will point out with pride that SLC was built under divine inspiration, citing wide streets as an example of some sort of civic soothsaying. Why couldn't Utah receive some divine inspiration when laying out its freeway system, or lack thereof? It takes me a minimum of 12-15 minutes every day to get to the freeway from my house. If you have weather or construction delays, it can take 30 minutes.

Utah needs more freeways.

Utah really has limited options heading East and West.

I agree.

[Topper]

Somebody called you sexist for opposing Hillary?? I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

That same someone who is now called out for opposing Judge Shelby's decision. The door swings both ways.

I would like a woman to be President. That person in the eighties could have been Margaret Thatcher.
That person should NOT be Hillary as she is nothing more than a smarmy, self-absorbed, conniving, corrupt politician. Rice would be a better choice and Palin is no choice at all.

[TripletDaddy]

It will cause me eight years of ulcers if Hillary is elected. Unlike the famous celebrities, I do not financially have the option of relocating upon her election, but if enabled, I would gladly depart until her termination of her Presidency. But then even after her stepping down, we will have to hear her comment upon every big event. It is truly an awful thought to have Hillary elected. Hillary is proof that God does not exist. It's a dog eat dog world out there.

Get your Tums ready. I also like how you accurately predicted 8 years, not 4. I don't share your opposition to Hillary or the Clintons, but understand that they are a polarizing lot.

I won't be surprised if Utah Mos turn out in droves to vote against the first female president, just like they voted against the first black president.

[USUC]

Utah really has limited options heading East and West.

I agree.

But plenty going North and South. My understanding is that Mountain View Corridor was designed to be a future freeway (there is more than enough space for expansion). But again, East to West is a problem.

[Topper]

Get your Tums ready. I also like how you accurately predicted 8 years, not 4. I don't share your opposition to Hillary or the Clintons, but understand that they are a polarizing lot.

I won't be surprised if Utah Mos turn out in droves to vote against the first female president, just like they voted against the first black president.

I know some clients who have done business with her. She is a despicable human being, her fiscal and monetary policies as an ideology are horrible, and her choices in regard to foreign policy are disastrous.

The GOP is screwing the pooch as usual. I will probably have to find a way to defer income. I am taking a fancy to "carried interests" btw. That glorious option will likely be screwed up in the next ten years.

It is easier to win elections by promising voters the spoils of war, than in preaching self-restraint and denial. It is of small wonder that Democrats win elections on a national scale, but the GOP does a most excellent job in promoting unelectable candidates.