Rather than refute or counterpoint someone's position, it's easier to discredit them by labeling them a ..........., be it liberal, progressive, racist, conservative, left wing, right wing, etc.

The other problem is that many Americans are like children, demanding instant gratification. It is unrealistic to expect that government (or anyone else) can fix over night a problem that was 5 years or more in the making.

True: our entitlement mentality is certainly not limited just to those wanting handouts.

Disaster preparedness supplies in the main; guns, to taste, with reloading facilities and about a gazillion primers of every size you use, perhaps even down to the flintlock, flints/flint and a barrelful of old tire weights for melting down into bullets; explosives, in limited quantity and really more for blasting stumps.

And every Firefox book there is.

Darn, I only voted for one: I like the "Congress is corrupt but the Republic will survive them" option too.

When there is overmuch administration and too little of the productive, an organization is out of balance and it will fall. Government is not the productive wealth generator -- it is the administrative overhead. Too much overhead is bad for economic health of both corporations and nations.

Small government imposes but small burden upon wealth generation. This is to be desired, is it not?

[Too many statists have idiotically forgotten this. Do you wonder, now, why I speak as I do?]

When their manifest ideology demonstrates their unwisdom, is it wrong to affix the correct label?

There are some few here who would insist I am not among the wise, but these are people to whom wisdom is a stranger anyway, if what they write is a window into their thought.

Congress!? I'll tell ya what's wrong with Cong---ooh, look, a butterfly!

Who cares what the party, or if it's bipartisan. If they bankrupt us, they're evil bastards.

Speaking of evil bastards...

As this is an international forum I can't honestly see how it can be a reflection of the US political system.

I am going to be voting with my dollars. Or lack thereof in McDonald's case.

Rhetoric much?

It wasn't "McDonalds" telling workers what to do, it wasn't a "a multinational corporation like McDonalds threatening it's employees". Those are the grab lines that make for feel-good moral indignation.

It was one franchise owner doing something illegal, which the "evil multinational corporation" immediately disavowed.

Yebbut...
McDonalds is known worldwide for its heavy-handedness.
I agree with what you've said, but I'd have read the article with far more initial scepticism had it been Ben & Jerry's (for example).

Thanks for the reality-check, smooth.

Excellent blog read...

6 Political Talking Points that Need to Die





http://www.emagill.com/gallery/economics.jpg