Frogwatch wrote:
On Aug 11, 3:34 pm, "Don White" wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message

...

I just dont like being told what to do whether it be by Libs or Cons.
Cons are traditionally the party of religion but hardly anybody takes
the religious right serriously so I ignore them. It seems to me that
it is always the libs attacking personal freedom and demanding
adherence to their ideas whereas cons at least believe in
individuality. If the Cons started demanding I go along with their
ideas I'd resist them too. I resist the religion of Obama for the
same reason I resist Conservative religion, most religion is just
nuts. Libs wanna force me to pay for health schemes I do not think
will work and I know will bankrupt all of us so I resist that.
Likewise I resisted the parts of the patriot act that required
librarians to turn over records (eventually overturned).
My point in all of this is that for me it is not a matter of Liberal
vs Conservative because I am simply not conservative. It IS a matter
of freedom vs servitude.
It's the greediness of your Wall Street and corporate leaders who will
bankrupt you.

Wall St did not force me to buy anything, the govt forces me to pay
taxes. Nobody forced you to overpay for an overpriced piece of real
estate. The govt does force me to support them.
Some govt is good because Libertarianism simply does not work. Govt
regulation is actually good if it isnt too extreme. I've got no
objection to reasonable taxation. I think we should have a safety net
for people who have problems or who make a few poor choices. However,
dependency should not be a choice for people. Likewise, given a
choice tween pvt and govt enterprise, I'd favor private.
I see nothing radical about my views whereas I do see people who favor
extreme regulations and govt intrusion into peoples lives as being
bizarre and extreme.


Bizarre? You mean forcing honesty and accountability on health insurers?