workers paradise lost, capitalist paradise regained

Of course i know the story about right to work laws.  The particular case before the supreme court right now has nothing to do with Michigan.  It is some renegade California teachers who want to be freeloaders so they can breathe the rarefied air of liberty and not have part of their fat wages, which they only have because union predecessors fought for them, spent to advance the socialist paradise.  I think this particular case is limited to public sector unions, but one assumes it will go down to all unions, and help the capitalists return to their paradise lost of 6 workdays a week, and 12 hour days, and child labor, and certainly no minimum wage.  As you can see, I have an opinion on that.

I guess you quit the libs when they didn't want to topple Hussein (Saddam, not Obama, who of course they have wanted to topple since day one).  I seem to recall that pop of Rand was against it, and some of the leftiest dems, and probably the official libertarian party, which I assume is the one you quit.  So seeing the result of that bold move of planting boots in the desert do you still think that was a good idea?

I do agree that libs and lefties have different kinds of doveness.  The lefties are more like all men are brothers and the libs are more like fuck everybody else, but the end result is the same.

I don't see where Israel is in any trouble at all these days.  All their enemies, who were ineffectual and mostly hot air when they were threats to Israel, are lining up to fight each other, so maybe that was the secret plan behind breaking Iraq, to get them all fighting each other and leaving Israel alone.  All the neocons were strongly pro Israel.

That thing about fighting a war for other ends than defeating the enemy reminds me of your theories where we get into wars with the purpose of losing them, I forget why, to bring shame to the state I think.  I always wondered where you got those outlandish theories.  Lately I have been reading a little bit about the Birchers which I remember you were one, and that was one of their chief tenets, that we (or rather the secret commisars among us) got us into these things so that we could lose them.  They were conspiracy theorists before conspiracy theories became cool.

The reps were able to block single player because they had the insurance companies on their side on that one.  Once single-payer was gone the insurance companies changed sides.

I don't think these guys who are rushing off to the emporium to buy their fifth or sixth gun are buying target or hunting rifles, I believe they are buying something beefier, something that looks cooler slung over the shoulder or strapped to the hip when they occupy some bird sanctuary in the middle of nowhere.

I don't think any of those gun nuts, except the young ones that are just coming of age, are buying their first guns.  The people who didn't have one before Obama still don't have any.

You are aware I assume that in recent polls about 55 percent think gun controls should be more strict, 10 percent less, and 30 kept as they are.  Which I realize doesn't mean that much because gun control nuts are concerned about other issues too whereas gun nuts are mostly just concerned about guns.

It's kind of a red herring to pin gun ownership on Obama because you guys have been filling your basements before he was elected and you will be filling them after he is gone.