Americans who support freedom and limited government think not.
Social conservatives and Republicans disagree, to the point of supporting nanny-state criminalization of felonious card-playing.
Dogs? They appear to choose freedom.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Republicans Choosing Small Government And Freedom? The Odds Appear To Be Against It
Should the government forbid adults to use the Intertubes to play poker for money?
Americans who support freedom and limited government think not.
Social conservatives and Republicans disagree, to the point of supporting nanny-state criminalization of felonious card-playing.
Dogs? They appear to choose freedom.
Americans who support freedom and limited government think not.
Social conservatives and Republicans disagree, to the point of supporting nanny-state criminalization of felonious card-playing.
Dogs? They appear to choose freedom.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
For somebody who always reads local politics in terms of “who benefits,” you could do better than feigning naivety about national politics. This bill, whatever its other merits, is Reid paying-off his campaign donors by boosting the interests of big (Nevada) casinos over the hundreds of small ones now open around the country.
Naive? That's believing nanny-state social conservatives will abandon their hypocrisy when they no longer suspect Harry Reid is playing politics.
It is a very vital bit of hypocrisy to anybody who wants to be able to raise money for various local and state governments by taxing gambling.
But irrelevant to the freedom-haters who want to put dope-smokers, poker players, abortion doctors, and porn producers in jail; treat gays like dirt; and force-feed their fairy tales in public life.
Post a Comment