|
NAVIGATION
|
NEWS TIPS!
RightMichigan.com
Who are the NERD fund donors Mr Snyder?Tweets about "#RightMi, -YoungLibertyMI, -dennislennox,"
 |
McDirty little secretsBy maidintheus, Section News
Can't issues be handled without crippling business/people/economies.
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." What don't we agree with here? It will not save MI businesses tons of money and it will push some out altogether. The incentive produces a monopoly. We should not be getting our energy policy from a Sears sales rep. That would be like getting our foreign policy from Pres. Carter. For something to stand up in the free market it will need to be better then some of those water saving toilets which ended up using more because they needed to be flushed more then once to get the job done. Your saying something doesn't make it true. How and where is the monopoly going to help businesses? I'm saying just a cursory glance indicates it won't. Perhaps we can agree the "new energy tax" will be handed down to the customer. The businesses outside the monopoly won't be able to afford the tax. This doesn't help business or consumer/people. Making it sound like it's going to cost me one extra dollar is silly. The dollar (read above article) is another cost in considering many costs. Your saying something doesn't make it true. You say, "I've got no dog in the PA 141 rereg/dereg fight." Whaaaaaaha haa ha ha!! I say, read what you've written for proof otherwise. That would be like me saying I don't have a "dog" in it. I think it's obvious we do. Isn't the real issue: Whats our objective? If our objectives are the same (smart choices/what's best for individuals/what works/freedom/law/economics) we can talk about the different approaches. If your objective is to discourage my choice, individual freedoms, and the law, we are on a different course entirely. The U.S. came up with the nuclear thing but we use it the least. Do a study on that. You have shown that you are not aware of the true meaning of the word progressive. Study nuclear power and then come back and make comments based on what you know, minus the blanket statement/fear tactics. An opinion is one thing but it doesn't make it fact. Here's a place to start: http://www.jbs.org/node/371 This doesn't even begin to explain the problems with this monopoly and the positions you proselytize, mcdirt. My saying something doesn't make it true. We can choose to search out the information and honestly dialog about all (the whole picture) angles.
a Triple Threat/recognizing differences:
McDirt opines. But why disregard the law and use a strawman instead? See mcdirt here: http://www.rightmichigan.com/story/2008/4/19/01414/5278 If mcdirt was remotely interested in "what's good for the whole country" he would nicely dialog from a position on the information found in The Three Documents. This isn't what we see though. What we see is someone coming in to quip little put downs to our snarky comments. We won't find this level of criticism when the Mcdirt people are on their own threads. So, the dirty game is obvious and this type of technique is found in the Andy Dillon camp of obstructing the right of citizens freedoms with disregard of the law...The Three Documents. I believe that McDirt and Company are afraid of The Three Documents and consider them a Triple Threat, as well they should. This is why they can't dialog from a position of said docs/law. They can only insert disruption, strawman topics, and their dogma. We will not see statements of inquiry or comment with info taken/based/referenced in light of said docs. I don't really care about personal choices, that's on you. We are talking about this country that we all (citizens) have a share in. This country is: The Three Documents. When someone doesn't have these docs for a basis of their "set beliefs" it shows they are undermining them or are unaware of them. Perhaps our visitor is just unaware. One can't be unaware and be a citizen, one of us, We The People. Mcdirt isn't unintelligent. Is there an intent to use subterfuge, an artifice or expedient used to evade a rule, escape a consequence, hide something, etc, and undermine said documents? McDirt purports opinions as valid nonetheless.
Share This:
McDirty little secrets | 3 comments (3 topical, 0 hidden)
McDirty little secrets | 3 comments (3 topical, 0 hidden)
|
 |
