So a woman you find attractive agrees to sit down with you and, rather than give her your full attention, you hover over the bartender? 

1.  You look like an overbearing micromanager right off the bat.  In her head she's probably thinking, "god, how would this guy react if I put 5 pounds on?"

2.  Your priorities are all screwed up.  Focus on the pretty lady in front of you, not the molecular makeup of your Martini.

3.  You're insulting the bartender.  He/she might not seem to care, but they do.   Order your drink as you like it, but don't hover. 

It doesn't matter who the POTUS is or what he says, no group is voluntarily going to give up their protected-class status.

I always thought that one of the best things about the James Bond franchise was that, throughout its history, it was edgy without ever being overly vulgar.  The sex scenes, the language, and the violence are all pretty tame.

To be clear, I don't have a problem with the mega corporations freely competing for consumer dollars.  It is my belief that the corner hardware store has a vested interest in the survival of your town.  Is he more expensive?  Maybe.  But both the wages paid and any profit he makes stays in town.  The hardware store owner is keenly aware of the difficulties of operating a small business and often supports other local small businesses.  

I work for a Fortune 500 co.  I'm not against big business, but supporting your local pizzeria does more good for your community than having Domino's delivered.    My local butcher and fishmonger make my town more attractive to prospective homebuyers.  They buy from local farmers.  In the end, I'd argue that while they may not create the same number of jobs, they create better jobs and better positive externalities than a super Walmart. 

True.  If the rank and file Democrat ever spent more than a minute considering the EPA's effect, they'd have a real hard time blaming the demise of manufacturing on corporate greed.

Also, these little towns would be wise to reject mega corporations moving in.  A McDonalds pulls money out of a community.  The local diner provides a comfortable life for the entire family that owns it and keeps money local.  When you save .50 cents on a box of nails at home depot rather than your local store, that money ends up in Atlanta.

I have no doubt that the U.S. could support a robust manufacturing economy.  We would need to be selective regarding what we create.  We can't compete on cheap plastic stuff, but why not higher quality items that require craftsmanship?  I think it is totally doable.  The real impediment is union bullying.  Why on earth would I risk my own capital to open a small factory if I knew that I would soon be under attack from union thugs? 

Tuck, I have no legal basis for my opinion on this, but would you be OK with Occupy setting up shop on the SCOTUS steps for the next 12 months?

Wow...I've never set off a Ricochet chain reaction like that before.

Faith and social justice are both justifications to restrict liberty through government intervention.  You have faith in one, and they have faith in the other.  Neither can be empirically proven to be correct but both can be used to restrict freedom.

change one word and you're best friends with every Liberal on the planet-

Plus, those individuals acting in their own interests need to be restrained by a social expectation of ethics grounded in social justice.

.

I'm not all that familiar with Switzerland's structure, but are there any checks and balances that would limit the legislature AND a majority from taking away the rights of a minority?  A bill of rights is an important aspect of a free society. 

It isn't the NAP or Christianity.  Libertarians offer NAP and Christianity...if that's what you, as an individual, want.  You would be free to practice your religion as you see fit and associate with those who share similar values.  The government would neither limit nor endorse your religious views or anyone else's.  Assuming we were able to install a Libertarian government in the U.S.A. doesn't mean everyone would immediately become a godless heathen overnight.

A libertarian state would still have courts that handle disputes, and law enforcement, and prisons to handle those who don't sign on...they just wouldn't fine/punish/incarcerate people for quite as many reasons as we currently do.

As I see it, the NAP is all-encompassing.  Christianity strikes me as less so, despite my being a Christian.

A libertarian state would require a broad acceptance of the non-aggression principle.  And what part of Christian values makes them more conducive to freedom than the non-aggression principle? 

Some people just look like Liberals...and if your political leanings are described as "I watch Fox News", then there's a 99% chance you're a troll.

Also, one of the basic tenets of progressivism is taking what doesn't belong to you:  100% incompatible with the concept of a "moral human being"