Hey!

I live for apathy!

I'd name him "Bob".

How about the point that the "compromise" is after the fact, and Catholic Charities in Massachusetts has already been persecuted out of the business of finding good homes for needy children for refusing to consider  newly recognized "equivalent" relationships to actually be equivalent to traditionally married couples for the purpose of raising children.

You are not responsible for crimes that others do in your name. At least not until you deny those crimes occurred and push to continue the abuse.

Who else? Can we just close our eyes, plug our ears and "la la la" until the killing stops?

Trading partners we've beaten or liberated outnumber those we haven't - by a lot.

Which "neocon" whipped out the Korea example?

This isn't about changing the definition of "marriage".

It's about changing the definition of "equality".

Sorry, text filters out sarcasm.

What's "Mad Men"?

I love the Islays, but I recognize that it's an acquired taste.

If forced to describe the flavor, my attempt would include phrases like "freshly burned band-aid".

Political parties usually have formal names. I don't know about you, but I capitalize proper nouns without my eyes going all glassy.

I've also been known to capitalize the names of politicians with whom I disagree.

If there is no connection, there's still something wrong with the DoD if it's management - political or military - believes that Evangelicals and the Catholic Church are the most dangerous groups of religious extremists.

Those groups could only be considered extremist if you allow that a very few extremists spoil the whole barrel.

I don't disagree on either point. But without the action of those servicemen, and others who didn't die, there would be nothing from which that capitalist growth could spring.

I do not defend the policy of full military support of South Korea. They should build their own military. But they could not be where they are now without the war.

It's true that Vietnam is getting industrial despite our abandonment, but millions died there and in the surrounding countries because we failed in our agreement to support the South with materiel.

This is way out in the weeds from the original discussion, but Prager's point can be plainly seen: Some government action can actually preserve society.

I used to drive 10 mph over the limit on rural roads, and 5 mph over the limit on limited access urban highways, always monitoring my passport.

I still follow this practice on my motorcycle, secure in the knowledge that this makes it much more likely that I'll pass traffic rather than traffic passing me.

Several changes have caused me to re-evaluate the practice while driving a car or truck. First, Texas changed the state speed limit to 75 from 70/65 night. This allows shorter travel times and is safer as there are fewer speeders so the differential between the fastest and general population of speed limit followers has been reduced. Second, toll roads have opened that have speed limits as high as 85 mph. Thirdly, I now live in an area with zero limited access urban highways. And finally, Texas DPS now uses laser speed measurement in most cases, and this can't be reliably detected until they point the gun at my car.

So, most of the time, I now follow the speed limit. It's safer from a legal perspective, and with the higher limits traveling the speed limit is safer and faster.

Tommy, Brent, for clarity I capitalize Libertarian when I'm talking about the party, and I don't capitalize when I'm talking about the ideology or ideals. Same with Democrat and democrat, Republican or republican, Socialist or socialist.

It's when the ideals aren't clear that the train goes off the track.

That's a fairly brutal judgement of the place where well fed and free people built my television and my car, don't you think?

I'm pretty sure that neither man is capable of phrasing a statement in 200 words or less.