• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Ann Coulter's final solution the Occupy problem: Shoot them

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
JSt0rm said:
Large government is also intrusive government yes or no?

Or do conservative want a small in size but highly intrusive government into the lives of citizens?
Click to expand...

You are a day late and a dollar short. Already addressed that.

Now:

Support your stance they are related.
 
Everything points to a $ amount savings by not having a death penalty.

This $ is money spent by the government on government services. By reducing it you reduce not only the total size of the government but the scope of the government.

Both of these are issues championed by the right (when they want votes)
 
Jhhnn said:
If you've ever made sense, chucky, that wasn't the occasion.

It won't get cheaper, nor should it. The frontier closed 120 years ago, and the days when executions were expedient disappeared shortly thereafter.

Fundie-whacks everywhere share certain characteristics. In the world of the Ayatollahs, all appeals are made directly to the Lord, and I doubt that our own death penalty zealots would want it to be any different.

See, y'all really do have something in common.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about appeals?
 
JSt0rm said:
I dont understand your question. rephrase it.
Click to expand...

You claimed that small government republicans are hypocrits if they support a more intrusive government.

Since hypocrisy is basically saying one thing and doing another, you have to show the two are opposites in order for your sentence to be anything but complete nonsense.

Show that small government cannot be intrusive...support your statement.
 
cybrsage said:
JSt0rm said:
cybrsage said:
... Capital punishment neither increases nor decreases the size of government. The two are not linked at all.
Click to expand...
Care to back that up with more then your opinion?
Click to expand...
Use simple logic.

...

So. Basic logic says capital punishment and the size of government are not related.

Your turn. Support your stance they are.
Click to expand...
Size of government in the context of 'large or small' usually refers to the quantity and degree of its powers. Capital punishment is a power that can be given to or taken away from the government. Logic says that giving one more power to the government increases its size while taking away a single power decreases its size. Is this simple enough for you?
 
dank69 said:
Size of government in the context of 'large or small' usually refers to the quantity and degree of its powers. Capital punishment is a power that can be given to or taken away from the government. Logic says that giving one more power to the government increases its size while taking away a single power decreases its size. Is this simple enough for you?
Click to expand...

Simple, but wrong.

This would mean that anyone who supports small government must want to be rid of the justice system altogether, which is so silly not even Ausm would say it...and he is the forum jester, whose main purpose is to say silly things.
 
cybrsage said:
Simple, but wrong.

This would mean that anyone who supports small government must want to be rid of the justice system altogether, which is so silly not even Ausm would say it...and he is the forum jester, whose main purpose is to say silly things.
Click to expand...
Hyperbole only helps your case in the eyes of the dim witted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top