I'm assuming nothing about which way you lean politically as I'm speaking directly to the content of your post. My point was directed at the rationale you used to denigrate Scott Walker on this particular issue. Surely you know that there are legitimate arguments for/against casinos that go well beyond jobs. In Walker's opinion, the negatives outweighed the positives. This is not about hypocrisy as you have framed this. It's more about him approaching a complex issue rationally and making decisions as to what he feels is best for the State. You may not agree with his decision, but that doesn't make him a hypocrite for coming to a conclusion on an issue that you personally don't happen to agree with.
Well said. Personally I disagree with you and Walker on this issue, but your analysis is spot-on. It isn't an open and shut question, but rather relative weighting of individual liberty versus societal damage.
You posted some things that an insignificant number of politicians have done or have attempted to do. Politicians on all sides propose and/or attempt to pass legislation that not everyone on "in their camp" or on the other sides has agreed is a solution. It will always be this way until ordinary citizens have either the means or the exact same influence corporate and special interest lobbyists enjoy.
Quality education and due diligence in all societal and political issues is what's needed to keep legislators and individuals in check.
Yes, an insignificant number of politicians in the same fashion as an insignificant number of politicians are pushing to ban teaching evolution in school. That doesn't mean that insignificant number of politicians doesn't have a significant effect on those in their power.
In any case, let's not forget that in my statement I was actually defending the left by pointing out their pet causes have the exact same trade-offs between societal evils and individual liberty as do more traditionally right causes such as banning gambling. In my opinion that's just as important as recognizing that on any non-trivial issue there is some cross-pollination between mostly left and mostly right, since most people are complex critters. Far too often we represent our side as flawed saints and the other side as Spandex-clad villains dry-washing their hands in between petting somnolent Persian kitties.
I highly doubt Walker doesn't believe in evolution. He just knows that saying he does believe in evolution will hurt him in the primaries.
Exactly. But aren't you really, really tired of politicians whose every statement is gamed to not offend any voters? Isn't that just as bad as reporters playing gotcha games to boost their own ideology?
Obama is NOT my guy. I love America and thus did not wish to see her fundamentally transformed, and I fundamentally disagree with probably 3/4 of what Obama wants to do. But it was truly refreshing to see how candid he was about his true agenda, even if most people read into it what they wanted to hear.
Facebook
Twitter