Started By
Message
re: I Stand in Awe of Arkansas' Legislators
Posted on 3/27/15 at 8:55 pm to Killean
Posted on 3/27/15 at 8:55 pm to Killean
quote:
those new laws/regs tend to be to prevent any sort of change and to preserve a status quo
Taxation of mileage preserves the status quo?
Forcing civics classes to cover history is status quo?
0
Posted on 3/27/15 at 9:55 pm to SunHog
quote:
I Stand in Awe of Arkansas' Legislators
I stand in awe of the voters.
Posted on 3/27/15 at 10:10 pm to Stonehog
Could be worse folks, we could have Smilin' Bobby Jindal as Governor.
Posted on 3/27/15 at 10:42 pm to Killean
quote:I didn't think about that. Having like 4 weeks dedicated to Colonial History every single year is pretty stupid.
yeah.. it means ALL of them..
Posted on 3/28/15 at 12:42 am to SunHog
Its really embarrassing, I deal with people all around the world, North America mainly, this just helps back up the stereotypes people have of this state and the backwardness that comprises it.
Posted on 3/28/15 at 10:11 am to SunHog
Beside the point, but like Yelp was going to invest any fricking money in Arkansas in the first place...
Posted on 3/28/15 at 10:16 am to WonderWartHawg
They were...
It pisses me off because there are no fricking tech jobs in Arkansas. I'm a tech by trade.
That's why I and others left the state. You can't get tech jobs. One of my better friends really good systems afmin got laid off by HP, senate making it harder for him to get a real job. But then, he's a freeloader because he's on unemployment
It pisses me off because there are no fricking tech jobs in Arkansas. I'm a tech by trade.
That's why I and others left the state. You can't get tech jobs. One of my better friends really good systems afmin got laid off by HP, senate making it harder for him to get a real job. But then, he's a freeloader because he's on unemployment
This post was edited on 3/28/15 at 10:20 am
Posted on 3/28/15 at 10:36 am to Killean
Posted on 3/28/15 at 10:37 am to vengeanceofrain
quote:
They were...
Must have missed that announcement. Disappointed.
Posted on 3/28/15 at 10:45 am to WonderWartHawg
I don't agree with the definition of Conservative being "generally keeping things the way they are". That is way too convoluted and confusing. Everybody has a different viewpoint of how things "use to be" and nothing ever stays exactly the same anyway.
Conservatism is the ideology or belief in smaller government, less government intervention and meddling, and less control by government over it's citizens, letting citizens have more power and freedom to make decisions for themselves on what is right and how to live their lives.
Republicans use this definition when it concerns business and taxes. They consider themselves "conservative" when they argue for less government intervention in the business world, less intervention in the environment for example, let the people who are making millions selling a product that creates some collateral damage to the environment in places they don't live in decide if the damage is warranted.
Somehow over the years Republicans have managed to assign a completely different definition to the word "conservative" when it comes to social issues. Republican stance on social issues is that the government is generally in a better position to take freedom of choice away from its citizens on social issues as they continually push for greater government control of people's personal lives against their will.
Republicans are extremely LIBERAL when it comes to social issues. It doesn't get anymore liberal than empowering the government to take control over a person's own body, to legislate what music they can listen to, who they can marry, what words they can use in public, how they are supposed to have sex and who with, force their citizens to become liars to fit in with their determined version of religious society, and destroy anything that might better inform its citizens and expose their lies, etc. etc.
Democrats and libertarian politicians should have been smart enough to have used the word "liberal" (which republicans have been so successful in demonizing) against them on social issues and been able to spoon feed that to the ignorant masses that make up the majority of our electorate so that they could better understand what they are truly supporting when they vote to strip away our freedoms as Americans in electing these extreme dogmatic candidates.
Conservatism is the ideology or belief in smaller government, less government intervention and meddling, and less control by government over it's citizens, letting citizens have more power and freedom to make decisions for themselves on what is right and how to live their lives.
Republicans use this definition when it concerns business and taxes. They consider themselves "conservative" when they argue for less government intervention in the business world, less intervention in the environment for example, let the people who are making millions selling a product that creates some collateral damage to the environment in places they don't live in decide if the damage is warranted.
Somehow over the years Republicans have managed to assign a completely different definition to the word "conservative" when it comes to social issues. Republican stance on social issues is that the government is generally in a better position to take freedom of choice away from its citizens on social issues as they continually push for greater government control of people's personal lives against their will.
Republicans are extremely LIBERAL when it comes to social issues. It doesn't get anymore liberal than empowering the government to take control over a person's own body, to legislate what music they can listen to, who they can marry, what words they can use in public, how they are supposed to have sex and who with, force their citizens to become liars to fit in with their determined version of religious society, and destroy anything that might better inform its citizens and expose their lies, etc. etc.
Democrats and libertarian politicians should have been smart enough to have used the word "liberal" (which republicans have been so successful in demonizing) against them on social issues and been able to spoon feed that to the ignorant masses that make up the majority of our electorate so that they could better understand what they are truly supporting when they vote to strip away our freedoms as Americans in electing these extreme dogmatic candidates.
This post was edited on 3/28/15 at 10:52 am
Posted on 3/28/15 at 10:48 am to WonderWartHawg
And links to two petitions making the rounds
LINK
LINK
Doubt anything happens because of the petitions (not sure anything actually has come of a single petition in AR), but it's there for those who wish to sign it.
ETA: Going off Dale's point, I used to brag about Arkansas's progressive nature compared to the rest of the states around us, particularly MS, TN, and TX. Now I look like a gigantic arse and AR looks no better than the rest unless Asa vetoes that bill.
LINK
LINK
Doubt anything happens because of the petitions (not sure anything actually has come of a single petition in AR), but it's there for those who wish to sign it.
ETA: Going off Dale's point, I used to brag about Arkansas's progressive nature compared to the rest of the states around us, particularly MS, TN, and TX. Now I look like a gigantic arse and AR looks no better than the rest unless Asa vetoes that bill.
This post was edited on 3/28/15 at 10:57 am
Posted on 3/28/15 at 11:06 am to BarkRuffalo
This is not just an Arkansas problem. I see it daily here in Alabama and in Louisiana where most of my family live.
The bottom line (from my perspective) is until the majority actually gets off their arse, goes to the polls and VOTES then the fringe will continue to send their minions to "represent".
This comes from a "born and raised Dixiecrat" turned Regan Republican that now votes not from a party line but who I feel best represents the majority of their constituency.
Don't come at me as "Pro Life" and then vote against any social programs that would support the families and children you "protected".
The bottom line (from my perspective) is until the majority actually gets off their arse, goes to the polls and VOTES then the fringe will continue to send their minions to "represent".
This comes from a "born and raised Dixiecrat" turned Regan Republican that now votes not from a party line but who I feel best represents the majority of their constituency.
Don't come at me as "Pro Life" and then vote against any social programs that would support the families and children you "protected".
Posted on 3/28/15 at 11:11 am to BarkRuffalo
There are lawyers literally waiting in the wings, track shoes on so they can get out off the blocks a bit faster, to sue the first time this law backfires. Which it will. It is going to directly and indirectly cost the state a chunk of change and we can't afford that.
I'm probably a lot closer to being a Republican on many issues then I am a Democrat but this law will accomplish nothing good and give the state a black eye. I have lived in this state most of my life, and I can honestly say that religious freedom of expression isn't really a problem here.
I'm probably a lot closer to being a Republican on many issues then I am a Democrat but this law will accomplish nothing good and give the state a black eye. I have lived in this state most of my life, and I can honestly say that religious freedom of expression isn't really a problem here.
Posted on 3/28/15 at 11:12 am to PygmalionEffect
Here is what Goldwater had to say about the religious right overtaking the GOP and the conservative movement.
“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”
? Barry M. Goldwater
“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”
? Barry M. Goldwater
Posted on 3/28/15 at 12:36 pm to PygmalionEffect
quote:Liberalism is not about "empowering the government to take control over a person's own body," it's about working to achieve liberty and equality for all people. The things you listed as being "liberal" are all completely antithetical to liberalism.
Republicans are extremely LIBERAL when it comes to social issues. It doesn't get anymore liberal than empowering the government to take control over a person's own body, to legislate what music they can listen to, who they can marry, what words they can use in public, how they are supposed to have sex and who with, force their citizens to become liars to fit in with their determined version of religious society, and destroy anything that might better inform its citizens and expose their lies, etc. etc.
Posted on 3/28/15 at 3:35 pm to vengeanceofrain
quote:I noticed that. I was trying to get my foot in the door into the tech industry when I moved to Fayetteville, ended up just working for a bank. There's a serious shortage.
It pisses me off because there are no fricking tech jobs in Arkansas
Posted on 3/29/15 at 10:23 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:
Liberalism is not about "empowering the government to take control over a person's own body," it's about working to achieve liberty and equality for all people.
That is not the republican party's definition, and that was my point.
Let me simplify it for you.
Which party represents themselves as "the party of small government"?
But on most social issues republicans push for more laws that empower the government to eliminate individual freedom and force all citizens to assimilate to a rigid set of mores dictated by a minority segment of the population.
More laws to suppress and control individual choice = Bigger Government not smaller government.
This post was edited on 3/29/15 at 10:23 am
Posted on 3/29/15 at 11:07 am to PygmalionEffect
I don't see how anyone can argue that point.
Posted on 3/29/15 at 12:15 pm to PygmalionEffect
quote:
But on most social issues republicans push for more laws that empower the government to eliminate individual freedom and force all citizens to assimilate to a rigid set of mores dictated by a minority segment of the population.
And you think that's liberalism?
Posted on 3/29/15 at 1:08 pm to PygmalionEffect
"Liberal" and "leftist" aren't the same thing. Its a shame they've gotten confused in our society.
Liberals like freedom, science and options. Leftists hate free speech, guns, etc. I think the founding fathers were Liberals on a lot of issues. Marxists have co-opted the "liberal" party because it was easier than co-opting the conservative side.
Liberals like freedom, science and options. Leftists hate free speech, guns, etc. I think the founding fathers were Liberals on a lot of issues. Marxists have co-opted the "liberal" party because it was easier than co-opting the conservative side.
This post was edited on 3/29/15 at 1:09 pm
Page 2 of 13
Latest Arkansas News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News