This is the thread for the Fox News "Daily Show for conservatives" thing

And what do you man by not have thought things through thoroughly" shadowcat?
I find when people say things like that they mean "accept political parties, if you don't you're wasting your time!" or "The government needs to interfere on behalf of (insert X whiney group who has no right to complain) because they're too lazy to get off their ass and do something other than whine!"
I had this LOONG discussion wih a very leftist woman. it was about the smoking bans.
"but what about the people who don't smoke?"
Who's making them go there?
"Where else will they go?"
A non=smoking restaraunt.
"Those didn't exist."
Hahahaa! Yeah they did. they were all over.
"You probably don't remember, but ost places were either smoking all over or the smoking section was poorly divided."
Yeah, I remember, and whle some places were poorly set up, newer restaraunts were very different.
"circular argument!"
No.
"Why should I have do deal with the smoke?"
You don't. Go somewhere else.
"Why should I have to?"
Because the owner of a private establishment has chosen not to abolish a certain legal activity.
"Where else should I go?"
That loop continued for about 10 minutes.
Eventually I suggested the alternative of getting together and starting a business that didn't have smoking.
"Well that's really hard!"(more or less)
Name a business that's easy and guaranteed, and I'll punch you for being stupid(isn't what I said, but it's what I meant).
"But a non smoking restaraunt would fail!"
Well first, that would show a lack of interest by the public for that kind of restaraunt, and second we're sitting in a restaraunt that's been non-smoking from day one and it's doing just fine.
"but what about the health risks for employees?"
at that point I gave up and didn't say "Who forced them to work there? NO ONE likes to work in food service, so they've probably got jack for skills and shouldn't be picky!"
I did however touch on the idea of PRECEDENT.

SO. if you're calling me an idealist, thank you.
If you just think that the government should be like an overprotective christian parent and watch and guide our every move, try making choices for yourself for a whole month. No book can tell you what to do, you cannot ask for advice. You will make every decision for yourself.
I suggest you do this on vacation.
My guess is you'll either be addicted to freedom or be frightened by choice. In case one, I'll congradulate you, in case two, I pity you.

Quickest sign that you have no argument: "lolz your punctuation sucks," which, while not a direct quote is fairly humouous in it's irony.

Oh, and I quit smoking last month, and prefer my brain cells specifically not coated in a waxy, irremovable substance that causes me to be too lazy for the letters Y and O.

and what on earth do you mean by "intelligible speech"?
I'm not DICTATING this so that's utter nonsense. Please take the time to type what you mean, as this is obviously not that.

Because clearly a) no-one here has ever had to make decisions for themselves before; and ii) relying on others for advice is a sign of weakness.

GZ I'm sick and tired of libertarians telling me that defending and promoting enforcement of labor, health and environmental standards is some kind of delusion we should unshackle ourselves from. Stop telling me what to do. And stop pretending that your standard of living and well-being is somehow unconnected from generations of political and human-rights movements that worked, fought and sacrificed so that you could enjoy the fruits of a society that hasn't yet managed to pollute all its rivers, allow banks and speculators to drive its economy into the ground, and drive all its citizens into an early grave with backbreaking, low-paid work.

"Buck up! You wouldn't have lasted a day on the Oregon Trail you buncha softies!" is not even close to anything I've said.
In fact, I have no idea what it could possibly have to do with liitation of personal freedoms.

I'm not 100% against government involvement in things like pollution(dumping, factory emissions, things that affect large areas) or fair labor practices(minimum wage, required to carry workers comp). I have a problem with the erosion of personal freedom.
Telling a business they can't allow their customers to do certain things is insane.
First it's smoking, next it's swearing, then it's questioning your leaders.
That's a 20 year journey, but it's quite possible.

1. A has occurred (or will or might occur); therefore
2. B will inevitably happen. (slippery slope)
3. B is wrong; therefore
4. A is wrong. (straw man)

This form of argument often provides evaluative judgments on social change: once an exception is made to some rule, nothing will hold back further, more egregious exceptions to that rule.

Note that these arguments may indeed have validity, but they require some independent justification of the connection between their terms: otherwise the argument (as a logical tool) remains fallacious.

i am shocked - SHOCKED - that you support government interaction in regulating harmful emissions you have nothing to do with, yet oppose it regulating harmful emissions that you personally enjoy

you, sir, are a true patriot

WOW you don't know anything about international economics or the realities of global trade.

Some people must have.
Some people have not.
But they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.
Some people will work.
Some simply will not.
But they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.
Like this: It's society's fault I don't have a job.
It's society's fault I am a slob.
I have potential no one can see.
Give me welfare. Let me be me!
Hey, Bud, you're livin' in the Land of the Free.
No one's gonna hand you opportunity!
Some people must have.
Some never will.
But they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.
I don't have a house. I don't have a car.
I spend all my money getting' drunk in a bar.
I wanna be rich. I don't have a brain.
Just give me a handout while I complain.
Or this: I wanna stay in bed and watch TV.
Go out weekends in a limousine
And dance all night takin' lots of drugs
And wake up when I wanna.
Hey, Bud, you're livin' in the Land of the Free.
No one's gonna hand you opportunity!
Some people will learn.
Some never do.
But they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.
Yeah, they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.

He's a whore on the level of Mo Rocca, this is not that surprising.

1. that people really believe jimmy fallon brought the roffles over tina fey
2. bhopal
3. smart people wasting their time arguing with the funtionally retarded.

SRSLY. The only thing he ever did on that show is giggle and bat his eyes coyly at the camera.

1. do not EVER contest anything The GZeus says (cf. IMM, ILG, countless examples)
2. I will teach anybody how to install and run the killfile in firefox ok? I should write up a howto and post it to a thread.

"WOW you don't know anything about international economics or the realities of global trade."
So the complete debasement of the manufacturing base in the USA has nothing to do with everything saying "made in china" on it?
I thought people in this thread would be against big busiess CEOs getting richer as they lay off their union workers to put shildren to work.

"I think the GZeus is a Libertarian because he wants to buy Japan-only hentai PS2 games and the modchips to play them from Lik Sang."
Buh?
I don't have a PS2(kinda want one, but only for Katamari) and I was against Sony's actions because they(I believe unlawfully) interfered with free trade.
I don't buy from china if it's reasonably possible, in fact.
H-games are boring as hell, dude. I used to hit keys at random to 'play' one of them yars back before I could read japanese. Once I could read the dialogue I realised that the story I thought it in had was false and it was in fact retarded. (stunted, emotionally and socially, but I won't get into why)
Please excuse this rambling bumbling post but I don't like walking away from misunderstandings or weird slander.

GZeus, do you know that modern anti-smoking legislation - in every municipality and country where it's been adopted - has its foundation and justification in workplace health and safety? The "door" that was left open for this legislation to walk through was won over the last century in a disparate, gruelling set of battles to secure the right of workers to not be driven to an early grave simply because of the place they work.

What kind of door does it open, what kind of PRECEDENT does it set, to say that some lines of work are simply not deserving of workplace health safeguards? Because they are "dives", or unsavoury, or whatever other reason, big or small?