If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
Duplicate of another approved link: 7436096


(Reason Magazine)   Oh, so you thought they would only come for that fat guy's soda and that skank's pack of smokes, and leave you and your beer alone? That's so cute   (reason.com) divider line 5
    More: Obvious, obesities, physical examinations, Dietary Guidelines for Americans, George Burns, American adults  
•       •       •

182 clicks; Favorite

Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-11-25 03:42:19 PM
1 votes:

Lsherm: What I don't understand is that banning should be something that liberals fundamentally oppose, yet they embrace it just as willingly as any authoritarian. They just put the reasons for it in a different dress.


Other than Bloomberg in NYC with the soda ban and state politicians taxing the hell out of cigarettes, I don't really know of any serious pushes from the left to ban things.
2012-11-25 03:21:32 PM
1 votes:

Lsherm: Lionel Mandrake: Lsherm: God forbid anyone on earth enjoy themselves with something decadent, it pisses fundies and liberals off equally.

You don't actually know any liberals, do you?

I know plenty. The zealots are just as spiteful and mean-spirited as a fundie. The middle of the road liberals, the kind that don't want to ban anything, are just like the middle of the road conservatives.


Mean spirited zealots, huh? And what group of people has good zealots in it's ranks?

If your problem is with zealots, then I'm with you, but you don't point out the faults with zealots, you point out the faults of liberals. And when you do, you inevitably use a Limbaugh-esque caricature of a liberal to do it.

I know many liberals (in real life, even) and not a single one of them gives a shiat what anyone drinks, eats, smokes or anything else, unless that person's actions affect them or a loved one or their stuff.

So as long as you keep spouting off about what "the liberals" want to do, I have no choice but to consider you some kind of zealot.
2012-11-25 02:38:34 PM
1 votes:

Lsherm: The Christians took it away for one day (not counting prohibition)


It's like you just decided to self-righteously cherry pick and ignore the whole dry county thing.
2012-11-25 01:34:19 PM
1 votes:

Lsherm: fark you people. I told you this would happen. Nanny-statism doesn't stop once it starts.

/I don't drink


You mean the Christian movement to ban alcohol that have existed for decades? It wasn't liberals that banned alcohol sales in this state on Sundays. Hell, Tennessee is I think technically dry, just almost every single county has established legal alcohol sales. I'm not positive about that, Tennessee liquor laws are a fantastically inconsistent jury-rigging. Lynchburg/Moore County, where I might remind you they make Jack Daniels, is dry. They had to liberalize, and that is the correct word there for relaxing the laws, to sell Jack Daniels at the distillery.

So when you say liberals are taking away booze, might I remind you to shut the fark up.
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-11-25 12:47:03 PM
1 votes:
Yes, that why there are so many "sin taxes" on alcohol in the South and dry counties and "blue laws" that make it illegal to buy beer on Sundays.

You know, because the South is so liberal and all.
 
Displayed 5 of 5 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report