Here is my plan:

1) Pave the rest of West Virginia and finish the Robert C. Byrd Memorial Building in every town there so we can be done with that and start something new.

2) Do like Hugo Chavez, have our government nationalize all American companies and industries on its soil and say its for the people.

3) Free health care for all

4) Free housing for all

5) Free (organic vegetarian) food for all

6) Gasoline engines prohibited, oil production and importation stopped immediately

7) Free Bubble-up

8) No smoking, drinking of alcohol, drinking of sodas, eating McDonalds or other unhealthful activities allowed except for recreational drug use which shall be unrestrained.

9) Automatic increase of the minimum wage by $15.00 per hour every year until all Americans are rich

10) No meat, leather, other animal products, Oreos, or movie theater butter allowed

11) Free Rainbow Stew

12) Display of the American flag or support the troops magnets shall not be allowed

13) Finally switch that amendment to actually say separation of church and state that shall apply in all cases except for campaigning in African-American churches or Buddhist temples which shall not be infringed.

14) Only felons, college professors, and Hollywood celebrities allowed to vote

15) The military shall be disbanded and funds redirected for more free Bubble-up and Rainbow Stew

Go fark your sister.

Well there you go, rational discourse from the liberal side. B-rilliant.

Nahh, just print more money and give some out to everyone. That'll fix it!

The liberals insist on raising the minimum wage. Of course its just to buy votes. But seriously, can the price floor on labor be too high? If not, why not $1,000 an hour? That would make everyone rich? Right? I mean, if a price floor on labor is good, then make it high enough so we can all work an hour and get rich enough so we all never have to work again.

LMAO Arkansas

Oh man, thats some serious thought on your part. You are the next Chomsky. The arguments and debating points put forward in your post provides ample evidence that the educational system in your home state has provided you with such an education that I cannot hope to compete with it.

LMAO Arkansas

Man, I just can't fight the overpowering logic you have put forth. It's so far above my educational level.

LMAO Arkansas

We need to engrave this in bronze and post it on a plaque in your high school so that those coming behind you can aspire to your brilliance and can see what your states educational system can do for their own lives.

LMAO Arkansas

Wow.

Arkansians shouldn't get into debates about education.

Republicans in Arkansas can. My party has not controlled the legislature, educational priorities, standards, disbursements, or much of anything else related to Arkansas education since the end of the Civil War. The educational situation in Arkansas is solely, and completely, the property of the Democratic Party. Our legislature is one-party dominated. When the one-party legislature meets it has, literally, earned the nickname "Grabfest".

Nope, he was making extreme, sweeping generalizations of what the left thinks, so I decided to do the same for the right. Of course neither side thinks this except the actual communists and actual facsits.

I normally don't bother trying to rationally debate on posts that start with "Fark your sister". Nevertheless, you are correct. I made sweeping generalizations in a "modest proposal" sense.

But, you are wrong because a huge number of liberals really do believe the stuff I posted, not just communists. And a huge number conservatives do believe a bunch of the stuff you posted. I have more of a libertarian bent, so I get into plenty of arguments with my other conservatives on this stuff.

Both sides are destroying this country. To highlight, liberals believe that the 2nd Amendment should be interpreted very narrowly, that only the National Guard are really allowed firearms. Yet Amendments they favor need to be interpreted very broadly, such as privacy. Freedom of the press, broad....freedom of religion, narrow.

Conservatives believe that the 2nd Amendment should be interpreted broadly...but privacy narrowly. First amendment narrowly in regard to press, broadly in regard to religion.

Thats situational ethics on both sides and its screwing up the country.

My view has always been.....when the Constitution speaks on citizens rights....interpret it broadly.....when it speaks on powers of government....interpret it narrowly. That means freedom of the press, right to bear arms, freedom of religion.....all broad. Not just pick and choose. ALL.

The Constitution has words and word have specific meanings. We can't have some people in black robes "reinterpreting" all the time. If times change, and we need change, amend it. The Constitution is your foundation, it cannot be shifting sand.

You are naive if you do not think that a huge number of liberals believe the points I posted should be enacted. Go to DemocraticUnderground......you are naive if you don't think a large number of conservatives believe some of your points...go to FreeRepublic.

Sodomy....whatever people do between consenting adults in private is not the government's business.

Sex toys....ridiculous.

Gay marriage.....government should be out of the "marriage" business. Marriage is a religious institution by definition. I oppose gay marriage, because marriage is a traditional religious term and government should not be defining it. Its not fair to religions that do not believe in same sex marriages to have the term dictated by government. Government should be providing "civil unions" to any couple, "marriage" to NO couple. Marriage is the province of whatever religion you belong to. Civil Unions ar e the province of the state. Gay couples can do what they want, just don't steal the term marriage. They way to prevent this, is for government not to do "marriages" or use that terminology.

tarrant84

Just to reiterate. I am opposed to the terminology "gay marriage". I am in favor of government getting out of the "marriage" business for both homosexual and heterosexual couples.