We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
From Wiliamson's The Thirty Years’ War -What this country needs is a war of attrition against the welfare state and entrenched incompetency:
I like Senators Paul, Cruz, and Rubio; each has his own virtues and admirable characteristics. But none of them has done one single thing of interest in office other than campaign for president since about five minutes after being sworn into the Senate.
Kids who sext are probably more numerous than various other sexual minorities who demand freedom for their practices. Why is this illegal? Why should it be shameful when little else is? Respect the sexting gender. Liberate sexting.
As to where children learn this behavior…[Gales of riotous laughter]…. adults, parents, television, movies, youtube,… basically everywhere there are people.
nope. Same old idiotic idea that "conservatives" are morality champions.
As if anything to do with sex at all is automatically wrong, but that's beside the point.
Your dad has his stash of porn pictures somewhere, so did grandfather before him.
And so no doubt do you...
The people screaming most harshly that others are "sinning" or "immoral" always have themselves the most to hide.
And anyway, if you're as loving of freedom and personal choice as you claim as a conservative, you wouldn't want to restrict what others can do.
Looking at pictures of naked people doesn't harm anyone, or even if you believe it harms the person looking at them that's none of your business as it's a personal decision and harms no other person, certainly not you, so it's no business of yours whether people do it.
Same with kids sending each other pictures of themselves, with or without clothes. None of your business, unless maybe you're their parent in which case the choice is simple: let them do it or take that smartphone away (and then only if it's you who's paying for it, if the kid bought it from his own money, again it's none of your business what the kid does with it).
I am in no way a nutritionist, nor an exercise guru, but it occurs to me that the four miles to work off a coke is probably a direct comparison of calories burned in the run to the calories contained in the coke. But regular exercise increases your metabolism which also burns calories and I doubt this is taken into account.
Regardless, I think labeling cokes in this way would probably discourage a lot of people from exercising as they may see it as futile. Besides, there are enough government required things on the label already. I think it's time to take some of them off.
Will they put this information on all foods or just the foods that the food police dislike? If 20% or 25% of us are obese should we fat shame everyone? Should our national food police limit everyone's diet or is it acceptable to recognize that some of us are obese and some are not? How do you label and apple or an orange? Who decides what I can eat? One of my children drank 5 or 6 cokes a day maybe more. When he wanted to join the army he was underweight (115 lbs) so had to gain 5 lbs to do it. Why didn't the coke make him obese or fat or even normal weight? Does coke make you fat? I have living evidence it does not and yet we feel the need to fat shame coke and everyone who drinks coke. Who decides this stuff and why?
The article lists a bunch of countries that stand to lose from lower oil prices but the author left out the US. The oil boom we are now experiencing is responsible for a major portion of the jobs (real jobs, not the part time ones that seem to be the majority now). It is also a large contributor to the economic growth (such as it is) that we have seen recently. If the price of oil declines much further, it will be uneconomical for many US drillers to continue to drill putting a large crimp in jobs and economic growth.
I think Saudi Arabia and OPEC in general would love to throw a wrench in our oil production. I believe this is at least one of the reasons they continue to pump oil as the price goes down which encourages further price declines.