They can't point to cost when the matter was already on the ballot in this instance. Cost CAN be a factor in implementing some changes or not. That depends on what we're talking about changing. It's a factor in everyone's daily life. But we're talking about changing a document, not about implementing mass changes to an entire system of governance. Heck, the vast majority of people knew that the measures to be voted on were already obsolete and unenforceable. That makes it even crazier in my eyes.
Wasn't defending miscegenation laws a "state's rights" issue back in the day? How come it's good for some issues and not others?
Really? You don't hear the "That oughta be illegal..." line every time someone talks about something they don't like? I hear it everywhere, from the conservative to the liberal, no matter where I have lived.
Crazy talk. People disapprove of a lot of stuff without going as far as to think it should be illegal -- think drugs, guns, prostitution, abortion, smoking, etc. I disapprove of Mississippi racists, but I don't think their beliefs should be illegal.
The matter is not anywhere near so simple. Monopolies are economic freedoms. Bribes are economic freedoms. As are cartels and putting feces into hot dogs.
This is ridiculous. I don't go around saying that murdering, raping, extorting, and conspiracy are human freedoms. But selling something I make to people who want to buy it is just as human of a freedom as freedom of speech.
If you lived during the time period of the French or American Revolution, the same would have been said about the idea of freedom of speech.
Just like snake oil! Bridges to Manhattan Defective child seats (as long as I can pay good lawyers and hire a bad ass PR firm to deflect the blame) As someone that grew up in Mexico, believe me monopolies are not very good for the economy. IMO
You are of course making a dig at the late Senator Robert Byrd. That's a shame, because if you hadn't been so blindly partisan you would have realized West Virginia was the part of Virginia that left the Confederacy because a) they had few slaves and b) no common connection to the rebels. They joined the Union after the release of the Emancipation Proclamation. Also this, which describes that West Virginia had fewer lynchings than Southern States.
I don't for a moment suggest that it made any sense. I'm just saying that when people spoke of it, cost was the thing they pointed to when trying to support their desire to keep the constitution as it is.
Not at all. Plenty of murderers and accomplices still living full, free lives down here. People forget that it was only 1962 or so when that happened.
You sound like one of those dumbass Black Christians who spent too much time in church. Louis Allen's son ought to be on 60 Minutes for making knife handles out of that sheriff's femurs, not for whining like a little girl to the media while the murderer lives out a long, happy White life.