Society disagrees.
Part of participating in society to sell your wears and goods is doing so by societies rules.
The customer is not under the same onus.
It's not an equal partnership.
The customer can be as idiotically prejudiced and discriminatory as they please, but not the business owner. That's the law, and how society operates. Your preference notwithstanding.

That was cute...

That reminds me of my kid at that age...just one long run on sentence that never really seems to have a break and flows from one stream of consciousness to the next eventually building to what you believe will be the dramatic finale but really is just an involuntary gasp triggered by an oxygen starved brain that once replenished resumes its partnership with the mouth to bring on a fourth act soliloquy of just how awesome My Little Pony is and oh don't you love that new pony sunset shimmer sparkle fart?

from link:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/year-one-list-81-major-trump-achievements-11-obama-legacy-items-repealed/article/2644159

Below are the 12 categories and 81 wins cited by the White House.

Jobs and the economy

Passage of the tax reform bill providing $5.5 billion in cuts and repealing the Obamacare mandate.
Increase of the GDP above 3 percent.
Creation of 1.7 million new jobs, cutting unemployment to 4.1 percent.
Saw the Dow Jones reach record highs.
A rebound in economic confidence to a 17-year high.
A new executive order to boost apprenticeships.
A move to boost computer sciences in Education Department programs.
Prioritizing women-owned businesses for some $500 million in SBA loans.
Killing job-stifling regulations

Signed an Executive Order demanding that two regulations be killed for every new one creates. He beat that big and cut 16 rules and regulations for every one created, saving $8.1 billion.
Signed 15 congressional regulatory cuts.
Withdrew from the Obama-era Paris Climate Agreement, ending the threat of environmental regulations.
Signed an Executive Order cutting the time for infrastructure permit approvals.
Eliminated an Obama rule on streams that Trump felt unfairly targeted the coal industry.
Fair trade

Made good on his campaign promise to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Opened up the North American Free Trade Agreement for talks to better the deal for the U.S.
Worked to bring companies back to the U.S., and companies like Toyota, Mazda, Broadcom Limited, and Foxconn announced plans to open U.S. plants.
Worked to promote the sale of U.S products abroad.
Made enforcement of U.S. trade laws, especially those that involve national security, a priority.
Ended Obama’s deal with Cuba.
Boosting U.S. energy dominance

The Department of Interior, which has led the way in cutting regulations, opened plans to lease 77 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling.
Trump traveled the world to promote the sale and use of U.S. energy.
Expanded energy infrastructure projects like the Keystone XL Pipeline snubbed by Obama.
Ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to kill Obama’s Clean Power Plan.
EPA is reconsidering Obama rules on methane emissions.
Protecting the U.S. homeland

Laid out new principles for reforming immigration and announced plan to end "chain migration," which lets one legal immigrant to bring in dozens of family members.
Made progress to build the border wall with Mexico.
Ended the Obama-era “catch and release” of illegal immigrants.
Boosted the arrests of illegals inside the U.S.
Doubled the number of counties participating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement charged with deporting illegals.
Removed 36 percent more criminal gang members than in fiscal 2016.
Started the end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program.
Ditto for other amnesty programs like Deferred Action for Parents of Americans.
Cracking down on some 300 sanctuary cities that defy ICE but still get federal dollars.
Added some 100 new immigration judges.
Protecting communities

Justice announced grants of $98 million to fund 802 new cops.
Justice worked with Central American nations to arrest and charge 4,000 MS-13 members.
Homeland rounded up nearly 800 MS-13 members, an 83 percent one-year increase.
Signed three executive orders aimed at cracking down on international criminal organizations.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions created new National Public Safety Partnership, a cooperative initiative with cities to reduce violent crimes.
Accountability

Trump has nominated 73 federal judges and won his nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
Ordered ethical standards including a lobbying ban.
Called for a comprehensive plan to reorganize the executive branch.
Ordered an overhaul to modernize the digital government.
Called for a full audit of the Pentagon and its spending.
Combatting opioids

First, the president declared a Nationwide Public Health Emergency on opioids.
His Council of Economic Advisors played a role in determining that overdoses are underreported by as much as 24 percent.
The Department of Health and Human Services laid out a new five-point strategy to fight the crisis.
Justice announced it was scheduling fentanyl substances as a drug class under the Controlled Substances Act.
Justice started a fraud crackdown, arresting more than 400.
The administration added $500 million to fight the crisis.
On National Drug Take Back Day, the Drug Enforcement Agency collected 456 tons.

Helping veterans

Signed the Veterans Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act to allow senior officials in the Department of Veterans Affairs to fire failing employees and establish safeguards to protect whistleblowers.
Signed the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act.
Signed the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act, to provide support.
Signed the VA Choice and Quality Employment Act of 2017 to authorize $2.1 billion in additional funds for the Veterans Choice Program.
Created a VA hotline.
Had the VA launch an online “Access and Quality Tool,” providing veterans with a way to access wait time and quality of care data.
With VA Secretary Dr. David Shulkin, announced three initiatives to expand access to healthcare for veterans using telehealth technology.
Promoting peace through strength

Directed the rebuilding of the military and ordered a new national strategy and nuclear posture review.
Worked to increase defense spending.
Empowered military leaders to “seize the initiative and win,” reducing the need for a White House sign off on every mission.
Directed the revival of the National Space Council to develop space war strategies.
Elevated U.S. Cyber Command into a major warfighting command.
Withdrew from the U.N. Global Compact on Migration, which Trump saw as a threat to borders.
Imposed a travel ban on nations that lack border and anti-terrorism security.
Saw ISIS lose virtually all of its territory.
Pushed for strong action against global outlaw North Korea and its development of nuclear weapons.
Announced a new Afghanistan strategy that strengthens support for U.S. forces at war with terrorism.
NATO increased support for the war in Afghanistan.
Approved a new Iran strategy plan focused on neutralizing the country’s influence in the region.
Ordered missile strikes against a Syrian airbase used in a chemical weapons attack.
Prevented subsequent chemical attacks by announcing a plan to detect them better and warned of future strikes if they were used.
Ordered new sanctions on the dictatorship in Venezuela.
Restoring confidence in and respect for America

Trump won the release of Americans held abroad, often using his personal relationships with world leaders.
Made good on a campaign promise to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
Conducted a historic 12-day trip through Asia, winning new cooperative deals. On the trip, he attended three regional summits to promote American interests.
He traveled to the Middle East and Europe to build new relationships with leaders.
Traveled to Poland and on to Germany for the G-20 meeting where he pushed again for funding of women entrepreneurs.


see link above for more complete

I don't think brussel sprouts are food, but I won't be campaigning to stop other people eating them if they want to.

They must think gay marriage devalues the currency, that their marriage will somehow be less sacred because other people have a different idea what it means. As if straight people haven't been fucking it up enough already.

Also, does anybody else find it strange that gay marriage seems to be entirely about men most of the time. Why is that?

ps. Can straight people get a civil partnership now please.

Which shows that Baker and Genscher had no idea of the margin of their victory in the cold war. The word of two men on NATO not wanting to expand is one thing, whole countries actively seeking partnership in NATO to protect them from future russian threat is another.

I would downvote this video just to shut up this guy. What shortsighted stupidity.

That guy from Kansas who is on a field trip to Estonia is there to demonstrate NATO commitment. No "massive numbers", no "offensive threat to Putin".

This guy speaks of the "border" with russia like its some desert wasteland where NATO and russian troops can move in and out at will. These are civilised countries with hundreds of millions of people living in them, currently in a defensive partnership with the USofA. I wonder what the "good deal" will be that the clown gets to sell out.

Poland doesnt even border the main part of Russia, only the Kaliningrad exclave.

Also dont forget that all these other countries also contribute troops to NATO. The only thing that the clown has right is that they should be contributing more.

"REACH! Partnership School is an innovative Baltimore City public middle and high school operated by Civic Works. We prepare students for college and careers in Healthcare and Construction. Graduates of REACH! Partnership leave the school with certifications that let them start jobs or apprenticeships as nursing assistants, pharmacy technicians, carpenters, or electricians. "

I doubt it will go further than a grand jury, but apparently they are possibly going to face criminal charges. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/education/blog/bs-md-ci-school-slapping-video-20160301-story.html

People forget, Hillary scammed tons of money with the Whitewater scandal for decades until it was leaked in 1992, but they protected Hillary by everyone else in the partnership taking the heat but her, then very quickly almost without media catching it Bill Clinton as lame duck end of term pardoned everyone involved in Whitewater, in 1994 Hillary was stealing money "again", her law firm partner "fell on his sword" accepting the blame keeping Hillary safe, 1996 democrat fundraising head "fell on his sword" receiving 17 count indictment for money again.

there's ton of stuff even back to her youth with money scams and always wiggling out of it.


“In 1997, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, along with several other groups, filed a lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and Donna Shalala over closed-door meetings related to the health care plan. The AAPS sued to gain access to the list of members of the task force. Judge Royce C. Lamberth found in favor of the plaintiffs and awarded $285,864 to the AAPS for legal costs; Lamberth also harshly criticized the unethical tactics especially as she was a partner in a lawfirm, at least before it was shut down due to her partner "falling on his sword for theft and scamming clients".


“In the weeks before the inauguration, he [Vince Foster] had worked intensively with another Arkansas lawyer to expunge Bill and Hillary’s financial records of a shady land deal – a scandal later known as the Whitewater affair… One of his [Vince Foster’s] first jobs in the White House was to try to make sense of the Clintons’ false tax returns concerning the Whitewater land investment. A note in his hand-writing, found much later, warned that Whitewater was “a can of worms you shouldn’t open.”

Vince Foster was assassinated 1993.

After months offline I just wanted some cat videos and now this...

You know, Bob, I think you are right. I may not be a US citizen but I think there should be an international law, enforced by the UN.
As a species we can not allow morally bankrupt people to define what marriage should be, especially if that definition is ethically questionable and radically diverging from what the Bible, Torah or Quran describe.
Not only are we subjected to this bizarre propaganda of how normal this sickening behaviour is, this agenda is being sold to children as well. Even if we ignore the risk factors and possible fallout from this dangerous interaction with our youth, I think we can't deny that letting somebody that unstable adopt children isn't the best of ideas.
As you point out, this minority has a strong grasp on the media and an even stronger grip around the neck of political systems around the globe. Even our economy isn't safe of their influence which everyone can see everytime they hurt american businesses with their boycotts. Like disgusting, entitled children, they throw tantrums everytime they don't get their will, no mattere what the cost.
You're right, mankind shouldn't capitulate to their demands. I say annul their existing marriages or domestic partnerships and make it illegal for those people to marry. Worldwide.
According to Wikipedia (yes, I know, Wikipedia) there are 7.2 billion humans on earth and the GOP has around 30 million members. That's only 0.4% of the world population. You're right. Why should any society capitulate for such an insignificant demographic group? Why should we allow republicans to marry or recognize their marriages as legally binding? Nobody needs them to procreate.
Having said that, as far as I'm concerned, George W. Bush is a bastard, even by westerosi standards.

Racist, bigot and homophobic have nothing to do with this argument, Yet another straw man argument from the left.

The question really becomes Why should 1% demographic force the 99% to change its thinking?



http://www.gallup.com/poll/182837/estimated-780-000-americans-sex-marriages.aspx?utm_source=SAME_SEX_RELATIONS&utm_medium=topic&utm_campaign=tiles

Approximately 0.3% of adults in the U.S. are married to a same-sex spouse, and another 0.5% identify as being in a same-sex domestic partnership

Yep, this is currently a big issue with the Trans Pacfic Partnership trade agreement between the US and NZ (among others).

In NZ, there is a government subsidised drug buying agency called Pharmac. It standardises what treatment is used for each disease and as such, buys drugs in bulk at a discount.

The US pharmaceutical industry really wants to get rid of this, so they can shaft NZ like everywhere else, but it would be political suicide to get rid of it.

Yep, this is a big issue in the current Trans Pacific Partnership trade talks between NZ and the US (among others). The NZ drug buying agency Pharmac gets really good bulk prices. The pharmaceutical industry, of course, hates this and the USA are pushing to have this abolished. Luckily that would be political suicide in NZ.

Basically yes. This was done in voluntary partnership with the lab, who will remain anonymous, just because they were done with that batch of dogs. It's not like they hatched a daring escape plan, complete with puppy sized tunnels to freedom.

It's a bit of a dilemma to me. Of course it's good to find them homes once all the science is done. But, by making a video that seems like such a happy ending it makes the practice seem not so bad. As if these dogs just had to work in a lab for a couple of years, then retire in some sort of luxury puppy villa.

That may true for some areas, but not all of them.
In fact, it depends on the Chief and how they lead their people.
Yes, they have social issues, and so do we off the reserves, but they are self governing and work every day to provide services for those in need. In my area, we have a great partnership with the First Nations. They are a vital part of our city.
The place where I see issues is when the government uses land, Such as with the NorthWestern Pipeline, and the First Nations are the first to stand up in defiance in defense of our environment -- I applaud them for that. Not to mention that the Gov. will change treaty laws at random to suit their needs. But that's Big Business, and they screw everyone, not just treaty law.

"i admit my utter failure in expressing my position and decide to use someone i highly admire who could explain it better."

If your position is the same as Chomsky's, I understand that position. I have heard Chomsky talk about it repeatedly. (Here's a take on Chomsky by David Gordon with which I tend to agree).

"i want to understand why you choose your flavor of libertarianism."

If you want to understand my position, why send me Chomsky to explain YOUR position? Why not read what I sent you? Or what I've recommended that you read? Or simply respond to my comments?? This is NOT how you "understand" another position: by stating your own (or, someone else's, in this case, Chomsky's).

"which i dont because you never address the elephant in the room."

If the 'elephant' is all the conjectures you've seen about corporations/business taking over in evil ways, then I've already explained that those scenarios cannot happen under anarchy. That's not how business works in a government-free market.

"it appears to me your style of libertarianism is circa 1790."

I don't even know what this means...

"even Blankfist agreed that corporate power and influence MUST be restructured and possibly returned to temporary partnerships"

Let me restate it again then for you, since you seemed to have missed my position the first few times I've said it. Maybe I didn't say it enough times:

If you can do any of this, with no initiation of violence, zero, never initiating any physical violence against anyone's person or property, then I'm for it, whether you want to call it socialism, communism, anarchism, capitalism, whatever. But the requirement is zero initiation of violence. None. I don't know how you can have that with any form of syndicalism or socialism, unless everyone unanimously agrees on everything and that is quite rare. I doubt that it can happen except in the smallest groups, and even then, it's in specific and circumscribed ways. That is why a private property system is the only system that can ensure zero legal physical coercion/aggression against anyone's person and/or property. (Here's Rothbard's take on syndicalism. Worth reading.)

"like that the system will ultimately begin to cannibalize itself when growth becomes stagnant?"

This cannot/will not happen in a free market. Only when aggression is introduced could this happen.

"that unfettered capitalism will lay waste to everything"

Unfettered voluntary exchanges will never lay waste to anything. Do you understand how absurd this sounds to me? You are proposing the replacement of voluntary exchanges with coercion. Yes, you are -- because I have been clear that capitalism, as I am defining it, means free, voluntary exchanges. I don't care what corporations do as long as they engage in voluntary transactions providing goods and services that consumers want. Only through government-granted privileges -- enforced through violence -- can corporations do otherwise. There are no "natural monopolies." There have never been. Ever.

Even after watching the video, there is nothing there which "proves" that there is such a thing a "natural monopoly" or that "proves" that aggression is better than non-aggression. Is there?
But like I said, if you can show how to do any of what you'd propose with zero aggression, then I'm for it.

"you are not the person i gave you credit for."

Bad thymology, then, apparently.

"i made certain assumptions about you based an very little."

Similar to making all sorts of assumptions about corporations and the free market based on very little evidence.

"i was never trying to say you were wrong"

Really? What were you saying then??

"i just wanted to understand why you believe the things you believe."

Then, instead of insulting me or trying to shame or coerce me (what's with this posting "for Trancey"?! What?!), you could simply ask me polite questions, instead of ones like, "do you even know this or that"? No dice.

And instead of just telling me what "thou believe" or not. Is this about understanding my view or about you telling me what you believe or dictating what I ought to believe?

"is the corporate tyranny not as evident to you"

No. How is Apple tyrannizing you?
They haven't tyrannized me. Not one iota. In fact, they have provided my friends with some useful goods, for which they have gladly given them several thousands of dollars.

If you have a specific grievance against a specific company, let me know, and I can point out to you what your remedy could be. Any grievance that does not involve a government.

I wouldn't particularly appreciate you (or anyone) trying to interfere, through violence or the threat thereof, in any voluntary non-aggressive exchanges I choose to engage in, whether I do so as an individual or as a group, even as a group where we choose to call ourselves a corporation. And if our group does or does not want to structure itself as a syndicate, what business is it of yours?

Call me 1790 or whatever, but I don't really consider someone who'd want to impose their will on me like that a bonafide 'anarchist' despite what they choose to call themselves. I know, that's just my choice. I am not preventing you from calling yourself whatever you want. Just don't expect me to agree.