(Page 7 of 16)
br> Re: Patrick Hynes's CPAC Riding High : /p>"Time was, political cliché held that 'liberals were for change, conservatives are for the status quo.' I kind of liked that. I don't think the government has ever touched something and not cheapened or ruined it."
p>These two sentences are flatly contradictory. The status quo is that the government is touching, and cheapening, all kinds of things. If you're for the status quo, you're for that situation. If not, you have a "legislative agenda" and you're "for change." One or the other. br> -- Roy Koczela /p> p> THANKS A LOTT br> Re: John Carlisle's Slave Disclosure Shakedowns : /p>
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.