Local regulation and the politics of social conservatism

Time has a story on the impact of state and local regulations on market innovators like Tesla, Uber and Airbnb. There’s an opportunity here for Republicans, but it’s an opportunity we are unlikely to seize.

From the article:

Airbnb, a website that allows people to rent out everything from vacation homes to spare couches for short-term stays, works great for everyone but conventional hoteliers and cities trying to bilk travelers for tourist taxes. Operating in 192 countries and typically showing hundreds of thousands of offerings, Airbnb has faced stiff regulations in towns supposedly famous for their weirdness and openness to lifestyle experimentation, such as Austin, Texas (which charges hosts an annual licensing fee and limits the number of participants) and Portland, Oregon (which has banned the service in residential neighborhoods). In New York, rent-control advocates are teaming up with hospitality-industry heavyweights to try and shut down Airbnb and similar services.

Look carefully for the hand of the notorious Republican bogey-man in this piece and you will not find it. Sure, the Feds play their part in limiting competition and protecting economic incumbents, but it’s an extremely small part. Washington has nothing to do with the fact that I can’t use Uber to get to O’Hare. It’s not Washington that prevents food trucks from revolutionizing dining in freedom-loving, gun-toting downtown Houston.

Where were the “liberty” advocates of the Tea Party when Houston entrepreneurs were trying to break through stifling local regulations? Probably out protesting at abortion clinics and that gets to the heart of the problem.

It is harder than most people think to use use Federal power to build market protections. It happens, like in oil drilling, television broadcasting, and Internet service providers, but it accounts for a minimal fraction of our overall regulatory burden. Federal regulations are the simplest to track, the easiest to fight, the most practical to mobilize resistance against.

The forces that most complicate efforts to introduce innovation, and the creative destruction that accompanies it, are preferential rules, taxes and fees scattered throughout the more than 10,000 local government entities in our country. The City of Wheaton, a Republican bastion here in the Chicago area, issued regulations in 2010 to control the size and placement of RedBox machines. Why? A councilman described it as a “preventive measure.” What they were looking to prevent he did not say.

These kind of regulations exist everywhere, regardless of party or politics. The simple if cynical fact of the matter is that a local councilman is far cheaper to “influence” than a Congressman. It doesn’t take many of these nuisance regulations to gum up the works for a company trying to move into new markets. Though you hear Republicans rail about government intrusions in the marketplace you don’t see them do anything about this class of regulation for good reason.

It is politically expensive on many levels to tackle local regulations that protect established hotels, taxi services, restaurants, and other interests. On the other hand, it is politically cheap to target homosexuals, immigrants, or abortion clinics. There are no entrenched financial interests to confront and no hard choices to make.

It’s a fine formula. Complain about regulation in the abstract, where it matters little while focusing your real energy on poorly organized or financially weak targets who cannot hurt you (in the short run). Talk about EPA rules or government spending, abstract subjects far removed from the bump and grind of the political ground game. Meanwhile your real legislative attention is directed at under-represented scapegoats with little ability to fight back.

Companies keep their politically purchased market preferences while teen girls lose access to a safe abortion. That’s the political calculus that has made the GOP the party of social conservatism and left the party largely toothless in the real world effort to promote a more dynamic, prosperous economy. That’s why there is no major political force in the US championing the kind of economic dynamism that the Republican Party pretends to support.


Chris Ladd is a Texan living in the Chicago area. He has been involved in grassroots Republican politics for most of his life. He was a Republican precinct committeeman in suburban Chicago until he resigned from the party and his position after the 2016 Republican Convention. He can be reached at gopliferchicago at gmail dot com.

Tagged with: , , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Political Theory, Religious Right, Uncategorized
83 comments on “Local regulation and the politics of social conservatism
  1. You will want to locate someone that will assist you using the
    records; charges, limitations and regulations of the favored destination country as well about receive
    your vehicle at the said destination. Here again, the very role of international car shipping company can not
    be undermined anyways. Make sure that the organization is around date on their license and insurance.

  2. John Galt says:

    I have a sneaking suspicion that the mantra about local control really means “control at the highest level of government controlled by Republicans.” I haven’t noticed much devolution of power from Austin to cities/counties/school districts over the last 20 years. When do you think the state BOE is going to allow individual districts to choose their own textbooks? When the legislature reformed the Port Authority, did they leave the appointment of commissioners to local authorities? Yeah, right.

    • CaptSternn says:

      Now 13 years is suddely 20 years. I often wonder about the math skills of the left, they seem lacking. Then again, they usually don;t even know how long democrats have been in charge of the federal government.

      There could and should be more local control, especially over school districts. But parents can choose private schools, or even home school so they can choose what is taught and what is not. So, when is the federal governemnt going to butt out? Even at the state level, Texas doesn’t control other states.

    • John Galt says:

      W. was elected governor in 1995. So it’s 19 years.

      I quite like the HISD school my kid attends, in large part due to the fact that as an IB school they do not use the Texas curriculum. I want absolutely nothing to do with the BS that the hive of ignorance and religious intolerance that passes for the SBOE passes down.

      • CaptSternn says:

        The governor doesn’t write or pass legislation, congress does (though Obama doesn’t believe in congress, he wants to be a dictator and rule by decree). So 13 years, after over 100 years of democratic rule, voter oppression, Jim Crow laws, gerrymandering and all the other stuff democrats now claim to hate and try to blame on republicans.

        But wait, first you claim that a school district is forced to follow the state currculum, now you claim otherwise. Since I am not in school and have no kids, I can only call out the inconsistency in your claims.

      • John Galt says:

        Back to the claims that today’s Republicans were not yesterday’s Democrats. It’s tired and utterly wrong. Governors do lots of things that drive the agenda, such as calling special sessions, and they have to sign the bills, so what is passed has to have their stamp of approval or it’s not going to be enacted. So I think it’s fairly absurd to claim that legislation begins and ends with the legislature.

        School districts have to follow guidelines formulated by the SBOE and pick from a list of selected textbooks. There are some outs for individual schools that want to adopt certain alternative curricula, one of which is the International Baccalaureate program. As I understand it, there is a relatively complex application procedure and a whole district could not join. In HISD, only eight schools offer the IB. Some of the magnets (Debakey, HSPVA, etc) use other non-standard curricula.

      • CaptSternn says:

        No, today’s republicans are yesterdays republicans, minus the GOP establishment and their supporters like Lifer. And today’s democrats are yesterday’s democrats, still seeing all non-white males as inferior. Only they are trying a new and different form of oppression and control. Legislation starts and passes with congress, and is only signed or vetoed by the governor/president. And the governor/president can be overruled.

        Yes, you claim that schools cannot be independent, then claim that they can be independent. Inconsistent.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Odd…you can read this blog for 100 straight days, and you will not find a single Democrat or person on “the left” using the word “inferior” when referencing non-Whites.

        Yet, I would venture to say that Stern (and Buzz) have at least a couple of dozen examples of that work miraculously popping up in sentences about non-White folks.

        I think I know what you are trying to do. Simultaneously trying to be a bit provocative and attempting to explain to Democrats that some of their policies seem to suggest some non-White folks have trouble competing with White folks.

        I think most darn Democrats understand your ill conceived point, and simply do not agree with it. I think some folks on the left recognize that we are still kind of far away from equal opportunity. Given equal footing, let’s let the best woman win. Right now, the footing may not be all that equal.

        With regard to your (and Buzz’s) incessant bringing up the word “inferior” when talking about non-White folks, I’m forced to remember some childhood sayings such as, “he who smelt it, dealt it” when you folks rattle on about “inferior” groups.

      • John Galt says:

        I find it sad that a person who claims to be a student of history is so wrong-headed (or is it simply pig-headed?) when it comes to political history. The South used to be solidly Democratic. It is now solidly Republican. Unless the entire population of this region has changed, well, you do the math.

        99% of Texas schools use curriculum guidelines established in Austin and buy textbooks off an Austin-approved list. A very small number use some narrow loopholes to enhance their curriculum. Everything in life has some exceptions, Sternn, and this is no different.

  3. Bobo Amerigo says:

    Is cab traffic the same in all cities? I don’t think it is.

    In Houston, some people have to take a cab to the grocery store because no bus goes there.

    What would uber do for them?

    I don’t think I ever took a cab in Boston because I could get where I need to go on the T, also known as mass transit. A cab was considered a luxury item.

    I do think car dealers are postponing the inevitable. Car ownership is flattening and people who’ve grown up online will see no use for a high-priced intermediate in the process of acquiring a car.

  4. Manhattan says:

    I’ll be brutally honest, conservatism has been hijacked by the Religious Right and has turned into a litmus test with opposing any dissenting point of view and no possibility of pragmatism leading to getting kicked out of a primary. It is not the conservatism of Burke, it is just Christian Fundamentalists with a checklist of things to do in order to be a conservative.

    This happened in the 1990’s when Republicans won Congress and the Senate, they decided “Hey we don’t have a national enemy to fight! Let’s go pick on the moderates, they’re Democrats in disguise!” and they did for that 12 years unopposed until losing it in 2006. The wins in 1994 would not have been possible without moderates.

    Pandering to religion is more effective to get the base out to vote instead of actually trying to solve problems.

    Even William F Buckley knew he had to work with moderates and work with the other side in the Republican Party, now that’s gone.

    • GG says:

      Well said. I don’t remember religion being involved in politics until around Reagan and then just got worse but even Reagan was probably too “liberal” and “ungodly” for the crazies today.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        GG said this: ” I don’t remember religion being involved in politics until around Reagan and then just got worse but even Reagan was probably too “liberal” and “ungodly” Quite a few years off the mark. Basic history would have covered it. Cheesh!

    • kabuzz61 says:

      Manhattan, let me be brutally honest. You are completely wrong.

      Just look at GG’s post. You both speak from ignorance. Here’s a hint.

      “I’m Jimmy Carter and I’m running for President.” “I’m a born again Christian.” “I sin. I lust after women in my heart.”

      Now I checked my calendar and I discovered it was between 1976-77 that Carter said these things. That crazy theocrat.

      • GG says:

        Bitch, bitch, bitch…..all you ever do.

      • Manhattan says:

        Kabuzz, Reagan welcomed the Religious Right into the party and today’s Republicans call him to be a god despite the things he did would get him called a RINO by people like you. Jimmy Carter was pandering to the Religious Right for crying out loud.

  5. CaptSternn says:

    You bring up some very valid points, Lifer. Texas republicans are now in a position to change things democrats put in place over their more than 100 years of rule here, like not allowing Tesla and other car manufacturers to sell directly to the public.

    But you also bring up major cities like Houston, which are usually run by liberals, progressives and democrats. When it comes to such localized government, what business is it of mine what Houston does when I live in a different city? Who am I to tell Houstonians what to do? Just like who are Texans to tell California or New York what to do? Romneycare in Massachusetts did not affect the other 49 states, that is their business.

    Why would we tea party folk be butting into the business of others when that is what we are against? I’ll take care of my corner of the world, you take care of yours, leave everybody else alone (as long as rights are not violated). You bring up abortion, that is a serious violation of rights, the right to life and all other basic human rights.

    • goplifer says:

      Yes. Texas is absolutely choked with “liberals.” Come on…

      • CaptSternn says:

        Sure, those big cities are teaming with conservatives. Houston is the reason Harris County went to McCain and Romney.

        Oh, wait …

      • flypusher says:

        “Sure, those big cities are teaming with conservatives. Houston is the reason Harris County went to McCain and Romney.”

        Yeah, and all those liberals in Houston are the reasons there are Dems holding the offices of Harris County Judge, and Harris Co. DA, and Co. Clerk, and Co. Treasurer, etc………

      • GG says:

        Good for California. They will have a much better product for consumption.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Maybe because they see California trying to tell them what to do. My solution would be simply stop selling eggs to California. A serious shortage in California would probably make the people in California decide that they made a very unwise decision. Top that with not allowing eggs from California to be imported to those other states.

      • flypusher says:

        “Maybe because they see California trying to tell them what to do. ”

        CA is exercising their right to regulate their agriculture (they have that right, don’t they?). The law imposes the same regs on local egg production. It would be rather stupid to not also hold outside eggs to the same standards, don’tcha think?

        “My solution would be simply stop selling eggs to California.”

        I absolutely agree. But they don’t want to do that.

        “A serious shortage in California would probably make the people in California decide that they made a very unwise decision. ”

        Probably not. CA can produce plenty of eggs on its own- lots of agriculture going on in that state.

        “Top that with not allowing eggs from California to be imported to those other states.”

        I’m pretty sure they can’t just say “no eggs from CA allowed”; they’d have to find another rationale to base a ban on. But it would be rather bad PR to say “We INSIST on eggs from chickens kept in crowded, inhumane conditions!!!”

      • CaptSternn says:

        Then why would California be importing eggs in the first place? Don’t think you thought that one through.

      • flypusher says:

        Right, because if people want the cage free eggs, and other states don’t sell them, it’s not like anyone local could possibly seize the opportunity and increase their production, right?

    • way2gosassy says:

      ” Legislators in Texas failed to vote in their most recent session on a bill backed by Tesla that would have loosened the state’s restriction on dealerships owned by automakers. Virginia rejected the electric-car maker’s dealership application earlier this year.

      Dealers argue that the traditional franchise system is best for car buyers because it preserves competition between dealerships selling the same products. But Tesla worries that traditional franchised dealers, who also have gasoline cars to sell, won’t represent its products properly or aggressively enough.

      Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who touted the White House petition on his Twitter feed, argues that consumers overwhelmingly favor allowing direct sales. ”


      Now Sternn would that be Democratic Legislators in the State house of Texas, Kentucky, and North Carolina? Oh, and how long have they been in power?

      • CaptSternn says:

        Democrats created and enforced that rule. I am saying republicans should do away with it. Democrats had been in control of Texas from the end of Reconstruction until late 2002. That is almost 13 years for republicans out of over 100 years. Then again, do you still wonder why the GOP establishment hates and fears the tea party movement more that democrats do? Just look at Lifer’s hatred and fear of us to gain an understanding. He will even ban people he can’t refute. ‘Nuff said.

      • way2gosassy says:

        How many years was George Bush Governor before Rick Perry? Seems to me that more than twenty years of Republican control they might have time to repeal a lot of those so called Democratic job killing and unreasonable regulations.

      • way2gosassy says:

        Oh and by the way, Republicans this year had an opportunity to repeal that law and they chose not to! They do have a super majority in both houses so you really can’t blame this on the Democrats.

      • flypusher says:

        ” I am saying republicans should do away with it.”

        Seems to me that’s the whole point of this blog post- that the GOP should ditch the culture wars and focus on such economic issues.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Congress has the control, Way, just as with the federal government. Democrats held the Texas congress from the end of Reconstruction until the end of 2002. And no, they only had a super majority in the house for a couple of years. We need more tea party backed candidates in the Texas congress. Then we could get these laws changed.

      • GG says:

        “Just look at Lifer’s hatred and fear of us to gain an understanding. He will even ban people he can’t refute. ‘Nuff said.”

        No, not enough said. Disagreement over policies and opinion does not equal “hatred” or “fear”. Who has Chris banned just out of curiosity?

      • GG says:

        Never mind. I read further.

  6. flypusher says:

    Government at the state level can also stifle the market. Remember all the hurdles to allowing microbreweries in TX? It was an uphill battle to get that through the TX lege. That should have been a no-brainer- local entrepreneurs starting businesses in TX and hiring Texans. More choices for customers. But guess who didn’t want competition and had a few reps in their pockets? It took a few tries to get Senate Bill 639 passed, and that should have been a no brainer too.

    So basically about once every 2 decades the TX lege does something beneficial.

  7. kabuzz61 says:

    Nice try Chris and your very eager fan Way2 Snobby.

    The cities are usually in almost all cases democratically controlled. The surrounding areas may be GOP based. So you will have to ask the democrat party why they stifle business? Conservatives agree with you, they do. But try to get Houston to lower their very high hotel, car rental taxes. No way. A democrat has never seen a tax they don’t like. The same with the charitable organizations. Ask the democrats. You’re definitely barking up the wrong tree.

    Oh yea! TEA Party. Taxed Enough Already. Has nothing to do with homosexuals, although you bring it up every chance you get, or abortion, etc. Are you dense or playing stupid?

    • goplifer says:

      Here’s the deal. You are hereby banned from posting until you do one of two things:

      Go find me a Tea Party-backed Congressman who supports gay marriage and abortion rights and opposes school prayer.


      Admit that there is no difference between the Tea Party and the religious right.

      The Tea Party is all about fiscal responsibility, so I assume this won’t be a problem. I’ll be waiting right here.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Petty, Lifer, and a strong showing of weakness. Here is an opinion piece from your side of the aisle, maybe you should pay more attention to it.


      • CaptSternn says:

        Here is another point of view from my side of the aisle.


      • goplifer says:

        Still waiting.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Lifer, you still don’t accept that many of us in the tea party movement have strong libertarian leanings. Then again, you don’t even know what libertarianism is.

        Hey, it’s your blog. Easier to ban people, silence them, that to back up your arguments and claims. Why not just ban everybody that disagrees with you?

        Or maybe you should find an OWS backed congressman that is anti-abortion and anti-same-sex marriage?

        I wonder how many in your “echo chamber” appreciate or support you banning Kabuzz because you disagree with what he supports?

        Weak, petty and pathetic. So go ahead and show just how far you will go, add me to the list.

      • flypusher says:

        “Or maybe you should find an OWS backed congressman that is anti-abortion and anti-same-sex marriage?”

        Red herring. I can’t recall anyone here claiming membership in or personal association with OWS and saying anything about their views on the culture war fodder. I’d suspect they would be liberal, but I ever heard of them being broached by that group. I also don’t recall them backing any Congresspeople.

        “I wonder how many in your “echo chamber” appreciate or support you banning Kabuzz because you disagree with what he supports?”

        Buzzy has the key to let himself back in. His choice.

      • John Galt says:

        Talk, Sternn, talk. There is a lot of talk about Tea Party libertarianism. When it comes to walking the walk, this becomes very closely aligned with religious conservatism. They are not the same thing, but the intersection of the two groups is pretty darn big.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Chris, you need to get a handle on your information. Their is no official TEA Party organization that I am part of. There are groups with websites that say they are TEA Party people but that is neither here nor there. Are you saying the name doesn’t stand for Taxed Enough Already? I think the dishonesty on your part is amazing.

        If you want to ban me, go ahead. I don’t jump through hoops for no one. I don’t think you would either.

        GG, the always empty shooter; none of the conservatives on this site bring up faith or abortion or homosexuality first. It is either the main part of one of Chris’ missives or the echo chamber brings it up.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Kabuzz, the concept of a grass roots movement with no defined leader is something the left cannot grasp. They absolutely need a leader to follow, and they need for the other side to have a leader they can attack. It is the reason so many here are always posting links to what this or that person said or did. They didn’t even realize that Stockman wasn’t backed by the tea party movement. The leftist media held him up as if he was, and they blindly followed.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Very well said Captain. Bravo. But I have to think Chris gets it. He can’t or isn’t that out of touch is he?

    • way2gosassy says:

      The only one playing stupid here is you Kabuzz. I see you are still working on that personality thingy.

      • GG says:

        Cappy, I’m sure Chris banishing Buzzy has a lot more to do with kitty’s foul attitude and hurling insults willy-nilly. Buzzy has no one except himself to blame.

        Frankly, I’d have banished him long ago because he cannot EVER play nice. BTW, where Dan?

      • DanMan says:

        right here watching y’all fawn over Chris’ word salad of BS.

      • GG says:

        There you are Dan. I was wondering if you’d been banished too. Hadn’t seen many posts lately.

      • Turtles Run says:

        Sassy – Really, you think buzzy is playing?

    • GG says:

      That’s funny. Why do they all talk about homosexuality and abortion then? Seem every tp’er I’ve heard is very religious and wants to impose their morality on everyone else. Even you and Sternn.

      • CaptSternn says:

        We have opinions on issues other than fiscal responsibility, but fiscal responsibility and limited government are the points of the movement. And no, I have not attempted to impose morality on anyone through force of law, but none of you have any problems doing so and violating teh rights and liberties of individuals.

      • GG says:

        Who is “none of you”? I have no interest in imposing morality on anyone.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Really, GG? So you actually support allowing business owners to refuse service to people for any reason, or no reason at all?

      • GG says:

        I don’t believe a business has the right to refuse service to anyone because of religion, race, or sexuality. If a customer’s kid is screaming and running riot, or they are otherwise upsetting other customers then by all mean boot them out. We know that you support the right to refuse service because of color and sexuality. We get it already.

      • CaptSternn says:

        “I have no interest in imposing morality on anyone.” – GG

        “I don’t believe a business has the right to refuse service to anyone because of religion, race, or sexuality.” – GG

        In other words, you do not believe in property rights, or the right to refuse to associate with people or do business with people for any reason, or no reason at all. You seek to impose your version of morality on others, and they have no right to refuse your version of morality. Check and mate.

  8. way2gosassy says:

    Great piece Chris and a very interesting article from the Times.

    I also happen to agree that it is local regulations that dampen small business creation and creativity more than most Federal regulation. Unfortunately it doesn’t stop there. In the last year here in Houston even charitable organizations that cater to the poor and homeless have been so regulated as to force many of these organizations to stop providing relief for those on the outer limits of survival.

    The GOP has loudly proclaimed that they know how to create jobs and praise the small business creators as the largest bloc of employers, yet they do very little to support those that put their capitol on the line to create those jobs. They prefer instead to blame “Obamacare” or any other social program as the true job killers. While I do not support “Obamacare” as the be all to end all program to address our seriously flawed healthcare system. In my opinion it did not go far enough but it has had some very positive results. “Job lock” was the bogey man of the Republicans when it was Unions demanding healthcare benefits for employees. Now that the healthcare law has effectively removed job lock for a large percentage of people that can and most likely will strike out on their own to create these small businesses it is now a bad thing. Those intrepid souls who will spend their time and money to create their own niches in this country will be forced to deal with more obstructionism from the party of small government.

    • CaptSternn says:

      You forgot to mention that people will quit their jobs and go on government handouts. Strike out on your own if you want, but not on my dime. Or they will be severely punished for dropping health insurance provided by the employer, which means they won’t strike out on their own, job lock more than ever. It is very similar to the bailouts, capitalize success, socialize failure. That is why conservatives, especially those of us in the tea party movement, were always against the bailouts.

      • way2gosassy says:

        Good lord Sternn do you always have to be so effin dense? Do you even try to understand another view point? Believe this or not but nobody wants your damn dime!

      • CaptSternn says:

        Really? No food stamps, no housing, no extended unemployment, no calls for universal health care? No subsidies for health insurance? Evidence says otherwise.

      • way2gosassy says:

        My, my Sternn. I learn something new every day. I did not know that we didn’t have “food stamps, no housing, no extended unemployment, no calls for universal health care? No subsidies for health insurance? Evidence says otherwise” before we had “Obamacare” what the hell was I thinking!

      • CaptSternn says:

        “… what the hell was I thinking!”

        You weren’t.

      • way2gosassy says:

        I think ’tis you that has the thought processing problem, that’s it I’m done trying to have a reasonable debate with you.

      • GG says:

        Cappy, civilized societies provide safety nets for people who need it. Do I think there’s welfare fraud and abuse? Yes and I wish the system would get an overhaul but I’d rather see some of my “dimes” go to feeding and housing the underprivileged then letting them starve in the streets. If you like living like that may I suggest some backward country like Haiti or one of the many nations in Africa. They also still burn witches, subjugate women and allow children to starve to death. Just think of the good times for you.

      • CaptSternn says:

        None of those countres have our constitution nor the principles behind it. You want to turn us into the USSR, China, Cuba or maybe venezuela. Seems like you would be more at home in one of those places.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Again, Way2Snobby gets the facts thrown at her so she decides to give up on the fact giver. Back at you. Do YOU even try to understand another view point? Buzz! No, you don’t.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Welcome back Kabuzz. But please leave the name calling to the left.

      • GG says:

        No thanks Cappy I think the religious nuttery of those countries would be more to your liking.

      • GG says:

        Too late Cappy. Buzz had his comments on the new piece zapped. It’s impossible for him not to hurl insults at everyone.

      • CaptSternn says:

        If Lifer is going to delete posts based on insults, there are a lot pf people on the left that need to have their comments deleted as well. Otherwise it is inconsistent.

        As for the religious nuttery in those places, they promote government as the religion and ban God oriented religions. That fits in well with many on the left.

      • GG says:

        I think everyone here has thrown a few insults but Buzzy and Dan start out threads consistently with them and continue bashing anyone they don’t agree with. It’s pure trollery. They do it on purpose to incite a reaction. They are not here to discuss anything.

      • CaptSternn says:

        You left out Bubba, GG. Very conspicuous. But he is on yoyr side, so that doesn;t count, right?

      • Turtles Run says:

        Your dime? If I am not mistaken you have admitted to not paying your taxes and the IRS was forced to fine you for non-payment. Why was it OK for all of us to fund your lack of responsibility? Just because you wanted to live beyond your means you feel we should fund it.

        If you had personal responsibility your would have paid your taxes and then maybe you could have some credibility when speak about those that want live off the system. No wonder you believe that people will just live off the system because that is exactly what you did.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Turtles, is Cappy’s consummate hypocrisy a surprise to anyone? Though I understand wanting to call him on it every time he reaches for his trusty security bag of hypocrisy.

        Speaking of which, as you cast aspersions Cappy, STILL no denunciation of DanHater on his Hispanics are lazy hate meme? Even your better half felt the need to respond and correct Dan for his fact challenged hate flame.

        But politics trumps honesty and decency in your twisted little “Libertarian” world, doesn’t it Cappy?

        Now this is where Cappy resorts to his usual “you Liberals are meanies for picking on me and pointing out how wrong all the stupid things I say are.”

      • Turtles Run says:

        I missed Danny-Boy’s comment I never knew he was a Democrat (using cappy’s logic).

      • CaptSternn says:

        Turtles, you are still having problems with reading comprehension. I have paid all my taxes and then some. I came up short one year after the dot com bust and having my web design business fail. I never said I didn’t owe the taxes, I got them paid, plus interest and fines. I accepted full responsibility.

        Now, go explain to John again how the IRS is powerless to collect any and all taxes owed. I know that is a lie.

      • Turtles Run says:

        Whether you eventually paid the money that was due is not relevant. You at one time felt it was fine to not pay your taxes and still enjoyed the services that our tax dollars bought for you. If you exercised personal responsibility your taxes would have been paid and you would not have lived on our dime.

        So try to remember that the next time you want to disparage others that encounter hard times. You are a taker plain and simple.

      • CaptSternn says:

        No, Turtles, I never felt is was fine to come up short on my taxes. Nor did I ever attempt to get out of paying my taxes, or the interest or the fines. I took full responsibility for everything involved because I was responsible. Nothing even similar to being a “taker”.

        Now run along and tell John again how the IRS has no ability to collect what is owed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 454 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: