You don't get laws singing many songs do you? Part from folklore of course...

Sorry I missed out a couple of important strokes in that last post of mine - the idea was to have the quotes in italics and the rest not. Here goes again.

Referring to the States rRightys stuff: At this point that's more or less how the European Union operates. I imagine if there hadn't been bent judges who thought slavery wasn't barred by the Constitution, that might be how the USA still operated. A bit late to go back to that now though isn't it? Not a very conservative things to do either.

Many public assistance programs yank the financial rug from under those who get entry level jobs and practically guarantee failure and return to the welfare rolls.

And I take it, MAV, you think that is a stupid way to run a welfare benefit system? And that help should only be tapered off reasonably gradually to help people get back on their feet? Well, that's something to agree on anyway. I hadn't heard that attacking poverty traps like that was Republican policy, or Republican practice either, but if it is going to be undwer this "compassionate conservatism", that's great.

There are cases where the drug/alcohol addictions are treated as a "disability" and their habit is then subsidized.

But is that necessarily be a bad thing, if it stops people robbing and stealing from their neighbours to pay for their habit, and putting enormous sums of money into the hands of the drug and booze entrepreneurs, and then costing the community enormous sums to keep in jail? (I don't mean give them extra money to buy the stuff on the street.)

When someone retires or quits, their "non-essential position" circles the bowl.

That's a bit too cryptic for me. What's it mean?