I think that the major flaw in several of your posts is that you want the government to solve all of our problems and that will never happen in a free society. We call too much government control socialism or communism. This system doesn’t work. We need to focus on bringing up our children right. We have ruined our nation In One generation and taught them that the government will solve all the problems. Problem is, the government is a whole slew of rich elites that are out of touch with reality and want to spend their whole lives in government which makes them even further out of touch. Also, they spend half their time in office campaigning for re-election. That kinda pisses me off........ why doNt they do what they are pod to do? I bet my employer would send me packing if I spent half my time trying to get a job, but it’s exactly what they do. The government isn’t nor will ever be the answer to all our problems............ the family, nuclear family, is.

All I can say is WOW! If you truly believe that list is accurate then there is no conversation that can be engaged in !
You are already brain washed and unwilling to hear anything you don’t like. You are painting with an incredibly wide brush and stereotyping millions of people as someone they most definitely are not. I feel sorry for you if you are truly that afraid of that many of your fellow citizens. Democratic voters are still Americans whether you think they should be or not. And for your information, if voters on the left like you describe even exist, they are a tiny minority as to be insignificant. Sheesh!

The problem lies in profit margins for all kinds of organizations. First, the cost to your hospital or insurance provider is far greater if you get thrown out of the car on impact. Second, the rest figure that if you violate one law, you're more likely to violate some other one ... doesn't matter if it's true or not (cue the actuaries). Third, the rest follow suit for the same reasons, figuring that you're a financial risk because you will be more likely violate some law or regulation someday, not just in your vehicle.
Insurance isn't insurance any more. It's more an investment firm that seeks to maximize profits at the expense of the insured. It is supposed to be a pool of people that overall will average out to a net zero on their premiums vs. payouts. It ain't that way any more, and the insurance companies now are some of the biggest investors and landowners in the country. Their motto is 'charge more, pay less'. Whether Congress will fix this, I think you've already answered that question.
I figure that if you don't want to wear a seatbelt and want to go for a Darwin Award, that's your choice, but I would prefer not having to pick up the tab for that stupidity. Seatbelts do save lives, but I'm ambivalent about making you save yours.

I'm glad the subject of seatbelt use was mentioned, because to me it is a good example of why freedom and socialism are mutually exclusive. In a free society, one would be free to choose whether or not to use a seatbelt. If injured in an accident, with or without a seatbelt, that person would use their own resources and insurance to pay for damages and medical bills.

In a socialistic society the general public is responsible for paying the cost of an accident, so the general public, or society, has not just a right, but an obligation to require the use of seatbelts in order to help reduce the costs associated with the accident.

Same with motorcycle helmets. And anti-drug laws. And soda bans. And...

Basically, when personal responsibility is replaced with socialism, society (government) is obligated to micro-manage everybody's life while everybody becomes poorer while paying for others' mistakes.

As for those mean old for-profit insurance companies, do you think their employees should be required to work for sub-minimum wage? Are you aware that there are non-profit insurance companies, and that they are usually more expensive than for-profit ones?

Finally, given your belief that conservatives are all for a patriarchal society where women are second-class citizens and men can do whatever they want, how do you feel about the left's obsession to remove every woman's ability to defend herself against a man, or group of men, who want to rape her?

I'm glad the subject of seatbelt use was mentioned, because to me it is a good example of why freedom and socialism are mutually exclusive. In a free society, one would be free to choose whether or not to use a seatbelt. If injured in an accident, with or without a seatbelt, that person would use their own resources and insurance to pay for damages and medical bills.

In a socialistic society the general public is responsible for paying the cost of an accident, so the general public, or society, has not just a right, but an obligation to require the use of seatbelts in order to help reduce the costs associated with the accident.

Same with motorcycle helmets. And anti-drug laws. And soda bans. And...

Basically, when personal responsibility is replaced with socialism, society (government) is obligated to micro-manage everybody's life while everybody becomes poorer while paying for others' mistakes.

As for those mean old for-profit insurance companies, do you think their employees should be required to work for sub-minimum wage? Are you aware that there are non-profit insurance companies, and that they are usually more expensive than for-profit ones?

Finally, given your belief that conservatives are all for a patriarchal society where women are second-class citizens and men can do whatever they want, how do you feel about the left's obsession to remove every woman's ability to defend herself against a man, or group of men, who want to rape her?

This comparison was posted earlier as my view of the difference between Conservatism and the Left, but with a few additions. Not in any specific order:



Conservative.............................................The Left Today

Constructive..................................Destructive of the Current State
Truth Telling..................................Evasions and Lies
For Proper Discrimination................For Indiscrimination
For the People...............................For the State, Military, and Vassals
For US Sovereignty........................For Global Governance
Judicial Fidelity..............................Judicial Activism
For Jobs.......................................For Handouts, Dependency
For Smaller Government................For Large Government
For Right to Life............................For Abortion
For Affordable Healthcare...............For Obamacare
For Positive Action.........................For Talk-Talk
For Charity...................................For Welfare, Dependency on the State
Belief in God.................................Belief in State and Man
Freedom of Religion.......................The Same
For the Citizens.............................For So-Called Elites First and Foremost
Thinks of Past, Present and Future...Thinks of Today and Tomorrow
For the Constitution.......................For Elite Rule & "Living Constitution"
For Equal Opportunity....................For Equal Outcomes
For Well-Rounded Education............For Constrained Ideological Education
For Military Strength......................For Military Reductions
For Democracy and the Republic......For Collectivism=>Socialism=>Communi.
For Heeding Lessons of the Past.......For Utopian Ideals That Do Not Work
For Free Flow of Legislation.............For Obstruction of Legislation
For Fiscal Prudence........................Spendthrift, Reallocation of Funds
For Debt Reduction.........................For Deficit Spending
For Social Harmony........................For "Social Justice"
For Comity and Congeniality............For Ad Hominem Attacks
For Legal Immigration....................For Illegal Immigration and Amnesty
For Christian Marriage....................For Same Sex Marriage
For States Rights...........................For Powerful Central Government
For Order and Discipline.................For Chaos and Revolution Now
For Verbal Clarity..........................For Verbal Verbosity
For Immigration Control.................For Open Borders
For Long-Term Stability..................For Unwelcome Changes Now
For Rational Compromise................For Compromise Their Way Only
Natural Demeanor.........................Totally Smug and Nasty Grin
Reserved and Polite.......................Angry and Jarring


Thus:
For Sane and Balanced...................For Unbalanced

So how does one reconcile the two postures? It is not clear to me. I see no reason whatsoever to change the conservative stance.

This comparison was posted earlier as my view of the difference between Conservatism and the Left, but with a few additions. Not in any specific order:



Conservative.............................................The Left Today

Constructive..................................Destructive of the Current State
Truth Telling..................................Evasions and Lies
For Proper Discrimination................For Indiscrimination
For the People...............................For the State, Military, and Vassals
For US Sovereignty........................For Global Governance
Judicial Fidelity..............................Judicial Activism
For Jobs.......................................For Handouts, Dependency
For Smaller Government................For Large Government
For Right to Life............................For Abortion
For Affordable Healthcare...............For Obamacare
For Positive Action.........................For Talk-Talk
For Charity...................................For Welfare, Dependency on the State
Belief in God.................................Belief in State and Man
Freedom of Religion.......................The Same
For the Citizens.............................For So-Called Elites First and Foremost
Thinks of Past, Present and Future...Thinks of Today and Tomorrow
For the Constitution.......................For Elite Rule & "Living Constitution"
For Equal Opportunity....................For Equal Outcomes
For Well-Rounded Education............For Constrained Ideological Education
For Military Strength......................For Military Reductions
For Democracy and the Republic......For Collectivism=>Socialism=>Communi.
For Heeding Lessons of the Past.......For Utopian Ideals That Do Not Work
For Free Flow of Legislation.............For Obstruction of Legislation
For Fiscal Prudence........................Spendthrift, Reallocation of Funds
For Debt Reduction.........................For Deficit Spending
For Social Harmony........................For "Social Justice"
For Comity and Congeniality............For Ad Hominem Attacks
For Legal Immigration....................For Illegal Immigration and Amnesty
For Christian Marriage....................For Same Sex Marriage
For States Rights...........................For Powerful Central Government
For Order and Discipline.................For Chaos and Revolution Now
For Verbal Clarity..........................For Verbal Verbosity
For Immigration Control.................For Open Borders
For Long-Term Stability..................For Unwelcome Changes Now
For Rational Compromise................For Compromise Their Way Only
Natural Demeanor.........................Totally Smug and Nasty Grin
Reserved and Polite.......................Angry and Jarring


Thus:
For Sane and Balanced...................For Unbalanced

So how does one reconcile the two postures? It is not clear to me. I see no reason whatsoever to change the conservative stance.

No, whineybrat, conservatives DON'T hate or fear change or want to "freeze time". There's also an old saying "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater ". Change just for the sake of change engenders chaos. Certain things are the way they are because of decades or even centuries of trial and error. I think one of the more oxymoronic of the new "laws" is gay marriage. Marriage is actually a religious institution where couples pledge to each other and any children of the union. But even farther back it was an institution whereby a man and a woman (and in polygamous societies women, if the man was deemed able to afford same) were married for the sole purpose of legitimizing any offspring of the union and providing for same. Gays don't have offspring. So a civil ceremony would be adequate whereby they gained the ability to be claimed as dependents for insurance and tax reasons and have an inheritance claim. Another oxymoronic law is the whole illegal alien question. Which I think is summed up perfectly in the meme "if someone moves into your house without permission does that make them part of the family?". Conservatives also believe in personal responsibility. If you make decisions and/or take actions YOU are responsible for the consequences. You don't get a special pass cuz you have a great excuse or are the minority du jour.