...when you combine social engineering into Government.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20045942-37.html
Now, these are all D's. Reid, Schumer, Lautenberg and Udall.
But, in the spirit of pages 3 and 4 of this thread (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=28891.75)... this is why we get the coalition work done FIRST before allowing fringe interests on EITHER side to fire a pet salvo. You get Statism. No matter what. Someone ends up controlling someone else.
What builds coalitions? Resentment of someone else exerting control over disparate groups. That builds coalitions.
Same thing could be said if we were legislating more things about gayzors and uhborshins.
Keep the People's Money out of it, and legislate it at the State level. Simple 'nuff.
I'd be happy to have everything done at the state level. Too bad it's all been pushed to the federal level, SO THAT everything must now be done at the federal level in order to get it back into the state's hands.
In fact, what's the one piece of legislation at the federal level dealing with so-called "fiscal cons" pet concern, teh gayz? (Incidentally, though I think stopping the gay agenda important it rates far below fiscal issues and MUCH farther below the lives of the unborn.)
DOMA. You know, the one that makes it so that each state can make their own formulations and not be forced to accept what MA or CA decide?
Further, I'm still confused by all of this. The people who claim to want a truce on social issues are the ones that keep bringing up social issues.
Why not wait until there is actually a "problem" before attacking your "allies"?