Paying for Things You Don’t Like

A short list of things, inspired bythis nonsense, that I would like to defund because I have moral qualms:

David Vitter’s health care

The electricity, copy paper and intern hours devoted to producing a resolution honoring Rush Limbaugh

Both wars

Wars in general

Especially wars the public has decided it’s had enough of

War profiteering

Rape Gurney Joe Lieberman’s health care

Freedom Fries

Seriously, the Congressional cafeterias. It should only serve that which is served to the poorest public schoolchildren in DC. Anything fancier is unconscionable.

I don’t know where we got this idea, probably from the glibertarian crowd, that we govern like you order fast food. You don’t have to pay for anything you don’t like! Well, guess what? You’ll be eating your fucking hash browns because I want my McChicken and you’ll motherfucking like it. We all have to pay for things we don’t like, things we consider objectionable, things we have deep moral qualms about.

I don’t know when abortion became the only issue about which you could have moral reservations, either. Got moral reservations about the war? Shut up, hippie. Moral reservations about whether the state can force a woman to bear a child against her will? We’d better respect your point of view lest we look compassionless. This isn’t even my pro-choice talking, it’s my bullshit detector going off.



19 thoughts on “Paying for Things You Don’t Like

  1. There’s a whole list of stuff I’d like to defund on moral grounds: tax exemptions for religious institutions that tolerate pedophilia, “private Christian academies” that receive benefits like taxpayer funded textbooks and bus service; as a proud secular humanist, I also oppose on moral grounds ANY attempt to demean evolutionary theory and promote creationism (on that note I sometimes think creationists shouldn’t be allowed modern health care that’s based in no small part on a solid understanding of biological evolution, however, that could punish kids for merely having idiot parents.)

  2. This has pissed me off since Vietnam, when A whole bunch of people didn’t want their taxes to go to that particular catastrophe.
    I have a clear memory of Vin Weber, being a wise elder of the sainted Republican party, on some tv program, intoning that “of course you cannot pick and choose what your taxes pay for.” Had I been wearing shoes I’d a’killed that tv.
    I’d like to have a check off box on my tax return to specify the top 5 or 6 things I’d want my taxes to go for.
    Oh, and I agree, one of the things I least want my taxes to go for is Vitter’s health care. Or Stupak’s, for that matter.

  3. Oh, I also don’t particularly like “subsidizing” sports franchises (actually more like blackmail, since teams routinely threaten to relocate if they don’t get their cut) — here in Loosiana, they flat out pay the football team something like $10 million dollars a year. Funny: it’s maybe the ONLY item related to New Orleans that the reps from the northern part of the State support.

  4. I’d also like to require that the Congressional Gymnasium showers be wired to the same standards as the showers our troops must use in Afghanistan and Iraq.

  5. ” Moral reservations about whether the state can force a woman to bear a child against her will?”
    This one is way off. Come on now, where is the REAL “force” in this? A mother killing her child, or the child living because the state protected the child from being killed by the mother? Of course, the real “force” is found in the act of abortion… which is an act of violence one human perpetrates upon another.
    At least you used the correct term “child”. And did not use terms like “blob of cells” that some use to de-humanize these actual human beings in arguments that support killing them.

  6. Afuckingmen to all, but a special afuckingmen to your point on the Congressional cafeterias. It’s a point that should extend to all benefits our congresscritters enjoy. Want to live off the taxpayer largesse? Then you and your family should share the same healthcare, education and food that the least of your constituents do. Chew on that for a while before you decide how to cast your next vote.

  7. Hey none…at what point does the ‘blob of cells’ turn into a ‘child’? Of course it is a child at the time it is being born; that’s obvious. But when does it become a ‘child’ in your opinion?

  8. Can you show me where in the Constitution “No Child Left Behind” is explicitly authorized?
    It seems like the case for that is a lot stronger than what the tenthers are screaming.

  9. Trollelspeth said: “Hey, troll, er, ‘none’, when the woman gives birth, it’s a child. Get bent.”
    Ever hear of the term “with child”?
    Besides, the first (primary) definition of “child” in Merriam-Webster is “an unborn or recently born person”.
    I can see why you are getting testy, as you were shown to be completely wrong about this.

  10. Maple: That’s a meaningless question. You ought to read the Constitution. The Constitution specifically describes and authorizes Congress with legislative powers.

  11. Hey none…at what point does the ‘blob of cells’ turn into a ‘child’? Of course it is a child at the time it is being born; that’s obvious. But when does it become a ‘child’ in your opinion?

  12. None, Yes, I have read the constitution.
    I’m just applying the tenthers logic to one of their pet causes. Not to mention that the causes they are rebelling about are in the constitution much stronger than education where a strong argument can be made for states’ rights.

Comments are closed.