Even then, it's still cheaper for me, and cheaper for most if they count the time lost doing extra paperwork that should be the damn bureaucrat's responsibility.

I've told you that I'm for liberty, on federal Constitutional issues.

  I wish you were around in the early 1800s. That would put you in favor of slavery as a matter of property rights. Prohibition (and the present one is far from constitutional, but it's no better when the states do it) is very similar, prison being the new slavery that it is. Arguing states rights puts you right into that camp. Qualifying liberty the way you do means you're not for liberty, except for some. You remain in favor of privilege. Try being for what's right, not for what's constitutional.

Would I not be taking the liberty from the residents of the other 56 states if I forced them to adhere to MY definition of liberty?

Heh, that's how MH42 likes to frame it also. You have a right to your liberties even if others find them morally offensive. They have no right to sanction you for it. Neither you or the state have the right to meddle with those who cause no harm to others. You must show evidence before you even attempt it.

If they don't lend the money, the US will just go in and take it, like they do for other resources they want.

It's cheaper, and you're better off just paying the fine, and wait until we get medicare for all.

Like I said, you refuse to deal with the direct, very simple question at hand that only requires a simple yes or no, nothing more.. You have not connected any dots at all, and your obfuscation does not impress. It only confirms that you are not for liberty.

Therefore, no country would be able to just print money to buy new resources.

With a strong enough military they can. That is what backs up one's currency. And that is why the US still dominates that market. That is why it is at war with the Middle East. Lead is much more persuasive than gold.

You can't piss them off too much or they'll leave you without money once you spent everything they already gave you.

That's where military intervention comes in... I mean, "liberation" from those dirty commies. Send in the drones... It will be interesting to see if the US can defeat a real army.

Besides, it doesn't matter. If the US doesn't want to pay the "debt", who has the power to force them? The whole thing is so phony, nothing more than something to fill time on the TV news to keep our minds off our stolen pensions.

Can we, you know, *learn* from that?

Yes, that's why we have to demand Medicare for all, unconditionally. Flash a card, get fixed, less paperwork, boom, done. It can be very simple and much better for everybody... except the Wall Street crowd and the government bureaucrats who make rules to justify their existence. People can still buy their own insurance if they want more channels on the cable TV in their rooms. We will all be much prosperous for it.

I don't know. Maybe Times Roman wasn't invented before the sign was printed, though it did come out in the same year.

Redistribute power, not wealth...

Even though I'm talking to the hand, I will remind you again that that is impossible. They are the same thing.

As to the question, where I could not have been more clear, I will have to take your non answer as a "no" to any referendum for abolition (to be even more obvious, specifically something similar to what was passed in Colorado and Washington), and thus the only logical conclusion is to say you are only for the liberties you personally approve of as dictated by your bible. This is how I know it is you that stands tall for the status quo and powerful, coercive social hierarchies with abundant privileges for specific groups at the expense of others, the very same thing you project upon me.

What you call "entitlements" (notably you conveniently don't consider corporate welfare AND the military machine's bureaucratic promotions for the careerists as "entitlements"), The rest of us near retirement call earned, fully paid for (and stolen by, or given to Wall Street) benefits. And military spending is not decreasing, it's merely being contracted out, again, to cook the books. The money still comes from our labor.

Hey, kill the bill, I say, though there are better ways to do it without the theatrics to distract us from the pension heists. It only exists for the benefit of the insurance industry. Replace it with medicare for all, and cut back on the attempted world domination. Problem solved for the rest of us. It will be cheaper for me just to pay the fine for not carrying at this point.

Who cares if I'm insulted? That makes no sense. The right to offend is sacrosanct. Feeling insulted is strictly personal. Everybody reacts differently, regardless of what's in your dictionary, so whatever your point is, it is baseless.

I feel it's a factual statement...

Yes, you feel... That's a personal issue. You're trying to use a book to tell people how they should feel. Culture, DNA, and experience define how people react to words. The words themselves carry no intrinsic value one way or another of any kind, and nobody has any right to determine, legally or otherwise, how they are used. Educate or sanction the listener, and nobody else. Like they say about the idiots on talk radio. it's their followers you should be afraid of, not the blabbermouth. Only there will you find the real danger. You're just trying to tell me that I can't say "fuck" on TV.

:-) Yes or no? While your attempts at diversion and avoiding the question are admirable, where is your right to tell me what kind of plants I can cultivate, process, and possess, state, federal, or any other authority you try to claim over any other person?