seriously?

There are people who haven't seen the Lord of the Rings movies out there?

Click the picture, it's a funny link

There is at least two of us.

In my mind, liberals are mostly very good people with very good goals and intentions.

Just like liberals, I wish everyone had a decent income and could afford things like education and healthcare.  I donate to various charities that I respect.

The problem is that liberals have is "unintended (but highly predictable) consequences"
They don't want to admit that human nature is not only an immutable fact of nature, but that human nature varies with each human.

If the law were able to make everything fair, it wouldn't be long before people figure out how to once again garner more than their fair share.

If you make things easy for people, SOME people will quit trying and make a life out of the easy pickings.

Humans are not going to just settle for their fair share.  Whether it is the rich people that always want more and will work (or lie or cheat) to get it, or the poor people that are going to try to get as much as they can without working or producing at all.

So I like liberals.  But they need to figure out that the ONLY thing we should give the poor is opportunity.  And this country provides that in abundance, even if there is still prejudice, discrimination and greed.  Those things will always be there as long as there are humans.  We should strive to eliminate that as much as possible while acknowledging that it exists.  It is up to the individual to rise to limits of their ability and potential.  It is up to the rest of us to help take care of those with no ability or potential.  Lack of  personal responsibility does not qualify.

Seems kinda like holding all Christians responsible for the actions of Westboro Baptist Church.

Not even close. The Westboro group was a tiny slice of idiots that were widely condemned by virtually every other Christian. They just happened to be protected by the Constitution.

Poor kid. He got caught banging his own mom.


What? Too soon?? 

Naw.
That was funny.
But if Trump said it, that would be different.

Funny stuff.
Any good democrat should love all those exaggerations and mischaracterizations. That was good enough for SNL.

So, let's consider a population of a million people.  Or N million people where N > 1, if it matters.

Let's put aside the (very small, hopefully) portion of the population that have an adverse reaction to a vaccine for <disease X> (this reaction is not necessarily known prior to the vaccination)

In a hypothetical case where everyone except for 1000 people get vaccinated, what risk to the vaccinated population is presented by the 1000 unvaccinated people?

Very few vaccines are 100% effective.  MMR is about 93% effective.

One of the costs to society is that it is possible to virtually wipe out diseases through universal vaccination.  But without universal vaccination, the strain can continue and mutate to become resistant to the vaccines.

On the other hand, universal vaccination causes the weak that would normally be weeded out of the gene pool to flourish.

'Gimp,

Wow!

What an articulate, well reasoned post. Thanks for that.

There's an expression: "The perception is the reality".

And my post on the topic was simply answering the allegation that the Trump=Hitler was concocted by the media, solely to bring Trump down. Emphasizing the fact that I had had a similar sentiment prior to reading it elsewhere. It was, in fact, a particular speech I listened to in my car where he was mocking Bush and Kerry in a very sarcastic, bombastic manner, and it all just sounded familiar, somehow.

Admittedly, "The Rise and Fall..." is not the be all and end all chronicle of what happened there, but I trust it got the broad sweep correctly. Another gem is "Berlin Diary", also by William Shirer, outlining a small slice of what transpired in the first person as a correspondent. Well worth the read. And available somewhere online as a pdf, IIRC.

But, again, thank for your post, and I see where you're coming from. Though the "Obama=Hitler" seems like a bit of a stretch.

I seriously doubt Gimp was advancing the "Obama = Hitler" analogy.  I think he was merely stating that it was less of a stretch than "Trump = Hitler".  I don't think Obama is near the demon that Hitler was.  But he has a very similar ability to mesmerize the masses through skillful oratory.

This might be the kiss of death, because every time I decided I liked a particular Republican candidate, they dropped out a few days later.

But now I have decided I want Kasich to win.  The biggest knock I hear about him is that "he doesn't have a chance".  That is the definition of a self-fulfilling prophesy.

But I truly think that Trump, Cruz and Rubio (who I thought I would be supporting) are all making a mockery out of the process.  Even though I like a lot of what each of them say, they have all proven to me that they are unqualified for the job of CIC.

So honestly, if you were to discard your current first choice among the contenders, who would be your second choice?

But regardless of what I think of any of them, I think that any of them would be better than Hillary or Sanders.