I think they spike the water in Massachusetts, because they also keep electing Kennedys and Kerrys as well.

Regards,
Peter H.

My own mother can’t stand him. She finds him sloppy and unkept. I couldn’t agree more. His actions are directly responsible for this financial fiasco. My biggest beef is with his constituency. Why do they keep re-electing him?

Beyond that, Bawney Fwank is illustrating the devil’s bargain the Democrats make and that the left eagerly embraces: “We will let you do whatever you want in the bedroom, and in return, you let us control absolutely every aspect of your life outside the bedroom.”

A case can be made that these things also impact broader society (as the libs assert when addressing smoking and eating).

Could it be that Frank is OK with hedonistic impulses because people occupied solely with pleasure don’t really care about what’s going on as long as the party doesn’t end? A “Brave New World”?

Conservatives could be thought to concern themselves with things seen to interfere assuming responsibility (sometimes correctly, sometimes not).

There is this strange dichotomy among liberals like Barney who favor unfettered personal freedom in the social sphere, but wish to severely constrain our choices in the economic one. But, then again, there is a strange dichotomy among social conservatives who favor unfettered personal freedom in the marketplace (except when it comes to buying certain products of which they disapprove), but not in one’s own bedroom.

One explanation is that liberals are materialists/utilitarians and conservatives are moralists/spiritualists. The reason that liberals want to limit economic freedom and conservatives want to limit personal freedom is control. Both groups attempt to control those spheres about which they are most concerned.