[Griff]

There is often a difference between what people think they're saying and what they are saying.
ex: UG thinks he's saying freedom for everyone. I'd say what people generally hear is submit to my freedom. That is why he and Radar and Dana collide, they all want a version of freedom to reign, but their definitions are incompatible.

My current definition shifts with what I see. It may not look that different from Radar's except that I do think that, despite its moral hazards, a social saftey net is in order. I do believe in the freedom to fail, which has become unpopular in governmental circles, meaning I'd rather see Wagoner on welfare than running GM. I believe the Supreme Court got it right, we have a individual right to self defense. I believe in a lot of stuff, but what do you hear?