[Gabz]

I have no problem with your stance and agree with the majority of it - with slight exceptions - pro-small government,...... pro-liberty constitution -

If this were true - all of the nanny state lovers would have been gone years ago - but they are permitted to remain, no matter how ignorant they get with those of us who refuse to accept any of it.

Any one pro-small government and pro-liberty would not support any law that restricts the right of property owners or small businesses -— but they are permitted to flourish here.

I would like to know why?

[Sola Veritas]

“If this were true - all of the nanny state lovers would have been gone years ago - but they are permitted to remain, no matter how ignorant they get with those of us who refuse to accept any of it.”

It has been my experience that those that scream the loudest about “nanny state” are libertarians. That is just another form of anarchy.

Of course, I would have to see examples of what you call “nanny state.” If you mean keeping illicit drugs illegal....that IS NOT nanny state, that is keeping a safe an ordered society.

Now IF you mean someone legislating the fat content of food, then that would be “nanny state.”