|
|
On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical.
Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist.
|
On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist.
You are correct in a general sense, but to be fair to OsoVega, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, we're extremely liberal. The Republicans use tax cuts to make sure that we get further and further into debt. The Democrats use spending to make sure that we get further and further into debt. Where is the conservatism?
There is no actual fiscal conservatism in mainstream American politics right now with the possible exception of some Tea Party members (but then they add all sorts of their own crazy on top, grrrr). The last time I saw a mainstream politician talk about fiscal conservatism was McCain in the 2000 primaries when he planned to use the "surplus" to pay down the national debt.
Yeah, he lost. Turns out the "conservatives" like a quick payoff (Bush promised tax cuts) more than actual conservative values.
|
On August 19 2012 23:56 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. You are correct in a general sense, but to be fair to OsoVega, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, we're extremely liberal. The Republicans use tax cuts to make sure that we get further and further into debt. The Democrats use spending to make sure that we get further and further into debt. Where is the conservatism? There is no actual fiscal conservatism in mainstream American politics right now with the possible exception of some Tea Party members (but then they add all sorts of their own crazy on top, grrrr). The last time I saw a mainstream politician talk about fiscal conservatism was McCain in the 2000 primaries when he planned to use the "surplus" to pay down the national debt. Yeah, he lost. Turns out the "conservatives" like a quick payoff (Bush promised tax cuts) more than actual conservative values.
I think it's rather silly that you're essentially saying that liberal = fiscally irresponsible. Seriously?
Spending and increasing the debt is what you're supposed to do economically in a recession. That's not "conservative" or "liberal," that's just sensible economics.
|
On August 20 2012 00:03 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 23:56 RenSC2 wrote:On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. You are correct in a general sense, but to be fair to OsoVega, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, we're extremely liberal. The Republicans use tax cuts to make sure that we get further and further into debt. The Democrats use spending to make sure that we get further and further into debt. Where is the conservatism? There is no actual fiscal conservatism in mainstream American politics right now with the possible exception of some Tea Party members (but then they add all sorts of their own crazy on top, grrrr). The last time I saw a mainstream politician talk about fiscal conservatism was McCain in the 2000 primaries when he planned to use the "surplus" to pay down the national debt. Yeah, he lost. Turns out the "conservatives" like a quick payoff (Bush promised tax cuts) more than actual conservative values. I think it's rather silly that you're essentially saying that liberal = fiscally irresponsible. Seriously? Spending and increasing the debt is what you're supposed to do economically in a recession. That's not "conservative" or "liberal," that's just sensible economics.
That's not sensible economics, that is the witch doctory known as Keynesianism and the fact that both Democrats and Republicans in this country are generally in favor of Keynesianism is disasterous. And we're not even in official recession anymore but QE2 has clearly not worked and now they want to throw more gas on the fire with QE3, even if they don't call it that.
|
On August 20 2012 00:03 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 23:56 RenSC2 wrote:On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. You are correct in a general sense, but to be fair to OsoVega, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, we're extremely liberal. The Republicans use tax cuts to make sure that we get further and further into debt. The Democrats use spending to make sure that we get further and further into debt. Where is the conservatism? There is no actual fiscal conservatism in mainstream American politics right now with the possible exception of some Tea Party members (but then they add all sorts of their own crazy on top, grrrr). The last time I saw a mainstream politician talk about fiscal conservatism was McCain in the 2000 primaries when he planned to use the "surplus" to pay down the national debt. Yeah, he lost. Turns out the "conservatives" like a quick payoff (Bush promised tax cuts) more than actual conservative values. I think it's rather silly that you're essentially saying that liberal = fiscally irresponsible. Seriously? Spending and increasing the debt is what you're supposed to do economically in a recession. That's not "conservative" or "liberal," that's just sensible economics.
Definitions are different from person to person. I once remember someone giving a definition of left-wing and right-wing where I would have to put the democrats on the right and the republicans on the left.
By my definition of fiscal liberalism or conservatism, conservatism is all about eliminating debt and potentially even running government surpluses in good times that they could dip into during hard times. Responsible liberalism is more about trying to keep a balanced budget, but being willing to take on debt to accomplish goals.
While I do equate fiscal responsibility to conservatism and fiscal irresponsibility to liberalism, being fiscally irresponsible can be "just sensible economics" at times.
|
On August 20 2012 00:23 OsoVega wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 00:03 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:56 RenSC2 wrote:On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. You are correct in a general sense, but to be fair to OsoVega, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, we're extremely liberal. The Republicans use tax cuts to make sure that we get further and further into debt. The Democrats use spending to make sure that we get further and further into debt. Where is the conservatism? There is no actual fiscal conservatism in mainstream American politics right now with the possible exception of some Tea Party members (but then they add all sorts of their own crazy on top, grrrr). The last time I saw a mainstream politician talk about fiscal conservatism was McCain in the 2000 primaries when he planned to use the "surplus" to pay down the national debt. Yeah, he lost. Turns out the "conservatives" like a quick payoff (Bush promised tax cuts) more than actual conservative values. I think it's rather silly that you're essentially saying that liberal = fiscally irresponsible. Seriously? Spending and increasing the debt is what you're supposed to do economically in a recession. That's not "conservative" or "liberal," that's just sensible economics. That's not sensible economics, that is the witch doctory known as Keynesianism and the fact that both Democrats and Republicans in this country are generally in favor of Keynesianism is disasterous. And we're not even in official recession anymore but QE2 has clearly not worked and now they want to throw more gas on the fire with QE3, even if they don't call it that.
Keynesianism is only economic theory that has evidence and can demonstrate any kind of success and depth. Keynesianism makes successful predictions all the time on economic theory and strategies. There is no economic theory at the moment that comes close to the accuracy of Keynesian economics.
I have no idea what "witch doctory" you follow, so I can't tell you why it's idiotic and stupid until you tell me what it is.
On August 20 2012 00:27 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 00:03 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:56 RenSC2 wrote:On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. You are correct in a general sense, but to be fair to OsoVega, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, we're extremely liberal. The Republicans use tax cuts to make sure that we get further and further into debt. The Democrats use spending to make sure that we get further and further into debt. Where is the conservatism? There is no actual fiscal conservatism in mainstream American politics right now with the possible exception of some Tea Party members (but then they add all sorts of their own crazy on top, grrrr). The last time I saw a mainstream politician talk about fiscal conservatism was McCain in the 2000 primaries when he planned to use the "surplus" to pay down the national debt. Yeah, he lost. Turns out the "conservatives" like a quick payoff (Bush promised tax cuts) more than actual conservative values. I think it's rather silly that you're essentially saying that liberal = fiscally irresponsible. Seriously? Spending and increasing the debt is what you're supposed to do economically in a recession. That's not "conservative" or "liberal," that's just sensible economics. Definitions are different from person to person. I once remember someone giving a definition of left-wing and right-wing where I would have to put the democrats on the right and the republicans on the left. By my definition of fiscal liberalism or conservatism, conservatism is all about eliminating debt and potentially even running government surpluses in good times that they could dip into during hard times. Responsible liberalism is more about trying to keep a balanced budget, but being willing to take on debt to accomplish goals. While I do equate fiscal responsibility to conservatism and fiscal irresponsibility to liberalism, being fiscally irresponsible can be "just sensible economics" at times.
I... what? My description of liberal and conservative economics is the exact opposite of what you just said. Putting these labels on makes absolutely no sense. Economics is about what works and what doesn't work.
|
On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist.
He's not a socialist, he is a facist in the literal sense of the term. He wants government control of economics but he leaves it in private hands so that he can always blame free markets for the problems that government causes. This is where your misunderstanding may come from since facism is generally seen as a right-wing ideology, even though both facism and socialism are anti-liberty. What barely exists in this country any more is people who fight for liberty and capitalism. The Democratic and Republican Party have been taken over by statists and the only significant group fighting back is the Tea Party. Despite the media trying to paint them as a bunch of religous nutjobs, the core of the movement is towards liberty and shrinking government. Their only problem is that they lack an explicit philosophy, which is why you have some people showing up to Tea Parties demanding that the government not touch their medi-care. Still though, the Tea Party represents an emotional backlash against the statist direction of this country and while they don't have explicit enough a philosophy to save the country, they are certainly healthy sign of the American sense of life and are a useful force for freedom.
|
On August 20 2012 00:34 OsoVega wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. He's not a socialist, he is a facist in the literal sense of the term. He wants government control of economics but he leaves it in private hands so that he can always blame free markets for the problems that government causes. This is where your misunderstanding may come from since facism is generally seen as a right-wing ideology, even though both facism and socialism are anti-liberty. What barely exists in this country any more is people who fight for liberty and capitalism. The Democratic and Republican Party have been taken over by statists and the only significant group fighting back is the Tea Party. Despite the media trying to paint them as a bunch of religous nutjobs, the core of the movement is towards liberty and shrinking government. Their only problem is that they lack an explicit philosophy, which is why you have some people showing up to Tea Parties demanding that the government not touch their medi-care. Still though, the Tea Party represents an emotional backlash against the statist direction of this country and while they don't have explicit enough a philosophy to save the country, they are certainly healthy sign of the American sense of life and are a useful force for freedom.
Oh god, nevermind. Sorry, I was actually taking you seriously for a moment there. My bad.
I congratulate you on waking up and no longer being one of the "sheeple." Everything must all make sense now.
|
On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. Obama is the most left wing president ever. Hes the most Authoritarian since Wilson. He's never done a single centrist thing in his life, on any stage of politics.
|
On August 20 2012 00:47 whatevername wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. Obama is the most left wing president ever. Hes the most Authoritarian since Wilson. He's never done a single centrist thing in his life, on any stage of politics.
Name a single leftist thing he's done?
Financial Reform? Healthcare Reform? Guantanamo? Drone Strikes? Foreign Policy? Repeal of DADT?
Are any of these things leftist to you? Pick any of his policies, and we can discuss why you're wrong.
|
On August 20 2012 00:56 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 00:47 whatevername wrote:On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. Obama is the most left wing president ever. Hes the most Authoritarian since Wilson. He's never done a single centrist thing in his life, on any stage of politics. Name a single leftist thing he's done? Financial Reform? Healthcare Reform? Guantanamo? Drone Strikes? Foreign Policy? Repeal of DADT? Are any of these things leftist to you? Pick any of his policies, and we can discuss why you're wrong. Sorry, I consider you about as reasonable and worthy of a discussion as you take that "obama is a fascist" guy. Anyone who imagines Obama is a centrist in the American political spectrum is hilariously delusional.
|
On August 19 2012 16:51 MinusPlus wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 14:22 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2012 14:07 darthfoley wrote:On August 19 2012 12:48 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2012 12:02 Zooper31 wrote:On August 19 2012 11:34 Savio wrote:A bit of the influence Paul Ryan is having on the Romney Camp: Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan has infused his ticket-mate Mr. Romney with more than just some much-needed energy on the campaign trail. Since Mr. Romney announced Mr. Ryan as his running mate Saturday, the Romney campaign has raked in more than $10 million in online fundraising and approximately 124,800 online donations, the campaign said Friday.
"Tomorrow marks a week since Mitt Romney announced his choice of Congressman Paul Ryan to join him on America's Comeback Team, and it's clear that his choice has reshaped the race in a positive way," Romney campaign manager Matt Rhoades wrote in a memo. "The Obama team's increasing vitriol is a sure sign that they're rattled by the pick. Unable to engage in an elevated policy debate, they've spent the past few days drowning in their own venom."
The average donation was $81, and about two-thirds were new donors.
Mr. Rhoades also highlighted gains in online media: 54,000 additional Twitter followers for Mr. Romney, bringing the total to 861,000, and a gain of 118,500 for Mr. Romney. Additionally, 45,000 have signed up to volunteer online.
"While President Obama's team continues its campaign of frustration and division to distract voters from his failed record, the Romney-Ryan team will continue offering solutions to the challenges facing our nation," Mr. Rhoades wrote. "America is ready for a comeback and if this past week is any indication, America's comeback will begin on November 6th."
Read more: Romney camp: $10 million raised in 125k online donations since Ryan announcement - Washington Times
SourceEDIT: Also found this very funny: Source+ Show Spoiler +Back in May, Ann Romney, wife of Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, wore a $990 Reed Krakoff silk shirt for a media appearance. The item of clothing set off a media firestorm, with the Romneys widely accused of being “out of touch” with average Americans.
In particular, the Washington Post wrote that the $990 blouse “will not help her husband change those perceptions, no matter how many Laundromat photo ops are on the campaign’s itinerary.”
Fast forward to last Friday, when First Lady Michelle Obama attended an Olympics reception for heads of state at Buckingham Palace, donning a J. Mendel cap sleeve jacket from the 2013 Resort collection.
The price-tag? $6,800.
This time, the Washington Post simply described the intricacies of the jacket and noted that Mrs. Obama has previously been criticized for “not dressing up enough for Queen Elizabeth II, so she stepped up her game.” No snide remarks, no outrage over the cost, no suggestion she was “out of touch.”
“The media’s overabundant love affair with the Obamas has become increasingly blatant as this election draws nearer. Scrutinizing Mrs. Romney for a fashion choice that cost considerably less than that of the First Lady is yet another example of the media being purely sanctimonious,” former political publicist Angie Meyer told FoxNews.com. “The media continues to relish their roles as liberal bullies, and have relentlessly bullied the Romneys from the beginning. It is pure hypocrisy at its finest.” If people can't tell the difference to dressing up at a random campaign stop and between meeting the fucking queen of England then I don't even know anymore. Michelle has a long history of dressing up in expensive designer clothes as first lady, and the media has typically ignored it or given positive comments. maybe because michelle seems like a likeable person, whereas the romney's come across as cold blooded rich white people. The irrational hatred that many liberals have for republicans never ceases to amaze me. Stay classy, bro. I apologize for possibly being too direct (or off-topic), but...xDaunt, this post just makes me think you don't understand the words "irrational" or "hatred".
Classwarfare rhetoric has its foundations in jealously, which generally leads to hatred. Haven't you seen Star Wars? I believe Yoda speaks eloquently on the relationship of jealousy to hatred.
And why is it always "us against them", with everything you post? You openly trash any and everything about Obama, but you completely evade any rational (!) discussion by dismissing the sources as biased, or partisan, or nonsense, and you seem to be going out of your way to miss the point whenever anyone comes along with a strong argument wanting a reasonable response. Then you change the topic as usual through some handwaving comment about "If that's the best they can come up with then they are fucked" or something. Or, even better, with some kind of personal attack or insult (see above).
I haven't even been following the thread for all 300 pages (sorry, it's a lot) and I've seen at least two people (plus myself) call you out to defend something directed to you, clearly challenging your views, that's gone unanswered. What the hell, dude (or ladydude). If you're a posterchild for the party's behavior then it's no wonder at all that the "liberals" can't stand you. "Y'all" or "you, specifically", take your pick.
I've enjoyed following the thread, and have stayed silent until very recently, but...dammit, xDaunt, stop deflecting and say something, please.
(Again, I apologize for the derail. Thread seems pretty slow right at this moment, and I don't believe this is entirely irrelevant. I expect the response -- assuming this it isn't just ignored, -- will be something along the lines of, "Well, what can I say? The discussion about clothing disgusted me" or "That was completely relevant to the current topic" or "Stupid hypocritical liberal", but that would be missing the point...by still continuing to avoid answering the sure-to-be many things actually directed to and yet not responded to on his/her part. Not coincidentally, this would be completely in character.)
If this what you actually think about my posts, then you are not reading them very carefully.
Like I have mentioned before, I am not interested in discussing the merits of actual policy so much as I am interested in discussing political strategy. Most of my posts and discussions are on this latter point. Go back and re-read how the Medicare discussion came up and what my focus on it was.
Unfortunately, most posters are on here miss what I am doing and would rather debate policy. Sometimes I humor them. Sometimes I don't. I certainly don't feel any obligation to do so. Even if I do engage in the debate, I'm not looking to convince anyone to change their points of view so much as I enjoy the stimulation. I also don't have the time or inclination to respond to every post that comes my way (which is a lot), so I am content to let others have the last word. If I didn't, discussions would never end. I realize that some confuse this for "xDaunt can't respond or xDaunt has given up because he knows that he is wrong," but quite frankly, I really don't care.
|
Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 00:27 RenSC2 wrote:On August 20 2012 00:03 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:56 RenSC2 wrote:On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. You are correct in a general sense, but to be fair to OsoVega, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, we're extremely liberal. The Republicans use tax cuts to make sure that we get further and further into debt. The Democrats use spending to make sure that we get further and further into debt. Where is the conservatism? There is no actual fiscal conservatism in mainstream American politics right now with the possible exception of some Tea Party members (but then they add all sorts of their own crazy on top, grrrr). The last time I saw a mainstream politician talk about fiscal conservatism was McCain in the 2000 primaries when he planned to use the "surplus" to pay down the national debt. Yeah, he lost. Turns out the "conservatives" like a quick payoff (Bush promised tax cuts) more than actual conservative values. I think it's rather silly that you're essentially saying that liberal = fiscally irresponsible. Seriously? Spending and increasing the debt is what you're supposed to do economically in a recession. That's not "conservative" or "liberal," that's just sensible economics. Definitions are different from person to person. I once remember someone giving a definition of left-wing and right-wing where I would have to put the democrats on the right and the republicans on the left. By my definition of fiscal liberalism or conservatism, conservatism is all about eliminating debt and potentially even running government surpluses in good times that they could dip into during hard times. Responsible liberalism is more about trying to keep a balanced budget, but being willing to take on debt to accomplish goals. While I do equate fiscal responsibility to conservatism and fiscal irresponsibility to liberalism, being fiscally irresponsible can be "just sensible economics" at times. I... what? My description of liberal and conservative economics is the exact opposite of what you just said. Putting these labels on makes absolutely no sense. Economics is about what works and what doesn't work.
Perhaps this is why debating politics is so difficult. People don't even have the same basic definitions.
Economics can be done in many different ways and it is all still just theory. Read up on the role of the Federal Reserve during the Great Depression. They followed an extremely conservative approach and many economists (like Milton Friedman) say it was a complete failure. Just because it was a poor policy doesn't make it any less conservative.
The gold standard is somewhat conservative while fiat money is liberal... it's just that we have shifted so far left on our monetary system that the very notion of fiat money doesn't seem so liberal anymore (though some ultra-conservatives propose we go back to the gold standard). When you really look at it, even gold was once a liberal system that replaced the barter system. They all work economically in some ways, but the more liberal system have picked up steam in the last millenium and especially in the last century.
I'm not sure how your definitions vary, but I'm definitely not going out on a limb by using these definitions of conservative and liberal fiscal policy.
I'll even walk you through an example:
- Tea Party Republicans are considered ultra conservative, correct?
- Tea Party Republicans tried to introduce a balanced budget amendment. If properly written and adhered to, this amendment would ensure that the government would never again go into debt.
- Note how that is a very conservative action by my definition, whereas liberals are willing to go into debt.
- Note how Tea Party Republicans are ultra conservative and Tea Party Republicans tried to push for what I would call a conservative measure. It fits quite nicely.
|
|
|
On August 20 2012 01:08 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 00:27 RenSC2 wrote:On August 20 2012 00:03 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:56 RenSC2 wrote:On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. You are correct in a general sense, but to be fair to OsoVega, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, we're extremely liberal. The Republicans use tax cuts to make sure that we get further and further into debt. The Democrats use spending to make sure that we get further and further into debt. Where is the conservatism? There is no actual fiscal conservatism in mainstream American politics right now with the possible exception of some Tea Party members (but then they add all sorts of their own crazy on top, grrrr). The last time I saw a mainstream politician talk about fiscal conservatism was McCain in the 2000 primaries when he planned to use the "surplus" to pay down the national debt. Yeah, he lost. Turns out the "conservatives" like a quick payoff (Bush promised tax cuts) more than actual conservative values. I think it's rather silly that you're essentially saying that liberal = fiscally irresponsible. Seriously? Spending and increasing the debt is what you're supposed to do economically in a recession. That's not "conservative" or "liberal," that's just sensible economics. Definitions are different from person to person. I once remember someone giving a definition of left-wing and right-wing where I would have to put the democrats on the right and the republicans on the left. By my definition of fiscal liberalism or conservatism, conservatism is all about eliminating debt and potentially even running government surpluses in good times that they could dip into during hard times. Responsible liberalism is more about trying to keep a balanced budget, but being willing to take on debt to accomplish goals. While I do equate fiscal responsibility to conservatism and fiscal irresponsibility to liberalism, being fiscally irresponsible can be "just sensible economics" at times. I... what? My description of liberal and conservative economics is the exact opposite of what you just said. Putting these labels on makes absolutely no sense. Economics is about what works and what doesn't work. Perhaps this is why debating politics is so difficult. People don't even have the same basic definitions. Economics can be done in many different ways and it is all still just theory. Read up on the role of the Federal Reserve during the Great Depression. They followed an extremely conservative approach and many economists (like Milton Friedman) say it was a complete failure. Just because it was a poor policy doesn't make it any less conservative. The gold standard is somewhat conservative while fiat money is liberal... it's just that we have shifted so far left on our monetary system that the very notion of fiat money doesn't seem so liberal anymore (though some ultra-conservatives propose we go back to the gold standard). When you really look at it, even gold was once a liberal system that replaced the barter system. They all work economically in some ways, but the more liberal system have picked up steam in the last millenium and especially in the last century. I'm not sure how your definitions vary, but I'm definitely not going out on a limb by using these definitions of conservative and liberal fiscal policy. I'll even walk you through an example: - Tea Party Republicans are considered ultra conservative, correct? - Tea Party Republicans tried to introduce a balanced budget amendment. If properly written and adhered to, this amendment would ensure that the government would never again go into debt. - Note how that is a very conservative action by my definition, whereas liberals are willing to go into debt. - Note how Tea Party Republicans are ultra conservative and Tea Party Republicans tried to push for what I would call a conservative measure. It fits quite nicely.
Tea Partiers are morons. I learned that recently.
|
On August 20 2012 01:08 xDaunt wrote:
Like I have mentioned before, I am not interested in discussing the merits of actual policy so much as I am interested in discussing political strategy. Most of my posts and discussions are on this latter point. Go back and re-read how the Medicare discussion came up and what my focus on it was.
Unfortunately, most posters are on here miss what I am doing and would rather debate policy. Sometimes I humor them. Sometimes I don't. I certainly don't feel any obligation to do so. Even if I do engage in the debate, I'm not looking to convince anyone to change their points of view so much as I enjoy the stimulation. I also don't have the time or inclination to respond to every post that comes my way (which is a lot), so I am content to let others have the last word. If I didn't, discussions would never end. I realize that some confuse this for "xDaunt can't respond or xDaunt has given up because he knows that he is wrong," but quite frankly, I really don't care.
Wait, what? So you just want to parrot political talking points without actual arguing the merits of them? At least you've gotten to the point where you admit that you can't defend the points you're making, you just want to say them anyways.
Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.
|
I was curious what the requirements are to run for mayor. I was thinking about running for mayor.
|
On August 20 2012 01:22 Nymphaceae wrote:
I was curious what the requirements are to run for mayor. I was thinking about running for mayor.
Check with your minicipality. It's usually just 18 and a resident.
|
On August 20 2012 01:27 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 01:22 Nymphaceae wrote:
I was curious what the requirements are to run for mayor. I was thinking about running for mayor. Check with your minicipality. It's usually just 18 and a resident.
Thanks,
What are the requirements to be a resident.
|
On August 20 2012 00:23 OsoVega wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 00:03 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:56 RenSC2 wrote:On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. You are correct in a general sense, but to be fair to OsoVega, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, we're extremely liberal. The Republicans use tax cuts to make sure that we get further and further into debt. The Democrats use spending to make sure that we get further and further into debt. Where is the conservatism? There is no actual fiscal conservatism in mainstream American politics right now with the possible exception of some Tea Party members (but then they add all sorts of their own crazy on top, grrrr). The last time I saw a mainstream politician talk about fiscal conservatism was McCain in the 2000 primaries when he planned to use the "surplus" to pay down the national debt. Yeah, he lost. Turns out the "conservatives" like a quick payoff (Bush promised tax cuts) more than actual conservative values. I think it's rather silly that you're essentially saying that liberal = fiscally irresponsible. Seriously? Spending and increasing the debt is what you're supposed to do economically in a recession. That's not "conservative" or "liberal," that's just sensible economics. That's not sensible economics, that is the witch doctory known as Keynesianism and the fact that both Democrats and Republicans in this country are generally in favor of Keynesianism is disasterous. And we're not even in official recession anymore but QE2 has clearly not worked and now they want to throw more gas on the fire with QE3, even if they don't call it that.
He has a point. America generally expounds neoliberalism in theory, and imposes it by force abroad, but domestically it is Keynesian, in opposition to the theory. Basically we are hypocrites in this respect. Both the American right and the American "left" are neoliberals abroad and Keynesian domestically.
To be sure, it's a sort of bastardization of Keynesianism and neoliberalism, with the worst aspects of both.
edit:
On August 20 2012 01:04 whatevername wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 00:56 DoubleReed wrote:On August 20 2012 00:47 whatevername wrote:On August 19 2012 23:47 DoubleReed wrote:On August 19 2012 23:29 OsoVega wrote:On August 19 2012 16:11 Kenpachi wrote:
a friend of mine said he prefers Romney because Ryan has a good economic plan. i havent been really paying all that much attention to this election because i predict Obama to win with ease but what exactly is this plan that he proposed? His supposedly radical, draconian plan is to not grow the government quite as much as Obama plans to. Certainly better than Obama, but it also shows how weak the right and how far left the left is when not growing the government enough is considered radical. Are you joking? America has moved so far to the right that even someone as centrist and corporatist as Obama is considered a radical leftist and socialist. Obama is the most left wing president ever. Hes the most Authoritarian since Wilson. He's never done a single centrist thing in his life, on any stage of politics. Name a single leftist thing he's done? Financial Reform? Healthcare Reform? Guantanamo? Drone Strikes? Foreign Policy? Repeal of DADT? Are any of these things leftist to you? Pick any of his policies, and we can discuss why you're wrong. Sorry, I consider you about as reasonable and worthy of a discussion as you take that "obama is a fascist" guy. Anyone who imagines Obama is a centrist in the American political spectrum is hilariously delusional.
The thing is that judging by the American political spectrum is incredibly myopic, because the American political spectrum is utterly impoverished.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
