You would think that the Ron Paul supporters would have known they would get mugged at the GOP Convention. I don't know what they thought the reaction would be to how well they worked the rules in the Caucuses and Delegate Selections but it certainly seems wishful thinking that the GOP would ignore it. Well, the GOP didn't ignore it and has gone to lengths to keep things on track (non-Paul track) and following the script of Romney. The Paul crowd doesn't seem to quite understand the authoritarianism inherent in both the GOP and particularly Romney.
They're going to have a few days to watch the GOP Convention follow its script and maybe actually think about it. I'll be damned if I'm going to spend a page debunking bullshit that they think Paul stands for, I'll just go ahead and pretty much accept that they believe the things they say. They are going to get absolutely not spit out of the GOP Platform, the speakers, or R-money. It gets worse than that, the R/R campaign's foreign policy outfit is stuffed full of neo-cons; remember Iraq? There is a stated desire to go to war with Iran... and others. Whatever version of Anti-abortion you pick from the mess that is the GOP/R-money it is in direct opposition to the Paulista's position. (I already said I'm not debunking...) As for the Drug War, any comparison between their positions is ludicrously divergent. You can go on and on, and find about the only thing close is the Platform in regard to the Fed - and you can bet your first born that R-money isn't on board with that. (maybe the 2nd Amendment, also; too)
The Paulistas get truly pissed-off if you bring up the racism of Paul - denying and stomping their feet, but since the R/R campaign is blatantly whistling up the race card there is that congruence; unless, of course, they actually mean their denials. This brings about the crux of "Whither The Paulistas ?" because almost everything they say they believe is in direct opposition to R/R beyond the amorphous assertions about smaller government and that fails their included phrase "less intrusive."
No, Obama is not directly in line with the Paulista's themes, in fact he is pretty awful in regard to a lot of their stuff. The question they have to ask themselves is which of the two actual candidates, c'mon nobody else is a factor, is less bad. Yep, I said it - less bad, you know the "lesser of two evils." What are they going to do with that? There are options:
Vote the least bad real candidate - Obama (he is black)
Vote the most offensive candidate - r-Money (he isn't black)
Vote the protest candidate - whatever...
Stay the hell home
Really, I'd bet on splintering badly, the "not black", the protest candidate, staying home. You may note that the lesser evil gets no consideration in my guess-work. I'll even tell you why two thing drive that consideration - I'm pretty sure the denials of racism are horseshit and less intrusive government counts for nothing against SMALL government - FYIGM ( F*** You I Got Mine). Like almost every small government bullshit booster; the second their break gets the axe they go ballistic.
I'm sorry Paulistas, you're as full of shit as your candidate is and as ignorant of history and consequences as most rocks. The second you come on this blog and swarm me with promises to vote Obama I'll take it back. Don't bother me with the protest candidate vote - it is outcome meaningless other than possibly tilting a very few places Obama. And before you get all over me about being an Obama-ite, I see him as a lesser evil and have stated that repeatedly and kicked the Democrats for their corporatist outcomes.
Showing posts with label Libertarian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Libertarian. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Ron Paul's Latest Panty-sniffing
Let's set this stage a bit with Ron Paul's Campaign site and the "official" statement regarding abortion.
I don't know about your understanding of abortion but I will state that Libertarianism and the above two statements don't exactly line up - like at all.
In regard to that Paultard baiting headline, from the CNN "debate" Rep Paul:
Maybe you folks thinking no Federal War on Drugs means you get to smoke pot (hint - not a f***ing chance) ought to also give up on the idea that sexy-time without children as an outcome is on the Paul approved list. As for you married folks, pot or otherwise, you do that stuff and not have kids for it - well, you're immoral and a part of the decline of the US.
The guy tells you up front that he's not about your personal liberties, he's about the Fed not being involved. He's all for Government telling you what to do but just his Last Confederate Standing version. He tells you and you don't listen - your imagination just runs wild with your ideas and not what he means. Words for that run from "delusional" to "really damned stupid." Libertarian my ass - just another bigoted panty-sniffer.
Excuse the rest of us for pointing and laughing.
And as President, Ron Paul will continue to fight for the same pro-life solutions he has upheld in Congress, including:
* Immediately saving lives by effectively repealing Roe v. Wade and preventing activist judges from interfering with state decisions on life by removing abortion from federal court jurisdiction through legislation modeled after his “We the People Act.”
* Defining life as beginning at conception by passing a “Sanctity of Life Act.”
I don't know about your understanding of abortion but I will state that Libertarianism and the above two statements don't exactly line up - like at all.
In regard to that Paultard baiting headline, from the CNN "debate" Rep Paul:
“But sort of along the line of the [contraception] pills creating immorality, I don’t see it that way. I think the immorality creates the problem of wanting to use the pills. So you don’t blame the pills.”
Maybe you folks thinking no Federal War on Drugs means you get to smoke pot (hint - not a f***ing chance) ought to also give up on the idea that sexy-time without children as an outcome is on the Paul approved list. As for you married folks, pot or otherwise, you do that stuff and not have kids for it - well, you're immoral and a part of the decline of the US.
The guy tells you up front that he's not about your personal liberties, he's about the Fed not being involved. He's all for Government telling you what to do but just his Last Confederate Standing version. He tells you and you don't listen - your imagination just runs wild with your ideas and not what he means. Words for that run from "delusional" to "really damned stupid." Libertarian my ass - just another bigoted panty-sniffer.
Excuse the rest of us for pointing and laughing.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
M-O-N-E-Y Spells Respect, ummm
Last night I admitted to left wing Democratic tendencies to a couple people I knew perfectly good and well wouldn't like anything about that. This resulted in the usual stupid and false GOP/Libertarian talking points. I've certainly heard all that stuff better phrased and better presented but I went ahead and poked the bull just for giggles. It was an exercise in pointlessness because whatever fact I presented was going to be ignored in pursuit of the stupid emotional appeals crafted by their ... 'betters.'
Neither of these individuals is ever going to make enough money to matter in the scheme of wealth, taxation, or power. Not ever, not going to happen and not even in their dreams. Their concerns were all theoretical, entirely outside their experiences or possible experiences and somehow addressed 'fairness.' The mantras were familiar to anyone acquainted with Libertarianism, high marginal tax brackets/tax rates punishing success, no civilization has ever taxed its way to success, the left trusts government, and on and on.
Neither person was stupid, they were quite capable of speaking in complete sentences and being, frankly, more lucid (even with alcohol involved) than Sarah Palin. No, that is not some joke, they were. Their points were not their own, they are manufactured by people with something to gain from selling them. Much of their birth as public discourse can be tracked to the economic abortion that was the St Ronnie Administration. Trickle down economics may be one of the most stupid commonly held beliefs in currency today and then and despite all evidence to the contrary it vampirically refuses to die. It is the corner stone of all the other horse ... pucky.
The real problem with trying to rebut this 'stuff' is that there is always the excuse that the failures are the result of insufficient application - ie Democrats messed it up. (h/t Michael B) You can point out to them the nearly steady decrease in top marginal rates from St Ronnie on to this historical low and it just simply doesn't matter. The dislocation of wealth simply is not of any concern - the fact that economic improvement, as economics is presently practiced in the US, is strictly a one way street upward demonstrates nothing. Well, it does represent the theft of their money by supporting the impoverished and disabled with their SS/FICA taxes... No matter that the Capital Gains rate is effectively lower, that one applies to everyone. Not that hardly anyone is actually concerned actually paying it...
There is one hope in this kind of discussion. The hope is that the GOP will continue to overstep the bounds of sense and insult the supposedly important and informed "middle."
As though the media would collude in any such informing
Neither of these individuals is ever going to make enough money to matter in the scheme of wealth, taxation, or power. Not ever, not going to happen and not even in their dreams. Their concerns were all theoretical, entirely outside their experiences or possible experiences and somehow addressed 'fairness.' The mantras were familiar to anyone acquainted with Libertarianism, high marginal tax brackets/tax rates punishing success, no civilization has ever taxed its way to success, the left trusts government, and on and on.
Neither person was stupid, they were quite capable of speaking in complete sentences and being, frankly, more lucid (even with alcohol involved) than Sarah Palin. No, that is not some joke, they were. Their points were not their own, they are manufactured by people with something to gain from selling them. Much of their birth as public discourse can be tracked to the economic abortion that was the St Ronnie Administration. Trickle down economics may be one of the most stupid commonly held beliefs in currency today and then and despite all evidence to the contrary it vampirically refuses to die. It is the corner stone of all the other horse ... pucky.
The real problem with trying to rebut this 'stuff' is that there is always the excuse that the failures are the result of insufficient application - ie Democrats messed it up. (h/t Michael B) You can point out to them the nearly steady decrease in top marginal rates from St Ronnie on to this historical low and it just simply doesn't matter. The dislocation of wealth simply is not of any concern - the fact that economic improvement, as economics is presently practiced in the US, is strictly a one way street upward demonstrates nothing. Well, it does represent the theft of their money by supporting the impoverished and disabled with their SS/FICA taxes... No matter that the Capital Gains rate is effectively lower, that one applies to everyone. Not that hardly anyone is actually concerned actually paying it...
There is one hope in this kind of discussion. The hope is that the GOP will continue to overstep the bounds of sense and insult the supposedly important and informed "middle."
As though the media would collude in any such informing
Friday, May 21, 2010
Why Rand Paul Is Fun
No, it isn't because he says what he believes and that it is a stupidly unworkable mash of magical thinking mixed in with FYIGM*. It isn't that his ideas would put the US back to the Robber Baron Era at best. It isn't that greed, classism, and racism are the natural outcomes of that "philosophy." The (") marks are deliberate, go look at the founder of and the tenets of Libertarianism and even that laughable mess isn't what makes this fun.
What makes this fun is that what Rand Paul has the bad judgement to state baldly (and badly) is the operating philosophy of the Teabaggers and the GOP when it is out of public view. Nah, they're embarrassed to have it out there for god and everybody to see but it isn't as though there's any fundamental disagreement about the ideas. Neither of those two organizations want blunt statements that make clear what the outcomes of their entire movements entail, they want to use silly "uninforming" buzz words instead. They want to rail against socialism rather than tell you that burying miners for profit is a good thing. They do not want to address the things that most people want as results being undone by their junk ideas because they'd be laughed off the public stage.
Even the laughable Libertarianism of Rand Paul is really weak tea as Libertarianism, when it is in reality today's GOP point of view. It says nothing about the massive government handouts to big (really big) business but howls about something entirely other than Paul's Medicaid payments - like anything poor people get. Paul's version of Libertarianism includes prohibition of marijuana which under most Libertarian views is over-reach. It is straight up GOP nonsense dressed up in a label and something the GOP doesn't want out there. The GOP doesn't want a Paul saying racism is an outcome of the dogwhistle dogcrap the GOP presents. The Confederate Party of Republicanism wants to whisper its appeal not have it laid straight out. None of the successful GOP pols wants to have "nigger" signs at their rallies even though they want that vote. The Teabaggery wing presents an embarrassment of riches, a self-organizing wing but one that holds up a public face the GOP doesn't want "out there."
The fun is having the real face, the one even the Limbaugh/Becks deny, out there where the general public can see it and watching the CPoR try to run away from it. You get a complete dick like Sen John Kyl talking about 2AM dorm talk being separate from day to day politics - while he does exactly the same thing without being "clear" about it. It would be even more fun if one could have some confidence that the general voting public was remotely aware of the circus.
Go ahead, hold your breath.
*(F--k You I Got Mine)
What makes this fun is that what Rand Paul has the bad judgement to state baldly (and badly) is the operating philosophy of the Teabaggers and the GOP when it is out of public view. Nah, they're embarrassed to have it out there for god and everybody to see but it isn't as though there's any fundamental disagreement about the ideas. Neither of those two organizations want blunt statements that make clear what the outcomes of their entire movements entail, they want to use silly "uninforming" buzz words instead. They want to rail against socialism rather than tell you that burying miners for profit is a good thing. They do not want to address the things that most people want as results being undone by their junk ideas because they'd be laughed off the public stage.
Even the laughable Libertarianism of Rand Paul is really weak tea as Libertarianism, when it is in reality today's GOP point of view. It says nothing about the massive government handouts to big (really big) business but howls about something entirely other than Paul's Medicaid payments - like anything poor people get. Paul's version of Libertarianism includes prohibition of marijuana which under most Libertarian views is over-reach. It is straight up GOP nonsense dressed up in a label and something the GOP doesn't want out there. The GOP doesn't want a Paul saying racism is an outcome of the dogwhistle dogcrap the GOP presents. The Confederate Party of Republicanism wants to whisper its appeal not have it laid straight out. None of the successful GOP pols wants to have "nigger" signs at their rallies even though they want that vote. The Teabaggery wing presents an embarrassment of riches, a self-organizing wing but one that holds up a public face the GOP doesn't want "out there."
The fun is having the real face, the one even the Limbaugh/Becks deny, out there where the general public can see it and watching the CPoR try to run away from it. You get a complete dick like Sen John Kyl talking about 2AM dorm talk being separate from day to day politics - while he does exactly the same thing without being "clear" about it. It would be even more fun if one could have some confidence that the general voting public was remotely aware of the circus.
Go ahead, hold your breath.
*(F--k You I Got Mine)
Sunday, August 30, 2009
You're Not A Libertarian
Top 10 Signs You're Not a Libertarian has soooo much good in it that I'm saying no more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)