Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 4546474849> |
| Author | |||||
Textbook 
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: October 08 2009 Status: Offline Points: 3281 |
 Posted: April 11 2012 at 21:08 |
||||
|
I think people are ready, or close to ready, for a third party. There's a lot of disillusioned people on both sides. Lots of people think Obama is underwhelming but Romney is a conman so it's quite a sh*tty choice. I think the time is right to do the ground work one establishing a third party but you'll have to be looking to 2020 or 2024 at the least before anything really happens. Sounds like too long to wait? Well that's what it's going to take, you're not cracking the two party duopoly in five minutes.
|
|||||
 |
|||||
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32553 |
Posted: April 11 2012 at 21:12 |
||||
You have not been paying attention.
You go ahead. |
|||||
|
|||||
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005 Location: Philly Status: Offline Points: 15784 |
Posted: April 11 2012 at 21:19 |
||||
Lol I missed that |
|||||
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
RoyFairbank
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 07 2008 Location: Somewhere Status: Offline Points: 1072 |
Posted: April 11 2012 at 22:53 |
||||
On immigration: We quadrupled the TSA, you know, and hired more people who look more suspicious to me than most Americans who are getting checked. Most of them, they just don't look very American to me. If I'd have been looking, they look suspicious.… I mean, a lot of them can't even speak English, hardly. Not that I'm accusing them of anything, but it's sort of ironic. quoted in Michael Scherer (2 June 2007) "Ron Paul is blowing up real good" Salon.com Typical Right Wing Nut. |
|||||
|
|||||
|
horsewithteeth11
Prog Reviewer 
Joined: January 09 2008 Location: Kentucky Status: Offline Points: 24598 |
Posted: April 11 2012 at 22:58 |
||||
I'm too tired right now to point out all the issues where you misstated what the man's opinion is. I'll take care of it tomorrow if no one else does. Where exactly did you get that information from? |
|||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
RoyFairbank
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 07 2008 Location: Somewhere Status: Offline Points: 1072 |
Posted: April 11 2012 at 23:14 |
||||
Summed up from Wikiquotes I am not committed to major research wars into Paul's views and what him and his partisans think his views are. My own summation is: He is a right-wing bourgeois politician who is virulently nationalistic, a defender of wealth and private domination of the economy, an enemy of progressive social and economic measures, and an old windbag whose hypocritical and very limited gestures about Iraq and Afghanistan will never become political reality in either his political party or in United States foreign policy. |
|||||
|
|||||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: April 11 2012 at 23:38 |
||||
|
Virulently nationalistic -> but doesn't want the US to enter any wars or increase the empire. Actually he wants to reduce or eliminate the empire. Go figure.
A defender of wealth -> eveybody defends wealth. Why, you defend poverty? I assume what you meant is "a defender of the wealthy", well, where? Anyway, defender of the wealthy -> wants to eliminate The Fed (the best tool of creation of wealth for the already-wealthy) and wants to do away with protections for special interests. Go figure. Defender of private domination of the economy -> why, is it bad? Do you prefer an economy that is dominated by a central apparatus? Maybe a politburo? What's bad about this? Go figure. An enemy of progressive social measures -> wants to legalize drugs and all activities that don't harm nobody else. Go figure. An enemy of progressive economic measures -> why, have those measures really worked? Has poverty been eliminated? (actually, under Obama income inequality is worse than under Bush). What are these measures anyway? What could be more fair than liberty? Go figure. Obviously you don't understand or haven't really read his position on abortion. As a defender of personal rights and liberty, his view is that the first right to be protected is the one to live. But he would prefer the states to decide on the issue, which brings it closer to a personal decision. Reading wikiquotes doesn't really make you the expert on Ron Paul you think? The last comment borders on idiocy. Yes, his position on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and now the ones others wa t to launch in Iran and N Korea have been so "limited and hypocritical" that his chances of winning a single primary have been killed because, you know, most republicans nowadays are actual nationalistic warmongering windbags who can't take a guy who says "stop the empire". Go figure. Actually, go read. |
|||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32553 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 07:02 |
||||
Then don't you dare try to speak for him. |
|||||
|
|||||
|
RoyFairbank
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 07 2008 Location: Somewhere Status: Offline Points: 1072 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 08:53 |
||||
I won't speak for him, I'll speak about him though. I read the news. To confuse Ron Paul with an anti-imperialist candidate is stupid. He talks about isolationism. Hardly new. Its nothing to get all excited about. The whole republican party was isolationist until shortly after the 2nd world war. Didn't make them good dudes. At the same time they supported the McCarthyist witchhunts and always supported wars and military activity when it was really put to them. As for his libertarian economics, they have been tried and failed, resulting in this recession. The nominal regulations don't make much of a difference - its free reign for capitalism in this country, whatever Ron Paul pretends. He wouldn't be happy until the Fed is abolished, which as it is only exists to pump liquidity into private enterprise so it can go out on its way speculating and gambling. To think any official politician is somehow different is very naive. Some people on the fringes can afford to look marginally different, but at the core the thing has to operate smoothly, and when they are in office they are virtually identical. The democrats have their Ron Pauls too, the "non-conformists." Having such fringe "alternatives" is a natural part of the squeaky clean system of political monopoly of which Ron Paul is a member. As said, the alternatives are very superficial. Whether its the "socialists" on the Democratic side who would be right wing liberals in Europe, or its the "pure" libertarians on the Republican side. That Ron Paul could even be thought of as somehow a different candidate is a sign of political immaturity. |
|||||
|
|||||
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32553 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 08:58 |
||||
I challenge you to point to a specific period in US history when genuine libertarian economics were tried and describe the specific results. |
|||||
|
|||||
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005 Location: Philly Status: Offline Points: 15784 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 09:11 |
||||
Wouldn't isolationism be anti-imperialist by definition? Isolationist itself is a smear term you're adopting. You mean that he would forgo military intervention except when directly attacked by a government. You mean he would stop giving foreign aid. You should also mention that he would lift all sanctions and trade embargo, opening commerce up to every country. You should also mention that he would be willing to negotiate with foreign entitties rather than threaten them with military action. This is not isolationist behavior. It's non-imperial behavior. You then make a bad fallacy of generalization. Some people who called themselves isolationists supported bad things so people who are isolationists all bad things. That's just gibberish. You have nothing to point to which would suggest that Paul would behave differently than his pristine voting record and speeches would indicate.
As Rob said,...
To think that none can be different is naive. Whenever you lock yourself into an absolute, you are already wrong.
And that he isn't thought of as a different candidate is a sign of political stupidity. |
|||||
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
RoyFairbank
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 07 2008 Location: Somewhere Status: Offline Points: 1072 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 09:14 |
||||
1920s Presidents: Harding, Coolidge (Republicans) No regulation of big business, credit, banking activities, no separation of finance and savings.... "The business of America is business" - Coolidge Result: stock market bubble, credit bubble, build up of fictitious values Great Depression, wiping out of living standards because of no regulation and safety mechanisms President Hoover (Republican), refuses to intervene, saying Government's place is no interference Result: Great Depression becomes horrendous mess until FDR interferes with Big Business. ......... |
|||||
|
|||||
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008 Location: Big Muddy Status: Offline Points: 5210 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 09:26 |
||||
|
Ron Paul is not going to be the Republic nominee, let alone the President.
So I'm not worried about his policy suggestions. Instead, I applaud some of the conversations his views have cause to happen in the American consciousness.
That is all.
|
|||||
|
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32553 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 10:24 |
||||
Dear oh dear. How in the world were the 1920s an example of genuine Libertarian economics? The Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913, for crying out loud.  Recessions happen because the economy is cyclical. Look at US history: We've had a recession about every ten years or so. This means you cannot conveniently pin a recession or depression on a US President and call it a day. The issue is how one handles a recession. The interventionist policies of Herbert Hoover in 1929 magnified the crisis. He effectively doubled federal spending and expanded regulation.
http://books.google.com/books?id=vZtzHFJ7hckC&pg=PA30#v=onepage&q&f=false The Federal Reserve Act, signed into law by Woodrow Wilson, is also responsible for increasing the severity of the Great Depression due to the bubble of easy credit, among other things. Even Ben Bernanke, current Chairman of the Federal Reserve admits that the Federal Reserve was responsible! If FDR is such a hero, would you care to explain the Recession of 1937, one of the worst recessions of the 20th century? |
|||||
|
|||||
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32553 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 10:30 |
||||
I have to call you out on this.
http://www.cato.org/publications/briefing-paper/herbert-hoover-father-new-deal And if you don't believe that, then here is Wikipedia:
Edited by Epignosis - April 12 2012 at 10:41 |
|||||
|
|||||
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005 Location: Philly Status: Offline Points: 15784 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 11:24 |
||||
FDR's entire first New Deal came as a direct extension of Herbert Hoover's policies. Much of FDR's administration came as leftovers from Hoover's. It's inane to suggest Hoover as a non-interventionist. Unit banking laws provide one easy example of over regulation that led to bank failures. Compare bank failures in states with and without unit banking laws. Compare those in the US to Canada, the latter of which had almost no such laws in place. We could keep going into examples all day honestly. Roy's portrait of Hoover and the political landscape at the time is pure fantasy. |
|||||
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
RoyFairbank
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 07 2008 Location: Somewhere Status: Offline Points: 1072 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 11:58 |
||||
|
Hoover passed a tariff, build a single dam, and took other limited actions in the midst of the worst recession in history. Compare this to Roosevelt's actions, which intervened into every aspect of the American economy. Night and Day.
What's the point of Libertarianism? Capitalist countries have always, in the real world, intervened in their economies to a small or large degree, though often not remotely as much as Libertarians seem to think. Such intervention is due to many facts, including the inefficiencies of the capitalist system which causes crises, conflicts and stoppages, the strains of international relations and competition which leads to war, protectionism and commercial conflict, and the staggering imbalances of distribution of wealth that clogs up the system and creates political chaos. Imagining that the means used to compensate for these facts by capitalist governments are the reason for their existing is a utopian illusion, and given capitalism's intrinsic obsession with the freedom to exploit others even with the petty safeguards in place, a rather misanthropic one. |
|||||
|
|||||
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005 Location: Philly Status: Offline Points: 15784 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 12:17 |
||||
|
Hmmmm, I think you're misrepresenting when you say he built a single dam. That was kinda a big project. No he did not take limited actions. You also grossly misrepresent when you say he passed a tariff, again it was kinda a major tariff.
Look at Hoover's own words during his campaign.
I don't feel like going into lists and lists of what he did. Just google it. Hundreds of millions of low interest loans to farmers, established the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, massively expanded public works spending and federal salaries, doubled the estate tax, raised income tax by 40%, introduced a check tax. The most influential member of FDR's stupid braintrust, or one of the top 3, Tugwell said the entire New Deal came from what Hoover initiated. What's the point of laws. People always break them. Your argument makes no sense. Your critiques of capitalism are non-sense. |
|||||
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32553 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 12:30 |
||||
This is a poor attempt to dodge the initial challenge.
You may try again if you wish. Or you may admit that your claim that "Libertarianism has been tried and failed" is false. (That you think Libertarianism is what got us into this recession is strange: If we have been so Libertarian as a country, then why was Ron Paul never our President?) Edited by Epignosis - April 12 2012 at 12:30 |
|||||
|
|||||
|
RoyFairbank
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 07 2008 Location: Somewhere Status: Offline Points: 1072 |
Posted: April 12 2012 at 13:17 |
||||
|
Basically Libertarianism is apologetics for Capitalism
Is there war under Capitalism? Yes. Is there poverty under capitalism? Yes Is there a longterm crisis of capitalism / decline of the United States? Yes Is capitalism inefficient - i.e. does it stop and start periodically? Yes So here comes Libertarianism as a panacea. Forgive me If my clap is too slow. "If I punched you in the head in the right way, it wouldn't hurt, so stand still" |
|||||
|
|||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 4546474849> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Is The GOP Race Over?
Topic Options
RoyFairbank wrote: