1. Obama is your president as well.
And Ill treat him with the same respect that liberals treated Bush. I’ll vilify him at every turn.
2. Obama has done good efforts to bring various opinions together. Far more than Bush(s) or Clinton.
This is nothing more than complete insanity. He has done NOTHING bipartisan. His view of Washington thus far has been “I Won”. Meanwhile bush spent 8 years kissing democrat a$$ while they were kicking him in the shins. Medicare drug benefits, No child left behind, immigration reform. These are all democrat positions. He worked with democrats like ted kennedy on these things. Liberals hate bush because he 1. Won in 2000 2. Went into Iraq. (A Clinton position, by the way). 3. Cut taxes (created a boom).
3. I am a Libertarian Socialist.
Libertarian Socialism is an oxymoron. It’s the same silly kind of utopian thinking that communism was only without the social order. You asked me where capitalism has worked. Where has libertarian socialism worked?
4. The Black Bush argument goes back to the Israeli influence in our govt.
It only proves that the muslim extremists are going to hate us no matter what. So all of this crying about “mending” can stop. They hate us because we support freedom and not Islamic law. We support our freedom, Israel’s freedom and even theirs.
5. Consumerism and debt, passively going day to day activities without regards to the bigger picture….is our problem.
Please explain to me how my big screen TV purchased on my Chase credit card has done anything but help this economy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Here's my definition of a "libertarian socialist": a hypocrite who doesn't want the government intervening in their lives/decisions unless it is to mitigate or eliminate the consequences of their bad decisions through the use of other peoples' money.
For example:
-Government funded AIDS research
-Government funded abortions
-"Free" needles for junkies
-Refundable tax credits
-Socialized medicine
The libertarian socialist is either incapable or unwilling to make the connection between the freedom to make a choice and the responsibility of bearing the consequences of that choice.
I have to admit that it does sound more sophisticated than calling yourself a short-sighted societal parasite.
The only bi-partisan action I've seen since Dumbo's inauguration is the bi-partison oposition to his pork spending bill in the house of representatives. Support for the gross increase in size and scope of government was a partisan democrat majority.
Responding point for point. I'll try to keep it short.
1. I will hold Obama to the same standards as Bush. Glad we can agree.
2. Obama has been very open to the Republicans / Right. He listened and spoke with both left and right commentators. He holds lunches with them, supports tax cuts for businesses that repubs want. I don't know where you think I come up with this as "insanity". Yes, Bush did work with DEmocrats on several things. Positions I can't stand as well. No child left behind is a joke. 2000 is a very arguable issue. Sadly elections got solved in courts. More power to Bush I guess. Yes, liberals hate Bush because Iraq War. I will always hold this position and never forgive him for the 4000+ dead Americans and countless more Iraqis due to manipulated intel that related it all to 911. Fear Factor America.
3. I said lean Libertarian Socialist. I'm not an absolutist in any ways. I've never been a republican, a democrat, or associated with any party. It is not an oxymoron either. It is just the most sensible view of society that I imagine works the best. It's just an opinion. Has nothing to do with communism either.
Here is a quick rundown.
Libertarian socialists assert that when power is exercised, as exemplified by the economic, social, or physical dominance of one individual over another, the burden of proof is always on the authoritarian to justify their action as legitimate when taken against its effect of narrowing the scope of human freedom.
Typical examples of legitimate exercise of power would include the use of physical force to rescue someone from being injured by an oncoming vehicle, or self-defense. Libertarian socialists typically oppose rigid and stratified structures of authority, be they political, economic, or social.
Libertarian socialists believe that all social bonds should be developed by individuals who have an equal amount of bargaining power, that an accumulation of economic power in the hands of a few and the centralization of political power both reduce the bargaining power—and thus the liberty of the other individuals in society. To put it another way, capitalist (and right-libertarian) principles concentrate economic power in the hands of those who own the most capital. Libertarian socialism aims to distribute power, and thus freedom, more equally amongst members of society. A key difference between libertarian socialism and free-market libertarianism is that advocates of the former generally believe that one's degree of freedom is affected by one's economic and social status, whereas advocates of the latter focus on freedom of choice. This is sometimes characterized as a desire to maximize "free creativity" in a society in preference to "free enterprise."
Libertarian socialists believe if freedom is valued, then society must work towards a system in which individuals have the power to decide economic issues along with political issues. Libertarian socialists seek to replace unjustified authority with direct democracy, voluntary federation, and popular autonomy in all aspects of life, including physical communities and economic enterprises.
Many libertarian socialists argue that large-scale voluntary associations should manage industrial manufacture, while workers retain rights to the individual products of their labor. As such, they see a distinction between the concepts of "private property" and "personal possession". Whereas "private property" grants an individual exclusive control over a thing whether it is in use or not, and regardless of its productive capacity, "possession" grants no rights to things that are not in use.
4. Well, we will just have to disagree on this. Our interpretation of freedom is going to be different than another nations'.
5. Contributing to the personal debt growth of the national economy. Makes China and other investing countries a bit stronger when we collectively have a larger debt. No I'm not going to sit here like a hipocrit and act like I don't have credit card debt, what I am saying is that Americans (for the most part across the board) don't think of their daily activities and out it affects our national interests. And my comment on McDonalds, well that is just a simple health issue and goes back to the point of we are a instant consumer satisfaction society. I guess I see the effects of this more when I travel
to other countries that have lives based around smaller, collective villages that take care of each others health and welfare and quality of life a bit better.
Have a nice weekend.
In response to "Way out West":
Obama supports refundable tax credits for businesses that either: 1. are unable to turn a profit because the are poorly run, or 2. bow to leftist environmental standards, affirmative action, and multiple other beurocratic regulations.
A refundable tax credit is not lower taxes, IT IS GOVERNMENT SPENDING. Obama has said nothing of lowering our corporate income tax, which is second highest in the world, or lowering the capital gains tax in order to encourage economic growth.
"The first casualty of war is truth." - Winston Churchill
3. Libertarian Socialism is exactly what it sounds like - a contradiction. You dont like power to be centralized with the people who earn it(the rich) so you use a centralized power (government) to take it and divide it among people who don't know how to maintain it. Brilliant!
5. The only debt I've created is my own. It's the government that gets its loans from China, not me.
Post a Comment