Lame Duck Obama

[tvashtarkatena]

tvash, you are too quick with your keyboard, like I stated, the comment was to KKK.

 

Perhaps that makes two of us, no?

 

[glassgowkiss]

BTW, blaming executive branch for debit is like blaming your bank for credit card debt.

[ivan]

wait, i thought kkk was one of "the good ones" since he was pro gay-weed? good enough for me to pull'em out of the line bound for madame guillotine at any rate

 

that aiken feller, on the other hand...

 

as for the other complaint, of course every loyal and true democrat's in a pissed-off mood today, we stayed up all goddamn night drinking than had to get up this morning and go to work!

[tvashtarkatena]

Treat voters like intelligent adults and they reward you with votes. Many folks off all political stripes voted for gay weed...more for weed (a surprise to me), but no matter. Both campaigns stuck to the facts, were open and honest, and respected differences of opinion. In the end, WA got done what other states could not. It might be appropriate to drop some partisan cliches and recognize how lucky we are to live in a state that's leading the rest of the country forward.

 

More importantly, I 502 and 74 will hopefully serve as models for how campaigns SHOULD be run - no attack ads, no bullshit, no out of context sound bites, no bait and switch, no partisan bickering. Voters deserve a lot better than what they've been getting.

Edited November 7, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[KaskadskyjKozak]

wait, i thought kkk was one of "the good ones" since he was pro gay-weed?

 

What Libertarian would not support people doing what the fuck they want as long as they don't hurt others?

 

 

[prole]

Most Libertarians give fuck-all about whether the policies they advocate would hurt others.

 

"GM: Let it Burn" LOL

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Most Libertarians give fuck-all about whether the policies they advocate would hurt others.

 

"GM: Let it Burn" LOL

 

Hey, you still haven't slit your wrists yet? Still planning the revolution... you know, since democracy is "broken"?

[tvashtarkatena]

My experience with 'libertarians' , and its been pretty extensive at this point, is that its not a group - its an ideology that encompasses a broad range of ideas, some kooky, some pretty damn sound.

 

Self reliance, personal responsibility, personal liberty, and privacy are all part of the libertarian spectrum - they seem like pretty good ideas to me. Like any idea, they can be taken to a ridiculous extreme, but many folks I've talked with who espouse them are more complex and considered in their views.

 

Personally, I haven't found it difficult to connect with and have a pretty good time with self described libertarians - and I always learn seem to learn something from the encounter.

 

Maybe fewer labels and a greater appreciation that people are more complicated than those labels, which are mainly for the media anyway, imply would lead to a bit more innovation regarding public policy.

 

[prole]

Big "L" libertarianism doesn't have a monopoly over self reliance, personal responsibility, personal liberty, and privacy. These are pretty much universal tropes easily available and repeatable by any political stripe. Just saying them doesn't really count.

The problem with Libertarians is that they have no understanding or critique of power relations beyond State power, no analysis of how concentrations of economic wealth relates to the political sphere, an inabilty to wrestle with the social repercussions of raw market outcomes or market failures or externalities, and a dogged unwillingness to address the fallout from unregulated capitalism past, present, or future. Far from complex or considered, their views seem lazy, narrow, and backward.

As long as Libertarians are unable to address BIG issues or introduce a kind of social organization to meet them (that isn't "government"), they can remain the Star Trek convention of crackpots theay are on the American political scene.

 

Edited November 8, 2012 by prole

[prole]

Economic Evangelicals: Complex and Considered

 

LULZ

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Big "L" libertarianism doesn't have a monopoly over self reliance, personal responsibility, personal liberty, and privacy. These are pretty much universal tropes easily available and repeatable by any political stripe. Just saying them doesn't really count.

The problem with Libertarians is that they have no understanding or critique of power relations beyond State power, no analysis of how concentrations of economic wealth relates to the political sphere, an inabilty to wrestle with the social repercussions of raw market outcomes or market failures or externalities, and a dogged unwillingness to address the fallout from unregulated capitalism past, present, or future. Far from complex or considered, their views seem lazy, narrow, and backward.

As long as Libertarians are unable to address BIG issues or introduce a kind of social organization to meet them (that isn't "government"), they can remain the Star Trek convention of crackpots theay are on the American political scene.

 

Seek help.

[prole]

Libertarianism: Last Refuge for the Doggedly Confused and Historical Amnesiac

[G-spotter]

WHERE IS THIS FISCAL CLIFF? I HEAR BECKEY DID A FA THERE?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

WHERE IS THIS FISCAL CLIFF? I HEAR BECKEY DID A FA THERE?

 

Woah, that's a climbing reference. Prole won't get that.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Well, I talk to folks one by one, and they seem to vary in their opinions and experiences a fair bit. Always something to learn there for a pair of open ears.

 

Never addressed all Libertarians in a borg like mass, so maybe you're right - maybe they do zombiefy when a critical mass is reached.

 

Cherry pick the dumbest sound bites from any movement and you're not set up for a very long conversation, I expect.

[tvashtarkatena]

Most Libertarians give fuck-all about whether the policies they advocate would hurt others.

 

"GM: Let it Burn" LOL

 

I was dubious about the auto bailout at the time - didn't trust the automakers much at the time, but I turned out to be wrong on that issue. Hindsight is not a proxy for IQ. The uncertainty and corporate scandals at the time made bailing out the auto makers (who arrived to their hearing in corporate jets, as I recall) a tough call to make for the average Joe.

 

[rob]

Most Libertarians give fuck-all about whether the policies they advocate would hurt others.

 

Do you really believe this? Sounds like bombastic garbage to me.

 

I think most libertarians honestly believe their ideas will help people, not hurt them. To say that "most" libertarians suffer from severe antisocial personality disorder seems fairly unlikely (and hyperbolic) to me.

[tvashtarkatena]

A lot of libertarians I know are from smaller communities where self reliance is a must. Walk a few feet in their shoes and their beliefs and values make a bit more sense.

[JosephH]

A lot of libertarians I know are from smaller communities where self reliance is a must. Walk a few feet in their shoes and their beliefs and values make a bit more sense.

I don't know, don't most smaller communities rely more heavily on state and federal funds than larger ones.

 

Personally I'm slowly coming to a conclusion quite the opposite of libertarian themes - that we should instead abolish the states as an unnecessary anachronism from our past which now serves more as a clear and abiding hindrance to infrastructure improvements, suck at education, impede addressing national priorities and goals, drag on our comparative advantage, and simply foster paralysis and division.

[ivan]

i like librarians - shit, under that plaid skirt n' yo-adrian glasses there's a sexual tigress looking to get out

[ivan]

oh.......

 

[prole]

A lot of libertarians I know are from smaller communities where self reliance is a must. Walk a few feet in their shoes and their beliefs and values make a bit more sense.

 

Yeah, walking down a mud track to WalMart sucks?

CleElum's Vision for 21st Century America!

Are you kidding me right now?

[prole]

I think most libertarians honestly believe their ideas will help people, not hurt them.

 

See, this is a problem. I don't care what these people believe. We need only look at the very recent past to see that deregulation, privatization, austerity, demonizing pubic works, programs, and workers (all Libertarian initiatives) have and continue to be a disaster. How can this possibly be news to anyone?

[glassgowkiss]

I think most libertarians honestly believe their ideas will help people, not hurt them.

 

See, this is a problem. I don't care what these people believe. We need only look at the very recent past to see that deregulation, privatization, austerity, demonizing pubic works, programs, and workers (all Libertarian initiatives) have and continue to be a disaster. How can this possibly be news to anyone?

 

At the core of the issue are the dreams of making it big. while joe the plumber was making 23K a year and had his house in a foreclosure, he was worrying what's going to happen, when he earns 250K. Stupid fuck doesn't even see, he has no chance in hell to make that additional 172K.

[rob]

Most Libertarians give fuck-all about whether the policies they advocate would hurt others.

I think most libertarians honestly believe their ideas will help people, not hurt them.

 

See, this is a problem. I don't care what these people believe. We need only look at the very recent past to see that deregulation, privatization, austerity, demonizing pubic works, programs, and workers (all Libertarian initiatives) have and continue to be a disaster. How can this possibly be news to anyone?

 

Someone may or not have misguided beliefs but that doesn't mean they're maliciously non-sympathetic to people's troubles, which is the assertion of yours that what I was objecting to. I think even George W. Bush probably thought he was doing the right thing.

 

My point is, I think most people want to help others. Maybe I'm naive, but I've met a lot of people in my life and I've met very few that genuinely didn't care if they hurt others.