Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Can Romney/Ryan get elected? Options · View
Guest
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2012 5:02:18 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 883,360
1ball wrote:

No, our world is full of people who convince governments to repeat the experiment that always fails and then blame the predictable consequences on others.


Exactly.
That's what Paul Krugman has been saying about Republican fairy dust all along.
Glad to see you're entering the light.

---

You are so adorable when you're all pouty and belligerent. Like a deaf, miniature bulldog I once owned that used to bark at itself all day and all night, because it couldn't hear. Sadly, it got loose from its chain one January morning and was flattened on the highway by a tour bus driven by Mitt Romney's campaign manager. They had it stuffed, then tied it to the roof and drove around with it to demonstrate how they'd re-animate America's economy after a respectful period of austerity, equipage, and calling old folks irresponsible for needing meds. So, at least the dog still gets around.

You don't seem to be aware, but CoopsRuthie refuted your Hazlitt book articulately, elegantly and completely. Every argument you have started has been refuted totally - by principessa, LadyX, Magical_felix, and others who were all far more mature, articulate, polite, patient, and persuasive than you could ever hope to be. Just cause you're still barking doesn't mean you won anything. It just means you can't hear. There's a word for that condition: Republicanism.

Here's an article about Romney's tax 'plan':
Have a good life.


http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/10/the-6-studies-paul-ryan-cited-prove-mitt-romneys-tax-plan-is-impossible/26

principessa
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2012 5:47:57 PM

Rank: Sophisticate
Moderator

Joined: 8/23/2011
Posts: 4,935
Location: Canada
Thank you, Oberon, for summarizing it all so eloquently. Interestingly, you have observed deafness, while I thought it was willful blindness - the refusal to acknowledge the obvious, proven truth. But I guess there are some people out there still who think the world is flat and are afraid of sailing off the edge.

I will be so happy when the election over and, please God, this thread is finished.

Guest
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2012 6:08:24 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 883,360
principessa wrote:
Thank you, Oberon, for summarizing it all so eloquently. Interestingly, you have observed deafness, while I thought it was willful blindness - the refusal to acknowledge the obvious, proven truth. But I guess there are some people out there still who think the world is flat and are afraid of sailing off the edge.

I will be so happy when the election over and, please God, this thread is finished.


Willful blindness, yes! Another branch of denial.

Well, this experience turned out to be worthwhile. I'm going to read your stories now.

Cheers,

- o -
1ball
Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 5:14:29 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
[quote=Oberon]
That's what Paul Krugman... [quote]

Krugman is not credible and neither are any of the other people who are trying to sell an agenda of self-sacrifice. I'll continue to vote against Democrats until they boot out the socialists, because the damage that socialism does is greater than the damage that other religions do. Your inability to credibly defend it is all you've proven. No sale on your sugar coated horse shit.


My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
1ball
Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 10:26:49 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
Hasabrain2 wrote:
If Romeny gets elected it will be the because beleive his lies.


If Romney gets elected, it will be because people are tired of Obama and his inability to be anything other than divisive.

Quote:
Obama says he think everyone should have health and voila, you have OBama care.


Lfunny

Quote:
You may or may not agree with, but you can't claim he didn't do what he said he would.


Didn't he say he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class?

Quote:
God forbid Romeny get elected and does what he says. Then we would have 50 Medicare plans,


Is Europe doing something wrong by having 20+ different welfare states for their freeriders to choose from?

Quote:
you'd have seniors moving state to state trying to get the best plan and fifty different state agencies trying to learn how to provide medical care for seniors.


That sounds like a great way to evolve the best system, instead of the one that will bankrupt the entire country. It would also help protect the US from runaway democracy and nationwide crony socialism.


My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:13:40 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,771
1ball wrote:
No sale on your sugar coated horse shit.


But you're not still under the impression that anyone's trying to sell you on anything right? You got your whole doctrine laid out for yourself, come what may, and everyone else is wrong. I don't buy your brand of horseshit either, and it's already been established that all of our opinions and beliefs, plus most of our own questions, are irrelevant anyway- which is sort of freeing, really. I can see the appeal in that.

Look, your nihilism is rubbing off on me! evil4

tazznjazz
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:49:32 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/30/2012
Posts: 329
Location: under bright lights, United States
LadyX wrote:


But you're not still under the impression that anyone's trying to sell you on anything right? You got your whole doctrine laid out for yourself, come what may, and everyone else is wrong. I don't buy your brand of horseshit either, and it's already been established that all of our opinions and beliefs, plus most of our own questions, are irrelevant anyway- which is sort of freeing, really. I can see the appeal in that.

Look, your nihilism is rubbing off on me! evil4



I don't recall seeing our resident know it all 1 ball published in any newspapers, and my opinion is your horseshit is far from sugar coated, just plain stinky.evil4


Milik_the_Red
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 1:18:29 AM

Rank: Internet Philosopher

Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 6,124
Location: Sharing my life with Simplicity, United States
I'm not particularly political, but Romney just doesn't seem to have any plan except for right wing morality. One could argue about Obama's failures, I thought pushing a terrible health plan rather than getting us off foreign oil was a massive misjudgment of priorities, but at least he has some ideas.
Romney is just another right wing empty suit.




angieseroticpen
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 2:36:50 AM

Rank: Story Verifier
Moderator

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 1,561
Location: United Kingdom
What I would like to know is which one of them is capable of handling the coming war between Iran and Israel. Once this election is over those two narions are going to be kicking the s*** out of each other and it is going to drag most of the world into the conflict. Which one of them is capable of not only keeping a cool head but also keeping the conflict as localised as possible.

“When one door closes, another opens; but we often look so long and so regretfully upon the closed door that we do not see the one which has opened for us.”
1ball
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 8:41:14 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
LadyX wrote:
But you're not still under the impression that anyone's trying to sell you on anything right?


You mean like membership in the Utopia? Every collectivist is always trying to sell that, at least until they wake up and look at the their co-believers and realize they've boxed themselves into a lifetime of servitude to the cronies of the leaders they've been electing. The problem is you can't sell the belief that your Utopia is something other than a dystopia.

Quote:
You got your whole doctrine laid out for yourself,


Actually, I've no doctrine, unless you consider "Life is Good" to be a doctrine. I personally call it an axiom. I'll take that on faith. The rest derives from it. What you don't seem to realize is that the axiom at the root of your beliefs is "Life is conditionally good and somebody else gets to set the conditions." It doesn't matter whether were talking, Catholicism, Communism, Socialism, or whatever brand of collectivism you care to admit to, it's all the same in the relevant aspects.

Quote:
everyone else is wrong.


Trying to pretend I'm the only one who who shares the ideals and principles that derive from Life is Good, is a futile approach. The evidence that I'm not is all around you. Capital flight from blue states, job losses from the US, growing debt with no politically viable plan to stop it. People are defeating your doctrine of servitude to the "common good" consistently and routinely. So no, not "everyone else is wrong". The people who are daily refusing to buy into the hive mind aren't wrong.

Quote:
I don't buy your brand of horseshit either, and it's already been established that all of our opinions and beliefs, plus most of our own questions, are irrelevant anyway- which is sort of freeing, really. I can see the appeal in that.


As long as you're not expecting different results, I say go for it. Keep voting for people who promise you something paid for by somebody else and who deliver only more pain. Step on the accelerator and have fun. evil4


My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 8:59:23 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,771
Quote:
You mean like membership in the Utopia? Every collectivist is always trying to sell that, at least until they wake up and look at the their co-believers and realize they've boxed themselves into a lifetime of servitude to the cronies of the leaders they've been electing.


LOL. What page of your fantasy novel does this seminal moment occur on?

"Oh, dear. It would appear that the chickens have come home to roost, Pappy! And all we have to show for it is all this servitude. Where will we put it?"


Quote:
Actually, I've no doctrine, unless you consider "Life is Good" to be a doctrine.




You chose a corporate apparel slogan? laughing9 Coming from you, that's at least fitting.

Quote:
Trying to pretend I'm the only one who who shares the ideals and principles that derive from Life is Good, is a futile approach.


You mean, other than "Life Is Good"s shareholders?

No, you're right. There's lots of wacky individualists and right-wingers that drink that kool-aid. It's cool. Different strokes, and all.

But to crawl into your paranoid mind for a moment: let's assume that I have a "doctrine of servitude", and it's being defeated consistently and routinely. If this is true, then what's all the fuss about? If this imaginary fight you believe in is such a one-sided blowout, then why all the Cassandra-talk about a country on the brink, and "it's too late to save it anyway, we can only slow the descent", and all the other talk about collectivist armageddon being inevitable? If life's so damn good, then what's with all the hand-wringing, demagoguery, and angst?


LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:03:46 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,771
angieseroticpen wrote:
What I would like to know is which one of them is capable of handling the coming war between Iran and Israel. Once this election is over those two narions are going to be kicking the s*** out of each other and it is going to drag most of the world into the conflict. Which one of them is capable of not only keeping a cool head but also keeping the conflict as localised as possible.


I trust Obama more on this issue, personally. He's been hesitant to get sucked into Bibi Netanyahu's bluff-game, and the other ticket, especially Paul Ryan, have more than a taste of Bush-era "you're either furr us or aginn us" neo-conservative bluster to their rhetoric. Remember that Bush didn't engage with any of that talk before he was elected. He only decided to become a dim-witted faux-John Wayne after his handlers let him try on some cowboy clothes. If Romney/Ryan are saying what they're saying in an effort to get elected on it, well that's a little more alarming.
1ball
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:12:02 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
Milik_The_Red wrote:
I'm not particularly political, but Romney just doesn't seem to have any plan except for right wing morality. One could argue about Obama's failures, I thought pushing a terrible health plan rather than getting us off foreign oil was a massive misjudgment of priorities, but at least he has some ideas.
Romney is just another right wing empty suit.


Romney's just following conventional political wisdom. To get the broadest appeal possible, he has to avoid being specific, because being specific excludes. To say he has no ideas is to assume you can trust the words that come from his mouth. That's a mistake with any politician. They all throw inconvenient constituent groups under the bus after they win. The echoes from Obama's oath of office were still rolling around DC when he threw gays overboard. They all reveal their ideas during a first term, but only as a means to get reelected. They all spend their second term trying to patch up their legacy with the people who matter to them. That's the pattern.

My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
WellMadeMale
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:31:43 AM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 11,199
Location: Cakeland
angieseroticpen wrote:
What I would like to know is which one of them is capable of handling the coming war between Iran and Israel. Once this election is over those two narions are going to be kicking the s*** out of each other and it is going to drag most of the world into the conflict. Which one of them is capable of not only keeping a cool head but also keeping the conflict as localised as possible.


Why does there have to be a war, to begin with? And if there is warfare, why would America have to be involved, aside from the fact that our leaders (both Democrats & Republicans, can't seem to let a good opportunity for war profiteering pass by without stepping up to the trough).

How much military & domestic financial aid has the United States been giving to Israel since that nation tried to sink the USS Liberty? Israel has plenty of firepower they've purchased or been given over the last 30 years and if they wish to start some shit, let 'em, I say.

Israel also has nukes, they've had them since the 1960s while pretending to the world that they do not. And they are whining about Iran having the capability to manufacture nuclear weapons? Gimme a fucking break.



Obscenity is the last refuge of an inarticulate motherfucker.
1ball
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:32:07 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
LadyX wrote:
LOL. What page of your fantasy novel does this seminal moment occur on?


When wisdom arrives. For some that never happens. They spend their entire lives feeling entitled, causing misery and unnecessary suffering.

Quote:
You chose a corporate apparel slogan?


The corporation chose an axiom as a slogan.

Quote:
No, you're right. There's lots of wacky individualists and right-wingers that drink that kool-aid.


Are you implying that Life is not Good? ;)

Quote:
let's assume that I have a "doctrine of servitude", and it's being defeated consistently and routinely. If this is true, then what's all the fuss about?


To complain and blame others while causing your own pain is irrational.

Quote:
If this imaginary fight you believe in is such a one-sided blowout, then why all the Cassandra-talk about a country on the brink, and "it's too late to save it anyway, we can only slow the descent", and all the other talk about collectivist armageddon being inevitable? If life's so damn good, then what's with all the hand-wringing, demagoguery, and angst?


There is no hand-wringing, demagoguery or angst. I enjoy communicating a message of hope to those who are suffering. Turning to a live and let live morality would free you of much of the angst in your life. It would mean hard work, but it's rewarding work, because you would be working for yourself rather than those who determine what "the common good" is. All you have to do is free your mind from the belief that simply being human entitles you to subsidy. You learned when you were a baby that all you had to do was cry and somebody would stuff a nipple in your mouth or change your diaper. Maturing emotionally means unlearning that.


My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 10:43:57 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,771
1ball wrote:


There is no hand-wringing, demagoguery or angst. I enjoy communicating a message of hope to those who are suffering. Turning to a live and let live morality would free you of much of the angst in your life. It would mean hard work, but it's rewarding work, because you would be working for yourself rather than those who determine what "the common good" is. All you have to do is free your mind from the belief that simply being human entitles you to subsidy. You learned when you were a baby that all you had to do was cry and somebody would stuff a nipple in your mouth or change your diaper. Maturing emotionally means unlearning that.


You didn't really answer the question there. If this battle in your head is so one-sided and routinely won by people such as yourself, then why the broken-record stridency about the inevitable ruin at the hands of collectivism?

As for the other, I'm not the subsidy-grubbing ideologue that your worldview demands you identify me to be. My life's taught me to rely on nothing and give ultimate trust to nobody. Life is really a piece of shit, generally, but I have to admit it's been pretty damn good for me lately. Especially since I had a child and things have gone pretty well in my life for a change. Nevertheless, throwaway slogans don't mean anything to me. The future of this country does, however powerless I am to do anything about it.

I'm happy to let you characterize me any way you wish, just as I'm happy to agree to disagree. I will, however, speak up when and if it becomes a misrepresentation of me, or an opportunity to share an oppositional opinion.
1ball
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:02:07 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
LadyX wrote:
You didn't really answer the question there. If this battle in your head


I reject your description of a battle in my head. There is an ideology that, despite your protests, you adhere to. It is a belief that sufficient cooperation with an ideal called "the common good" will result in a climate where a majority will decide that the common good results from treating the wealth of others as common wealth.

Quote:
is so one-sided and routinely won by people such as yourself, then why the broken-record stridency about the inevitable ruin at the hands of collectivism?


I didn't say "won". I said they are defeating your doctrine of servitude. They are rejecting your beliefs and avoiding your grasp. They do this on an individual level and transfer the pain you wish to cause them back to you.

Quote:
As for the other, I'm not the subsidy-grubbing ideologue that your worldview demands you identify me to be.


Yes, you are. You specifically want "affordable" health care at somebody else's expense. You voted accordingly to attempt to coerce that result.

Quote:
My life's taught me to rely on nothing and give ultimate trust to nobody. Life is really a piece of shit, generally, but I have to admit it's been pretty damn good for me lately. Especially since I had a child and things have gone pretty well in my life for a change. Nevertheless, throwaway slogans don't mean anything to me. The future of this country does, however powerless I am to do anything about it.


You can make life even better by accepting that you don't deserve subsidy from anybody.


My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:12:29 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 883,360
Let's hope so!!
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:22:16 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,771
ladyx and individualist-boy wrote:

As for the other, I'm not the subsidy-grubbing ideologue that your worldview demands you identify me to be. ------>


Yes, you are. You specifically want "affordable" health care at somebody else's expense. You voted accordingly to attempt to coerce that result.


My point exactly LOL. Repeating it ad nauseum doesn't make it so, but good try.

"Life is good"
1ball
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 2:32:46 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
LadyX wrote:
Repeating it ad nauseum doesn't make it so, but good try.


So you didn't vote for Obama in '08? and you're not going to vote for him in November? Maybe you have some wisdom after all. ;)

My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 2:35:46 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,771
LOL. I'll never have your brand of wisdom, sadly. My vote doesn't count in the state where I live anyway.
Milik_the_Red
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 8:55:45 PM

Rank: Internet Philosopher

Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 6,124
Location: Sharing my life with Simplicity, United States
1ball wrote:


Romney's just following conventional political wisdom. To get the broadest appeal possible, he has to avoid being specific, because being specific excludes. To say he has no ideas is to assume you can trust the words that come from his mouth. That's a mistake with any politician. They all throw inconvenient constituent groups under the bus after they win. The echoes from Obama's oath of office were still rolling around DC when he threw gays overboard. They all reveal their ideas during a first term, but only as a means to get reelected. They all spend their second term trying to patch up their legacy with the people who matter to them. That's the pattern.


Hence my lack of faith in the system. Both parties are commited to restricting the rights of the people. So then we are left only to decide which rights we want protected.
If you want to own guns and drive an off road vehicle, vote rebulican.
Want to chose who you want to have sex with or have such disdain for religon that you want it out of all public life, vote democrat. Just dont believe any really cares, they just pander to a specific demographic.

1ball
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:08:49 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
LadyX wrote:
My vote doesn't count in the state where I live anyway.


You don't vote for Congress?

It doesn't really matter. By merely adhering to the "I'm entitled because I'm human" ideology, you make your life worse. If you rejected it, you would make your life better. You would set a better example for your kid and you would have a more positive outlook on life.


My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:33:26 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,771
1ball wrote:


You don't vote for Congress?



I do, but it's a republican-dominated state, so it's no use.

Thx for the life advice, by the way. Lwinking
1ball
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:39:38 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
Milik_The_Red wrote:
Hence my lack of faith in the system. Both parties are commited to restricting the rights of the people. So then we are left only to decide which rights we want protected.
If you want to own guns and drive an off road vehicle, vote rebulican.
Want to chose who you want to have sex with or have such disdain for religon that you want it out of all public life, vote democrat. Just dont believe any really cares, they just pander to a specific demographic.


If you lose your economic liberties, you're sunk. One party clearly wants to deprive you of independent control of your economic destiny. They want to run a plantation of people who are economically dependent on them.

Your basic choice is to work for or against the worst party in the system. The way it's structured, The worst party will take advantage of any opportunity you offer them. Only by depriving them of power can you force them to become not the worst, because they will do anything they have to in order to regain power, even to the point of abandoning the principles that make them the worst. That's probably the best you can hope for.


My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
Milik_the_Red
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 10:54:38 PM

Rank: Internet Philosopher

Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 6,124
Location: Sharing my life with Simplicity, United States
1ball wrote:


If you lose your economic liberties, you're sunk. One party clearly wants to deprive you of independent control of your economic destiny. They want to run a plantation of people who are economically dependent on them.

Your basic choice is to work for or against the worst party in the system. The way it's structured, The worst party will take advantage of any opportunity you offer them. Only by depriving them of power can you force them to become not the worst, because they will do anything they have to in order to regain power, even to the point of abandoning the principles that make them the worst. That's probably the best you can hope for.


That is an interesting point, but it assumes one is better than the other. So, who am I to support? The party who would tax me into oblivion in order to provide the basis for a welfare State? Or perhaps I should vote for the party that cares only about big buisness and gives them monopolistic control of commerce while doing nothing to protect the average worker and instead encourages companies to outsource our jobs.

The fallacy is the thought that either gives a shit for the middle class. You can vote for your lesser evil if you wish, I long ago realised that I could only count on myself for my economic safety.

bazzahard
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2012 12:57:27 AM

Rank: Active Ink Slinger

Joined: 3/16/2012
Posts: 14
Location: Australia
NO WAY, he squates to pee.
1ball
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2012 10:39:04 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
Milik_The_Red wrote:
That is an interesting point, but it assumes one is better than the other. So, who am I to support?


The one with the greater respect for individual economic choice. With fifty states to choose from, those who favor blue can find a place where they get what they want and those who favor red can also.

Quote:
The party who would tax me into oblivion in order to provide the basis for a welfare State? Or perhaps I should vote for the party that cares only about big buisness and gives them monopolistic control of commerce while doing nothing to protect the average worker and instead encourages companies to outsource our jobs.

The fallacy is the thought that either gives a shit for the middle class. You can vote for your lesser evil if you wish, I long ago realised that I could only count on myself for my economic safety.


There is no fallacy in always voting against the greater evil and the concentration of authority at the highest level of government is the greater evil. Choosing the more "hands off" party vs. the more "hands on" party gets you past the specifics you mention. In a hands off economy, where the role of the central government is mostly limited to protecting individual rights, market forces and courts take out the bad actors, including the bad state governments. In a hands on economy that is heavy with controls to favor groups over individuals, the cronies of the hands on party are the only real winners.


My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
Milik_the_Red
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2012 11:35:14 AM

Rank: Internet Philosopher

Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 6,124
Location: Sharing my life with Simplicity, United States
1ball wrote:


There is no fallacy in always voting against the greater evil and the concentration of authority at the highest level of government is the greater evil. Choosing the more "hands off" party vs. the more "hands on" party gets you past the specifics you mention. In a hands off economy, where the role of the central government is mostly limited to protecting individual rights, market forces and courts take out the bad actors, including the bad state governments. In a hands on economy that is heavy with controls to favor groups over individuals, the cronies of the hands on party are the only real winners.

Perhaps you misunderstood. There is no lesser or greater evil. There is only a choice between what kind of evil you choose to support. You speak of individual rights, yet I have shown that both parties restrict these. That point remains unrefuted. You speak of controls that favor groups over individuals, yet again I have shown that both do this, they simply better different groups. Again an unrefuted point.

You see, to choose a "lesser evil" would mean one would have to decide what that lesser evil is. Is it those on the right who sell power to corporate interest at the expense of the middle class or those on the Left who seek to consolade power in government at the expense of the middle class? This very simple question remains unanswered.
Now, as the choice does simply come down to the fact that one of these two will win, you have a point that we can face one of two evils. That may be true. I however, will not choose one villain over another simply because it is predetermined that one will win. That being the case, there is no real republic and we the people don't choose anything.
A basic mantra that equals all arguments in politics is this. If one believes in freedom, then one cannot try to cherry pick which freedoms to support, and which to allow to be revoked. If you take an action that supports the revocation of a freedom, you are freedoms enemy.
That is the cost of voting for your lesser evil.

1ball
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2012 1:39:54 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
Milik_The_Red wrote:

Perhaps you misunderstood. There is no lesser or greater evil. There is only a choice between what kind of evil you choose to support. You speak of individual rights, yet I have shown that both parties restrict these. That point remains unrefuted. You speak of controls that favor groups over individuals, yet again I have shown that both do this, they simply better different groups. Again an unrefuted point.


And you don't have an opinion on which one is more hands on as far as controlling the individual? I find that hard to believe.

Quote:
If you take an action that supports the revocation of a freedom, you are freedoms enemy.
That is the cost of voting for your lesser evil.


Life is full of choices, including choosing whether to effectively or ineffectively oppose the greater of two evils. Choosing to support the lesser in order to effectively oppose the greater is simply using judgement, not being "freedom's enemy", or any such stark absolute. As long as you consistently oppose the greater, and when that becomes the party you previously supported, you then oppose them, you are not freedom's enemy. You are just someone who is making the best of a bad situation, opposing the most authoritarian as effectively as possible. Now if you really aren't decisive enough to choose which represents the greater threat to your economic liberty over the near and long term, then you probably aren't capable of voting responsibly. Informed consent is the goal for voters. An expectation that they will vote in what they perceive is their best interest is implicit in the system. Tossing up their hands and saying, "I'm in the wrong either way." is a copout.


My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
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.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.