This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Game of Thrones: The Debate of Liars
It was fairly unanimous in the MSM that Romney won the debate. Comments were that he was forceful, engaged, animated, presidential, challenging, and on the offensive. The president seemed lackluster, dull, unresponsive, and tired. All this is true.
Unfortunately they both lied.
I wish to point out that I will vote for Romney and I was pleased that he is perceived to have won the debate. But I thought he won based on theatrical performance rather than content, which, to be honest, is how most of the great unwashed judge candidates.
Neither candidate made much sense. Saying words people want to hear won't make it so.
Look, President Obama is a left-wing liberal (Progressive, socialist, whatever). He is an ideologue and I respect him for at least letting us know what he stands for. I know exactly what to expect from him and I strongly disagree with most of his policies. There are two really good reasons to vote him out, beside the fact that his policies have failed.
I've written many times about the danger of Obamacare to the overall economy and the social fabric of America. It is not just another government program. It is a major entitlement that will end up like every form of regulated or nationalized health care system around the world—broke. Costs will skyrocket, more regulations will be imposed, people (you 47 percenters) will demand more services, taxes will go up to pay for it, health care prices and wages will be controlled in some form or another, the quality of health care will go down, the economy will remain moribund with the high cost burden to producers, and unemployment will remain high (see, Europe).
The other major issue is that Obama will appoint Progressive "living Constitution" Supreme Court justices who will turn the country seriously to the left similar to what FDR did back in the Thirties when he tried to nationalize the economy.
What is there to say about Romney? Those who claim he is an advocate of liberty and free markets are blind to the meaning of those words because his history as a governor and presidential aspirant belie those ideals. Here is the thing about Romney: he will say and do anything to get elected. He is not an ideologue. An ideologue is "A person who zealously advocates a particular idea, concept, theory or ideology." The words he uses, like "free markets", have no more meaning to him than "I love you, man." ("No, Mitt, you can't have my Bud Lite.") He also believes in “... an America where millions of Americans believe in an America that’s the America millions of Americans believe in. That’s the America I love.” (Thanks, Tim Price for that wonderful quote.)
He derides Obamacare but supported Romneycare. He didn't want to tax the rich, but now he does, at least as of last night's debate. He scapegoats China for our government's reckless spending yet professes he's for free trade. He may favor abortion or the right to life. He thinks he can balance the budget by creating a growing economy, which is true but not very feasible based on his Laffer Curve idea that tax cuts alone will grow the economy. Tax cuts can help, but it's the Fed that's driving this train. As the Fed continues to destroy capital with QE?, more private spending as a result of tax cuts will just destroy more capital (we need to save, not spend, to revive the economy). He supports a "strong military" which I assume means more U.S. intervention and new wars since we already have the most powerful military on the planet.
Romney has some good points if we can believe him. He will do his best to repeal Obamacare and, hopefully,not replace it with some similar, junior entitlement version. Yes, he does believe that "excessive" government regulation is harmful to business. I'm hopeful that he actually believes that (they all say this) but my guess is that he will take a "balanced" (i.e., weak-kneed) approach on this (he'll deal away regulatory cutbacks to get something else). He says he will try to semi-privatize Medicare for pre-retirees (Good luck! Ask W about that one). He says he will appoint "conservative" justices to the Supreme Court, which I applaud.
During the debate Romney lied about deficits, entitlements, and economic growth, but so did Obama. They are pandering to us dimwits, throwing out buzz words to gloss over the fact that their "reforms" have failed or can't work.
I do think however there is one major difference between the candidates. It is obvious that Obama has no faith in the private economy to pull us out of our continuing recession. I actually don't think he believes the economy will recover, based on his many policy failures. His entire campaign theme is for government programs, funded by higher taxes, to alleviate the continuing misery caused by the Obama recession. Romney does believe the private sector can lead us to recovery, but that will work only if he (a) leaves us alone and (b) replaces Ben Bernanke with a Paul Volcker. Those, my fellow citizens, are big ifs. But it will be better than another four years of Obama.
»
- Econophile's blog
- 13178 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Looks like the Zeitgeist bunch will get much more traction in the near future!
The lesser of two evils is still evil. Every nation gets a government it deserves.
Before the election season we had a choice but the corrupt political party's two factions, the Rs and the Ds, along with their organ, the MSM, have nullified that. You have made your bed, USA now lay in it.
Actually, and in fact, the potential alternatives, with their own strengths and weaknesses, couldn't get out of their own way sufficiently to attarct the ground roots support to make their candaditates into playaz.
No joy for them, and no bitchin' on your behalf. Politics ain't beanbag, don't cha' know.
Yep, we get the .gov that we deserve.
And a reddie on ya for whining.
- Ned
Interesting. As a liberal, I've read hundreds, maybe thousands (by now) of scathing critiques of Obama from the left. I contribute to the best of my ability and promote others heavily. To the dimocrats I'm a very, very bad boy.
But there I am. Fuck the dimocrats. I hate them even more personally than I do the rethuglicans. They're the family I wish I could love.
They don't make it easy. They are widely active on the net, in many different capacities. They're writers, publishers and commentors. It's a busy world for Obamabots.
The best ones work like this article. Lesser of two evils. Feeding the political duopoly.
Which leaves me wondering if this is the republican version of that shit. Liberals don't take kindly to that from the dims . . . it'll be interesting to see how professed libertarians and principled conservatives respond to it.
Then again, I spoze I could simply be wrong.
The response has been pretty clear. This article is despised as it should be. I guess your preconcieved notions of "libertarians" and "principled conservatives" was fairly off base. I think your post falls into the same category that you profess to criticize.
What the fuck is a dimocrat?
Supporter of Jamie Dimon?
Favors 20 watt bulbs?
There's always the gas pipe, especially after the Joe-Bite-Me "debate", that will surely be your surscease.
DO IT!
- Ned
ROFL speaking of Gas Pipe
An Eco-Fascist Gassing Experiment with Diesel Fumes at the EPA
snip
It has been recently revealed that the EPA has far surpassed the dark humor ofblowing up kids and people on film that global warming scare-mongers promoted a few years back. In real life, the EPA has been conducting human experiments on people by piping diesel fumes from a running truck mixed with air into their lungs at a North Carolina university. The agency has ginned up yet another green crusade -- the lethal dangers of diesel fumes. They even had a gas chamber set up to accommodate the environmental research project that shockingly recalls the death camps in Poland.
Not surprisingly, the EPA is now in the process of being sued for conducting dangerous experiments on human guinea pigs
VP Debate...
I cannot wait for the theater, the drama of it all
POPCORN TIME
They've instituted some sort of weird Mercy Rule for this one via it being officiated by Candy Crowley.
"CROWLEY: …that this might be, (the Ryan pick) looks a little bit like some sort of ticket death wish."
Sure babe, whatever you say ;-)
Hey Chuck, where is Chuck? Stand up Chuck let em have a look atcha. Oh, God what am I saying?...ROTFL!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2mzbuRgnI4
Crowley? OMFG. Can't watch that shit. I'd be off my feed for a week.
"I do think however there is one major difference between the candidates..."
Yeah, mormon moron primises to piss even more money away on the military, probably the only pomised this election that can be believed
mittens is a Zionist that proved his colors when he stopped in Israel to grovel and get his orders after his Olympics debacle. I'm sure what he tells big-time Israel-first donors in private is terrifying. and you can be DAMNED sure there are no secret recordings of those.
Yeah, America is still the Promised Land... they promise you anything and everything.
Well, I have no problem with unemploying Lehrer, but Big Bird? Man thats cold.
rick steves and tom silva and norm abrams are cool
You do know that the Sesame Street Empire is like ~1/2$BB, don'tcha? Like the biggest hugest big-birdest thang? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sesame_Street_crew
for a start,
don't cha' know.
- Ned
PBS and NPR are simply forms of liberal crony capitalism.
Bottom line- They are both war mongering bank loving paid for cronyoligists.
I say again? Who they?????
Obamey, meaning one in the same, they, obama romney
Robamanation clan of DImwitpublicans
Them
Bottom line- They are both war mongering bank loving paid for cronyoligists.
who they?
Toldja-Them!
i am happy to see that you recognize obamney for the liars that they are, but then turning around to vote for obamney makes you a highly cultivated fucktard.....at least you have an iq higher than those stupid students at university of wisconsin madison fox news interviewed about the fairness of the debate committee depriving obamney of the use of teleprompters.....i have never watched such stupid fuck people in all my life and they are going to be college gradeates and run the country in 20 years.....but they will vote in 30 days - either outcome to be a disaster....
obamney will do nothing to slow the socialist train - it will proceed with great force as totalitarianism is the leitmotif of both the left and right....a strong america is code for imperial aggression - my goodness, a nation with 3-4% of the world's population needs to spend 47-50% of world arms expenditures to protect itself??? fuck you.....
i like your economics, but your politics is why is america is a gutter tramp....
I'd go along with your comment, except that the primary difference is that Romney will stimulate the economy by firing TOTUS and saving all of that money. y'know, the "support staff" involved.
- Ned
{and, after seeing Michele fire herself onto the stage, we can look forward to a distinct reduction in the FLOTUS staff. Why, the WH dinners might go from American-Kobe beef to peanut butter sandwiches on white bread! And look at the savings on the faux wine bills!}
None of the progs have any idea what you're talking about.
At the same time O'Barry was talking "sacrifice" to the American people by turning down their thermostats in winter he was jacking his up at the WH. At the same time he was bellyaching about "carbon footprints" he was flying in OUR JET to NYC for a dinner and a night out on the town with Michelle Antionette. At the same time the private sector was being decimated with job losses and masses of people lining up for food stamps & unemployment his cronies were being made wealthy in such "wonderful free market enterprises" as Solyndra, Fisker, LightSquared and Solazyme.
They are now hopeless, lost cause dead enders, I have zero respect for.
+1 nmewn! " I'm styling a formal rebuttal" ;-}
Ya, we're seeing that in the Granny Warren "campaign" here in the Commonwealth. Granny is touting her support for the "people" while her law practice shows that she's been on the insurance company's side in the asbestos suits that she claims she was on the "people's side".
Cub Scouts around here are selling popcorn at the local Home Depot and I'm buying the "extra butter" version. Bot one for the Patz and another for the Joe-Bite-Me vs. Ryan show. Not sure, ... err... ---au contraire, I'd be rooting for Manning vs. Joe.
Duh.
- Ned
Practicing law without a license is still a crime in Massachusetts isn't it?
Its hard to keep up sometimes ;-)
She was relying on that exemption for members of the Cherokee Nation.
ROTFL!!!...yes...she is from the Kleptocratic Tribe within the Cherokee Nation.
You can always spot the members of her tribe by their blue eyes, high cheek bones and lies on their resumes.
///////////////
Fucking truth hurts don't it prog junker.
Princess Fauxcahontas Warren 2012 ;-)
I can still remember some 50 years ago, my grandfather (I must have been about 8) told me, in a heated lecture,
" They are all a bunch of lousy gonifs! (yiddish word for crooks and referring to politicians). In the old days when they got out of line we would all go and vote Socialist.! We didn't want to vote Socialist (he said this waving his finger back and forth in the air), but let me tell you, it straightened them out real fast and reminded them what their job was who was in charge!
Where are the great statesmen who really considered the fate of the people and the world? Maybe we shouldn't stand for all the lies and sound bites and maybe it is time to remind them.
"Expecting that you can stop politicians from being dishonest, or bankers from being greedy is like expecting that you can stop teenagers from being horny!"
-Woody Brock
No belief in free markets is going to save the United States of America from the dustbin of history, because it has taxed the labor of its citizens heavily and allow goods from overseas to enter the country duty free for too long. Americans have lost the technical ability, the skills, and the resources to provide the basic staples of a modern society to themselves. The day that the world stops taking U.S. paper trash for real products, resources, and services, the United States will enter a dark, dark era. That is stark, cold reality. The United States has died on the spike of free trade; the head just does not know that the body is dead yet. There is no other way around it.
The solution requires a radical restructuring of nearly every aspect of American society.. not just unleashing free markets and reducing government regulation (though reducing government regulation of many things would certainly help matters). Income taxes must begin to fall and be replace slowly by import tariffs. The government must balance its books and pursue a hard money policy (lest China, Saudi Arabia, and the others who provide America with the essentials of their life revolt against the tariffs) immediately. Usury laws must be passed and enforced. Fractural reserve lending must be severely limited, and all forms of government insurance of those who engage in such practices must end. Social Security must be rolled into the welfare system and the Social Security tax abolished entirely and immediately. All student loan debt must be forgiven by the government. Medicaid and Medicare must stop paying for most of the things that they currently cover and be made available to every American. In exchange for forgiveness of medical school debt, wages for doctors, nurses, etc. must fall. Only very basic care (antibiotics, sutures, x-rays, etc) should be paid for by the government. Complex procedures will have to be paid for privately or from private insurance.
The entire education system must be purged and 90% of the faculty outside of the math, medical, science, and foreign language departments should be fired and never eligible for rehire at every level of the system. The public schools must remake the entire curriculum so that school is competitive, challenging, and students who fall behind are left behind or given technical training only after a certain level. They must emphasize moral education and instruction in virtue and teach Americans to be a civilized people.
Finally, democracy does not work. Aristotle figured this out 2,400 years ago. America must return to a republic. No more universal suffrage. One household gets one vote, not 1 person. In order to receive a vote, a household must have "skin in the game" and an interest in the future of the republic; they must be 1) free of debt 2) have children or a child who has not yet married and formed their own household 3) own property in some form (a business, a home, something tangible) and 4) contain a husband and wife who have sworn and oath to support each other. This is your solution to the problems of America. Nothing short will work.
Tired of hearing the whole "skin in the game" mantra. Every single one of us has skin in the game. Our access to voting should not be determined by the fact that we own property. In case you have not noticed, property ownership has fallen into the hands of fewer and fewer people. In case you have not noticed, fewer and fewer of us have real jobs. Wake up or maybe some day you might find that the bar for the right to vote has been moved up to "manages a corporation that employs no fewer than 10,000 people".
You and I are unlikely to ever agree on a topic of any consequence.
"must be free of debt" wow, you just eliminated about 90% of the electorate.
Some good nuggets in here. But under your rules, about 50 people would get to vote.
If government guarantees of fractional reserve lending were removed and a hard money policy undertaken , the banking industry and mortgage holders, including Fanny Mae, Freddie Mac, et al would fall, the price of real estate would settle at a fair market rate, much of the debt would have to be written off in the collapse, and many people would be able to repurchase their homes for prices that reflect a reasonable amount of their labor. I suspect the pool of eligilbe voters would increase rapidly.
Moreover, if people wish to live as they please, having children out of wedlock and collecting welfare, no one would stop them. However, they get no say as to how much in welfare they may take from the labor of others. If this means few people vote, it means few people vote.
Where I am now, almost no one takes out a mortgage to buy property. Most people build their houses themselves, or pay for materials each month. Once they accumulate enough materials they pay a builder to add a room. Their houses grow as they age. Few people are in debt here and most people own something tangible: a home, a tienda, a panaderia, something. I am in a province of much maligned Argentina, by the way. The way of life here makes much more sense than the American system of debt and morgages. (The government is not much better than the American government, but at least they generate most of their revenue from import and export tariffs, which means I can start a business here for a reasonable sum of money, pay my people a living wage, and not have to compete with Chinese slave-labor.
Also, divorce is very uncommon here. People tend to marry young and stay married for their entire adult lives.
In the first election where Washington snuck in, 1.3% of the population voted.
It is unclear to me that broadening the franchise has increased the quality of the political filth.
Your semi-utopian civilization is sounding fine, but it will have to evolve from the smoking wreckage of the present system. There is no rewind, no going back. It's too late for that.
The race to be "modern," "liberal," "progressive" has destroyed every thread of the social fabric. It must be rebuilt thread by thread. Going back to the beginning is the only way to commence this process. There is no alternative but to restore conservatism as a political and social force. The libertarians believe that free markets and liberty will solve all problems. This is a naive belief, based upon 2 false premises: 1) "Natural law" dictates that market economics will solve every problem. 2) Human beings are inherently good and left to the devices of their liberty will create a better future.
The natural law argument is based upon a misinterpretation of evolution (as I have explained in other posts). I have no objection to many things being determined by free markets, but free markets must exist under the rule of law. Markets cannot be sovereign. Government must be, because men are capable of great evil left to the devices of their liberty; human beings are not "inherently good." Human beings are malleable creatures, more so than any other. The process of civilization is the process of rewarding virture and punishing vice.
All will be well when canines and molars look the same, the coccyx disappears, and the human body becomes hairless genetically. Then we'll have a chance. I'm saying, what? About another 800,000 years?
Obammy = Loser
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000087239639044376880457803649041502851...
....hearing price stability...no wait wait its the Obama phone.