Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Non-Glibertarian Edition (Adam Serwer & Katherine Mangu-Ward) (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=6913)

miceelf 07-26-2011 07:36 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarkang (Post 218580)
More likely he was being smug and attempting a display of superiority over people he deems "less serious" and therefore less entitled to have opinions

Holy psychoanalysis, Batman!!!

I really don't think that's the most plausible interpretation of what Wonderment was doing.

badhatharry 07-26-2011 07:37 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarkang (Post 218565)
Well, I hate Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Someone ought to slap them into reality. But Obama's been really reasonable, IMO. That could also be because he's the world's worst negotiator. Still, I do like that he's tried from the very beginning to not play the Washington game. At this point, it's pretty clear that the solution isn't more politicians with better gamesmanship.

Also, I think he's got good old fashioned American values. That goes with his crappy understanding of money, business and economy. Still, I like the man. Though, I'm curious as to why you don't.

The biggest problem I have with him is ACA. It's such a huge mess, it was his baby and it's sitting there festering like an infected wound and now we're on to the next thing. I don't like the lies he told about his mother's fight with her insurance carrier. I don't like how he blamed the financial crisis on the Republicans and George Bush. I don't like the way he lectures us. I don't like being told all the time how well he's doing and that people like him should be glad to fork over more dough. I don't like how he drops his 'g's when he's talkin' to the folks. I don't like how he pretends to know stuff. He's as phony as a $3 bill.

but he has nice hair.

sugarkang 07-26-2011 07:45 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 218585)
Holy psychoanalysis, Batman!!!

I really don't think that's the most plausible interpretation of what Wonderment was doing.

Uhh, okay. You ask him and if he says I'm wrong, I'll retract and apologize.


Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 218586)
but he has nice hair.

He totally does not! I mean, it's just standard. And greying way too early like all our other presidents.

apple 07-26-2011 07:52 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218579)
Ok..i'll quote from the article:

So you take an article that says Perry DID NOT make a threat to secede, but 'edged toward' such a threat, to mean that he actually made a veiled threat. Ok, have it your way. Thats reasonable.

It may not be the exact same thing, but even you have to admit that it's pretty close. He didn't explicitly threaten to secede, which Politifact described as "edged toward", and I described as a "veiled threat". Anyway, if you don't, I'm OK describing it as "edging toward" a secession threat. It doesn't make him look any better in my book.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218579)
I personally see it more the way the folks at politifact see it. That Bill Whites statement that:
In Rick Perry's Texas, the governor threatens to leave, to secede from the greatest country in the" world.
is not true, or almost true, or even mostly false. It is an absolutely false statement.

Strawman and splitting hairs. That is not a claim I made, and is therefore irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that he believes that Tejas has a right to secede, which legal experts know is not true. And fact is also that he (at the very least) edged toward making a threat to secede, which also does not make him look good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218579)
Anti-Islamists are not harmless.

Either we're going to define "harm" as concrete harm, or we're going to define it as hurt feelings. Your argument seems to be that anti-Islamists hurt the feelings of Muslims, and that they are therefore not harmless. I could easily say that anyone who disagrees with me hurts my feelings and that they are therefore not harmless. Rick Perry hurts my feelings by threatening to secede.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218579)
I would very much fight for your right to be anti-islamist. I would never accuse you, apple, or your fellow anti-islamists of promoting violence and would never suggest that your rhetoric should be held responsible for violence against muslims, should that happen, and would defend you against such accusations.

Thank you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218579)
However, I believe your words themselves are hurtful to your fellow Muslim Americans. And Cain's words were hurtful to any listening to him.

I still don't know what he said that you find so offensive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218579)
I believe Islamaphobes have a right to be Islamaphobes as long as they don't physically hurt anyone. But islamaphobic rhetoric hurts muslims in the same way that homophobic rhetoric hurts gays. Its just words, and people have a right to them that I would defend to the maximum, but its still not nice and I don't have to vote for people who engage in it.

It's interesting, when Robert Wright compared "Islamophobia" to homophobia on the website of the New York Times, all the liberals there objected to this comparison. It's disappointing to see a conservative buying into such an equivalence.

Are Nazis entitled to the same rights as Muslims? Naziphobia hurts the feelings of Nazis, would you therefore avoid voting for critics of Nazism?

badhatharry 07-26-2011 07:53 PM

Re: On the 'Reactions to Oslo' Segment:
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hal Morris (Post 218584)

As for Tucson and the accusations of incitement or calls for renewed civility, I think the extreme right, or "movement conservatism", whatever you call it, did not let that crisis go to waste (and they never do), and they won a flat-out victory over common sense.

so common sense was to blame the Teaparty for Jerod Loughner? Not in my book.

Quote:

But the right went on a tear finding the earliest slightest suggestion to that effect and shooting it down preemptively, starting before we knew if Giffords was going to live or not. I know because I'm close to someone who was following it on right wing blogs which she regularly reads and believes, and I was in the same room.
What does Gifford's condition have to do with it?

Quote:

We should not allow this crap to pass -- this ju-jitsu trick of calling every critic a censor who wants to lock up the "politically incorrect" in concentration camps.
I would agree that crap should not be allowed to pass, unless there is a toilet and toilet paper available.

apple 07-26-2011 07:53 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 218582)
I meant his actual vocal style.

I know. You compared his "actual vocal style" favorably to George W. Bush, suggesting that he would be a better candidate. However, I pointed out that Bush did not have Perry's history of extremism, and that Perry would therefore probably be a weaker candidate than Bush.

AemJeff 07-26-2011 07:54 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarkang (Post 218583)
If you're gonna be like that about it, who isn't guilty? The measure of a man is what he does in comparison to his peers. You can only take your anti-slavery message so far when all your peers are slave owners.

Tyler Cowen has good insight, I think.

Heh. I'm in substantive agreement with harkin here. SK has (typically) failed to provide an actual on-point response to what harkin said. He could have pointed out that what harkin said was over-the-top, mind-bendingly hyperbolic, riddled with silly partisam claims that wouldn't withstand casual scrutiny, and couched in ridiculous language that no impartial observer would ever credit. Instead, he apparently missed the fact that harkin was responding to a factual claim, made by none other than SK himself (Obama doesn't "play the Washington game") - that's either true or false (obviously false in this case, even if harkin's preposterous assertions don't actually speak to that) and about which relative claims (he's better than the rest of them!) are completely irrelevant.

sugarkang 07-26-2011 07:57 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 218592)
Heh. I'm in substantive agreement with harkin here. SK has (typically) failed to provide an actual on-point response to what harkin said. He could have pointed out that what harkin said was over-the-top, mind-bendingly hyperbolic, riddled with silly partisam claims that wouldn't withstand casual scrutiny, and couched in ridiculous language that no impartial observer would ever credit. Instead, he apparently missed the fact that harkin was responding to the factual claim, made by none other than SK himself (Obama doesn't "play the Washington game") - that's either true or false (obviously false in this case, even if harkin's preposterous assertions don't actually speak to that) and about which relative claims (he's better than the rest of them!) are completely irrelevant.

You should just go ahead and get the full dozen donuts. It's only an extra $2. And you're totally worth it.

badhatharry 07-26-2011 08:03 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarkang (Post 218588)
Uhh, okay. You ask him and if he says I'm wrong, I'll retract and apologize.

he was kidding about the earlobes and toenails in response to all the talk about nice hair. A smiley face is never required. I'd ask him but he's ignoring me because I'm a climate sceptic.

Quote:

He totally does not! I mean, it's just standard. And greying way too early like all our other presidents
yeah, what's that about? Someone should do a government funded study about presidential stress and grey hair. Ronald Reagan didn't seem to have that problem. :) (ooops)

miceelf 07-26-2011 08:04 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Thanks. He'll chime in if he wants, but having been on the receiving end myself earlier this weekend, it seems to me that you sometimes interpret ambiguous statements in the most hostile way possible.

Hal Morris 07-26-2011 08:09 PM

"Fringe People" (Geller et al)
 
Well, there's just so much wonderful synergy between painting all Muslims as devils (or "the great Satan" - hey there's a catchy phrase) and egging on the people willing to believe Obama is a secret Muslim.

At the site, "My Right Wing Dad", Between 5 and 10% of all RW forwarded emails (in this collection of well over 1000) are linked to "Muslims are Scary". See http://myrightwingdad.blogspot.com/s...%20ARE%20SCARY

Here's my response to one that my mother forwarded to me and was quite ready to believe, and she is an intelligent person who has til recently never expressed any "fringe" political ideas -- now she's awash in them all due to these emails that are churned out by the hundreds and made to look like they just came from a friend of a friend.

http://therealtruthproject.blogspot....-gaza-450.html

Here are some related articles:

http://therealtruthproject.blogspot....pose-mass.html

http://therealtruthproject.blogspot....m-and-her.html

http://therealtruthproject.blogspot....ama-is_31.html

apple 07-26-2011 08:17 PM

Re: "Fringe People" (Geller et al)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hal Morris (Post 218599)
Well, there's just so much wonderful synergy between painting all Muslims as devils (or "the great Satan" - hey there's a catchy phrase) and egging on the people willing to believe Obama is a secret Muslim.

At the site, "My Right Wing Dad", Between 5 and 10% of all RW forwarded emails (in this collection of well over 1000) are linked to "Muslims are Scary". See http://myrightwingdad.blogspot.com/s...%20ARE%20SCARY[/URL]

Show me the e-mail that "paint[s] all Muslims as devils" - the usual strawman of leftists like yourself.

badhatharry 07-26-2011 08:21 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by apple (Post 218591)
I know. You compared his "actual vocal style" favorably to George W. Bush, suggesting that he would be a better candidate. However, I pointed out that Bush did not have Perry's history of extremism, and that Perry would therefore probably be a weaker candidate than Bush.

Um, no I didn't. I just said he didn't trip over his words like GWB did/does. Actually I found GWB's hesitancy kind of endearing.

Who knows what kind of candidate is weak today?...except for just about every Republican, unfortunately. I just think Perry would make mincemeat of Obama and I'd pay to see that.
What is really unfortunate is that the quality and character of the candidate matters very little these days.

sugarkang 07-26-2011 08:29 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 218597)
Thanks. He'll chime in if he wants, but having been on the receiving end myself earlier this weekend, it seems to me that you sometimes interpret ambiguous statements in the most hostile way possible.

I'm very willing to be wrong. This is why I said I'd retract and apologize if he says that he sincerely only meant that post as a joke. Though, he's not responded to any of my posts for anything else, so, it just seems more than peculiar.

whburgess 07-26-2011 08:31 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by apple (Post 218589)
It may not be the exact same thing, but even you have to admit that it's pretty close. He didn't explicitly threaten to secede, which Politifact described as "edged toward", and I described as a "veiled threat". Anyway, if you don't, I'm OK describing it as "edging toward" a secession threat. It doesn't make him look any better in my book.

I'm sure he'd take it back if he could. I'm also sure it isn't going to be a significant factor in his chances.


Quote:

Either we're going to define "harm" as concrete harm, or we're going to define it as hurt feelings. Your argument seems to be that anti-Islamists hurt the feelings of Muslims, and that they are therefore not harmless. I could easily say that anyone who disagrees with me hurts my feelings and that they are therefore not harmless. Rick Perry hurts my feelings by threatening to secede.

Some peoples feelings should be hurt. I don't think Muslim Americans are in this class of people. But you do have a right to make them feel hated with your words. And Rick Perry has a right to make you feel hated with his take on the rights of Texas to secede. And if anyone else is in the odd position of feeling the Perry is engaged in hurtful speech with this, they won't support him (I'm sure he's so worried about that).

Quote:

I still don't know what he said that you find so offensive.
That Muslims should undergo a vetting process more rigorous then others to affirm their loyalty, and that cities have a right to ban mosques for no other reason then they are mosques.

Quote:

It's interesting, when Robert Wright compared "Islamophobia" to homophobia on the website of the New York Times, all the liberals there objected to this comparison. It's disappointing to see a conservative buying into such an equivalence.

I may be comparing, but I'm not saying they are exactly equivalent.
I'm saying they are both needlessly hurtful.

Quote:

Are Nazis entitled to the same rights as Muslims? Naziphobia hurts the feelings of Nazis, would you therefore avoid voting for critics of Nazism?
Yes. As long as they don't physically hurt anyone.

However, it's hard for me to imagine nazi ideology being compatible with a good person. So I don't really care if Nazis get their feelings hurt.

There are a lot of good Muslim people, I do care about them.

apple 07-26-2011 08:41 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218606)
I'm sure he'd take it back if he could. I'm also sure it isn't going to be a significant factor in his chances.

Then why would he take it back if he could? Your own source Politifact mentions that he has subsequently refused to back down. Apparently, he does think that this is important.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218606)
Some peoples feelings should be hurt.

By what standard do we determine whose feelings should be hurt?

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218606)
I don't think Muslim Americans are in this class of people. But you do have a right to make them feel hated with your words. And Rick Perry has a right to make you feel hated with his take on the rights of Texas to secede. And if anyone else is in the odd position of feeling the Perry is engaged in hurtful speech with this, they won't support him (I'm sure he's so worried about that).

So why do you back up the Muslims in repudiating Herman Cain, but not me?

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218606)
That Muslims should undergo a vetting process more rigorous then others to affirm their loyalty, and that cities have a right to ban mosques for no other reason then they are mosques.

He did not make that second statement during the debate. The first statement seems like common sense, which is Verboten under the current norms of political correctness. And of course, political correctness means that 4-year old children should be groped by the TSA, in order not to commit ethnic and religious profiling. It's disgusting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218606)
Yes. As long as they don't physically hurt anyone.

However, it's hard for me to imagine nazi ideology being compatible with a good person. So I don't really care if Nazis get their feelings hurt.

Why is Nazi ideology not compatible with being a good person?

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218606)
There are a lot of good Muslim people, I do care about them.

I care so much about them, that I want them to be liberated from the enslavement that is Islam. Islam means 'submission' and is incompatible with one's existence as a free man. Just like Abraham Lincoln wished for all men from the monstrous physical enslavement that was chattel slavery, I wish for all men to be free of the monstrous spiritual enslavement that is Islam.

apple 07-26-2011 08:43 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 218603)
Um, no I didn't. I just said he didn't trip over his words like GWB did/does. Actually I found GWB's hesitancy kind of endearing.

Who knows what kind of candidate is weak today?...except for just about every Republican, unfortunately. I just think Perry would make mincemeat of Obama and I'd pay to see that.

Mitt Romney would be a very strong candidate, were it not for his self-inflicted wounds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 218603)
What is really unfortunate is that the quality and character of the candidate matters very little these days.

Witness the fact that Perry and Bachmann get so much traction. Other than insanity, these two have absolutely nothing to contribute.

apple 07-26-2011 08:46 PM

Re: Non-Glibertarian Edition (Adam Serwer & Katherine Mangu-Ward)
 
If Perry is nominated, expect to see this picture in every Obama ad:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...ticleLarge.jpg

bkjazfan 07-26-2011 08:53 PM

Re: Non-Glibertarian Edition (Adam Serwer & Katherine Mangu-Ward)
 
If Romney takes the first 2 primaries, Iowa and New Hampshire, he will be the republican candidate for president. Last I heard he is neck and neck with Bachmann in Iowa and leads in New Hampshire.

whburgess 07-26-2011 08:56 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by apple (Post 218608)

He did not make that second statement during the debate. The first statement seems like common sense, which is Verboten under the current norms of political correctness. And of course, political correctness means that 4-year old children should be groped by the TSA, in order not to commit ethnic and religious profiling. It's disgusting.

You don't think terrorists could use children?
If you think they could, how would you decide which children should be groped?

Quote:


I care so much about them, that I want them to be liberated from the enslavement that is Islam. Islam means 'submission' and is incompatible with one's existence as a free man. Just like Abraham Lincoln wished for all men from the monstrous physical enslavement that was chattel slavery, I wish for all men to be free of the monstrous spiritual enslavement that is Islam.
Slaves didn't have a choice, American Muslims do. But you knew that, of course.
It is statements like this that make me wonder if you aren't trolling.

whburgess 07-26-2011 08:59 PM

Re: Non-Glibertarian Edition (Adam Serwer & Katherine Mangu-Ward)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bkjazfan (Post 218612)
If Romney takes the first 2 primaries, Iowa and New Hampshire, he will be the republican candidate for president. Last I heard he is neck and neck with Bachmann in Iowa and leads in New Hampshire.

He is my first choice. But I think Perry is a real danger to him.

apple 07-26-2011 09:03 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218613)
You don't think terrorists could use children?
If you think they could, how would you decide which children should be groped?

I do not think any child should be groped. The fact that children might be used by terrorists is a risk we'll have to take. Just like I'm willing to take an infinitesimal chance of the plane I'm in being blown up, for the privilege of flying without being groped by the TSA.

Ethnic and religious profiling can take care of the adults - this is what Israel is doing, and very successfully.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218613)
Slaves didn't have a choice, American Muslims do. But you knew that, of course.
It is statements like this that make me wonder if you aren't trolling.

Enslavement is an evil beyond the fact that it is involuntary. Drug users also chose to start using drugs, but it's enslavement nonetheless. Drug use is outlawed, because we do not believe that people have a right to make slaves out of themselves, just like (voluntary) debt bondage is not allowed. Similarly, Islam is a form of enslavement of which I disapprove, because I care about the victims.

I wish for all men to be free from such depravities, even if that offends people.

badhatharry 07-26-2011 09:08 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by apple (Post 218609)
Mitt Romney would be a very strong candidate, were it not for his self-inflicted wounds.



Witness the fact that Perry and Bachmann get so much traction. Other than insanity, these two have absolutely nothing to contribute.

And Romney's self inflicted wounds are what? What is insane about Perry?

whburgess 07-26-2011 09:09 PM

Re: Non-Glibertarian Edition (Adam Serwer & Katherine Mangu-Ward)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by apple (Post 218611)
If Perry is nominated, expect to see this picture in every Obama ad:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...ticleLarge.jpg

What would be the point?

It would work if it was a democratic primary and Perry was one of the democrats.

But such a photo would hurt more then it would help with swing voters.

rcocean 07-26-2011 09:11 PM

Glibertarian Gibberish on Open Borders
 
Ms. Mangu shows why Libertarians are really just liberals.

You see if million of illegals come in and join the welfare rolls and enjoy our safety net that's OK 'cause, aah, immigration is always good - no matter what.

AemJeff 07-26-2011 09:15 PM

Re: Non-Glibertarian Edition (Adam Serwer & Katherine Mangu-Ward)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218617)
What would be the point?

It would work if it was a democratic primary and Perry was one of the democrats.

But such a photo would hurt more then it would help with swing voters.

Check the polling data re GWB among independents. Why do you think 2006 and 2008 went Dem?

apple 07-26-2011 09:15 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 218616)
And Romney's self inflicted wounds are what?

His flip-flopping. Neglecting and trashing his home state. Also, Romneycare.

Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 218616)
What is insane about Perry?

It's better to ask what is not insane about Perry. Secession, radical social conservatism, big spending, apparently sending an innocent man to his death.

There might be more. I'm not a Perry expert. But I do know enough to know that he's batshit crazy.

whburgess 07-26-2011 09:16 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by apple (Post 218615)
I do not think any child should be groped. The fact that children might be used by terrorists is a risk we'll have to take. Just like I'm willing to take an infinitesimal chance of the plane I'm in being blown up, for the privilege of flying without being groped by the TSA.

Ethnic and religious profiling can take care of the adults - this is what Israel is doing, and very successfully.

I actually wouldn't be opposed to your approach to this. Although I can't really muster any passion for it.

Quote:

Enslavement is an evil beyond the fact that it is involuntary. Drug users also chose to start using drugs, but it's enslavement nonetheless. Drug use is outlawed, because we do not believe that people have a right to make slaves out of themselves, just like (voluntary) debt bondage is not allowed. Similarly, Islam is a form of enslavement of which I disapprove, because I care about the victims.

I wish for all men to be free from such depravities, even if that offends people.
Some would say you are enslaved to a depraved ideology. I'd say it's your choice.

carkrueger 07-26-2011 09:18 PM

Re: Non-Glibertarian Edition (Adam Serwer & Katherine Mangu-Ward)
 
I happen to like Robert Spencer and his site Jihad Watch. Adam certainly had strong views on Spencer and it turn out that Spencer has strong views on Adam Serwer.

Katherine claimed that after the Tucson shooting and the left (my sentiment) blaming Sarah Palin, that the (Super, Speedy, Twitter, Blogtastic) response cleaned up the mess. We must have very different memories. On the day of the massacre, Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva blamed the "Palin express." Giffords Father blamed"the whole Tea Party." The sheriff, Clarence Dupnik, blamed "the vitriolic rhetoric from people in the radio/tv business.

The Shooting occurred on a Saturday and that Tuesday evening Keith Olberman was mocking Palin's silence on the show "And why is the ever self-promoting Miss Palin so quiet?"

Then the next night Palin made her famous Mud Libel remarks. That was 5 Days Katherine into the nightmare for Palin and her supporters. The person who SHUT IT DOWN was PRESIDENT OBAMA, Day 7. Palin was not saved the (Super, Speedy, Twitter, Blogtastic) response - She was destroyed by it.

sugarkang 07-26-2011 09:20 PM

Re: Glibertarian Gibberish on Open Borders
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rcocean (Post 218618)
Ms. Mangu shows why Libertarians are really just liberals.

Hah. I'm sorry, I like Mexican food, cheap labor and the fact that Mexicans get a better life than the one they left behind. Win/Win. And I thought Ms. Mangu-Ward said we're just cheap dates for the GOP? You showed her!

Quote:

Originally Posted by apple (Post 218621)
His flip-flopping. Neglecting and trashing his home state. Also, Romneycare.

Nothing wrong with Romneycare within Massachusetts.

apple 07-26-2011 09:22 PM

Re: Obama's political capital and his negotiation skills
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 218622)
Some would say you are enslaved to a depraved ideology. I'd say it's your choice.

People can "say" that the Sun is an agent of the CIA, but that doesn't make it so. I think for myself, and am non-ideological, so it would make little sense for someone to say that.

But let's assume that this could be reasonable claimed. Should these people shut up, simply because it might hurt my feelings to have my ideology criticized (it doesn't)? Which returns us to the fact of whether anti-Islamism is harmful or not. Just because it hurts the feelings of Muslims, does not mean that it is harmful, anymore than criticism of my beliefs is harmful, because it might hurt my feelings. In fact, I'd say that anti-Islamism is beneficial. We should not pretend that Islam is a benign religion, and that it does no harm to the people who have submitted, and to others. It does. As I said, I wish for all men to be free, and not be in a state of submission to a 7th century desert ideology.

AemJeff 07-26-2011 09:25 PM

Re: Glibertarian Gibberish on Open Borders
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rcocean (Post 218618)
Ms. Mangu shows why Libertarians are really just liberals.

You see if million of illegals come in and join the welfare rolls and enjoy our safety net that's OK 'cause, aah, immigration is always good - no matter what.

How many "illegals" are on the "welfare rolls"? Effectively none, since you can't receive benefits if you aren't a citizen. Even if you consider their children (the subset of them who happen to be American citizens, that is) the amount spent on AFDC and food stamps is a small fraction of the total.

However, when it comes to tax policy, libertarians are just conservatives.

whburgess 07-26-2011 09:27 PM

Re: Non-Glibertarian Edition (Adam Serwer & Katherine Mangu-Ward)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 218620)
Check the polling data re GWB among independents. Why do you think 2006 and 2008 went Dem?

Job disapproval does not equal visceral hatred or even dislike.

Also, polls swing a lot, especially when the president in question is out of office. A poll last year had Bush at 47% up from the low 30's when he left office. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec...ankings-120610
I don't know if there are any recent ones...I just googled out of curiosity and got that one.


I think Republicans will be looking for every opportunity to prove that Obama wants to "Blame Bush" instead of taking responsibility for what has happened under his watch. I'd think Obama wouldn't want to reinforce that.

Maybe some liberal groups outside the Obama campaign will use it. But that would be only because they've confused their own Bush derangement syndrome as existing outside their circle. Obama's team is smarter then that.

Wonderment 07-26-2011 09:29 PM

Re: Glibertarian Gibberish on Open Borders
 
Quote:

You see if million of illegals come in and join the welfare rolls and enjoy our safety net that's OK 'cause, aah, immigration is always good - no matter what.
Please refrain from using the xenophobic noun "illegals." It is offensive. Also, please refrain from inventing an alternative reality for immigrant-bashing purposes. Undocumented workers are ineligible for "welfare."

Immigrants, as you know, were sold down the river in the Obama healthcare reform law (thanks to Republicans).

But well before that, the following was in effect regarding even documented Green Card immigrants:

Quote:

Legal immigrants are barred from all federal means-tested public benefits for five years after entering the country and barred from SSI and food stamps until citizenship. They are also barred from all federal means-tested public benefits for five years.

In addition, regarding undocumented families:

Quote:

Illegal [sic] immigrants are barred from the following federal public benefits: grants, contracts, loans, licenses, retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, post secondary education, food assistance, and unemployment benefits. States are barred from providing state or locally funded benefits to illegal immigrants unless a state law is enacted granting such authority.

apple 07-26-2011 09:30 PM

Re: Glibertarian Gibberish on Open Borders
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonderment (Post 218628)
Please refrain from using the xenophobic noun "illegals." It is offensive.

Wonderment, please just specify what you don't find offensive, if such mythical things in fact exist.

sugarkang 07-26-2011 09:35 PM

Re: Glibertarian Gibberish on Open Borders
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by apple (Post 218629)
Wonderment, please just specify what you don't find offensive, if such mythical things in fact exist.

Ban first; questions later.

Wonderment 07-26-2011 09:39 PM

apple, will you take the pledge?
 
Quote:

Wonderment, please just specify what you don't find offensive, if such mythical things in fact exist.
Take the pledge; you'll set a good example for Rocean.

apple 07-26-2011 09:40 PM

Re: apple, will you take the pledge?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonderment (Post 218631)
Take the pledge; you'll set a good example for Rocean.

My favorite suggested alternative is "NAFTA refugee".

rcocean 07-26-2011 10:05 PM

Re: Glibertarian Gibberish on Open Borders
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonderment (Post 218628)
Please refrain from using the xenophobic noun "illegals." It is offensive. Also, please refrain from inventing an alternative reality for immigrant-bashing purposes. Undocumented workers are ineligible for "welfare."

Sorry Wonderment, I should have used the correct term for "illegals":

Illegal Aliens.

rcocean 07-26-2011 10:15 PM

Re: Glibertarian Gibberish on Open Borders
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 218626)
How many "illegals" are on the "welfare rolls"? Effectively none, since you can't receive benefits if you aren't a citizen. Even if you consider their children (the subset of them who happen to be American citizens, that is) the amount spent on AFDC and food stamps is a small fraction of the total.

However, when it comes to tax policy, libertarians are just conservatives.

Thanks Jeff for ignoring my main point and focusing some imaginary "implied one". The main point is that "Libertarians" are supposed to be in favor of smaller government, yet Ms. Mangu favors "open Borders" even though these "immigrants" could walk into this country and go on government relief. But that's OK with Ms. Mangu 'cause immigration -legal or otherwise - is always good.

And I was mistaken to use the word "illegals" since under "Open Borders" anyone can walk into the country legally. Open borders = no immigration laws.

Finally, your statement that "illegals" can't get welfare strikes me as naive - but I don't care enough to argue the issue.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.