Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus) (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=7276)

Bloggingheads 12-31-2011 01:38 PM

Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 

Ocean 12-31-2011 01:46 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
Here's for the main theme. ;)

TwinSwords 12-31-2011 02:21 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ocean (Post 235743)
Here's for the main theme. ;)

Awesome! Thanks!

Gosh, based on the first two minutes of hilarious banter, this looks like it's going to be a good one. It's always great to see the Founders together.

harkin 12-31-2011 02:23 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
Mickey's drug war prediction was slightly off, he should have said the violence will be escalated with guns supplied by Obama's DOJ, resulting not in anyone taking responsibility but cries of racism towards anyone offering criticism.

Bob, if the Tea Party is damaging the conservative cause you'll have to admit the Occutards, with the bills now due for their babysitting, cleanup etc have done exponential damage to the statists (even with a cheerleading MSM).

redpeakpass 12-31-2011 02:48 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
Harkin, that is just sad. I hope, for your sake, that someone is paying you to post this drivel.

Florian 12-31-2011 03:07 PM

Re: Je me fous du passé
 
Happy New Year to everyone. Best of luck to Bob and looking forward to the future of bhtv.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3Kvu...eature=related

ginger baker 12-31-2011 03:19 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
another enjoyable dvlog by Robert Wright and Mickey Kaus. Regarding Steve Jobs: iSOdontcarethatmuch. And, I must interject, Robert Cray is a great talent, surely not in the style of SRV, but very, very good. So there.

bjkeefe 12-31-2011 03:24 PM

Haven't had a chance to listen yet, but ...
 
... that's the best section title I've read in years:

Quote:

BREAKING: Bloggingheads.tv will live on!

Wonderment 12-31-2011 03:38 PM

Mickey's criterion for selecting a president
 
Which candidate is more likely to fuck over poor Mexican families.

Don't worry, Real Americans. Mickey has your back, ensuring that drunk Mexicans in a bar are not plotting a takeover of our homeland:

Quote:

And the third thing—which is very controversial, which you can’t bring up—is we’re right next door to Mexico. Fifty percent of our illegal immigrants are from Mexico. In any other place in the world, you would say that’s a recipe for trouble, to have huge influxes of Mexicans living in an area that is adjacent to Mexico. One day they may want to be part of Mexico and they want more of an affiliation with Mexico.

reason: So you worry about a reconquista?

Kaus: Reconquista is a little—a little extreme. If you talk to people in Mexico, I’m told, if you get them drunk in a bar, they’ll say we’re taking it back, sorry. That’s not an uncommon sentiment in Mexico, so why can’t we take it seriously here?

Kevin 12-31-2011 03:43 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
I'm glad to hear that there may still be the foot traffic and churn of various new authors and profs, some of the time at least. The mixture of recurring pairings, Bobs, weekly series and being dropped in at the deep end of something you've never heard of, is pretty awesome. And difficult to pull off, so thank you Sang Ngo.

I do enjoy the line of reasoning that slick messaging is odious, and fumbling it a bit indicates a realness and decency. Sounds good to me.

I'm sorry to hear that people are losing hours. Hope everyone is all right.

What happens to the archives?? It's tremendously rich. Historians are going to be interested in them someday, for one thing. Keep the 2005-2011 canon safe, please!

jimM47 12-31-2011 03:46 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
I can vindicate Mickey's prediction about politifact.

Kevin 12-31-2011 04:06 PM

Re: Mickey's criterion for selecting a president
 
Thanks for excerpting this. It's a good antidote for oversentimentalizing the Founders just because I like BhTV so much.

jeffpeterson 12-31-2011 04:28 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
One idea for regulating the comments that might also enhance the sustainability issue would be to do what the Ricochet site does and charge a nominal sum for the privilege of commenting (it's about $4 monthly or a discounted $30 a year at Ricochet). That seems to work pretty well at weeding out trolls and riffraff.

jimM47 12-31-2011 05:00 PM

Bloggingheads.tv will live on: Some Addenda
 
Bob and Mickey did in under 9 minutes most of what the lost Commenter Klatch that my computer ate did in 20 minutes. I'll add a few extra comments that Bob mentioned in the lost diavlog that were's here before:

* Bob has already signed up a bunch of people who have promised to provide regularly monthly (or more frequent) contributions, where the main host is responsible for setting up conversations, sort of like the Week in Blog is now or like Free Will was in the past. These regular contributors will have identifiable "shows." Some of these hosts will come from (or possibly be) other institutions like magazines and think thanks, and the embedded player will be co-branded with the name of that institution. You may also see these co-branded episodes around the web, being promoted by those institutions (much like Bob's episodes will be "The Wright Show" and will appear on Slate). The new front page layout will help accommodate this branding, and also accomodate the fact that episodes might not always arrive at steady 24-hr intervals. [To clarify, though, all of this content will continue to be centrally located at the bh.tv site as well.]

* Bloggingheads is going to transition to the recording setup you saw in this diavlog between Mickey and Bob, where the two of them can see each other, and one of the diavloggers is left at the end with a more complete file of the conversation — previously each participant at the end only had their own side of the conversation. This is going to facilitate letting diavloggers do more of the work of identifying conversation topics. In the future, the topic headings also may not be ding-a-links with both and begin-point and an end-point. Many will just be a begin-point.

* Bob issued a heart-felt thank-you to all of the bh.tv viewers who contributed to the site following the call he made in the divalog with Aryeh. The contributions by individual viewers alone wouldn't be able to run the site long-term, but they were a real boon to bh.tv. Bob related to me how dark times were approaching at the end of the year, and there was a shortfall in the accounts that made it uncertain that Bloggingheads was going to be able to make it through the end of the year before the new Non-Profit started up. But when the donations came in, they cured the shortfall. Bob compared the feeling he got watching the donations come in to the end of "It's a Wonderful Life." It was pretty adorable. So thanks to all who donated!

Don Zeko 12-31-2011 05:50 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jimM47 (Post 235755)
I can vindicate Mickey's prediction about politifact.

I've been reading and agreeing with all sorts of pushback on this point from Liberal blogs. I don't know who I'm reading that Bob isn't, but Mickey is definitely not making this up.

harkin 12-31-2011 05:59 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
As always, the links are wanting. Here's a nice breakdown of Obama's ridiculously disingenuous Osawatomie speech declaring America's problems being the result of a "you're on your own" system:

"This is a deliciously perverse analysis of the situation confronting America and a fin de civilisation West. In what area of life are Americans now “on their own”? By 2008, Fannie and Freddie had a piece of over half the mortgages in this country; the “subprime” mortgage was an invention of government. America’s collective trillion dollars of college debt has been ramped up by government distortion of the student-loan market. Likewise, health care, where Americans labor under the misapprehension that they have a “private” system rather than one whose inflationary pressures and byzantine bureaucracy are both driven largely by remorseless incremental government annexation. Americans are ever less “on their own” in housing, education, health, and most other areas of life — and the present moribund slough is the direct consequence"

Instead they bother trying to find something said by E J Dioone that resembles the truth?

Quote:

Originally Posted by redpeakpass (Post 235747)
Harkin, that is just sad. I hope, for your sake, that someone is paying you to post this drivel.

Why is it the statists never understand self-sufficiency and free will (and always refuse to counter with argument, relying instead on the ad hominem)?

Unlike the Occutards and union members, I do not require that someone pay me to express an opinion, transport me to gatherings, provide me free food or posters, babysit myself and my compatriots, nor clean up my mess.

Rest assured however that while Bob is pleading for drastic raising of tax rates and Obama/Pelosi etc are enjoying their Wall St/Hollywood connections and vacationing in luxury, Eric Holder is still being paid to enforce the law.

whburgess 12-31-2011 06:44 PM

Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Bob provide a great assessment of Ron Paul's foreign policy.
Let this serve as a 'teachable moment' for those liberals on this board who allowed their disagreement with Paul's domestic conservative/libertarianism to lead them to portray this classic libertarian, who is the least sympathetic of the entire political field (including Obama) to Kaus and others obsessed with illegal immigrants, and who is the purist free trader of the entire political field, as, of all things, a 'nativist' or 'isolationist'.

The recent discussions, from the liberal commentors in this forum, regarding Ron Paul, is great example of how ideological identity can lead to huge blind spots.

Robert Wright 12-31-2011 06:57 PM

Re: Bloggingheads.tv will live on: Some Addenda
 
Thanks for this summary, Jim.

If I said we've "signed up a bunch of people" to contribute regularly, I overstated the case. But it's true that a number of people have expressed interest, and we hope that the results will be evident toward the end of January. Meanwhile, we'll work hard to line up enough of the more traditional programming (i.e., individually orchestrated) to keep the site dynamic.

Thanks especially for relating the 'Wonderful Life' story. It really is true that my wife had just told me we might be more than $1,000 shy of what we needed to pay all the workers through the end of the year, when, lo and behold, enough money to fill that need showed up. After I finished the diavlog with Mickey, I immediately regretted having forgotten to mention this.

Thanks to all those who made donations, and Happy New Year to everyone!

Bob

Ocean 12-31-2011 07:22 PM

Re: Je me fous du passé
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Florian (Post 235748)
Happy New Year to everyone. Best of luck to Bob and looking forward to the future of bhtv.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3Kvu...eature=related

Your link doesn't work here (?). But here's another.

Bonne année!

Wonderment 12-31-2011 07:26 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 235766)
Bob provide a great assessment of Ron Paul's foreign policy.
Let this serve as a 'teachable moment' for those liberals on this board who allowed their disagreement with Paul's domestic conservative/libertarianism to lead them to portray this classic libertarian, who is the least sympathetic of the entire political field (including Obama) to Kaus and others obsessed with illegal immigrants, and who is the purist free trader of the entire political field, as, of all things, a 'nativist' or 'isolationist'.

The recent discussions, from the liberal commentors in this forum, regarding Ron Paul, is great example of how ideological identity can lead to huge blind spots.

Well, Bob better prepare himself for heavy artillery because if it's anything like what I've faced from Forum liberals over the past few months for admiring and supporting Paul's foreign policy views (much as I disagree with him on many other issues), I can assure Bob that the response will be relentlessly hostile.

I'm sure Twin Swords will soon enough be pointing out to Bob (and Glenn and John) that "Monster" Paul and the "Paultards" real agenda is to trick Americans into destroying democracy and restoring racist and homophobic law and order for private elites.

I think I now understand why some liberals are far more upset than Republicans with support for Paul's views that are to the left of Obama on key issues like peace, immigration reform and the war on drugs. Mainstream Republicans have the luxury of humoring Ron Paul; liberals, on the other hand, must fear him because if he runs as an independent he could contribute significantly to Obama's defeat. This, I think, is a legitimate (albeit premature) concern. As someone who prefers Obama with all his shortcomings to Romney (much less Perry, Gingrich, Bachmann or Santorum who are all worse than Romney), I too would be worried by a third party candidate who'd weaken the Dems. On the other hand:

Quote:

If Mr. Paul was a legitimate candidate in a general election, we could finally have an honest debate about campaign finance reform, military spending, torture of enemy combatants, immigration, the Federal Reserve, free trade agreements, gay marriage and prison sentences for drug use. These issues are just the tip of the iceberg of themes that are glazed over with gimmick answers and worthless slogans in normal presidential debates.

sugarkang 12-31-2011 07:34 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
Love these diavlogs.
They're like Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon or Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau.

ohcomeon 12-31-2011 07:35 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
Bob,

I will repeat myself.
the number one reason people do not donate to non-profits is they haven't been asked. I still haven't been asked.

Wonderment 12-31-2011 07:44 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Your desperate.
You're.

You, Graz, have been -- by far -- the worst of all the "liberal" critics of my views on Paul. To Twin Swords' credit, he is well-informed, well-intentioned and capable of putting together a decent argument.

Your posts, on the other hand, are invariably insubstantial, ad hominem, insulting and borderline stalking. You're rarely funny and you're never insightful. Just noise.

graz 12-31-2011 07:54 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonderment (Post 235780)
You're.

You, Graz, have been -- by far -- the worst of all the "liberal" critics of my views on Paul. To Twin Swords' credit, he is well-informed, well-intentioned and capable of putting together a decent argument.

Your posts, on the other hand, are invariably insubstantial, ad hominem, insulting and borderline stalking. You're rarely funny and you're never insightful. Just noise.

The pity potty continues! Very becoming, don't you think?

miceelf 12-31-2011 08:12 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonderment (Post 235772)
I think I now understand why some liberals are far more upset than Republicans with support for Paul's views that are to the left of Obama on key issues like peace, immigration reform and the war on drugs. Mainstream Republicans have the luxury of humoring Ron Paul; liberals, on the other hand, must fear him because if he runs as an independent he could contribute significantly to Obama's defeat. This, I think, is a legitimate (albeit premature) concern. As someone who prefers Obama with all his shortcomings to Romney (much less Perry, Gingrich, Bachmann or Santorum who are all worse than Romney), I too would be worried by a third party candidate who'd weaken the Dems.

I think you may be overgeneralizing from some of the discussions here. A Paul third party candidacy is going to harm repubicans much more than dems. He's only to the left of Obama on "peace" if Pat Buchanan is. The war on drugs I will give you, but Paul's support of untrammeled immigration is based on his assessment that liberal critiques of immigration are correct; that it is an effective way of depressing wages for everyone except a few elites. Whether that proposition is true or not, it's clearly the basis for Ron Paul's support of open borders. He doesn't give a flying f**k about Mexicans' attempts to have a better life. he cares about the poor multinational that has the oppressive burden of paying people a living wage.

sugarkang 12-31-2011 08:18 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 235785)
He doesn't give a flying f**k about Mexicans' attempts to have a better life.

I wish you would research before saying things like this. This is the equivalent of saying he hates education because he wants to abolish the Dept of Education. BTW, Robert Wright just named Ron Paul his Hero of the Year.

Heads Exploooooode.

miceelf 12-31-2011 08:35 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarkang (Post 235787)
I wish you would research before saying things like this. This is the equivalent of saying he hates education because he wants to abolish the Dept of Education.

I have no belief that he hates education. I do believe that he is indifferent to the well-being of mexicans and that concern for their well-being is immaterial to his beliefs about immigration. I think his primary motivation is reducing the cost of labor for corporations. I don't see how a link to a good act on his part is proof of anything one way or the other about his views on immigration. It doesn't even say anything one way or the other about his views on race, not that that's relevant to this discussion. I don't much care whether some of his best patients are Black.

NVM, I see what you mean. I like Bob a lot; I don't think he's infallible. Ditto Wonderment, for that matter.

sugarkang 12-31-2011 08:36 PM

Re: Bloggingheads.tv will live on: Some Addenda
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Wright (Post 235767)
Thanks to all those who made donations, and Happy New Year to everyone!

Bob

Bob, my donation was not a donation; it was a quid pro quo. I will be expecting a package in the mail shortly.

sugarkang 12-31-2011 08:43 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 235788)
I do believe that he is indifferent to the well-being of mexicans and that concern for their well-being is immaterial to his beliefs about immigration.

This is not true. You have to recognize that the entire media is stacked against Paul so you're not going to understand his positions through ordinary sources. It's not some evil conspiracy against Paul, but it's a path of least resistance by the media that makes his positions difficult to know unless you research him yourself.

Quote:

I think his primary motivation is reducing the cost of labor for corporations. I don't see how a link to a good act on his part is proof of anything one way or the other about his views on immigration.
You must seek to understand before you criticize. Unless you can articulate RP's positions first and his justifications for them, any criticism will not be germane to the issue.

Quote:

It doesn't even say anything one way or the other about his views on race, not that that's relevant to this discusison.
He doesn't give a shit about race, just like I don't give a shit about race. Libertarians are about recognizing human rights first. If we are all equal, there is no need to subdivide into categories like black, gay, woman, minority, etc. That's your Democratic Party's tactics.

Quote:

Do you have a link to Bob's nomination?
It's a long diavlog, but it's somewhere in/around the Heroes and Villains of 2011.

badhatharry 12-31-2011 08:47 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by harkin (Post 235746)
Bob, if the Tea Party is damaging the conservative cause you'll have to admit the Occutards, with the bills now due for their babysitting, cleanup etc have done exponential damage to the statists (even with a cheerleading MSM).

If only that were true but it's not. A world gone mad.

Wonderment 12-31-2011 08:52 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 235785)
I think you may be overgeneralizing from some of the discussions here. A Paul third party candidacy is going to harm repubicans much more than dems.

That's a possibility. Third party candidacies are often debated in terms of who benefits most. Some people argue that Nader was a wash, although many are convinced that Gore would have won without Nader. Some attribute Clinton's 1992 victory to Ross Perot. Then there's George Wallace in 1968. My hunch is that Paul as a third party would hurt Obama, but I'm open to questioning that assumption or following some empirical data that might help clarify it.

Quote:

He's only to the left of Obama on "peace" if Pat Buchanan is.
Ok, that's also debatable. Buchanan has not been at all consistent in his opposition to militarism and war. He's an Old School Nixon-Reagan Cold Warrior who wanted to "win" in Vietnam, which hardly qualifies him as a leftist peacenik. He supported Bush-Cheney for re-election in 2004, endorses the Patriot Act and approves torture. On the other hand, he was to the left of Obama on Libya, opposing the intervention there. He was against the Iraq sanctions which killed countless Iraqis BEFORE the war. Obama, if I understand him correctly, approves analogous sanctions against Iran.

You do have a good point, however, in that the use of terms "left" and "right" are probably not helpful in the war-peace context.

miceelf 12-31-2011 08:53 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarkang (Post 235790)
This is not true. You have to recognize that the entire media is stacked against Paul so you're not going to understand his positions through ordinary sources.
....
You must seek to understand before you criticize. Unless you can articulate RP's positions first and his justifications for them, any criticism will not be germane to the issue.

I actually have to apologise to you, Wonderment, and I guess Dr. Paul. I had taken wonderment on his word that Dr. Paul is to the left of Obama on immigration. From a strictly labor rights perspective, it may be correct, but that's not what Wonderment was talking about. I fail to see how abolishing birthright citizenship puts Paul to the left of Obama on immigration.

So, my error was in taking the words of Paul's supporters (or whatever we want to call wonderment wrt Paul). It's not a crazy thing to do, but turns out to have been wrong. I guess I underestimated Wonderment's naivete where Dr. Paul is concerned.

http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/border-security/

Ocean 12-31-2011 09:07 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 235794)
I actually have to apologise to you, Wonderment, and I guess Dr. Paul. I had taken wonderment on his word that Dr. Paul is to the left of Obama on immigration. From a strictly labor rights perspective, it may be correct, but that's not what Wonderment was talking about. I fail to see how abolishing birthright citizenship puts Paul to the left of Obama on immigration.

So, my error was in taking the words of Paul's supporters (or whatever we want to call wonderment wrt Paul). It's not a crazy thing to do, but turns out to have been wrong. I guess I underestimated Wonderment's naivete where Dr. Paul is concerned.

http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/border-security/

I'm starting to suspect that some people have fallen to a new disease that manifests by becoming RonPaul-delusional. Whatever longing they have for certain kind of policy or principle, they plainly project it onto RP. Reality is secondary. And then they say that it is those of us who don't like him or his ideas, that are mistaken or wrong, or mislead by media, or misinterpreting him.

No, I haven't gotten to the point where Bob states that RP is hero of the year. Disappointing to hear if true.

rfrobison 12-31-2011 09:12 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ocean (Post 235795)
I'm starting to suspect that some people have fallen to a new disease that manifests by becoming RonPaul-delusional. Whatever longing they have for certain kind of policy or principle, they plainly project it onto RP. Reality is secondary. And then they say that it is those of us who don't like him or his ideas, that are mistaken or wrong, or mislead by media, or misinterpreting him.

No, I haven't gotten to the point where Bob states that RP is hero of the year. Disappointing to hear if true.

Change the parts in bold to Barack Obama and I'd say you're onto something. ;)

bkjazfan 12-31-2011 09:16 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 235785)
I think you may be overgeneralizing from some of the discussions here. A Paul third party candidacy is going to harm repubicans much more than dems. He's only to the left of Obama on "peace" if Pat Buchanan is. The war on drugs I will give you, but Paul's support of untrammeled immigration is based on his assessment that liberal critiques of immigration are correct; that it is an effective way of depressing wages for everyone except a few elites. Whether that proposition is true or not, it's clearly the basis for Ron Paul's support of open borders. He doesn't give a flying f**k about Mexicans' attempts to have a better life. he cares about the poor multinational that has the oppressive burden of paying people a living wage.

I thought that Ron Paul does not go along with most of his libertarian buddies when it comes to open borders. This coincides with one of their main theoreticians, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, stance against illegal immigration. Also, he is not pro choice on abortion.

Oh, sorry, I see where you corrected yourself on Paul's immigration stance.

Ocean 12-31-2011 09:36 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rfrobison (Post 235796)
Change the parts in bold to Barack Obama and I'd say you're onto something. ;)

Let's do it this way. I'll show you what I'm talking about in this thread, since it is this thread that I referred to.

Pay attention to the conversation:

Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 235766)
Bob provide a great assessment of Ron Paul's foreign policy.
Let this serve as a 'teachable moment' for those liberals on this board who allowed their disagreement with Paul's domestic conservative/libertarianism to lead them to portray this classic libertarian, who is the least sympathetic of the entire political field (including Obama) to Kaus and others obsessed with illegal immigrants, and who is the purist free trader of the entire political field, as, of all things, a 'nativist' or 'isolationist'.

The recent discussions, from the liberal commentors in this forum, regarding Ron Paul, is great example of how ideological identity can lead to huge blind spots.

Of course, you could say that Ron, being such a good boy, as soon as he found out he got an "F" , rushed to turn an extra credit assignment to see if he could make it to A+.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonderment (Post 235772)
I think I now understand why some liberals are far more upset than Republicans with support for Paul's views that are to the left of Obama on key issues like peace, immigration reform and the war on drugs.

miceelf reminiscing of the old RP, responds:

Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 235785)
... but Paul's support of untrammeled immigration is based on his assessment that liberal critiques of immigration are correct; that it is an effective way of depressing wages for everyone except a few elites. Whether that proposition is true or not, it's clearly the basis for Ron Paul's support of open borders. He doesn't give a flying f**k about Mexicans' attempts to have a better life. he cares about the poor multinational that has the oppressive burden of paying people a living wage.

And:

Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 235788)
I have no belief that he hates education. I do believe that he is indifferent to the well-being of mexicans and that concern for their well-being is immaterial to his beliefs about immigration. I think his primary motivation is reducing the cost of labor for corporations. I don't see how a link to a good act on his part is proof of anything one way or the other about his views on immigration. It doesn't even say anything one way or the other about his views on race, not that that's relevant to this discussion. I don't much care whether some of his best patients are Black.

NVM, I see what you mean. I like Bob a lot; I don't think he's infallible. Ditto Wonderment, for that matter.

SK responds:

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarkang (Post 235790)
This is not true. You have to recognize that the entire media is stacked against Paul so you're not going to understand his positions through ordinary sources. It's not some evil conspiracy against Paul, but it's a path of least resistance by the media that makes his positions difficult to know unless you research him yourself.

You must seek to understand before you criticize. Unless you can articulate RP's positions first and his justifications for them, any criticism will not be germane to the issue.

He doesn't give a shit about race, just like I don't give a shit about race. Libertarians are about recognizing human rights first. If we are all equal, there is no need to subdivide into categories like black, gay, woman, minority, etc. That's your Democratic Party's tactics.

So miceelf learns his lesson, and instead of believing the delusions expressed by the other commenters, he goes to the source to find out what RP's position on immigration is:

Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 235794)
I actually have to apologise to you, Wonderment, and I guess Dr. Paul. I had taken wonderment on his word that Dr. Paul is to the left of Obama on immigration. From a strictly labor rights perspective, it may be correct, but that's not what Wonderment was talking about. I fail to see how abolishing birthright citizenship puts Paul to the left of Obama on immigration.

So, my error was in taking the words of Paul's supporters (or whatever we want to call wonderment wrt Paul). It's not a crazy thing to do, but turns out to have been wrong. I guess I underestimated Wonderment's naivete where Dr. Paul is concerned.

http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/border-security/


In case it isn't clear:

Quote:

Ron Paul’s six point plan puts a stop to illegal immigration:

Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.
Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.
No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.
No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.
End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.
See what the delusions is? This is not an abstract idea about one's favorites candidates and soft biases. It's delusional.

But, who cares? Right? It's almost 2012!

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/8/8_6_58.gif

rfrobison 12-31-2011 09:59 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ocean (Post 235799)

I feel bad. I was just trying to rib you a bit about the president, and here you go constructing a well-reasoned refutation of my joke.

The truth is I have no dog in the Ron Paul fight. He's an interesting voice to have in the Republican conversation, but that's all. He's little more than a sideshow, and given his unconventional (i.e., isolationist) foreign policy views, he has absolutely no chance of being the Republican nominee. I suppose he could be a spoiler and end up putting Obama back in the White House in a close contest, but honestly I think he's not got much support beyond his devoted band of libertarian Internet activists.

Robert Wright, for his part, continually amuserates me -- that's a cross between "amuse" and "exasperates" -- with his touching paeans to the United Nations.

Sanctions against Iran might push the poor dears to start a WAR! Oh, my. We really should try to be more sympathetic to the mullahs. They have a right to their atomic toys, after all. Only action from the U.N. -- a body that held moment of silence in tribute to that renowned statesman Kim Jong-il -- is legitimate. Charming. Mr. Wright, I love what you do here on Bhtv, but man you're naive!

Sorry, I digress.

Globalcop 12-31-2011 10:00 PM

Re: Be Seeing You (Robert Wright & Mickey Kaus)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffpeterson (Post 235757)
One idea for regulating the comments that might also enhance the sustainability issue would be to do what the Ricochet site does and charge a nominal sum for the privilege of commenting (it's about $4 monthly or a discounted $30 a year at Ricochet). That seems to work pretty well at weeding out trolls and riffraff.

Who said anything about "regulating the comments?" In fact Bob said they're going to be open to an even wider group of "outsiders."

Ocean 12-31-2011 10:13 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rfrobison (Post 235802)
I feel bad. I was just trying to rib you a bit about the president, and here you go constructing a well-reasoned refutation of my joke.

The truth is I have no dog in the Ron Paul fight. He's an interesting voice to have in the Republican conversation, but that's all. He's little more than a sideshow, and given his unconventional (i.e., isolationist) foreign policy views, he has absolutely no chance of being the Republican nominee. I suppose he could be a spoiler and end up putting Obama back in the White House in a close contest, but honestly I think he's not got much support beyond his devoted band of libertarian Internet activists.

Robert Wright, for his part, continually amuserates me -- that's a cross between "amuse" and "exasperates" -- with his touching paeans to the United Nations.

Sanctions against Iran might push the poor dears to start a WAR! Oh, my. We really should try to be more sympathetic to the mullahs. They have a right to their atomic toys, after all. Only action from the U.N. -- a body that held moment of silence in tribute to that renowned statesman Kim Jong-il -- is legitimate. Charming. Mr. Wright, I love what you do here on Bhtv, but man you're naive!

Sorry, I digress.

Hmmm... I'll digress more. I wish I could have changed those blue eyes to brown eyes to be a bit more realistic... hmmm...

:)

Wonderment 12-31-2011 10:22 PM

Re: Kudos to Bob for setting the record straight on his hero, Ron Paul
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 235794)

So, my error was in taking the words of Paul's supporters (or whatever we want to call wonderment wrt Paul). It's not a crazy thing to do, but turns out to have been wrong.

My bad. Sorry about the confusion. I didn't mean to get you all to go off on tangents about Ron Paul's immigration views. I'll explain below.

But first, let me clarify for the umpteenth time, I am NOT a Ron Paul supporter. I have not contributed one penny to Ron Paul, and I am a card-carrying member of the Green Party, which does not endorse Ron Paul for a wide range of reasons (abortion, healthcare, the environment, etc., etc.). I am pro-choice, pro-FED, pro-gay marriage, pro single payer healthcare and pro liberal judges, to name just a few of the many issues that separate me from Ron Paul's views.

If Ron Paul ran against Obama, I would vote for Obama.

I really try to limit my comments on Ron Paul to his views on foreign policy, militarism, interventionism and general Bush-Obama defense/national security policies.

I do favor legalization of marijuana, and I do think Paul is to the left of Obama on that.

As to immigration, I was not really fully informed on Paul's immigration views, and basically went by his public comments about open borders and his written statements where he argues for borders to be "blurred and open" and that deportation is "incompatible with human rights." I still don't get how that is consistent with the standard right-wing fare he has on his website. But be that as it may, I'm really no more interested in Paul's immigration policy than I am in his abortion policy. Ron Paul is important for what he says about war and peace.

Having said that, I'll add that you don't have to be very left to take up some space to the left of President Obama on immigration. Deportations of Mexicans have broken all previous records under Obama, and tons of money has been poured into border enforcement with nothing going to immigration reform. The benign Dream Act was defeated, immigrants (including "legal" ones) were written OUT of so-called Obamacare, and Obama supports the right-wing Mexican government's horrific War on Drugs (leading from behind?). DHS's "Secure Communities" roundup-for-deportation program has been an abject failure.

Obama has done the bare minimum to keep the Latino vote from bailing on him, but it's hardly a progressive agenda. Of course, like with everything else, the liberal defense of Obama will be that he really really longs to do the right thing, but recalcitrant Congress members impede him from fulfilling his goals. It's partly true, but it's also partly true that Obama is not the president his supporters expected him to be, and that expectations were basically delusional. Exhibit A: Nobel Peace Prize.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.