[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I don’t feel any particular way about it. I have my own views. Many of which Beck shares and some he doesn’t. I don’t agree with anybody on everything as I suspect is the case with Beck as well. He mentioned the book, I posted it. I’ve never read it though I’ve read quotes from it. I’m pretty sure when I do read it I’ll have the same response I do to Beck. Lots of nodding with some scowling here and there.[/quote]
Well I was asking because it seems like some conservatives want to completely shut out ANY ideas from libertarians because they don’t agree with another part of their philosophy. Thanks for the response (and the videos).
Well I was asking because it seems like some conservatives want to completely shut out ANY ideas from libertarians because they don’t agree with another part of their philosophy…[/quote]
Where the heck did this come from? You surely haven’t seen it on this board.[/quote]
Sloth. And a couple others I can’t remember exactly.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I don’t feel any particular way about it. I have my own views. Many of which Beck shares and some he doesn’t. I don’t agree with anybody on everything as I suspect is the case with Beck as well. He mentioned the book, I posted it. I’ve never read it though I’ve read quotes from it. I’m pretty sure when I do read it I’ll have the same response I do to Beck. Lots of nodding with some scowling here and there.[/quote]
Well I was asking because it seems like some conservatives want to completely shut out ANY ideas from libertarians because they don’t agree with another part of their philosophy. Thanks for the response (and the videos).[/quote]
No problem and the libertarian thing is another discussion.
Another good Beck today, but I wish he’d let me help him with his show =] He got a little shaky in a couple spots again. I see the point he’s making, but I think the weather underground either needs it’s own show to demonstrate how it has anything to do with today or left alone altogether. Unless he can tie it directly in with contemporary policy makers. Also, I agree that Bill Clinton and Joe Biden aren’t dreaming of a communist America, but Obama most certainly is. As is Pelosi and Frank along with some others. He needs to keep hammering Van Jones though. This guy has been involved by his own declaration in anti American revolution for years and he was chosen by Valerie Jarret, Obama’s closest advisor to be part of his administration. http://gregnmary.gotdns.com:8080/index.php/topic,218.new.html#new
Well I was asking because it seems like some conservatives want to completely shut out ANY ideas from libertarians because they don’t agree with another part of their philosophy…[/quote]
Where the heck did this come from? You surely haven’t seen it on this board.[/quote]
Sloth. And a couple others I can’t remember exactly.[/quote]
Sloth doesn’t reject every part of libertarianism. He just believes that a strong (socially conservative) structure needs to be in place in society in order for it to survive without government help.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Another good Beck today, but I wish he’d let me help him with his show =] He got a little shaky in a couple spots again. I see the point he’s making, but I think the weather underground either needs it’s own show to demonstrate how it has anything to do with today or left alone altogether. Unless he can tie it directly in with contemporary policy makers. Also, I agree that Bill Clinton and Joe Biden aren’t dreaming of a communist America, but Obama most certainly is. As is Pelosi and Frank along with some others. He needs to keep hammering Van Jones though. This guy has been involved by his own declaration in anti American revolution for years and he was chosen by Valerie Jarret, Obama’s closest advisor to be part of his administration. http://gregnmary.gotdns.com:8080/index.php/topic,218.new.html#new[/quote]
yes, another good show. I think that Glenn suffers from a bit of information overload from his researchers - you must admit it would be hard to pick and choose which particular train of evidence to follow when dealing with such a wide-ranging set of players and organizations. He needs someone who knows how to put together a PDB who can summarize points and developments for him rather than just info dumping on him.
All told though, he does a decent job of identifying the players and their connections.
Well I was asking because it seems like some conservatives want to completely shut out ANY ideas from libertarians because they don’t agree with another part of their philosophy…[/quote]
Where the heck did this come from? You surely haven’t seen it on this board.[/quote]
Sloth. And a couple others I can’t remember exactly.[/quote]
Sloth doesn’t reject every part of libertarianism. He just believes that a strong (socially conservative) structure needs to be in place in society in order for it to survive without government help.
[/quote]
That’s pretty tough to justify given his statements in the “Liberals don’t understand economics thread.” And this isn’t meant as an attack on Sloth, I respect his ideas, but he is exceedingly hostile to libertarianism IMO. In any event, I don’t want to derail Tiribulus’ thread, so I’m going to end this here.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Another good Beck today, but I wish he’d let me help him with his show =] He got a little shaky in a couple spots again. I see the point he’s making, but I think the weather underground either needs it’s own show to demonstrate how it has anything to do with today or left alone altogether. Unless he can tie it directly in with contemporary policy makers. Also, I agree that Bill Clinton and Joe Biden aren’t dreaming of a communist America, but Obama most certainly is. As is Pelosi and Frank along with some others. He needs to keep hammering Van Jones though. This guy has been involved by his own declaration in anti American revolution for years and he was chosen by Valerie Jarret, Obama’s closest advisor to be part of his administration. http://gregnmary.gotdns.com:8080/index.php/topic,218.new.html#new[/quote]
yes, another good show. I think that Glenn suffers from a bit of information overload from his researchers - you must admit it would be hard to pick and choose which particular train of evidence to follow when dealing with such a wide-ranging set of players and organizations. He needs someone who knows how to put together a PDB who can summarize points and developments for him rather than just info dumping on him.
All told though, he does a decent job of identifying the players and their connections.[/quote]
I think there is something to this although I’m thinkin it might be pretty tough to practically implement. I mean what if somebody decides he didn’t need that for this week and he is asking them later why they didn’t give it him?
I think he does a great job of demonstrating the outright assault on historical America that has come to full fruition in this administration. I just sometimes find myself thinking “ooooo, I think that weakened the thrust of his thought a bit.”
I think he takes the “I don’t care what the critics think” principle one step too far a bit too often. One of the most potent weapons in a debater’s arsenal is the ability to anticipate an opponent’s attack and either co opt it or answer it at the outset before they get a chance to launch it. He leaves himself vulnerable to heckling and criticism unnecessarily at times IMO.
Don’t get me wrong. I love the guy, but I have to be honest.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I think there is something to this although I’m thinkin it might be pretty tough to practically implement. I mean what if somebody decides he didn’t need that for this week and he is asking them later why they didn’t give it him?
I think he does a great job of demonstrating the outright assault on historical America that has come to full fruition in this administration. I just sometimes find myself thinking “ooooo, I think that weakened the thrust of his thought a bit.”
I think he takes the “I don’t care what the critics think” principle one step too far a bit too often. One of the most potent weapons in a debater’s arsenal is the ability to anticipate an opponent’s attack and either co opt it or answer it at the outset before they get a chance to launch it. He leaves himself vulnerable to heckling and criticism unnecessarily at times IMO.
Don’t get me wrong. I love the guy, but I have to be honest.[/quote]
Yeah, really admire his skills, and I appreciate your honesty.
I’m right there with you, I admire his tenacity for doing this day in and day out (you know this has got to be exhausting) and am willing to cut him a little slack every now and then, but as you said, I have the same reaction when he streches a bit too far. That anticipatory calcuation should not be ignored.
She spoke specifically about the regulation of the oil and gas industry and how she felt it was necessary in Alaska based on her experience. Now if this makes her “just as bad as Democrats” then certainly you are entitled to your opinion but it would be intellectually healthy for you to make that distinction so that your opinion collides with fact from time to time.[/quote]
Democrats love fascism, it seems Palin does too. Ron Paul was right on the money leave it to the free market to regulate it. For many reasons, one they would not be out there drilling a mile deep in the free market, and second with no liability cap they would have paid way more attention to the drills.
How she can sit there and talk about limiting government then the next second talk about expanding its reach shows she is two faced.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you but when you fail to make the necessary distinctions like I just got you to do, you hurt your cause.
I don’t believe Palin espouses fascism strictly because she wants stringent safety standards for oil company drilling. C’mon, John, don’t let hyperbole on this subject whittle down your credibility on other things. Even Paul didn’t throw a hissy fit when Palin mentioned her views. Take a hint from his reaction.
With you its purism or the highway. Think this through for a minute…it’s not an effective long term approach.[/quote]
Palin can speak her views thats fine, but I will call her out on her two faced lies. Listen go look up Terry Branstad, this is who she endorsed in Iowa, she endorsed a tax and spend Rino.
This purism is purism with the constitution, where in the constitution does it give them the authority to regulate the oil industry.