I expect socialism from left wingers like George W. Bush and Barack Obama, but with McCain voting with Bush and Obama in favor of the Wall Street rescue/bailout he has lost my vote.
Here I already sent him $100 and was ready to get some bumper stickers and help man his phone banks. And I would prefer to see Root on top of the Libertarian ticket instead of Barr given Barr’s voting record on immigration, but its not a perfect world and a libertarian vote looks like the lesser of three evils as a way of making a meaningful and accurate statement at the voting booth.
Strike one against McCain (now that he has shaken me off of the right wing of his band wagon) was making the cynical choice of Palin as a VP to target voters with bibles and/or breasts, when no one really believes she is 2nd most qualified of 300 million Americans to serve in the post.
Strike two is his willingness to put my children $700 billion further in the hole with the Chinese to fund the quantum leap in democratic socialism that is grasping for euphisms as a “bailout” or “rescue”. When you’re in a crisis you go with what you believe in. Government intervention and excessive government spending make things worse. So why would we respond to a crisis by making things worse?
Strike three is the fact that this isn’t baseball and you don’t necessarily get three strikes. And btw, hats off to Rohrabacher and Sanchez for voting “no” on the bailout.
gaawwdd … I want to vote for Libertarian presidential candidate Wayne Root. But I can’t help thinking that a vote for Root is not negating one vote for Obama.
I know one thing for certain. If John Campbell votes in favor of the bailout again, I will be voting for the Libertarian Don Patterson for Congress 48th District.
humm … my Captcha words are – render underwear. Reminds of that not-so famous Latin phrase: “Seper ubi sub ubi.”
Translation, “Always wear underwear.”
http://ancienthistory.about.com/b/2006/10/30/semper-ubi-sub-ubi.htm
Captcha words are – render underwear.
The sinister part, though, junior, is “render.” If you care at all about your underwear I would keep an eye on them for a while – maybe see if you can put them all on at once – because it sounds like our government is threatening to snatch them and put ’em on a plane to Egypt or Syria, where they will be waterboarded or worse!
Vern – The good thing about waterboarding my underwear is that they will “come clean” – and I will therefore be better protected.
Sorry Ron St. John – promise to get back on the serious track.
Bush being a “left-winger”… Thanks for the laugh.
Any kind of ideology is wrong. The middle ground is where it’s at. Left-wingers (not Bush, he actually is rather right-wing) and right-wingers are, quite frankly, people who put their ideology above reason.
Life is compromise, not ideology.
Ey Lad, and my proud Scott’s ancestors from my dear mothers side, would disagree, all the better to tell the king what ya think of him before a battle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBCjH5BKU4A&feature=related
Time frame 1:50 of 9:58
as well as anthing else the romans said…
This thread has sunk to new levels. Sorry, Ron. 🙁
“Government intervention and excessive government spending make things worse.”
You’re objective enough to know that is an over-generalization, right?
The situation is so sad we all need a laugh or two, don’t ya think?
Junior, you and Ron are perfectly free to vote Libertarian without worrying about throwing out your vote, as there is absolutely no way McCain takes California anyhow. Seriously. You should help this worthwhile third party grow.
Just like when I voted Nader in 2000 (which I wouldn’ta done in Florida or Ohio.)
So, based on the past few entries you and your fellow bloggers have made about the bail-out it has become readily apparent that you don not understand it’s need nor the long term gain the government is going to make on this investment over time – and the economy as a whole. Do you? (or any of the 3 who’ve made nothing more than anecdotal swipes). How about you do yourselves a favor and take the time you are spending spewing the nonsense on this board and study up on the importance of commercial paper lending and it’s affect on the day to day operations of everything from your local dry cleaners up to a Fortune 500 company. The bottom line is that until banks feel their risk exposure is decreased, regardless of your principal of thought on the means by which this to be resolved, you can most certainly expect an utter collapse of the capital markets.
I’ve provided a link which should make it simple for everyone to understand:
http://www.riskglossary.com/link/commercial_paper.htm
5th, (nice link, thanks)
I agree with you as Joe and I exchanged last evening. Having the initial reaction of wanting to reject it, just on principal if nothing more, the more I learn, the more I understand why something needs to be done NOW. I have issues with some of the things I think are in the bill (haven’t had a chance to read it, and never know what to believe of what I hear) but some of it needs to worked out in committee if true. I hope it can be.
I still think the entire system needs to overhauled, but not on an emergency basis.
5thHorseman:
Some people are probably too dense to even understand the link you provided.
They aren’t really all that much different than the creationists. They too believe in an ideology against all reason. Just the ideology is a bit different…
And anybody challenging their oh-so-holy beliefs is subject to their scorn.
“… it has become readily apparent that you don not understand it’s need nor the long term gain the government is going to make on this investment over time … ”
Excuse me mr. horse-man, .. while I call BULLS**T !!
In the extremely unlikely possibility that the guv’ment does make money on this f’d up deal – do think that our omniscient fathers in Washington DC will spend said monetary gains in a wise manner? HA – HA – HA !!
Jr.,
Let me try to explain this best I have come to understand it.
(Even if we agree on your basic premise, and I have to hold my nose to buy this)
ER Vs. reconstructive surgery
It’s very much like a multiple stabing victim arriving at the hospital. The major damage isn’t to the major organs but because of multiple traumas, the bleeding is going to kill the victim. So you have to pour in pint after pint of blood to keep them going until you can patch up all the holes to stem the bleeding. Sometimes in the ER you have dump huge amounts of resources in so you can repair the damage under more controlled and managed conditions later. I may not like it but that’s kind of the environment I see us in right now. You know I was screaming NO WAY too, but upon reflection and a lot of reading, I’ve come to the ER decision as being better than letting the patient die. We can deal with this much better when everyone has calmed down and the system is at least not in eminent danger of collapse as it seems to be now.
I still need to read the freaking bill too, there may very well be stuff in there, like the last one, that would make me not support it.
Junior:
“do think that our omniscient fathers in Washington DC will spend said monetary gains in a wise manner? HA – HA – HA !!”
Well, junior, if you think you can do it so much better, how about putting your money where your mouth is (sorry for the pun):
Run for office in the House or the Senate.
Talk is cheap.
Carl – My diagnosis is that our patient has a cancer of the blood. The specific type of cancer is socialism.
Our patient must under-go chemo and/or radiation therapy. Some good blood cells and tissues will be damaged in the process and there will be side effects. But the cancer of socialism must be destroyed before our patient, the American economy will recover.
dr. junior
I can’t really argue that you’re wrong on that one either doc. BUT first you have to save the patient.
So I’m overgeneralizing when I say government intervention makes things worse, but its OK for the Chicken Littles to claim the sky is falling if we don’t let private capital markets tap into our government’s full faith and credit. And I will not be intimidated by how very-complex the capital markets are, and then cower in the corner while we set a horrible precedent about the fundamental relationship between government and private business.
What are we going to say when Ford and GM face bankruptcy? Which is probably about a week from Tuesday.
The worst part of the government’s involvement in the capital market is the $400 billion it soaks up annually for the fun of spending more than it takes in.
And no apologies to me by anyone needed. I’m flattered that this has stirred up such a row. There’s a joke lurking in here about using Vern’s underwear to torture POW’s, and as soon as I can articulate it I’ll make another post.
Touché Ron!
Junior:
Since you are always throwing this word around, you haven’t explained what is “socialistic” about the bailout/rescue plan.
What makes it “socialistic” in your view? And no platitudes, please. In other words, where’s the beef in your allegation?
The term socialism has its roots in the writings of French intellectuals of the early 19th Century who were frustrated by the bourgeoisie who had recently won their freedom from aristocratic oppression but who were at least perceived as exploiting the working class. This provided a new rationale for control of business by government based on the helplessness of the common people against the conduct of the business-class, bourgeoisie.
Socialism is a system of government in which the government conducts business that could be conducted in the private sector on some rationale that it can be done better or more efficiently if decisions are made based on government officials presumed dedication to the public good rather than profit-motive in the privatec sector.
Any bank or investor or consortium of investors could jump in and buy the paper at stake in the bailout, but they don’t because they don’t want to lose money. For government to try to advance the public good by being in the secondary paper market is an example of socialism. It would really be a tortured definition of “socialism” that included Obama/Nader/Michael Moore/Vern Nelson socialized medicine/energy proposals, but not the Bush/Obama/McCain credit bailout.
using Vern’s underwear to torture POW’s,
Damn it, St. John, I knew it was only a matter of time before you made common cause with Rohrabacher.
Carl O says: “BUT first you have to save the patient.”
Right Carl ! And you do not save the patient by injecting additional cancer cells, (socialism).
Ron, I didn’t ask you, I asked junior…
But in any case, I think your definition is flawed. You imply that the government trying to advance the common good is a bad thing. So, that would imply that the government having a police force is a bad thing. Police functions can be (and are) handled by private businesses, after all.
Similarly with the government having a military force. Following your definition, we should get rid of our police and military forces, and let the private sector take over these functions.
Joe,
Pardon my butting in. I realize that is a solecism in this context and sort of felt guilty about it later, but gave in to a mad moment.
You make a good case about the problems with an overly broad definition of socialism. We need some rule of law and security, otherwise the ‘free market’ degenerates into getting bombed by the Gambini brothers if you sell beer on the south side. But I still think that a carefully worded definition of socialism will include the nationalization of troubled loan portfolios.
Ron – You are being to kind to Joe. Yours was not much of a “solecism.” I admit that I did check Webster’s for that definition.
Solecism: a breach of good manners or etiquette, impropriety
Allow me to provide you with an example of a genuine “solecism” Ron.
Joe – I normally ignore your idiotic questions and comments. I will continue to do so.
junior