Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Funny how John McCain has been "The Maverick" for the past 8 years... that is, until he becomes the Republican nominee. Then all of a sudden he is George Bush III.

One of the Dems pointed that out. He said that instead of calling McCain "The Maverick" he should be called "The Sidekick" since he had voted in agreement with Bush so many times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't he though? This is their main point against McCain.

I would agree, except I'd say he'd be 4 more years of RECENT Bush. Meaning Bush who's keen on environmentalism, and diplomatic appeasement (at least superficially). Plus McCain differs in that he seems to call more firmly for more Americans "service", which is actually a staple of the left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, no one said anything positive. Big surprise! <_<

I did like the points that Clinton and Kerry made in their speeches. Like how Clinton talked about how people said the same thing about him being too young for the White House, and he left with a really strong economy and a budget surplus. I like how Biden made the point about work being better then welfare. There was some good in there, some bad.

Ughh you are so right, this is more award-show-like than I had previously remembered. The writing is so canned and corny "Sometimes I feel like my brother is looking down on me... literally!" Hurhurhur. Segue to 3 youths urging you to text message "CHOOSE" to the DNC phone line.

What was the quote from Star Wars? "So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause." Something similar applies here I guess... "So this is how liberty dies... with stars-and-stripes motif top hats, feather boas, and text messaging." <_<

Edit: They are now giving a very long and blatant prayer...

Did you miss the GOP Convention last time around? I mistook it for a "Who Can Wear The Most American Flags And Be A Bigger Patriotic Attention Getting Ass" contest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Day 3 was mostly the same, the subject was roughly focused on foreign policy. The idea seemed to be; make diplomatic solutions with Iran (whatever that is), Iraq wasn't the right country to go to war with, Afghanistan is re-emerging as a threat, and veterans deserve more money for sacrificing for us.

Clinton made a rather bland, unsurprising speech. Followed shortly by Bidden. He was the source of the most revealing comment of the evening. Speaking about the values his mother raised him with, "My mothers creed is the American creed"... "No one is better than you, everyone is your equal, and everyone is better than you" (I am uncertain of the exact wording, but I think that is quite accurate). That's a pretty decent summary of the Democratic party if I ever heard it.

After Bidden, Obama made a "surprise" appearance to sort of meld the two and show how fantastic they are together. It ended shortly after, and closed for the third day in a row with a long prayer lead by sister Catherine Pinkerton. Perhaps I am just young, this is only my second election I'll be voting in, but is this normal for the Democratic conventions or is it new? Long prayers are not what I typically equate with the left.

Tomorrow is the fourth and last day where Obama will ascend to his throne in heaven make his acceptance speech at a football stadium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, no one said anything positive. Big surprise! <_<

I did like the points that Clinton and Kerry made in their speeches. Like how Clinton talked about how people said the same thing about him being too young for the White House, and he left with a really strong economy and a budget surplus.

I'd like to add that Bill Clinton actually reduced the burdens of government while Bush has expanded it.

Edited by dadmonson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd like to add that Bill Clinton actually reduced the burdens of government while Bush has expanded it.

I was surprised to learn that a Dem was actually responsible for the reducing of welfare benefits, thereby reducing the number of people on welfare.

Bill isn't as bad as many would have us believe. I still am not a big fan, however.

Of course, I'm not a big fan of many of the presidents. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you miss the GOP Convention last time around? I mistook it for a "Who Can Wear The Most American Flags And Be A Bigger Patriotic Attention Getting Ass" contest.

What's wrong with wearing American flags and being patriotic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd like to add that Bill Clinton actually reduced the burdens of government while Bush has expanded it.

If Bill had been left to his own devices, he would have socialized the entire healthcare system and he never would have signed welfare reform into law. Bush has been pathetic as well, but that doesn't make Clinton any better.

What's wrong with wearing American flags and being patriotic?

That's part of the left's self-hate syndrome. They find it very difficult to celebrate the good things America has brought, always focusing on her problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was surprised to learn that a Dem was actually responsible for the reducing of welfare benefits, thereby reducing the number of people on welfare.

That was more the work of the GOP controlled House. Left to himself Clinton would ahve tacked farther left (not as left as Obama or Carter, but left). For that matter the result was a perfect example fo GOP statism.

Bill isn't as bad as many would have us believe.

Domestically maybe not, becasue he had his worst impulses thwarted by the other party. Do recall, however, that the CLintons pretty much intended to nationalize healthcare early in Bills' first term. Read up on Hillary-care.

BTW I think the best formula for America in the short term is a Democratic president and a Republican Congress. Why? Because if a Dem president wants to raise spending, the GOP Congress will rein him in. But if a GOP president wants to spend more, there are two possibilities: 1) A Republican Congress will go along for party unity, 2) A Dem Congress will howl that a mere trillion for welfare is not enough, and modify the pending bills to take up even more money.

Unless you could have a really fiscally responsible president. Regardless of ideology, to some extent, one who would say "Listen, people. We owe a lot of money and we have a big deficit. We're living way beyond our means. So we're going to cut spending until the national debt comes down to manageable levels."

But what are the chances of that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the one thing this Democratic party can do right, is market itself and use slick presentation. This days convention seemed more superbowl than politics. From inside the football stadium Sheryl Crow warmed the crowd up singing "if we could only get out of our head and into our hearts". They sure know how to pick their music to illustrate their point... (more than they'd know).

Governer Tom Kaine was one of the first speakers and didn't waste time groping for religious admiration. "Does anybody here have a little bit of faith tonight?!" Spoken to arouse cheers. Speaking of the difficulty of electing Obama "In the words of that old gospel hymn, we will say "move mountain"..."mountain get out of our way, and the mountain will move!". Apparently the environmentalists were not on hand to jeer mountain moving in order to disrupt the balance of nature.

I will say one other thing about the dems that is at least superficially positive, they had some rather clever writers with some very quotable moments. Paraphrasing Bill Richardson; "McCain may pay a lot for his shoes, but we're the ones who will pay for his flip-flops". Cute...

Next Gore was up played on to the tune of "Let the Sun Shine". Cute... He didn't say anything terribly unpredictable. He did make a new global warming claim however saying, (paraphrased) "scientists predict northern ice caps will be gone within first term of next president".

Next up was a group of testimonials from the "average" American. Two people of whom have unbelievably ironic names. Pamela Cash-Roper (yes, she's a democrat and her name is Cash-Roper, you really can't make this stuff up) testified how she was a Republican in the past, but the failures of the economy to provide for her made her switch votes this year. The same goes for a man named Barney Smith, who said "it's time for the government to care more about Barney Smith, and not Smith Barney" to loud cheering and applause.

Shortly afterward Obama was up. The key quotes I took away from him were (paraphrasing again) "every generation we have an obligation to do something for the next generation". And repeating the same line twice, "it is that fundamental belief I am my brothers keeper, I am my sisters keeper that makes this country work". Later he claimed that he will end our dependence on foreign oil within 10 years by investing 150billion dollars into energy. Yikes 150 billion!?! But he is prepared to explain how to pay for it all, "many of thse plans will cost money which is why ive laid out how to pay for them all"..."by closing corporate loopholes." I'm guessing "closing loopholes" means confiscating a companies earned profits to redistribute.

He proposes putting an end to companies discriminating against the sick who don't provide insurance. Apparently he is evading the problems socialized health care inevitably faces in having to choose between the elderly and the young who are sick, tending to favor the young.

Next he briefly made an attempt at sounding aggressive on foreign policy, claiming he would return the fight to Afghanistan to finish it.

Upon finishing confetti, fireworks, and streamers started exploding all around the stadium and Biden and their families joined him on stage. They lingered a bit before retreating into the backdrop on stage which was a set made to look like the white house. Complete with the Obama communist-esque stylized posters and it was more than a little bit creepy.

And last but not least, the ending prayer. If you've ever wondered what the heck a leftist prayer sounds like it would be this:

There was some comment about being humble and needing to help "all of those who are not privalaged" and "give us the zeal to clean the environment we have polluted" and "contribute to the common good so we can love our neighbors as we love ourselves" "lets go change the world for good!".

One thing that really bothered me this entire convention was the distinct absence of the word "freedom", and in it's place the word "promise". What makes America great, is it freedom? They would say it's "promise" that the world strives to come to America for. The "promise" of the American dream, meaning the freedom that allows for it, they turned into a promise of the good life at the expense of everyone else.

I'm glad that's over for another 4 years at least. Next up the GOP convention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"You learn about the strength of his mind. But more importantly, you learn about the quality of his heart." -Biden

Sometimes I swear the people who write these speeches use the villains of Atlas Shrugged as models.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tomorrow is the fourth and last day where Obama will ascend to his throne in heaven make his acceptance speech at a football stadium.

They lingered a bit before retreating into the backdrop on stage which was a set made to look like the white house. Complete with the Obama communist-esque stylized posters and it was more than a little bit creepy.

Are you referring to the Obamacropolis? Ye gods, it's more than just a bit creepy, that thing screams megalomania. The journalists at the NY Post here have it right:

Some Republicans have dubbed it the "Barackopolis," while others suggested the delegates should wear togas to fit in among the same Doric columns the ancient Greeks believed would stroke the egos of Zeus and Athena.

The "promise" of the American dream, meaning the freedom that allows for it, they turned into a promise of the good life at the expense of everyone else.

In other words, this was Barack Obama Gerald Starnes happily accepting his DNC Presidential Candidate nomination Presidency at the 20th Century Motor Co, making his speech in a football field main hangar, saying that we are our brothers' and sisters' keepers, and receiving thunderous applause from people whose real aim is to muscle in on the wealth of others.

JJM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That whole "brothers keeper" thing sent chills down my spine. Not the good ones, either. :(

If that gives you chills, take a look at their platform, page 39:

In local platform hearings around the country, people talked of the need for compassion, empathy, a commitment to our values and the importance of being united in order to take on the challenges and opportunities of the new century. They said that they valued Barack Obama’s message, that alongside Americans’ famous individualism, there's another ingredient in the American saga: a belief that we are connected to each other. We could all choose to focus on our own concerns and live our lives in a way that tries to keep our individual stories separate from the larger story of America. But that is not who we are. That is not our American story. If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to us, even if it's not our child. If there's a senior citizen in Elko, Nevada who has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes our lives poorer, even if it's not our grandmother. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling only your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it is only when we join together in something larger than ourselves that we can write the next great chapter in America's story.

http://www.workinglife.org/storage/users/4/4/images/111/2008%20democratic%20platform%20080808.pdf

I realise that political platforms don't really mean too much in terms of actual policy, however this one gives a pretty nice summary of the philosophy of the Democrat party. It's essentially a laundry list of their stands on the major issues. One thing it makes abundantly clear is that above all, the Democrats are the party of collectivism.

Edited by gags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling only your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it is only when we join together in something larger than ourselves that we can write the next great chapter in America's story.

“Focusing your life solely on making a buck shows a certain poverty of ambition. It asks too little of yourself.” –Barack Obama, Knox College Commencement Address 2005

This makes me violently ill. I'll never vote for that man, nor will I ever fundamentally respect anyone who does vote for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's wrong with wearing American flags and being patriotic?

I was responding to Ichor's commentings about flag-waving wackos. It seemed to me like he had a problem with it. And I was pointing out that the Republican's at the 2004 convention covered themselves in flags way more. The Republicans turned patriotism into a marketing scheme for their party and branded the Democrats as "America haters" so when the Democrats try to show they don't hate the country... they get blasted for flag-waving.

It's an always losing cycle.

Plus, the two don't correlate all the time. Just because you are covered in an American-flag-burka doesn't mean that you understand and appreciate the things this country was supposedly founded on.

It boils down to the equalivalent of what sports fans do for their team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shortly afterward Obama was up. The key quotes I took away from him were (paraphrasing again) "every generation we have an obligation to do something for the next generation". And repeating the same line twice, "it is that fundamental belief I am my brothers keeper, I am my sisters keeper that makes this country work". Later he claimed that he will end our dependence on foreign oil within 10 years by investing 150billion dollars into energy. Yikes 150 billion!?! But he is prepared to explain how to pay for it all, "many of thse plans will cost money which is why ive laid out how to pay for them all"..."by closing corporate loopholes." I'm guessing "closing loopholes" means confiscating a companies earned profits to redistribute.

Ichor, I think this entire thread only shows that you, and a lot of other people on here, suffer from huge confirmation bias'. You here what you want to hear, what you expect to hear... and block out the rest. Not objective at all.

Where was the mentioning of Obama's plans to cut the capital gains tax for small business owners? Or cutting taxes for 90% of Americans? Or cutting programs that don't work to save money, so taxes don't have to be raised and bonds don't have to be sold? About Obama's remarks that the government isn't the answer for everything. About personal responsibility? About working hard and keeping what you earned?

You didn't mention any of that. You probably ignored it. And either you, or someone else is going to immediately state that those good, positive things are vicious lies to fool people so they can go foward with their evil plans. I'm calling it.

I'm looking forward to an 100% equally critical response from the Republicans convention next week. If I don't see one, you don't deserve to call yourselves Objectivists because you'll give proof that you are evading reality and the proper judgements required to function in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where was the mentioning of Obama's plans to cut the capital gains tax for small business owners? Or cutting taxes for 90% of Americans? Or cutting programs that don't work to save money, so taxes don't have to be raised and bonds don't have to be sold? About Obama's remarks that the government isn't the answer for everything. About personal responsibility? About working hard and keeping what you earned?

Obama has talked consistently about raising taxes on the most productive people in our society. He's also happy to jump on the class warfare bandwagon at the drop of a hat (i.e. McCain is so rich he can't count how many houses he owns....). Based on what Obama has said, if you make more than $250k you're wealthy and you have a target on your back. Also, what politician doesn't talk about cutting programs that don't work? Does it ever actually happen? No. The Republicans don't do it and the Democrats don't do it.

As for the obligatory rhetoric about personal responsibility, where is the policy record that confirms this is more than just another hollow speech? The man is a statist, and to claim that he isn't is to disregard reality. McCain is a statist as well, he just emphasizes different aspects of statism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where was the mentioning of Obama's plans to cut the capital gains tax for small business owners? Or cutting taxes for 90% of Americans?
Larry Kudlow was saying that if you reduce or eliminate capital gains tax for investment in new or small business, money will flow toward these risky investments rather than to stable companies that have a proven track record. Why would you support a policy like this? As for cutting taxes to 90% of Americans, do you not realize that this money is first to be taken from the remaining 10%? What Obama is proposing is nothing more than a huge transfer of wealth from one group to another.
About working hard and keeping what you earned?
Apparently, this doesn't apply to that 10% now does it.

I'm looking forward to an 100% equally critical response from the Republicans convention next week. If I don't see one, you don't deserve to call yourselves Objectivists because you'll give proof that you are evading reality and the proper judgements required to function in it.
I may have missed it, but did you post a critical response to the democratic convention? Or is it just everyone else that has to be objective?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or is it just everyone else that has to be objective?
Here's the bottom line: <sarcasm>if one spouts Harvard-sponsored ideas unthinkingly, one can excused; but, if one spouts Objectivist ideas unthinkingly, one is held to be a retard. Double standard? No, not really, it's simply obvious that professors know what they're talking about.</sarcasm>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ichor, I think this entire thread only shows that you, and a lot of other people on here, suffer from huge confirmation bias'. You here what you want to hear, what you expect to hear... and block out the rest. Not objective at all.

Where was the mentioning of Obama's plans to cut the capital gains tax for small business owners? Or cutting taxes for 90% of Americans? Or cutting programs that don't work to save money, so taxes don't have to be raised and bonds don't have to be sold? About Obama's remarks that the government isn't the answer for everything. About personal responsibility? About working hard and keeping what you earned?

You didn't mention any of that. You probably ignored it. And either you, or someone else is going to immediately state that those good, positive things are vicious lies to fool people so they can go foward with their evil plans. I'm calling it.

In my own personal notes I took during his speech I actually did take notice of a lot of those things. At one point he stated "individual responsibility is the sole of Americas promise". But so what? This single line when taken into context with the whole of the rest of his campaign is like some kind of bad joke. If I had included that in my earlier post, it would have been followed by a simple "lol".

I am not unwilling to consider that some of the things Obama could introduce would be not that bad. Especially in the case of cutting taxes for the middle class. Here is another example, at one point he mentioned something like "don't tell me we can't uphold the 2nd amendment and at the same time keep AK47's out of the hands of criminals." Ok, that seems entirely reasonable. People have the right to bear arms, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. However that is a very marginal issue in his political goals as a whole. His general idea seems to be pulling a Carter and just falling somewhere in the middle. Instead of making a firm stance on national defense he wants to return to Afghanistan. So kinda sorta remaining at war, but not really only, with a small relatively harmless country.

I could have added these relatively inconsequential things, but they are redundant. It just shows him being a middle of the road appeaser, or a confused hypocrite which has been shown over and over for months now. The reason I made this thread was because I thought it would be fun if some of the boards posters were going to be watching the DNC they could discuss what was happening as it happened.

I'm looking forward to an 100% equally critical response from the Republicans convention next week. If I don't see one, you don't deserve to call yourselves Objectivists because you'll give proof that you are evading reality and the proper judgements required to function in it.

I absolutely wouldn't mind doing the same for the RNC and had planned to, but thanks for the vote of confidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×