utabintarbo
-
Posts
252 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by utabintarbo
-
-
The difference, though, is that the clause, and other parts of the Constitution, mention a right to property, so a right to healthcare would violate that right... unless you can make some bogus argument that your property is yours except when the government wants it, then however much the government asks for, that amount is no longer your property. Does the Constitution have anything to say about this?
Eminent Domain?
-
And what's your proposed solution? It seems that you plan to vote in the man who has unequivocally committed to raising taxes so that the clowns in Washington can just keep on spending.
And as important is the rationalization necessary to make doing so seem like The Right Thing.
-
...
So IF your strategy is to encourage gridlock in the hopes that the Rs will grow a spine when they are bickering, vote for McCain/Palin. The congress will almost certainly remain Democrat.
This is my analysis as well, and (IMO) will likely result in the least harm done. It may also serve as a repudiation of Obama's overt socialism (for maybe ten minutes, anyway
). -
Fundamentally they are very close. However, you might get a little less statism with McCain and a Democrat congress than with Obama and a Democrat congress.
Not to mention the overt socialism that comes with Obama.
-
Some of this may be age-related. As I've grown older, my sleep has taken a hit.
My father eventually evolved into a 3 on, 3 off sleeper. This drove Mom nuts.
-
...
The ruling says Wal-Mart has to issue vouchers accepted at all other supermarkets as well. There's no word on what happens to the employee discount. I do sonder is this isn't an anti Wal-Mart law. I'm pretty sure employees at the other big supermarket chains like Soriana and Comercial Mexicana also get vouchers exclusive for their stores and affiliates.
Can Wal-Mart just discontinue the practice, rather than issuing vouchers? After all, cash is kinda like a universal voucher, no?
-
...
As an aside, what is the proper word to define a person like Obama? Socialist? Marxist? Welfare statist? Leftist? None of those seem right. Any suggestions?
-
Has Peikoff's strategy of recommending votes for the Dhimmicrats changed with the sudden religious fervor being spouted by Obama and the other drones? The sudden rise of Christian Leftism is very disturbing. My province of Saskatchewan is only now beginning to recover from the socialist ruin inflicted upon it by Tommy Douglas, one of the more famous Christian Leftists that I can think of. We are still saddled with a massive welfare state including that famous Canadian soviet-style socialized medicine.
Is the USA ready for Jimmy Carter v2.0?
Peikoff must be hoping to force an Atlas Shrugged scenario. Or am I missing something?
-
Wow. Nice preemptive insult.
-
Check out what the communists are saying about him. I like that quote by the way. It's one of the reasons I am voting for the man.
If you think this is an honestly held position of his, why does he advocate policies antithetical to that position? Is it cognitive dissonance? Does he not understand how the policies are anti-capitalist? Or was he merely paying lip service to gain votes like yours?
-
If you are counting on he republican to restrain an Obama White House, you can forget it.
If Obama beats McCain and the democrats retain or increase their control over congress, there will be one word you will hear over and over again: mandate. Obama, it will be said, has a mandate for change. How will that manifest itself? Any way he and the dems want it to. Whatever Obama proposes, no matter how far out of the mainstream, will be portrayed as exactly the type of change he ran on and the American people voted for. Any republican opposition will be portrayed as obstructionism or outright defiance of the will of the American people. The left, of course, will not be afraid to play their racist trump card either. Just how much, it will be wondered, of the republican opposition to Obama is nothing more than a desire to see the first black president fail? Is their opposition is really philosophical, or is it just racial? Under that type of pressure, don't expect many republicans to pop their heads up.
In short, I suspect that in the first year or two of an Obama administration, whatever Obama wants, he will likely get.
This is precisely the nightmare scenario I see as a probability. This will essentially transform "Objectivists for Obama" into " Objectivists for Socialism". Who'd'a thunk it?!?
No, the way I see it, we should place our bets on a divided government over a rubber-stamp Democratic government. This isn't 1993-94. We can't count on the Democrats to put any kind of restraints on their "Rock Star" given the deep partisan divisions that have developed since the Great Republican Reformation.
-
When he does it's very likely the GOP will oppose him for two reasons 1) partisan grounds (which is a pretty bad reason, but you can count on it) and 2) some Republicans still favor smaller, limited government.
Partisan grounds, though, are the most important reason. The GOP would largely support a president McCain in almost everything for the same reason; as it supported Bush on his prescription drug governmental expansion. McCain is a big government conservative. he will expand the powers of government, too, but in a more modest fashion than Obama. But he'll do it nearly unopposed. democrats would press him for even more, if they press him for anything. So with Obama as president there is more oppposition in the right direction. it may even work.
Given that the Congress and Senate are already Democratic majorities, and that those majorities are predicted to strengthen, I am not sure that GOP backing will be that helpful. If anything, a divided government will allow little to be done, and that, generally, is the best scenario (IMHO).
I am loathe to give a Democratic Congress to Obama to do with as he sees fit. Given the charismatic aura (reminiscent of JFK) surrounding him, he will likely do a lot of damage. The kind of damage that builds institutional bureaucracies that are difficult (at best) to undo.
-
Given Barack Obama's well-known positions on politico-economic matters (higher taxes, nationalized/guaranteed healthcare, greater environmental regulation, expanded welfare state), and his propensity for blatant hypocrisy, I find it difficult to separate his from any other pragmatic (ie. creeping) socialist doctrine. And given his recent pronouncements on the role of religious groups in government, it seems the conclusions of the DIM hypothesis (as I understand it) are being turned on its head. I mean, how can intellectually honest Objectivists support this guy with a straight face?
Like the Christian leaders who supported the formation of the state of Israel, hoping it would speed the Armageddon/Rapture/Second Coming/End of Days (whatever), are Objectivists trying to "force" an "Atlas Shrugged" scenario?
-
...
If he were to choose Rudy Giuliani, I think it likely large numbers of Republicans wouldn't vote at all. Likewise if he chooses a Democrat, as many pundits fantasize about. If he picks a religious-right conservative, few Democrats will vote for him; particularly few Hillary supporters would vote for him. His best bet would be a well-known "moderate" Republican.
...
Chuck Hegel?
-
Yeah, as sick as those people are, I doubt they'd do something like that that would kill the kids.
Though that may be the best thing for the kids.
-
How on Earth could the author judge whether Rand exhibited those traits if he hadn't ever met her in person?
You assume that the author is honest. Perhaps this assumption is not valid.
-
I believe he is, um, deceased.
That may well be the case. I was interested in details on the interval between WXYT/WWJ and his present situation, whatever that may be.
skap35, please ignore this if it is uncomfortable. Thanks.
-
I, too, was a listener.
Whatever happened to him after Detroit/WWJ?
-
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."
- Alexis de Tocqueville
-
Interesting that China, a former communist country, has the highest percentage of pro-market people in the world.
I wonder if they would be so supportive if all the ramifications of a free market were made clear ie. no social safety net-type stuff.
And I'm not sure China can really be called a "former" communist country....
-
I think my sarcasm on the "congratulations" comment did not translate. I shall endeavour to be more explicit in the future.
I still think the reaction was a symptom of the current PC-ified culture. I doubt the reaction would have been nearly as shrill (if any, beyond a failing grade) when I was in HS (late 70's).
-
Welcome to you, and Thanks!
-
...
Also, I seem to recall the name R Kolker from time spent on a.p.o and h.p.o.m. Are you the same person?
There can be no other!
At least, nobody else would admit to it.
-
I'd be interested in hearing what people have to say about the following issue in the news (if I dare call CNN news):
From TFA:
"Emilio is on Medicaid, which usually doesn't pay for all hospital charges. The hospital's spokesman said that he doesn't know how much it's costing the hospital to keep Emilio alive, but that cost was not a consideration in the hospital's decision."
Why is cost not a consideration? I'm not saying it should be the only, or even necessarily a major consideration, but it definitely should be a factor. Especially when community aid is playing a (rather large) role.
2008 Presidential Thread
in US Elections 2004/2008/2012/2016
Posted
After much thought, I am coming around to the same conclusion - that an Obama presidency may be strategically better, though tactically disastrous.
This year's scenario reminds one of the situation in 1976:
I can't bring myself to vote for him, but it may just work out to be a transitional thing.
I am an optimist, mostly.