anaconda
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 19,403
What a ridiculous tool she is. She has no idea how silly she sounds to people who've had econ 1A & 1B.
Jon Stewart brings up Ron Paul
- Thread starter nedomedo
- Start date
What a ridiculous tool she is. She has no idea how silly she sounds to people who've had econ 1A & 1B.
anaconda
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 19,403
Not endorse. BUT I could see him voting for Ron, going public with it, and working it into his show with a grand display of chastisement for both the Republican & Democratic establishments.
Cyberbrain
Member
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2011
- Messages
- 249
But guys, guys you're missing the point. Under Ron Paul... WE WILL HAVE NO FUTURE!! Reality will cease to exist! Our children will be launched into the void! Won't you double your taxes, for the children?
GreenBulldog
Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2011
- Messages
- 231
There'll be a future. We'll have to go through some pain first though.
When we default, what will come out of the ashes? Before Ron Paul, I would have said socialism led by super-liberal (socialist, basically) that you see on OWS. Now I say we'll return to the principles this country was founded on. We have a tradition of freedom made by our founding fathers and their message have been revived by Ron Paul.
But damn. Having to argue with government brainwashed people is tiring. How do I sleep at night with all the pent-up frustration?
GreenBulldog
Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2011
- Messages
- 231
That's part of the problem: Taking econ 1A & 1B in Keynsian-government-run schools.
Unfortunately, not many take courses at MisesU
Sunstruck-Eden
Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 368
"Government is what we do together"
Then you are an accessory to Rape Mrs. Warren. The government fucks me at least once a year with income taxes that I get nothing from. She's obviously never heard of a usage tax, like you know the tax on gasoline or local taxes for roads.
She is so dependent on the government that she can't even look back 30 years ago and see how public schools existed and how since then the schooling has only gotten worse.
Then you are an accessory to Rape Mrs. Warren. The government fucks me at least once a year with income taxes that I get nothing from. She's obviously never heard of a usage tax, like you know the tax on gasoline or local taxes for roads.
She is so dependent on the government that she can't even look back 30 years ago and see how public schools existed and how since then the schooling has only gotten worse.
She didnt actually answer or respond to any of Stewart's questions. Not a single one. Her "answer" always reverted back to something unrelated to the question with a heavy dose of emotional appeal. Im glad so many are able to see thru her absurd claim that schools, roads and bridges would disappear if we don't continue shoveling trillions into taxation to the FEDERAL government. She's definitely one of the types that ignores state governments because they don't fit her globalist world view. Ive liked some things about Warren in the past but she does appear to be turning into the typical liberal politician now.
KingNothing
Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2011
- Messages
- 6,662
Warren isn't evil, I don't think. Her intentions, as Jon Stewart mentioned at the end, seem ridiculously pure. If every Democrat in politics, if every government worker and if everyone even associated with public "service" were more like her, things probably wouldn't stink as much as they do now.
If you sense that a big, hairy "but" is coming... you're right.
...but well-intentioned people like her are trying to make apples fall up. Human nature is human nature, and economic law is economic law. As Friedman said, spending one person's money on projects for a third person is always going to be inefficient. Even with good intentions and excellent managerial skills, it's impossible to get beyond that. In that regard, the Founders had the right idea - push government down to the most local level possible where the people heavily invested in a project are the ones who will reap the fruits of success or bear the burden of failure. The federal government was never intended to do the things we currently ask of it, and basic laws of nature make waste and graft a certainty.
If you sense that a big, hairy "but" is coming... you're right.
...but well-intentioned people like her are trying to make apples fall up. Human nature is human nature, and economic law is economic law. As Friedman said, spending one person's money on projects for a third person is always going to be inefficient. Even with good intentions and excellent managerial skills, it's impossible to get beyond that. In that regard, the Founders had the right idea - push government down to the most local level possible where the people heavily invested in a project are the ones who will reap the fruits of success or bear the burden of failure. The federal government was never intended to do the things we currently ask of it, and basic laws of nature make waste and graft a certainty.
Last edited:
voteliberty
Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2011
- Messages
- 12
Elizabeth Warren. Stewart brings up Ron's position, take the government out of regulating, therefore money is out of politics, she goes on the "WHO WILL BUILD OUR BRIDGES, SCHOOLS, AND ROADS?" excuse.
Ah, yes.. Bridges, schools, and roads- definitely gleaming bright spots of the United States Government. I mean just check out the test scores, potholes, and bridge stress fractures.
Kluge
Member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2011
- Messages
- 2,416
In my opinion, she's like Al Franken--she talks a good game (though I found her to come off as very phony during the Stewart interview), and will rally behind a few major points that progressives love...then when it comes to important issues, like say, war with Iran--she's toeing the line. Franken voted for NDAA then reversed it when he got a lot of shit about it. Warren has already wavered and said that she'd consider voting for war with Iran.
Just like those who voted for war with Iraq (a few exceptions--like that congressman who's sending apology letters to all of his constituents), I think anyone who votes for war with Iran are evil. And people like Warren and Franken are not stupid, they know exactly what they're voting for and why--and I see nothing to indicate that either one of them would have enough of a backbone to vote or speak out against it when the time comes.
That said, I don't think she'll be significantly different than Scott Walker, except that progressives have blind adoration for her. Which means that if she wins, she'll likely be there for a long time, like Pelosi.
Exactly.
It`s exactly those good intentions that are causing the problem. This need of helping each other springing from empathy is very human, but many fall in this trap. It takes self control to not let empathy get the best of you. Only reason can balance things out.
Women, due to higher Oxytocin levels are little more empathetic than men so there`s even stronger will of wanting to help one out. The strong maternal instinct of providing for the kids plays is prime reason for these elevated levels.
"As Friedman said, spending one person's money on projects for a third person is always going to be inefficient."
Or in other words: "Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish you feed him for a lifetime."
buck000
Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2007
- Messages
- 613
I'm not convinced that Jon Stewart agrees with Ron Paul's position, but that he understands that viewpoint and says it resonates with a lot of people.
I think, ideologically, Stewart is much closer to Warren than to Dr. Paul, although he does respect Dr. Paul for his consistency and honesty.
I think Warren is dangerously well-intentioned. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Stewart feels the same way about Dr. Paul.
I think, ideologically, Stewart is much closer to Warren than to Dr. Paul, although he does respect Dr. Paul for his consistency and honesty.
I think Warren is dangerously well-intentioned. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Stewart feels the same way about Dr. Paul.
Kluge
Member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2011
- Messages
- 2,416
So you think she's being sincere too? Really? You think she's so daft that she doesn't realize that we don't have the money to do any of this bullshit she allegedly wants? You think that women like Hillary, Pelosi, Madeleine Albright and others are empathetic people because they're female?
These are people, who happen to be female, who vote for unnecessary war, sanctions, support throwing those who use medical MJ in prison...and they're suspected of having "good intentions?"
I don't understand the logic. Warren will vote for wars, expanding the police state, she will vote for sanctions and she will write bills to try to pass progressive "helpy" bills knowing full well that they will be shot down, due to a lack of money....and that lack of money will be because of what she knowingly voted for, along with the deaths of innocent civilians in foreign lands.
People who underestimate the capability women have to be duplicitous and as evil as men have bought into a few too many fairy tales.
What a freaking lefty audience. I'm wondering if John Stewart like all liberal journalists thinks he is being objective and that his audience is politically versatile.
By the way I think Stewart doesn't believe government can suddenly be good, I'm pretty sure he is not even half as naive as that professor. I do think RP with whom he can identify (since RP is an intellectual and anti-war) has changed his mind to some degree. But it will take much much more to make him a libertarian. Although unlikely, but it can happen.
By the way I think Stewart doesn't believe government can suddenly be good, I'm pretty sure he is not even half as naive as that professor. I do think RP with whom he can identify (since RP is an intellectual and anti-war) has changed his mind to some degree. But it will take much much more to make him a libertarian. Although unlikely, but it can happen.
DerailingDaTrain
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2011
- Messages
- 2,738
As a regular watcher of the show (EVERY episode and the Colbert Report too) I can tell you guys that Jon Stewart doesn't like Obama because he lied about everything he would do and has accomplished nothing (especially the wars), thinks a lot of Dems are stupid, feels that many Republicans are stupid, and he most definitely agrees with Ron Paul on economics and foreign policy. The issues he does have with RP are so insignificant and if you guys don't believe me then I HIGHLY suggest you watch the two times he has had Judge Napolitano on the show which I rank as being the best two interviews I have ever seen in the show's history (the crowd actually cheers for the Judge many times in both interviews and Jon agrees with him on much of what he says). Personally, I don't care that Colbert and Stewart make a joke about Ron Paul once in a while because I know that the reason he isn't mentioned daily is because their job is to make fun of politicians for saying and doing stupid things and I feel glad when he isn't shown and laughed at.
Last edited:
Look. Communism was built by people who honestly believed in strong gov intervention and socialist values. Some believed in it so strongly, they were ready to give their life for it just to advance the cause.
If I were to play devil`s advocate here, I`ll say something like:
Hey, social welfare is good because we have to help everyone, all the needy, all the poor, or the helpless and everyone who can`t help themselves. The rich are already rich and can afford to pay more taxes to help the poor. If they refuse to do so is because they`re greedy bastards and don`t care and have no feelings.
We must all do like Robin Hood, steal from the rich and give to the poor and the needy. We must create parks, bridges, aqua parks, moon resorts where they can have sex in space `n so on.
It`s the Christian thing to do right? Love thy neighbor? So why not increase taxes a lot and create all these beautiful government programs like Obama care and who cares if we`re trillions of dollars in debt, world will keep buying or debt, there`s even talk of deflation. Surely we can`t let people without food stamps and all that, right? We just have to generate enough economic growth and all will be fine. We just have to bring back all those jobs from overseas and stimulate economy with another round of quantitative easing. That should do the trick.
Those evil libertarians want to throw us back in the wild west, where there was total chaos and band of marauders were running wild. We must do all we can to increase gov power.
Also, did you say something about wars? Well, didn`t you know those are needed so that we can keep world buying the dollars to sustain the system? It`s also good right? Because those states are evil anyways. They lack human rights. Heard they hang people on the streets in Iran and don`t allow gay rights. I don`t see the problem with taking them out, after all, we would just spread our democracy and bring human rights to those poor folks who have been suppressed for so long.
Last edited:
Similar threads
