GOP Nominee 2012 - Who Will It Be?, Pt. 4 - Page 20 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:37 PM   #381
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoMac

I know. It's just BVS being BVS, the Interference watchdog.
yes, thank god we have you.
__________________

BVS is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 02:38 PM   #382
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,321
Local Time: 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
I'm not doing anything, I just thought it was incredibly inappropriate.
You're doing exactly what I'm complaining about and drawing a false conclusion based upon some biased evidence! You immediately linked 'butthurt' to gay sex when in fact such a term is used widely, directed towards both males and females. Slightly mean/aggressive way of telling somebody to get over it? Absolutely. But to draw the conclusion that LuckyNumber7 is using homophobic slurs to get his point across because one out of ten uses of that term might be homophobic is just inaccurate, unfair, and wrong.

And I absolutely take that as a personal insult. You apparently know nothing of me, and I don't know why you'd go out on a stretch to call me homophobic.
__________________

LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-14-2012, 02:39 PM   #383
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,321
Local Time: 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Time to let this one drop, guys; it's taking the thread way off course.



p.s. "butthurt" has been used dozens of times before on Interference (do a search) by posters of all genders and political persuasions; this is the first time I've ever seen anyone object to it.
Sorry, I was in the middle of writing the last response before this came up.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-14-2012, 02:41 PM   #384
Self-righteous bullshitter
 
BoMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Soviet Canuckistan — Socialist paradise
Posts: 16,900
Local Time: 02:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
yes, thank god we have you.
Of course, because I'm the ONLY one on this board who thinks that.
__________________

BoMac is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 02:46 PM   #385
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
p.s. "butthurt" has been used dozens of times before on Interference (do a search) by posters of all genders and political persuasions; this is the first time I've ever seen anyone object to it.
This is true, I just can't ever remember it being used specifically towards a poster, especially one that didn't deserve it.
BVS is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:22 PM   #386
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 01:52 AM
Butthurt is in no way homophobic, at least in any context I've seen it used (scores of times). It's a common Internet expression.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:24 PM   #387
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Yeah, that article isn't biased one bit. Read the opening statement and get back to me. "nut-job Libertarian views". Yes, I believe in Libertarian ideology. Clearly whoever wrote that blog does not. That's established in the first paragraph. Furthermore, the writer continues on about 'us left-wing types'. I'm not a 'left-wing type'. I'm an independent Libertarian with socially liberal and economically conservative viewpoints.

Yes, Ron Paul is absolutely extreme. I understand that. But the crap flowing through that blog is just full of crap. It's America's favorite thing to mock or skew Ron Paul's views in order to devalue him.

But I mean we can break it down point by point:

1. Civil Rights Act - Ron Paul's case on repealing it. You don't actually think he'd be successful on something like that, do you? He's merely making a point that you can't force morality on somebody. You can't control them. Ron Paul has always been like that. Did you even read the link provided in that very blog?

2. American Disabilities Act

Okay I'm not going to go point to point here because I'll be saying the same thing. He's not some discriminatory animal like this article is trying to paste him as. If you bother to read any of the logic, he's about stripping down the government. He's an absolute extremist. He's not against the ADA because he doesn't like disabled people. He's against the ADA because it's telling people what they can and cannot do.

God, again. Did you even watch the video to decide for yourself, or did you just read the paragraph and accept everything it said and look at Paul with a dirty look? He promotes individual liberty. 'If a business chooses to mistreat its customers... no. Don't go. Boycott them'. It's fundamental thinking, where you have the freedom to choose morality. If you don't, others have the freedom to judge you.

Yes, it's extremist thinking. No, it would not see the light of day through Congress. That's just Ron Paul being Ron Paul. Being emphatic about his views.

This article paints the picture of Ron Paul as some Nazi. It's a joke. It refuses to tell the whole picture, or to see it from both sides. I can see it from both sides. I know Ron Paul is by no means ideal or perfect. There's not enough balance in his ideology. It's too extreme. But come on, I continue to read more and more from that page and it's just worse and worse. It concluded that he thinks 'Global Warming is a hoax'. Small conclusion for a deep thought, because that certainly does not tell the whole story of his viewpoint on Global Warming.

But more importantly, all of this is a bunch of shit because if you ask Ron Paul, he'll tell you that he's in favor of state's rights more than anything else. Cases like abortion, which Ron Paul is against, are cases where Ron Paul will say (and has said) that you should let the states decide.

The more that is said in that article, the more that continues to be ignored. He's against seat belts. Why? Why would somebody be against something that only saves lives? WHY WOULD YOU BUY A CAR WITHOUT SEAT BELTS? He's not against seat belts for God's sake. He's against the government telling us we cannot have a car without seat belts. Oh look. The article calls him homophobic. Yet the links provided in the same article state that he's for gay rights. And then the next point calls him a racist, yet the same article that was cited on the previous point clearly states that he was not.
Here's my problem with Ron Paul: he thinks state and local governments know everything, when they've proven time and time again that they can be just as fucked up as any of the worst decisions made on a national level. There are some issues where the states shouldn't be allowed to recklessly throw away laws for the sake of "individual rights."
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:35 PM   #388
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
Butthurt is in no way homophobic, at least in any context I've seen it used (scores of times). It's a common Internet expression.
Well I don't want to get this thread further off topic, and maybe it's a conversation for another day, but just because it's intent is not homophobic or it's a common internet expression does that mean it's not homophobic? It's origins are. To me it's like 'fag', you can argue all you want that your intent is harmless and you use it just like you do the word 'idiot', but the origins as to why 'fag' is used in a deragatory way are homophobic.
BVS is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:35 PM   #389
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,321
Local Time: 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
Here's my problem with Ron Paul: he thinks state and local governments know everything, when they've proven time and time again that they can be just as fucked up as any of the worst decisions made on a national level. There are some issues where the states shouldn't be allowed to recklessly throw away laws for the sake of "individual rights."
I think that's a fair conclusion with some thought put into it, and it's certainly a better argument than calling him a homophobic, racist, prejudiced, discriminatory nut who is out to ruin our country. All of those points posted were merely superficial things where one can be quick to draw an unfair conclusion.

The reason why I'm a fan of bringing the power from the national level to the state level is really because I feel as though it brings more power to the people. We elect our representatives to represent us on a federal level. That rarely ever happens, and I feel as though things become less of a game when you bring something like that more to a localized level, and it's easier to hold people accountable. Not to mention the fact that the media has less control of what goes on among all of this (I hate the media).
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:42 PM   #390
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 01:52 AM
In addition to what PhilsFan said, I have always taken issue with Ron Paul trying to paint himself as a libertarian, when in fact, he is a Republican, he caucuses with the Republicans, votes with them consistently and holds a number of views that would be totally contrary to basic libertarian principles.

His argument for states' rights is not a libertarian argument - it is a question of federalism. A true libertarian would not say to leave abortion rights to the states, because a true libertarian would not see any state encroachment on individual liberty as acceptable. (I picked abortion as the easy one, but you can go down the list of many of his states' rights initiatives and make the same type of argument.)

As an aside I'm also tired of the Tea Party being called the Tea Party - they are Republicans and I am not sure how the branding war was lost there. They vote like Republicans, for Republicans and are Republicans until such a time as they decide to break away and form an independent, third party. Until then, they're the GOP and they should be made to own it.
anitram is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:52 PM   #391
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 09:52 PM
some of these arguments sound good in principle,
and because there is a problem on one level, it does not always follow that a better solution is always found some where else.

if an unreasonable group wanted to take over and impose their views on others, would it be easier to do that on a small local level or a large national level?
deep is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:53 PM   #392
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post

The reason why I'm a fan of bringing the power from the national level to the state level is really because I feel as though it brings more power to the people.
I think this can be argued both ways. Let's take the ADA for example. If you have no ADA what is the incentive for a company to make the accomadations necessary for a disabled employee?

As a person in a wheelchair I can't fit into certain spaces, can't use certain facilities, I can't use certain elevators and the list goes on and on. Now I'm more qualified than you for the position of manager, but why would the company hire me? It will cost them to make modification to their office building.

So then that person stays unemployed just because they are in a wheelchair?

But wait now that person who is completely willing and able to work is collecting a check from the government? But Ron is against that as well, so what is his solution? Leave it up to the state? What's the state's motivator to do anything about it? And then what happens when you cross state borders, there is no uniform code?

This can be applied to civil rights, education, etc.

Libertarianism sounds good in theory, but cannot be implemented in the real world. It relies too much on people, organizations and corporations acting outside of their own interests.


Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post

Not to mention the fact that the media has less control of what goes on among all of this (I hate the media).
It's easy to blame or demonize "media", but really what does that mean? Does local media not count? Are they powerless, because last time I checked most of them are owned and ran by national affilates. I think one has to be careful when blaming "media" because there are plenty of mediums that are filled with great information and information is detrimental.
BVS is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:54 PM   #393
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 01:52 AM
"Libertarians" often like to pull that trick of talking about how they want to strip the federal government of power to give more power to the people and their individual rights, when in reality they want states to be allowed to ban women's rights, gay's rights, minority's rights, etc.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:56 PM   #394
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Well I don't want to get this thread further off topic, and maybe it's a conversation for another day, but just because it's intent is not homophobic or it's a common internet expression does that mean it's not homophobic? It's origins are. To me it's like 'fag', you can argue all you want that your intent is harmless and you use it just like you do the word 'idiot', but the origins as to why 'fag' is used in a deragatory way are homophobic.
This word is not "fag," sorry. I feel like younger people sort of have a better grasp of this. Its origins never had anything to do with homophobia. And I say this as someone who uses neither word.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:56 PM   #395
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,321
Local Time: 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
In addition to what PhilsFan said, I have always taken issue with Ron Paul trying to paint himself as a libertarian, when in fact, he is a Republican, he caucuses with the Republicans, votes with them consistently and holds a number of views that would be totally contrary to basic libertarian principles.

His argument for states' rights is not a libertarian argument - it is a question of federalism. A true libertarian would not say to leave abortion rights to the states, because a true libertarian would not see any state encroachment on individual liberty as acceptable. (I picked abortion as the easy one, but you can go down the list of many of his states' rights initiatives and make the same type of argument.)
There are in fact two types of Libertarians. The Libertarian Party also recognizes this, with a conservative and a liberal wing. Ron Paul was, of course, on the conservative wing in the Libertarian Party with his time there.

I think it's a bit ridiculous that you're questioning Ron Paul's credibility as a Libertarian. The man is as economically conservative as they get (total bare-bone laissez-faire economics), and totally socially liberal. He is all for individual rights of all people, even if he has a different approach on that (which meshes with his limited government viewpoints). If he were 'not a Libertarian' but actually just a straight up Republican as you say, he wouldn't be the black sheep that the Republican Party has created out of him. What viewpoints of his are contradictory to Libertarian ideology? He's absolutely a Libertarian. An absolutely extreme Libertarian.

He says things like 'leave abortion to the states rights' when he's prompted such a question at a Republican debate. If one were to ask Ron Paul what he believes, he would tell you 'abortion is wrong'. But Ron Paul wants to give the decision to the people to decide morality. He doesn't want to tell people what they can and cannot do. It appeases both Republicans and Democrats with states rights on something like abortion, that will never go away. That's not his way of slipping in an 'illegal abortion' clause to his Libertarian viewpoints. The point is that when you bring something down from a national level to a state level, the voice of the people is more relevant. Ron Paul always encourages the voice of the people. Like I said before, he isn't against the ADA so businesses can maximize benefits (like other Republicans might be), but rather he's for people making the decision themselves to demand that a business will make a place wheelchair accessible.

He's pretty Libertarian if you ask me...
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:59 PM   #396
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 09:52 PM
Paul has his cred in the libertarian movement for a few of his major stands

1. stop the war on drugs, let people do what they want with their own bodies.
2. stop fighting proxy wars for others, only fight to defend our boarders.
3. stop government spending on things that the government should not be doing.


those are just a few, one should not dismiss him or his followers, they have quite bit of influence.
deep is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 03:59 PM   #397
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
There are in fact two types of Libertarians. The Libertarian Party also recognizes this, with a conservative and a liberal wing. Ron Paul was, of course, on the conservative wing in the Libertarian Party with his time there.
By definition this doesn't make sense.
BVS is offline  
Old 03-14-2012, 04:08 PM   #398
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,321
Local Time: 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
I think this can be argued both ways. Let's take the ADA for example. If you have no ADA what is the incentive for a company to make the accomadations necessary for a disabled employee?

As a person in a wheelchair I can't fit into certain spaces, can't use certain facilities, I can't use certain elevators and the list goes on and on. Now I'm more qualified than you for the position of manager, but why would the company hire me? It will cost them to make modification to their office building.

So then that person stays unemployed just because they are in a wheelchair?
And I think this is absolutely a situation where the ideology is spot on but the approach is a bit too extreme. Ron Paul is about the message though. He's not going to be elected barring a miracle. His mission is to establish that ideology and leave that legacy, I presume. Even if he were to be elected, he would never be able to do away with the ADA. But he could absolutely dumb it down. I think it's too extreme to do away with the ADA as a whole because even like Ron Paul says himself: you can't instill morals in people. Like I said, he's not perfect, but something like that is much more of an ideological point than anything else.

Yes, some aspects of Libertarian ideology are flawed. It depends what approach on Libertarianism you're taking. On something like knocking out the federal income tax completely... that might be far-fetched on the microscopic scale but it's not actually flawed thinking, especially if you're diverting the tax rights to the states.

Quote:
It's easy to blame or demonize "media", but really what does that mean? Does local media not count? Are they powerless, because last time I checked most of them are owned and ran by national affilates. I think one has to be careful when blaming "media" because there are plenty of mediums that are filled with great information and information is detrimental.
Local media doesn't count in the same way national media does. National medias have a national agenda. Local medias might have a local agenda, but their influence is not nearly as strong. But you're misunderstanding my hatred of the media. I mean we can go into this deeper and deeper, but I think it's best just left at 'I hate the media'.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-14-2012, 04:16 PM   #399
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,321
Local Time: 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
By definition this doesn't make sense.
Sure it does.

You have left-libertarians and right-libertarians. The term libertarian can be applied in many fashions actually. More than just two.

It's not as cut and dry as a single definition.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-14-2012, 04:17 PM   #400
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
And I think this is absolutely a situation where the ideology is spot on but the approach is a bit too extreme. Ron Paul is about the message though. He's not going to be elected barring a miracle. His mission is to establish that ideology and leave that legacy, I presume. Even if he were to be elected, he would never be able to do away with the ADA.
This is why I don't get Paul and his supporters. What is the point? And how is he getting his message through? Through the media you hate

Surely there is a better way to convey a message, right?

Why run on a platform of theory that never intend to practice?
__________________

BVS is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×