To me, that's the fundamental difference between the current Right and Left in this country.* It is well-said in this editorial: http://pjmedia.com/blog/romney-is-no-savior-and-thats-the-point/?singlepage=true *I still don't understand the idolization of Reagan by the Right.
Ah yes, pjmedia, do they still have that male prostitute on staff? The one who printed verbatim RNC press releases as "news" and was praised by Sean Hannity, before he got busted peddling his tail? I have faith in myself, thank you. I can decide if/when to have a child. Decide which person I want to marry. What books to read. Whether or not to serve in the military. I don't need men to tell my doctor what script to read to me, or force a doctor shove a probe into my vagina, or pass a Constitutional amendment that says I forever have fewer rights, or censor books, or say that they want to ban LGBT people from serving because they think our military is too fragile to deal with a lesbian in the room. I have faith in intelligence and reason. I don't need a revealed truth telling me that all modern science is wrong and that 3000 year old myths need to be taught in science class. I don't need the Koch brothers hirelings telling me all the evidence considered by climate scientists is wrong. I have faith in the ability of people to make judgments. I don't need voter suppression to make sure that only the "right" people cast ballots.
Unlike ABC/NBC/NYT/etc. coordinating "news" with the DNC? I assume you still remember the JournoList, right? Attack the messenger. I understand that the wheels are coming off the Obama bus, but reading nonsense like the above is just ridiculous. BTW, what about that vote fraud that "never happens". Even Dems running for Congress now get busted for voting in multiple states. Cheaters!
Wishful thinking. The Obama "bus" is as strong as ever. Get used to 4 more years in this country that your party likes to claim is falling apart.
Sweet. You and I agree on most of the above. Do you really think I want to limit your personal rights? Please don't lump a bunch of socially conservative bullshit that wasn't written in the article into the debate. Since you think people should be left alone and treated equally (which I agree with), do you believe we should be forced to purchase health insurance? That we should pay different tax rates? That we be forced to subsidize lifestyles with which we disapprove? That we not have the choice of using our tax dollars for schools we choose, rather than schools the government tells us to fund? I think the government should be as small as possible, especially the Federal Government. The Constitution is a good start. Nowhere in that document does it say you--as a female or a gay person--is not equal in every way, shape and form. It's the government that you want to further grow and intrude on our day-to-day lives that have dictated that. Why not get them out of the way? Is it the government's business who you should marry? Why is the government even involved? Should the government decide what you do with your body? Then why do they wish to control the Nation's healthcare? I think the rights denied you that I have are bullshit. I think the best way to ensure that no favorites are played is to get government out of the picture. Where they get to decide equality, they also get to decide who wins or loses. It's best to limit their influence in our lives as much as possible.
That is well-written propaganda, and in audio form will convince most listeners with its sound bytes. Some readers, though, will notice that nowhere do you attempt to convince them of the causal connection between decreased government power (i.e. increased corporate power) and a liberalization of American cultural norms. Ir could easily go the opposite direction. There is no reason to believe that smaller government would make Crandc's life easier.
Legit questions, maxie, and at least you showed thought. Actually no, I don't like the health care plan, which was originally the Republican plan, to purchase private health insurance. It means we are paying for their profit and CEO salaries. I'd much rather have real national health. I'm not sure what you mean by subsidize lifestyles so can't answer that. Yes, I do think we should pay different tax rates. It's called noblesse oblige - position carries responsibility. As for school choice, it becomes elite private schools for the rich, religious propaganda for the middle class, and shit schools for the poor. I'd far rather have good schools, it is possible, and I'd willlingly pay for it. I think our fundamental difference, maxie, is that you see individual. Alone. I see individual rights (reproductive choice, marriage, et al, and yes, even smoking pot in private) but I also believe, absolutely and firmly, that we are NOT in this alone. That we ARE part of a community that is not just ourselves or our immediate family. It's the world. It's all people and all species. I mean, I'm past menopause, OK? I'm not getting pregnant. But I feel very deeply denial of reproductive choice. I feel the horror and fear of a woman forced to carry a pregnancy to term. And I know it also impacts me because of what it says about attitudes towards and status of women as a whole. That's just one example. I feel that it's not enough for me to have really good health insurance, which I do, through my job. I feel I benefit when everyone has good health care and prenatal care and good food and access to healthy exercise so they don't get as sick to start with. I could go on but I think you see the point. We are just coming from a different place. Sadly most of the so-called libertarians, like Ron and Rand Paul, talk about small government and personal freedom for straight white males. It's not small government if you monitor my body parts! And incidentally, it's why I'm a socialist, and btw Obama is most definitely not!
I would add one more slight clarification. Believe it or not, I too believe that we're in it together, but I first look to family, then friends, then community and lastly to the government. In other words, government should be the last resort, not the first. Also, I believe in a progressive income tax, but I was just bringing it up in terms of being treated equally.
I missed the straight white males part of their speeches. I think this is something you are making up, sorry to say.
They spoke out against non-traditional marriage (straight) they spoke out about protecting fetuses (male) and I don't think they have spoken out in support of voter suppression (white)
Pretty much 100% incorrect. Paul thinks marriage is a religious issue, and that government shouldn't be involved at all. Pretty much my views as well. I don't care if gays marry, and since the gov't has interjected itself into marriage, it is no longer a religious entity. Hence, gays should be allowed to get married, IMO. [video=youtube;QGaBAb_oS84]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGaBAb_oS84[/video]
Marriage is civil law in the US. Religious bodies may bless/perform if they choose but it is totally unnecessary; the legality of marriage is based on the license issued by civil authorities. I agree government should stay out of religion. The corrollary is religion should stay out of government. Clergy can decide whose marriages to bless. They have no right to decide civil law on whose marriages are legal. Ron and Rand Paul are for outlawing abortion in all cases. Interestingly, Ayn Rand, who was decidedly NOT a feminist, was at least consistent, she saw birth control and abortion as issues of personal freedom the state should stay out of. Not so her followers (including Paul Ryan). It's not small government if you want the state to monitor every pregnancy. It's not small government if you want the state to decide whose love is worthy of respect and whose is not.
