At 1/19/09 05:04 PM, Minarchist wrote:
At 1/19/09 04:40 PM, AKACCMIOF wrote:
At 1/19/09 04:32 PM, Minarchist wrote:
At 1/19/09 03:01 PM, BrianEtrius wrote:
Well, here it is folks. The big one. The time of the year to finally put the guy the majority of America voted for into office, and promptly kicking the old one out.
He's not being kicked out.
No but the Republican party is. The Republican campaign and the Liberal victory was more or less a bitch slap for Bush. A bush slap, if you will.
It's rightly deserved, but we'll soon see that the things we hated about Republicans are the same things we'll hate about Democrats in a couple years.
Speak for yourself.
Not really. Bush: Free market idealogue
Oh please.
Comparitively he is. He is much more in favour of deregulation than Obama.
with no real respect for human rights or civil liberties.
And in what ways on these issues is he different from Obama?
His voiding of human rights in the war in iraq.
Obama: Keynesian idealogue
Bush hasn't stepped in the way of any Keynesian policy.
Errrrm, yes he did. He deregulated majorly, even if not quite to the extent of removing the central bank (something I actually agree with.). It is however a minor point.
who wants to shut down unconstitutional "prisons"
I see you're trying to invoke the Constitution. I see few of Obama's promises that aren't unconstitutional.
Please, raise them.
As for the prisons, it's really a minor issue of human rights compared to the systematic theft and fraud committed by the Fed.
Water boarding is minor in comparison to fraud? Dude, I agree its not right (or will for sake of sticking to relevant points) but that is an over exaggeration and you know it.
and put more emphasis on rebuilding countries instead of destroying their infrastructure
Bush spent about 3 weeks bombing the country and 5 years rebuilding it. I'd say he emphasized on rebuilding, but what do Americans have to show for it? Bankruptcy.
Wow, know anything about what the funding went to in Iraq? It went on the continuation of war, not on the rebuilding of schools, hospitals etc. Whilst he may have been right to overthrow Saddam, he fucked up the end game, make no mistake.
and letting free markets do their work.
The economy is NO WHERE close to being free.
In Iraq it very much is.
But I know your position on economics, so I won't say anymore other than they are ideologically opposed.
I'm glad you know my position on economics. Remember it in a few years when mommy and daddy have to deal with the inflation involved in printing trillions of dollars every year just to cover budget deficits because the guy the White House thinks he can make jobs.
Because thats relevant you mentalist. You remind me of my communist friend who said earlier today how this was the fall of the west and how China would become a shining model nation and how many would see communism as the perfect economic model. You or him may be equally right, but all I want is a country without widespread poverty, where I can sleep safe in the knoweledge that a regulated (if done so pretty badly) market can be fixed by the guy in the white house with his reformist economics.
While I am in favour of local government, it is undeniable that so many major bipartisan nations have not ruined the dollar so to speak, that maybe hell do the right thing.
Hyperinflation is on the extreme end, but there have been very notable instances in history, like pre-Nazi Germany, and currently, like Zimbabwe. Outside of hyperinflating, in 2008 Iceland, once hailed by many liberal economists as having a shining model of welfare schemes, destroyed it's currency, the Icelandic crown, with reckless monetary policy. While we may not end up hyperinflating, you can be SURE the dollar will no longer be the reserve currency in the word.
Iceland's welfare system had little do with it recession, just like how Hitler's healthy diet had little to do with Nazism. And yes, there may be a recession, but it is the nature of capitalism, with freedom coming abuse of freedom, and whilst I may be for the restriction of those who would bring about such events, I doubt such a thing will change. But, more on topic, I doubt it will be Obama's fault when the recession shakes the globe, and I think that his welfare plans shall cushion the blow for the worst off, the ones most in need of protecting, who I am sure would watch their families suffer greatly and feel the blow of poverty under a free market, no matter how much you might say that the birth pangs are worth the child.
But I make you a wager to end all this, for an economic day of judgement is coming. An economolypse if you will, with a quasi socialist in the white house and a deregulator heading for Downing Street. Depending on which of these two cities does better, I shall finnally have my economic ideals. If deregulation works out I will buy you forty beers (or failing that sixty cans of energy drink), but if regulation works out, well, you decide. :P
Now what about his stance on all teh other issues?
