Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greenwald outs the GOP tea-party co-opting:

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    You didn't say you were weighting policies by their likelihood of being passed. I might construe that as a movement of goal posts, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

    Central banking reform is the most important issue to Ron Paul libertarians, and is among the least important to the GOP. Seems like a pretty big difference in economic viewpoints to me, to say nothing of the impact of Fed policy on economic activity itself - which is difficult to overstate.
    Last edited by HalfLotus; February 24, 2010, 13:57.

    Comment


    • #32
      Placed against polices likely to actually happen (if moving from ideological to practical may be moving the posts)...

      Tax reduction across the board.
      Tax reform to a serious extent (flat/fair).
      De-regulation in general.
      Spending cuts (granted, never a GOP reality).
      Reduction in budget for Pentagon.
      Reduction in budget for internal overwatch.

      We can hardly consider "end the fed" to be on a top list of worries/priorities.

      It's kind of like you hold up the most extreme (and unlikely) piece of a platform to proclaim them radicals who are unelectable. Look at the extremes of left-wing economics or right-wing social policy - just as wacky and slightly supported... and yet they exist... so... the edges of policy ideology do not render a worldview invalid or revolutionary.
      Everybody knows...Democracy...One of Us Cannot be Wrong...War...Fanatics

      Comment


      • #33
        We're a long way from ending the Fed, but that viewpoint has made unprecedented progress in the past few years, and that faction of the Tea Party shows no signs of slowing down.

        By contrast, Flat/Fair taxers like Boortz, who is fairly popular here in Georgia, have long since stagnated and become largely irrelevant.

        Comment


        • #34
          Boortz, nor the Fair Tax, are irrelevant.

          Ron Paul supports it (over the current system though he finds tweaking needed to make it ideal).

          There are like 50 co-sponsors in the House and a handful in the Senate.

          It was sidelined this week by the Tea Party, in leu a Flat Tax (that being more easily sellable). It remains an 'optional' faction of the TP and the "tax revolutionaries" (or whatever they are calling this online thing of late).

          Have the social and economic TPs officially split? I dunno... I heard about factions fragmenting.
          Everybody knows...Democracy...One of Us Cannot be Wrong...War...Fanatics

          Comment


          • #35
            50 co-sponsors is pitiful considering how long Flat/Fair have been in the libertarian mainstream. Boortz has been selling it for some 20-odd years. He continues to tread water per usual.

            Dr. Paul's 'Audit the Fed' bill has over 300 co-sponsors has been around for about a fraction of that time.

            Comment


            • #36
              Audit the Fed /= End the Fed

              Nor does it include repealing an Amendment or requiring a supermajority for amendment to the bill itself (HR25*).

              You are moving the goal from Apples (radical endeavors, ending fed) to Oranges (more paperwork, auditing it).
              Everybody knows...Democracy...One of Us Cannot be Wrong...War...Fanatics

              Comment


              • #37
                My point is that the Fed issue has far more momentum as is actually making progress, as opposed to Flat/Fair which are tired old hags.

                Flat/Fair supporters, at least here in Georgia, also tend to be Pentagon/warmongering cheerleaders. They can go to hell imo.

                Comment


                • #38
                  No, you go to hell. See avatar.
                  Everybody knows...Democracy...One of Us Cannot be Wrong...War...Fanatics

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Darius871 View Post
                    Obviously he meant "liberal" in the original laissez-faire sense of the term, not the bastardized yankee version of the term. Read that way his statement makes perfect sense.
                    I think the "bastardized" term is more the result of how people are labeled by conservatives.
                    I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                    - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I think the bastardized term is the result of democrats not wanting to be labeled authoritarian, as per their economic policy. How would hippies like that?

                      It is also the result of a paradox in US politics. We have 2 main parties (we only need 5% to make a 3rd party so don't give me that oppression BS).

                      1. Authoritarian socially, Liberal economically.

                      2. Liberal socially, Authoritarian economically.

                      It's like we cannot liberalize both socially and economically at the same time or a worm-hole will open.
                      Everybody knows...Democracy...One of Us Cannot be Wrong...War...Fanatics

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Actually I'm behind the times, HR 1207 to audit the Fed has passed the House.

                        Also polls show that 75% of Americans support an audit of the Fed.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Ecofarm is making my head hurt.
                          I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                          - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X