Bush III in 2016?

[ZeletDude]

No. Its sad, but its true.

He still did it though

We need a true peace President. But instead, we had to choose between Obama and Romney.

America can't seem to figure out that other countries DON'T LIKE IT when we bomb them to shreds. Which leads to our incredibly bloated defense budget.

Obama will bomb significantly less then Romney, and he's ended one war, and in the process of ending another one.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Obama is hugely popular internationally. Recall this was a source of propaganda for the Republicans calling his first term visits to the M.E. an apology tour.

If anything Obama's foreign policy achievement is healing the trans-atlantic rift between Europe and America Bush and his neo-cons created in his 8 years.

This allowed the US to pursue a policy in coordination with the Europeans on Libya and in relation to the Arab Spring, which it could not have done otherwise with an ascendant China-Russia foreign policy axis that seems diametrically opposed to everything the US wants to do.

For all the talk about pursuing national interests and chest thumping by the right, the fact that Obama's presidency has allowed the US to be viewed much more favourably internationally and allowed the country to pursue its trading interests seems lost to them.

Obama has been quite the warmongerer himself.

Setting aside things that all heads of government do then, you dislike Bill Clinton purely because he was a left-wing perjurer?

As far as I know of him, essentially.

I think he may have given certain national secrets to China as well but I'm not sure if that is or isn't the truth.

 

[ZeletDude]

What has Obama done that is remotely 'warmongering' that wasn't initiated by Bush ?

And he is certainly less warmongering then our previous president, and his opponent in this last election

 

[GhostWriter16]

Obama will bomb significantly less then Romney, and he's ended one war, and in the process of ending another one.

I wasn't actually all that unhappy that Obama won. I ultimately preferred him very, very marginally over Romney, although I thought that they were both crappy choices (Wow, I'm sounding like Cutlass aren't I [Our reasons are different]). That was in spite of the fact that I felt Romney would be better for the economy (Not by much, but you know.)

I'm registering to vote next year. I'm more likely to vote Republican for local offices (At least if there aren't any libertarians running) up to governor, but I think its unlikely I'll vote for either major party for President or Senate very often.

 

[civ_king]

What has Obama done that is remotely 'warmongering' that wasn't initiated by Bush ?

And he is certainly less warmongering then our previous president, and his opponent in this last election

Epic scale drone warfare.

 

[dexters]

Obama has been quite the warmongerer himself.

I would have preferred target drone strikes killing OBL in 2003 instead of wholesale invasion of a country over false pretences and the trillion dollars and thousands of US and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives lost to prosecute that war.

From a utilitarian point of view, it's no contest.

I understand there are rights issues around Obama's uses of Drones, but there's little evidence the alternative would be less willing to use it.

In that sense, US foreign policy is indeed fairly consistent regardless of the party in power, though Obama prosecuted it more smartly than his predecessor.

 

[ZeletDude]

I wasn't actually all that unhappy that Obama won. I ultimately preferred him very, very marginally over Romney, although I thought that they were both crappy choices (Wow, I'm sounding like Cutlass aren't I [Our reasons are different]). That was in spite of the fact that I felt Romney would be better for the economy (Not by much, but you know.)

I'm registering to vote next year. I'm more likely to vote Republican for local offices (At least if there aren't any libertarians running) up to governor, but I think its unlikely I'll vote for either major party for President or Senate very often.

I will register next year too, not sure how I will vote yet. But I will be living in Idaho (most likely) so it's not like my vote will matter..

 

[GhostWriter16]

What has Obama done that is remotely 'warmongering' that wasn't initiated by Bush ?

And he is certainly less warmongering then our previous president, and his opponent in this last election

Epic scale drone warfare.

That and I'm pretty sure he sent some troops into other places. I know he fought in Libya and surged the troops in Afghanistan.

I would have preferred target drone strikes killing OBL in 2003 instead of wholesale invasion of a country over false pretences and the trillion dollars and thousands of US and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives lost to prosecute that war.

From a utilitarian point of view, it's no contest.

I understand there are rights issues around Obama's uses of Drones, but there's little evidence the alternative would be less willing to use it.

In that sense, US foreign policy is indeed fairly consistent regardless of the party in power, though Obama prosecuted it more smartly than his predecessor.

Obama has used drones on US citizens as well. Also, the newest NDAA deserves to be mentioned.

And you defend it by saying "But he's better at it than Bush/Romney." I even gave this precise reason for saying Obama is (Barely) superior to Romney. That doesn't mean I approve of his regime one bit. Nor do I approve of the Bush administration that preceeded it.

Also, we should not have gone into Afghanistan either. It was really two wars. The sad thing is, Vice President Biden voted for both of those wars, and I am nearly certain Obama would have done so as well had he been in the senate at the time.

I will register next year too, not sure how I will vote yet. But I will be living in Idaho (most likely) so it's not like my vote will matter..

I thought you were definitely leaning Democrat?

Not that I necessarily see that as a problem. I don't like either party so I wouldn't try to convince you to go Republican. I lean hard right on the economy and the life issue but there's more to politics than that.

 

[ZeletDude]

Well, I would probably vote Dem, but it wouldn't matter if I live in Idaho..

It's one of the most Conservative states in the Union, I feel so out of place

 

[GhostWriter16]

Well, I would probably vote Dem, but it wouldn't matter if I live in Idaho..

It's one of the most Conservative states in the Union, I feel so out of place

I used to really feel out of place in NY until I began shifting towards Ron Paul style Republicanism and away from "Establishment" style Republicanism (Fun fact, I originally liked Ron Paul because of his stance on legalized machine guns, before I learned more about politics)

I still feel out of place here, but not as much as you'd think. At least I'm not surrounded by warmongerers

 

[AlpsStranger]

I need to move to/visit NYC someday. My nephew spent a few weeks there and says it's incredible. I think he wants to live there now, says it's like a different plant almost.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I hate NYC, and not just because its so far to the left and contains Bloomberg

Don't go now though, they're still in chaos from Sandy and are practically under martial law from what I've heard.

 

[dexters]

Bloomberg is an Republican/ independent isn't he? NYC is the biggest city in the union, I don't think it is far left, it's just very urban and cities generally require tolerance of various lifestyles and religions. There are many more cities that are far more liberal than NYC.

I find rural voters just don't get this because they know everyone within 10 miles and neighbous often substitute for government as a social safety net, so they have no conception that someone in the city cannot get the same kind of help.

Even religious organizations within cities tend to be liberal leaning and have almost no voice in the national discourse about religion which is almost entirely hijacked by evangelical bible tumpers proclaiming abortion is immoral and the gays causes hurricanes.

 

[downtown]

Govenor.

No. It's either Texas AG or Land Use Commissioner, not Gov.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Bloomberg is an Republican/ independent isn't he?

I feel like he might have been Democrat at one point as well, and he endorsed Obama, but I know he was once Republican and is now Independent.

Most conservatives I know hate him though. I hate him even more than they do, he's the very antithesis of everything I stand for, freedom and personal responsibility.

NYC is the biggest city in the union, I don't think it is far left, it's just very urban and cities generally require tolerance of various lifestyles and religions. There are many more cities that are far more liberal than NYC.

Maybe not, I was kind of being anecdotal. I really don't like it just 'cause its huge and I'm more of a "Rural" person.

I find rural voters just don't get this because they know everyone within 10 miles and neighbous often substitute for government as a social safety net, so they have no conception that someone in the city cannot get the same kind of help.

That's true.

While I may ideologically object to the social safety net, I admit we need some form right now. I just want to simplify and limit it. And keep the government out of it as much as possible.

proclaiming abortion is immoral and the gays causes hurricanes.

Please, please don't put an actual, legitimate political opinion in the same sentence as an absurdity (And if anyone does not know which part I'm calling the absurdity I am going to laugh at you)

 

[dexters]

Endorsing Obama shouldn't be a litmus test on how left someone is. I think Bloomberg is just a big city mayor with liberal views on social policy. Even Rudy is pro-choice. Obama is not very left either. He'd be a conservative in Canada.

This I feel is what is kind of the problem with the US political thinking on the right. OBAMA is incorrectly labelled in Fox News/Angry White Men rdio as the 'most Liberal' US president (Nixon's domestic policies were as Liberal if not more, not to say anything of LBJ) and then they work backwards from there.

Anyone associated with Obama is left wing socialists intent of turning the country in a communist state, while the freedom loving Republicans save the day.

There's a great article on the Fantasyland phenomenon of the modern GOP and conservatism. Where facts aren't just twisted as is often the case in politics, they're made up to suit an agenda. Very disturbing to me. I think if you're a Libertarian you should be too.

I am btw a Canadian conservative. heheheh.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Endorsing Obama shouldn't be a litmus test on how left someone is.

Fair enough. It at least shows they are only so right.

I think Bloomberg is just a big city mayor with liberal views on social policy.

Its not just his social policy (Although I really hate his view on abortion and don't really care what he thinks about SSM) its his rampant authoritarianism overall. He wants to control every part of the lives of his citizens.

Even Rudy is pro-choice. Obama is not very left either. He'd be a conservative in Canada.

I still consider him left on economics, but not as far as the talking heads say.

I actually supported him (Marginally) over Romney due to foreign policy. Romney would have been even worse.

Anyone associated with Obama is left wing socialists intent of turning the country in a communist state, while the freedom loving Republicans save the day.

The Republicans won't save us.

There's a great article on the Fantasyland phenomenon of the modern GOP and conservatism. Where facts aren't just twisted as is often the case in politics, they're made up to suit an agenda. Very disturbing to me. I think if you're a Libertarian you should be too.

I'm disturbed by pretty much all of US politics so yeah. Ron Paul was our last hope.

Prepare to sell our souls to China.

 

[dexters]

Its not just his social policy (Although I really hate his view on abortion and don't really care what he thinks about SSM) its his rampant authoritarianism overall. He wants to control every part of the lives of his citizens.

Any examples? I don't think this is a left/right issue. Facists can also be authoritarian and Theocracies as well. And there's been plenty of Republicans who have been guilty of trying to impose their morality on others this cycle and in the last several election cycles.

I'm disturbed by pretty much all of US politics so yeah. Ron Paul was our last hope.

Prepare to sell our souls to China.

I don't get the irrational fear for China or the adoration for Ron Paul. His economic views are pretty scary, and frankly would return the world to the stone age. There's really nothing wrong with printing money. Actually it is preferable to the alternative, because it severely constrains the ability of governments to deal with budgets and to run a government. I suppose hardcore Libertarians who opposes every item of spending outside of defence might find it palatable, but it's not something I think is going to work. It's appealing only because it's rightly an effective way to control spending, but the human cost will be extreme.

Money, like gold or silver is just a unit used to store wealth. The Spaniards achieved hyperinflation and debased their own currency even while under a Gold/Silver standard just the same when the wealth of the new world was shipped back to Europe. And there's been plenty of financial crises even while still in the gold standard. Speculative bubbles ruined the French, and Imperial China collapsed financially while on the silver standard.

The attachment to pegging currencies to metals is IMHO not realistic given how advanced we are.

I can imagine some nation state having a bright idea of mining gold from the Moon or an Asteroid in its place. And that assumes the whole world converts to the Gold standard. Which I doubt will happen. Modern financial systems of exchange rates makes it almost impossible for it to happen.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Any examples? I don't think this is a left/right issue. Facists can also be authoritarian and Theocracies as well. And there's been plenty of Republicans who have been guilty of trying to impose their morality on others this cycle and in the last several election cycles.

Drug war. Stop and frisk. Gun control. Trans Fat bans. Soda restrictions.

(Kochman had a bunch more. I'm not an expert of Bloomberg. But he opposes freedom in practically any case except the right to a goovernment marriage license and the right to kill.)

I don't get the irrational fear for China

I'm not actually afraid of China, I'm afraid of my own country stupidly and blindly going into far too much debt with China, or anywhere else.

or the adoration for Ron Paul. His economic views are pretty scary, and frankly would return the world to the stone age. There's really nothing wrong with printing money.

Ron doesn't want a gold standard, he wants to privatize money. Which I don't actually agree with, but I think it would accomplish the intended effect, destroying the thieving organization known as the Fed.

The Fed prints and prints and prints, its like another tax that actually CAN'T be resisted, so they don't have to use any restraint. And its devalued the dollar ridiculously.

It doesn't have to be gold, they can actually base it off the economy itself for all I care, but for goodness sakes, base it on SOMETHING. Do not give them unlimited authority to inflate our currency and steal our money.

That said, Ron Paul is not flawless. For one thing, he supports a wall on the US/Mexico border, I don't. He opposes a constitutional amendmnet to ban abortion nationwide. I support it, although I don't think its practical and so I practically agree with him. He supports the rape exception. I don't. He occasionally supports state's rights over individual rights to a point which I would not agree with. I know exactly why he does it, the Federal government is far more dangerous than the states, but I have no objection to the courts saying "You can't lock gays up for being gay anymore (Note that Ron did not support those laws, he just thought court intervention set a bad precedent. I disagree with him but I understand.) Yeah, those are the major ones.

If I were to list my major disagreements with Romney, Obama, or probably even Gary Johnson (I would have voted for Johnson) it would be a very, very long list.

But more importantly than all of those things, Ron Paul (Johnson too, but I agree with Ron more) is almost scarily honest in a world of lies and mudslinging.

 

[dexters]

Drug war. Stop and frisk. Gun control. Trans Fat bans. Soda restrictions.

Ah nanny state stuff. There's probably stuff I can agree to dislike here, but opposition to Gun Control is one issue I will never understand so I shall not say a word on it.

I'm not actually afraid of China, I'm afraid of my own country stupidly and blindly going into far too much debt with China, or anywhere else.

China owns the largest chunk of the debt owned by foreign countries, but the vast majority of the debt is held by Americans.

It's things like this, that I sort of reference back to the GOP Fantasyland scenario. They have a very good psy-ops team disseminating half truths as facts and the OMG CHINA OWNS America has worked, because just 15 years ago, it was OMG JAPAN owns America.

Guess what Japan still has those US T-bills, but I don't hear a peeps out of the right any more about how Japan was going to secrelty destroy the US, probably because US hawks see Japan as military outpost in the far east against an ascendant China.

Ron doesn't want a gold standard, he wants to privatize money. Which I don't actually agree with, but I think it would accomplish the intended effect, destroying the thieving organization known as the Fed.

The Fed prints and prints and prints, its like another tax that actually CAN'T be resisted, so they don't have to use any restraint. And its devalued the dollar ridiculously..

The Fed, like any central bank prints money to grow the money supply. They step on the gas or ease off it, to control how quickly the economy grows, while at the same time monitoring inflation. This was essentially the toolkit the conservatives came up with to slay the stagflation dragon in response to the keynesian policies of the 60s and 70s that saw rising inflation and unemployment together.

Devaluation of the dollar is quite frankly the least of your concerns. The US export industry is far more competitive today because of the US ability to devalue.

The Fed easing of the money supply has also been putting massive pressure on China to push up the value of the Yuan, and make their exports less competitive.

I'm not a Keynesian, but Keynesian policies clearly can work and in this case, it's worked to backstop the collapse of the US economy. That is good for everyone or we'd all be in a great depression right now.