Santorum Supporter Visits Ron Paul Rally

[peter grimes]

Perhaps we're all victims of another Poe?

 

[useless]

Santorum isn't really that different from Ron Paul:

Hes a racist, misognyistic homophobe.

The only difference is Paul is older.

 

[Hygro]

To be fair, Traitorfish, it was well assembled. At least from a writing craft standpoint, and rhetorical. I found it to be effective in communicating its viewpoint, and had me at least spending a moment considering the arguments, before I resumed my life back in reality

And yeah cryptic snow, the reason I read it was I too thought it was your article/face.

 

[G-Max]

I'm trying to figure out the point of this thread. Basically, it sounds like this guy supported Santorum under the misguided belief that the Sweater Vest wanted small, non-intrusive government; upon visiting a Ron Paul rally, he decided that Paul's fiscal conservatism was much more in line with his small-government views than Santorum's social conservatism was. Maybe someday, he'll see the light and become a full-blown libertarian.

It happens. The LP even offers tips on how to convince your Republican friends that they're really closet libertarians.

 

[Cryptic_Snow]

To be fair, Traitorfish, it was well assembled. At least from a writing craft standpoint, and rhetorical. I found it to be effective in communicating its viewpoint, and had me at least spending a moment considering the arguments, before I resumed my life back in reality

And yeah cryptic snow, the reason I read it was I too thought it was your article/face.

Didn't mean to convey that. I'm not a Santa supporter, and I hope I'm a bit better looking . I just wanted to give credit to the author. I also thought it was curious he's just now learning of Paul and witnessing him drawing big crowds wherever he speaks. Better late than never I suppose.

 

[Cryptic_Snow]

I'm trying to figure out the point of this thread. Basically, it sounds like this guy supported Santorum under the misguided belief that the Sweater Vest wanted small, non-intrusive government; upon visiting a Ron Paul rally, he decided that Paul's fiscal conservatism was much more in line with his small-government views than Santorum's social conservatism was. Maybe someday, he'll see the light and become a full-blown libertarian.

It happens. The LP even offers tips on how to convince your Republican friends that they're really closet libertarians.

I believe a lot of people are small L libertarians at heart. There's a huge untapped demographic of people that are fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I'd venture to say 60-70% of those 35 years and younger fall somewhere on that trend line.

 

[useless]

How can you seperate the fiscal and social issues when fiscal issues directly impact upon people in a social way? (see lack of funding for many black inner city areas)

It's a cop out to say "Oh I'm fiscally conservative, but I'm socially liberal!"

 

[Crezth]

How can you seperate the fiscal and social issues when fiscal issues directly impact upon people in a social way? (see lack of funding for many black inner city areas)

It's a cop out to say "Oh I'm fiscally conservative, but I'm socially liberal!"

To be fair, people who are "socially liberal" in the general sense can be people who are not necessarily motivated to alleviate any perceived inequality, but do not advocate continued persecution. I.e., they may not feel as if gay marriage is wrong, or are of the opinion that it's purely a personal matter, but would prefer to leave it up to the states as to the question of its legality.

The problems with this approach are, of course, numerous, but they are of a pragmatic nature rather than any kind of philosophical one.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

It's a cop out to say "Oh I'm fiscally conservative...!"

That's already stupid enough to say.
When was the last time a Conservative goernment has reduced the deficit ?
Every gain form a cut in (non-military) spending (that might have a significant multipl) will be diminished by tax cuts and the resulting loss of revenue.

 

[Leoreth]

The LP even offers tips on how to convince your Republican friends that they're really closet libertarians.

Maybe Santorum should start a movement to "pray the libertarian away"

 

[Cryptic_Snow]

How can you seperate the fiscal and social issues when fiscal issues directly impact upon people in a social way? (see lack of funding for many black inner city areas)

It's a cop out to say "Oh I'm fiscally conservative, but I'm socially liberal!"

Because I believe government shouldn't spend more than it takes in. Is it so draconian that we go back to what government spending levels were under Clinton? Was government so small in the early 90's that the U.S. couldn't function? I don't think that's an unrealistic goal to shoot for. It's very much like a household budget, just because you're socially liberal does that imply you use money irresponsibly? I think you can be socially liberal and manage your personal finances just fine. Government should be able to do this very basic function. And the government teaching people to be dependent on them isn't in the best interest of those they claim to help. Incurring debt and printing money leads to financial bubbles and economic downturns, which causes high unemployment. Not to mention it also leads to rising prices in food and energy which hurt the poor and those on fixed income substantially more.

Throwing money at problems isn't the answer, if it was, D.C. should the pinnacle of humanity in the world. D.C. isn't close in that regard. They get more money per student than almost anywhere, and education is lousy. Capitalism is a beautiful thing because it coordinates the resources of production with individual self-interest. A by-product of this system is wealth. Before you go on about fiscally conservatives being greedy, they actually donate to charity far more than liberals do. Charities also know how to stretch a dollar, much better than any government bureaucrat.

For more on black inner city areas. I suggest you listen and read the works of Dr. Walter Williams. In 1981, Secretary of Health Education and Welfare Patricia Harris wrote in the Washington Post that libertarian economists Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell are "middle class" so they "don't know what it is to be poor."

In fact, Williams grew up in a single-parent household in a poor section of Philadelphia. He was raised by his mother, who was a high school dropout. The family spent time on welfare, and eventually moved into the Richard Allen public housing project. (Sowell, whose father died before he was born, was the son of a maid.)

Dr. Walter Williams: Up From the Projects

Link to video.

 

[Crezth]

Throwing money at problems isn't the answer, if it was, D.C. should the pinnacle of humanity in the world. D.C. isn't close in that regard. They get more money per student than almost anywhere, and education is lousy. Capitalism is a beautiful thing because it coordinates the resources of production with individual self-interest. A by-product of this system is wealth. Before you go on about fiscally conservatives being greedy, they actually donate to charity far more than liberals do. Charities also know how to stretch a dollar, much better than any government bureaucrat.

Geez, there really are no shades of gray for you people, are there?

 

[Leoreth]

It's really hard to believe the Paulites' claims of superior economic understanding when they say things like "[Government budgets are] very much like a household budget".

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

It's really hard to believe the Paulites' claims of superior economic understanding when they say things like "[Government budgets are] very much like a household budget".

If only I had the ability to print money. Legally.

 

[G-Max]

How can you seperate the fiscal and social issues when fiscal issues directly impact upon people in a social way? (see lack of funding for many black inner city areas)

It's a cop out to say "Oh I'm fiscally conservative, but I'm socially liberal!"

I'm not seeing the connection. Fiscal conservatism is about getting government out of your wallet and your workplace. Social liberalism is about getting government out of your bedroom, your gun rack, and your hydroponic garden.

That's already stupid enough to say.
When was the last time a Conservative goernment has reduced the deficit ?

We haven't had a fiscally conservative government since the days of maybe Coolidge or Hoover, but Newt Gingrich did a pretty good job of closing the deficit from 1995-99

That's already stupid enough to say.
When was the last time a Conservative goernment has reduced the deficit ?
Every gain form a cut in (non-military) spending (that might have a significant multipl) will be diminished by tax cuts and the resulting loss of revenue.

Government spending doesn't increase tax revenue. Do you know what does? The economic growth that tax cuts allow.

Maybe Santorum should start a movement to "pray the libertarian away"

More like "pray the liberty away", if his platform is any indication.

It's really hard to believe the Paulites' claims of superior economic understanding when they say things like "[Government budgets are] very much like a household budget".

They are, in the sense that balancing them isn't too hard as long as you know the difference between "want" and "need".

 

[Crezth]

How do you feel about minimum wage, G-Max?

 

[Arakhor]

You know, chances are that I give more to charities every month as a woolly liberal than any "fiscal conservative" on these boards. But that won't sit well with your rhetoric, will it?

 

[peter grimes]

Because I believe government shouldn't spend more than it takes in. Is it so draconian that we go back to what government spending levels were under Clinton? Was government so small in the early 90's that the U.S. couldn't function?

If you look at the data (historical tables of government spending found on the whitehouse.gov website) you'll see that during Clinton (1992-2000) fiscal deficits ranged from -5.5% of GPD in 1992 to -.3%GDP in 1999.

Simply saying 'Fed should not run a deficit' is far too simplistic. Sometimes government *has* to run a deficit. Do you think that FDR was the antichrist because his policies led to annual deficits over 20 and even 30 percent of GDP during WW2?

Even during the Great Depression annual deficits were in line with Clinton's.

So what's your beef?

 

[G-Max]

How do you feel about minimum wage, G-Max?

I'm undecided on it. It's been pointed out that our recent increase in unemployment began at the same time as the first of the recent minimum wage increases, and leveled off just as the final increase took effect, bolstering the LP's claims that the minimum wage increases unemployment; however, correlation isn't causation, so I'm not about to jump to conclusions based on this one example. I don't think that you'll see much of a difference in unemployment rates between a $1/hour minimum wage and a lack of a minimum wage. Thus, I must take the same position on it that I take on most other things: get rid of it at the Federal level and let the states figure out what works and what doesn't.

For what it's worth, the minimum wage in San Francisco is $10.24/hour, and I'm willing to bet that most of the jobless people up there would rather be earning half of that than none of it.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

I wouldn't mind if the federal minimum wage died. My Washington minimum wage is higher than it.