Monday, February 23, 2009

DUmmies: Obasms vs Gorbasms

The DUmmies are in a dilemma. Who is the true savior? Obama or Gorbachev? What set this debate off is that website mocking George W. Bush by comparing him to a chimpanzee, SmirkingChimp.com. An article at The Smirking Chimp (meaning that Bush was like a chimpanzee) stated that Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev was smarter than Barack Obama because he accepted defeat in Afghanistan and brought Soviet troops home 20 years ago. This set off an Obasm vs Gorbasm debate in DUmmieland as you can see in this THREAD, "Gorby smarter than Obama: Soviet leader accepted defeat and brought his troops home from Afghanistan." So let us now watch the DUmmies debate Obasms vs Gorbasms in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, noting that you can follow his activities on Twitter by becoming his loyal acolyte by simple logging on to @pjcomix, is in the [barackets]:


Gorby smarter than Obama: Soviet leader accepted defeat and brought his troops home from Afghanistan

[GASP! Heresy! Let the debates begin!]

Twenty years ago this week, the last Soviet forces pulled out of Afghanistan. During the Soviet occupation (1979-1989), 1.5 million Afghans died at the hands of the Red Army and Afghan Communists.

The new Soviet chairman, Mikhail Gorbachev, proved a leader of great humanity, decency and intellect. I rank him with Nelson Mandela. Gorbachev determined the Afghan war, begun by his dim predecessor, Leonid Brezhnev, and a coterie of party and KGB hardliners, could not be won.

[You...you dare to rank him above our beloved Barack?]

Gorbachev courageously accepted defeat and brought his soldiers home. Soon after, the Soviet Union, a bankrupt imperium held together by fear and repression, began to crumble. Gorbachev refused to employ force to hold the Soviet empire together.

[And now Gorby lives in America earnings loads of money from liberals who still suffer from Gorbasms.]

The new president of the bankrupt American imperium should heed Gorbachev's wisdom. Barack Obama's inauguration offered a perfect opportunity to pause the U.S.-led Afghan war and open talks with Afghans resisting foreign occupation (both the Soviets and U.S. branded them "terrorists.")

[Obama should have surrendered in Afghanistan the moment he completed taking his messed up oath of office.]

Instead, Obama vowed to intensify the eight-year, $62-billion war. Ottawa's cost: $600-800 million in 2009 alone.

President Obama just declared he will send 17,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan on top of the 6,000 troops dispatched by George W. Bush.

Another 13,000 will follow. Reinforcements are supposed to come from the U.S. Iraq garrison. But the Pentagon is trying to delay or thwart the drawdown from Iraq.

[Do I detect cracks in the belief in the infallibity of Barack? Let the Obasm vs Gorbasm debates begin!]

I think the war should end but Gorby was a f*cking dumbass of the first water. What kind of shit for brains did he have to be listening to Ronnie Raygun and GHW Bush about "reforms" and their desire for peace. He got had, he got took, he got hoodwinked. The coup plotters were right.

[I remember when the Left was gloating over how Gorbachev would overwhelm Reagan with his mighty intellect. So how did he get "hoodwinked" by the Gipper?]

Gorby was ten times the man that you will ever be.

[Gorbasm detected!]

The man totally f*cked up his country.

[Obama or Gorbama?]

He attempted to revitalize the economy of his country using advice from his enemies. Unsurprisingly his reforms blew the country apart. Gorbachev with his reforms presided over the only GDP decline the Soviet economy had ever experience since the Germans invade. Even Brezhnev's period of stagnation was marked by low growth rather than decline.

[Ah. Brezhnev nostalgia. Those were the days, my friend. I thought they would never end.]

Gorbachev wanted nothing of what Ronald Reagan was proposing to him as far as capitalism goes. If Gorbachev had been successful, Russia would be a market socialist country today, not the predatory economy it currently is with a small gang of billionaires running everything. It was Boris Yeltsin who privatized the infrastructure and allowed capitalists to siphon hundreds of billions out of the Russian economy.

[A market socialist country? Do you enjoy tossing oxymorons around you moron?]

In 1989 there were two major uprisings in the communist world in Beijing and in several East German cities. The Chinese put theirs down harshly. Gorbachev had already informed Honecker that a similar action would not happen if East German situation were to get out of hand. This inaction was basically a declaration of death for the Warsaw Pact. Gorby should have reminded the East Germans, and all the other trouble making nationalists exactly who won WWII and put some boots in their asses. The progress of China in comparison to Russia over the last 20 years is a testimony to just how badly he f*cked up.

[Declared the Tiananmen Square contingent of DUmmieland.]

Obama is looking for the "light at the end of the tunnel" like one his predecessors. With the same predictable, and disastrous, results.

[The One had a colonoscopy?]

I don't think much of this chimp at the moment; NO ONE can draw conclusions about President Obama's Afghan policy yet.

[RACIST!!!]

he has surrounded himself with clinton/dlc/neolib conservatives in addition to the wall street boys. And NO, he has given ZERO indication he thinks for himself. He is following the same Clinton era Globalization and Defense policies with, wtf?, the same recycled advisers. I have zero expectations but am very willing and able to eat crow.

[Does this mean no more Obasms?]

Gorbachev is near the bottom of the "successful leaders to emulate" list.

[Hey, Gorby made a great Pizza Hut COMMERCIAL.]

I'm getting pretty tired of this historical penis measuring.

[The John Holmes era was the longest one in history.]

52 Comments:

Anonymous DumbAss Tanker said...

"Gorby should have reminded the East Germans, and all the other trouble making nationalists exactly who won WWII and put some boots in their asses."

Ah, those freedom-loving Democrats! I remember the Stasi bastards arresting (and, as I recall, immediately executing) an East German Army junior officer for refusing to have his troops open fire on a crowd of protestors. That and similar atrocities quickly turned the army on the Stasi instead of bringing the army into line, as it turned out. Those DUmmies loves them some freedom of expression!

10:05 AM  
Anonymous Icarus said...

"courageously accepted defeat"

:)

Only in DUmmieLand do you see phrases like that one ...

12:05 PM  
Anonymous Anon 1:50 said...

QUOTE: "Obama is looking for the "light at the end of the tunnel" like one his predecessors. With the same predictable, and disastrous, results."

Would that 'predecessor' be G.W. Bush and the "light at the end of the tunnel" be our victory in, and peace and a secular government for, Iraq?

Gee! Maybe Emperor JugEars Arugula McChimpHitler IS going for a victory. He could use one!

After all the only group for whom Iraq is "disastrous" are the treason-spewing bastards who constantly declared the war lost! This would include Hollywood, DUmmies, and colossal licksphincters like Harry Reid and Nancy Peloser.

12:05 PM  
Anonymous DumbAss Tanker said...

"McChimpHitler"

I believe we should update our usage on this moniker to "O'ChimpHitler," for reasons that should be obvious.

12:42 PM  
Anonymous Ray said...

"Only in DUmmieLand do you see phrases like that one ..."

Icarus, you got that right!

"Gorby smarter than Obama: Soviet leader accepted defeat and brought his troops home from Afghanistan. "

Hay, DUmmies, the majority of the Afghan people were fighting AGAINST the USSR. Now they're fighting alongside the US. How are the two separate situations analogous? Where's the US defeat?

2:11 PM  
Anonymous elrond hubbard said...

Obama's Afghanistan escalation is a real conundrum for the DUmmies.
After six years of Chimpy McHitler bashing and scorning his murderous troops, they've suddenly discovered that the One has vastly increased the scope of a war they had totally opposed.

Will they turn on Obama? Will they take to the streets to demmand bringing the troop home and calling for BOpeachment? Will Barry become another Gorby?
Will DUmmie heads explode?

Make some popcorn and stay tuned.

3:45 PM  
Anonymous Smitty said...

Was Gobachev good for the Soviet Union or bad for Russia? Was he duped by Reagan or did he outsmart the original chimp? Was the Soviet implosion inevitable or did Gorby's whimpiness cause the collapse? There's ideological conflict in DUmmieland. The Socialists arguing with the Leninists who dispute the ideas of the Chomskyites who contradict the Spartacists.

Silly people.

5:56 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"courageously accepted defeat":)
Only in DUmmieLand do you see phrases like that one..." icarus

Sure. Courageously accepting defeat is a concept common only in DUmmie Pussie Land.

These guys were pussies for sure.

"Despite the critical situation, MacArthur sent orders to Wainwright, which said: "I am utterly opposed under any circumstances or conditions to the ultimate capitulation of this command. If food fails you will prepare and execute an attack upon the enemy." (39) President Franklin Roosevelt agreed with MacArthur and issued his own "no surrender" orders. Wainwright forwarded the orders to King on April 4. (40)

While the U.S. troops were faltering, due to poor health, the Japanese were strong due to reinforcements. On April 3 they implemented a full attack. By April 8, the Americans and Filipinos could fight no longer. "As the Japanese approached Cabcaben, Bataan's commander, Major General Edward King, sadly concluded he had no alternative to surrender. Thus 79,500 men, the largest force in American military history to succumb to an enemy, put down their arms."
http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/st/~ehimchak/surrender2.html

If what you're saying is true, icarus, no one in the Bataan Death March courageously accepted defeat...unless they were living in DUmmie Pussie Land. The same is obviously true of those walking into a shower room at Auschwitz. Courageous defeat was reserved for DUmmie Pussians. What's that make you, icarus? You plan to go out with courage or screaming like a little girl? I doubt you'll go down, gun in hand, fighting the terrorists or libs like me, troglaman, storming your bunker. It's most likely going to come down to 'courage' or 'screaming like a little girl'.

Just so you know, icarus, if you choose 'courage', you choose Dummie Pussian. Your rules, not mine.

2:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Gorbachev courageously accepted defeat and brought his soldiers home."

Brave Sir Robin boldly ran away...

7:00 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

King surrendered because he wanted his men to live. Had he been prescient enough to anticipate the Death March would he have made the same choice?

You're a selectively-read ignoramus, troggie.

9:48 AM  
Anonymous Anon 1:50 said...

Emperor JugEars Arugula O'ChimpHitler?

I like it, Tanker!

It has a mellifluous quality and will look great on a T-Shirt.

12:46 PM  
Anonymous Ray said...

Hay, Troggy, have you forgotten about the Battle of the Bulge?

When the101st Airborne Division was surrounded by the Germans in the Belgian town of Bastogne, a German Commander issued a demand to the Ameircans that they should surrender in two hours or face annihilation The Commanding officer of that vastly outnumber unit, Harry W.O. Kinnard, sent back the response: "To the German commander: Nuts! The American commander." He refused to surrender his unit. Guess who won that battle?

So, Troggy, you can play the "surrender" game all you want. The U.S. Military DIDN'T cut and run in WWII. Once again, guess who won WWII?

1:47 PM  
Anonymous Ray said...

Also, Troggy, you forgot to mention that the surrender you cite happened during the beginning of Japan's war against the US. MacArther vowed that he would return, and he did!

1:54 PM  
Anonymous DumbAss Tanker said...

Troggie doesn't understand the difference between losing a battle and calling it quits on the whole war.

There are endless examples of the difference all the way back to the Punic Wars and beyond. Roman armies got their asses handed to them numerous times, but Rome persevered out of just plain relentless determination even when beaten back behind their city walls after Cannae. In the end it was Carthage, with its inconsistent commitment to prosecution of the war, that was crushed to utter nothingness.

2:23 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"Hay, Troggy, have you forgotten about the Battle of the Bulge?" ray

It's 'hey', not 'hay'. I think. You're all so complicated.

I didn't forget. You, my little Fairy Princess, miss the point. We won the Bulge and lost Bataan. Done deal. Answer this honestly, ray. Did anyone who died during the Bataan march meet their defeat courageously?

That's the point. Why? Because icarus ridiculously claims anyone meeting their defeat with courage is classified a Pussie Bucket. He says "courageously accepted defeat":) Only in DUmmieLand do you see phrases like that one..."

But he's wrong. Like you all are. All the fucking time.

That's the point.

12:43 AM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

By the way...see the speech?

You guys are so utterly fucked. Your ideology is, once and for all, not only exposed, but deemed irrelevant. Thank Jesus.

That sort of thing happens after catastrophic failure. Bad ideas get real and people wake up. Surprising, isn't it? That people understand who is and who isn't full of shit?

Might this finally be a 'time to swallow' moment?

2:41 AM  
Anonymous DumbAss Tanker said...

Troglaman said...
"By the way...see the speech?"

By the way, did you see the Dow? Down about 150 as of 10:30 EST this morning. You're right about us being fucked, but not in the way you think.

10:26 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

Obama is a great speech-deliverer. Jindal came off as a total amateur.

The critical difference is the content, not the delivery. Obama's was all about surrendering Liberty to Leviathan. Jindal's was all about throwing off Democrats so that Republicans can become Leviathan.

Obama's agenda is all about making WE THE PEOPLE even more dependent on government for our well-being. Such paternalism gave us Lenin, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and all the long, long list of both "liberal" and "conservative" tyrants of the 20th century.

The problem is "liberals" aren't truly Liberals: they are collectivist fascists. "Conservatives" aren't the Classic Liberals whose words they sometimes mouth: they are capitalistic and religious fascists.

Both "liberal" and "conservative" politicians are more concerned with expansion of government, personal power and prestige, graft to enrich themselves, and the constant pandering for re-election to keep themselves in power. All politicians are tools of "special interests."

And WE THE PEOPLE are brainwashed by the "culture of victimization" into surrendering even more responsibility for our well-being to government. Many people I've asked believe our rights are given to us by the Constitution. We are indeed fucked!

Classic Liberals were the Sons of The Enlightenment who threw off Leviathan in 18th century Europe. They were the Revolutionaries who pledged and indeed gave their lives and fortunes to "securing the Blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity."

11:32 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

http://www.mises.org/books/TRTS/

11:35 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

By the way, troggie: Capitalism is the logical and inevitable RESULT of Liberalism. It places economic power where it belongs: in the hands of those who create and earn it!

Prior to The Enlightenment and development of the philosophy of Liberalism, economic power was in the hands of hereditary aristocracy and monarchy. Those elite got their power, both economic and political through war and brute force.

Ordinary people were the slaves and serfs of those who held the economic and political power. Plague, starvation, and life-long servitude for the benefit of their masters were all the "common man" could expect. Life expectancy prior to The Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution was less than 30 years on average.

Is that the "Utopia" you pine for?

12:19 PM  
Anonymous elrond hubbard said...

That sort of thng happens after catastrophic failure. Bad ideas get real and people wake up.

That's true t-man, can't argue with you. Let's see when this current round of terrible, damaging plans wakes up the people. I suspect BO's cordless bungee jump into the abyss of bad ideas will serve as a loud alarm clock.

2:18 PM  
Anonymous elrond hubbard said...

By the way...see the speech?

I did. Obama gives good speech, it serves as cover for his bad ideas.

Well, his and Congress' bad ideas.

You guys are so utterly fucked.

If by "guys" you mean "American taxpayers" you're right.

2:59 PM  
Anonymous Ray said...

"We won the Bulge and lost Bataan."

We lost Bataan? That's funny, I don't see the Rising Sun flying over Bataan, do you?

Tell me, Troggy, does this look like the Rising Sun to you?

"That's the point."

No, the point is that you're ignorant of History.

5:49 PM  
Anonymous Ray said...

opps lets try that link again : Link

5:50 PM  
Anonymous Ray said...

"Did anyone who died during the Bataan march meet their defeat courageously?"

I would say every one of them did. But that wasn't a defeat of a war, that was a limited surrender of force. There IS a difference. Tell me, troggy, did America cut and run after those men became prisoners of war?

You keep missing the distinction between surrendering a unit on a battlefield and surrendering the entire war.

Take the Civil War as an example. Both sides surrendered troops during the various battles in that war, but which side surrendered the entire war?

The USSR surrendered the entire Afghanistan War. How does that relate to what happened in Bataan?

5:59 PM  
Anonymous kayinmaine said...

MY BARACK KICKED ASS LAST NIGHT. YOUR WANNABEE NIGGER JINDAL SUCKED HIS PIMPS SLONG!!!!

OK BARACK GAMES OVER. YOU HAD TO PLAY IT FOR AWHILE BUT NOW YOUVE GOT TOTAL POWER AND NO NEOCON CAN STOP YOU! WE. WANT. ALL. NECONS. DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I WANT DEAD NEOCONS STACKED HIGHER THAT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER THAT THEY AND THE JEWS DESTROYED FOR HALLIBURTON AND BLACKWATER! I WANT ROWS AND ROWS OF DEAD NEOCONS. DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! THATS HOW WE WANT THEM ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

HAMAS! HAMAS! JEWS TO THE GAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111

7:29 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"Obama's agenda is all about making WE THE PEOPLE even more dependent on government for our well-being." classic

Could we think about this statement for a moment?

...

...

WE THE PEOPLE, as I understand it, are the government. Or do I have that wrong?

What you're saying classic, is that "Obama's agenda is all about making WE THE PEOPLE even more dependent on government (WE THE PEOPLE) for our well-being."

You have a problem with that line of reasoning? That WE THE PEOPLE are dependent on WE THE PEOPLE for our well-being?

I think you do.

1:52 AM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"Tell me, troggy, did America cut and run after those men became prisoners of war?" ray

No. Why do you insist on changing the subject? Icarus said "courageously accepted defeat":) Only in DUmmieLand do you see phrases like that one..."

He's wrong, ray. He, in fact, disrespects those who did. You, yourself admit it - "I would say every one of (Bataan casualties) did (courageously accept defeat)". Icarus thinks that way of thinking makes you a pussy.

He said it. Not me. You're going after the wrong cave-dweller.

2:19 AM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

kayinmaine

Contrived? You decide.

2:28 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

Troggie, you're right: I do have a problem with WE THE PEOPLE surrendering more and more responsibility for our well-being to government. Elected representatives (politicians) comprise only a minuscule percentage of government: most of government comprises bureaucrats, many appointed as political favors, the rest career lifers and the vast majority of whom are unaccountable to voters (WE THE PEOPLE) for their actions.

It is these unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats, chartered by vague and conflicting policies stated as Congressional Bills, Resolutions, and Acts who arbitrarily interpret those policies and create the mountains of rules, regulations and Administrative Law that comprise the Federal Register and violate individuals' rights. Being fallible humans, these bureaucrats make mistakes, have their own agendas and can be influenced by corruption and graft to interpret policy in ways they end up picking winners and losers in life.

WE THE PEOPLE granted certain specific powers to government through the vehicle of the United States Constitution. Amendments IX and X reserved all powers and rights not specifically delegated to either Federal or state governments TO THE PEOPLE: i.e. to the individual citizens. While the Constitution is an excellent choke on government power, it is not perfect, as evidenced by its amendments over the years.

However, there comes a tipping point where so much power has been delegated that government is enabled to arrogate additional power to itself. This is classically illustrated by the National Labor Relations Act spawned by Roosevelt I, Theodore Rex, who while acknowledging that the Constitution did not give him power to negotiate labor contracts, nonetheless arrogantly took it on himself to "arbitrate" the dispute between mine owners and the National Anthracite Coal Workers union during his first administration 1901-1905.

The National Labor Relations Board was created as a result of the NLRA. It is a bureaucracy of imperfect people who have undermined individuals' right to bargain with employers as their judgment of their best self-interest would demand. Since that time government, most specifically the NLRB, has been biased for unions against employers' rights and has forced situations such as the current woes in the automobile industry.

Mister Middlefinger and his UAW have destroyed the US auto industry, but refuse to acknowledge the fact that they have killed, cooked, and mostly eaten the goose that laid their golden eggs. Once the carcass is completely consumed, those parasites will start attacking the general populace through the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation.

All because government has violated the rights of a disfavored minority (businessmen and corporations) in favor of another minority (unions).

As a result of union restrictions on who can be employed in a profession with the resulting restriction of the labor force available to employers, capable and willing laborers are denied their natural right to compete for those jobs and so remain unemployed or underemployed.

In other words, despite government statements that it is committed to full employment policy, another government policy favoring unions causes and increases unemployment. Government works against itself to the detriment of the citizens, and this is but a single example.

As Benjamin Franklin said: "Government powerful enough to give you everything you want is powerful enough to take everything you have."

8:43 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

Troggie, then there are the classic conflicting statements and hypocrisy of Obama himself. He says this is to be some new era of individual responsibility while at the same time telling us that we should look to government to take more responsibility for our well-being (specifically health care, our homes, and our education). Obama's policy is to force us to become moochers and parasites rather than responsible individuals.

People who don't pay for or earn things for themselves tend not to value those things highly nor do they take care of those things once they have them. If you are a landlord, you've learned this lesson in spades with maintenance and repairs of your rental properties.

8:58 AM  
Anonymous Thomas F said...

DumbAss Tanker said...
"By the way, did you see the Dow? Down about 150 as of 10:30 EST this morning. You're right about us being fucked, but not in the way you think."

I see Obama's failure in the 2200 point loss since he was elected..... confidence in him is soaring.....

10:47 AM  
Anonymous Thomas F said...

A month in and he is less popular than Bush at the same time.....

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116077/Obama-Job-Approval-Dips-Below-First-Time.aspx

11:50 AM  
Anonymous Thomas F said...

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/02/24/obama-less-popular-bush-after-first-month-office

11:51 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

BTW, trog you and I had a discussion about your use of the strawman argument method. Here's a view of Obama's use of that rhetorical device that he employs so subtly but you employ so clumsily:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561484923478287.html

6:58 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"It is these unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats, chartered by vague and conflicting policies stated as Congressional Bills, Resolutions, and Acts who arbitrarily interpret those policies and create the mountains of rules, regulations and Administrative Law." classic

He's right. He left out corruption but what the hell, he's right.

For some strange reason I think you (classic) and I would disagree about this army of bureaucrat's motives. But we would wholeheartedly agree they're really fucking things up. They're H.A.L. They don't know they're broken. They're singing "Daisy".

1:12 AM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"He (Obama) says this is to be some new era of individual responsibility while at the same time telling us that we should look to government to take more responsibility for our well-being (specifically health care, our homes, and our education)." classic

Once again the distinction between 'us' and 'the government'. According to the Constitution, classic, you ARE the government. Sorry, I meant to say you WERE the government. Because what makes us Americans great is we can, and do, have a revolution every 4 years. Great Big Party. Pretty cool, really.

You'll have your chance again 2012. If Obama screws the pooch you'll, once and for all, fuck up Social Security. You'll give it to Wall Street. It's what you baboons do.

So what's this I hear about Hannity's poll about the next American Revolution? I hear "Military Coup" is in the running.

Keep on keepin on, my brothers. You're making it easy.

1:53 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

He's right. He left out corruption but what the hell, he's right. -trog

The sentence after the one you quoted reads: "Being fallible humans, these bureaucrats make mistakes, have their own agendas and can be influenced by corruption and graft to interpret policy in ways they end up picking winners and losers in life."

As to bureaucrats' and government's motives: good goals cannot be achieved through immoral, repressive, or totalitarian methods. Ethics 101, troggie.

The basic disagreement between us relates to whether it is either moral or good for government to adopt a paternalistic altruistic attitude toward the less fortunate and force sacrifice (damage) to the more fortunate or capable to carry out that attitude. I contend the best approach is for government to get the hell out of our way and let us use our own judgment and independent action to build a flourishing life for ourselves. Most people are generous and will take care of those less fortunate without sacrifice to their own well-being.

I don't identify with either Republicans or Democrats as should be apparent from my earlier characterization of them as Tweedledee and Tweedledum. There are no truly consistent Liberals in our political system anymore. The Libertarians come close, but even they subscribe to mystical religion and altruism rather than Reason and Rationality as the basis of all virtue.

10:05 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

Most people are generous and will take care of those less fortunate without sacrifice to their own well-being. -me

Further, government paternalism at the expense of "those who can afford it" discourages and represses those folks' natural benevolence. Government not only interferes with individuals' basic right to ensure their own well-being but interferes with those who having ensured their own would turn to help others achieve it.

In short, government commits two evils for the sake of one good. That alone should be reason enough for people to object.

10:21 AM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

That should be "...government commits three evils for the sake of one good."

1.) forces "sacrifice" (damage) to one group

2.) discourages that group's virtuous benevolence

3.) represses all individuals' right to live or die by their own judgment and effort

10:24 AM  
Anonymous Smitty said...

Hey, time for a new DUmmie outrage!

6:23 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"The basic disagreement between us relates to whether it is either moral or good for government to adopt a paternalistic altruistic attitude toward the less fortunate and force sacrifice (damage) to the more fortunate or capable to carry out that attitude." classic

Doesn't seem that long ago the RepubliDUms wanted to be the Daddy Party. Were the Daddy Party. And now you're saying being a daddy is a DUmmie idea?

We abort, classic. Being a daddy isn't a part of the equation. Not only that, we eat our babies. Who's the daddy when the kid gets served up with an Asian peanut sauce?

Troglamatically speaking, the Daddy idea has something to do with Mommy's basement. That's clearly your problem.

2:08 AM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"Hey, time for a new DUmmie outrage!" smitty

You're right. Let's move on to Slumdog Jindal's utter fabrication of a conversation with Sheriff Harry Lee.

Another lie. You guys have to work on your technique. The old stuff isn't working anymore.

2:20 AM  
Anonymous elrond hubbard said...

Another lie. You guys have to work on your technique. The old stuff isn't working anymore.

Are you kidding? "The old stuff" still works, just ask Joe Biden.

BTW. We're all looking forward to hearing the heart rending stories of Obama voters like you losing your jobs, homes, prized possessions, etc., etc. as the Obama depression sets in. You morons elected this clown. Now you get to pay the price.

PS, I prefer my babies served with a fiery Szechwan sauce.

4:46 PM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

And now you're saying being a daddy is a DUmmie idea?

No -- read it again strawman.

4:51 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"PS, I prefer my babies served with a fiery Szechwan sauce" elrond

God. I know what you mean. Szechwan Baby is to die for.

2:27 AM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"as the Obama depression sets in." elrond

Not exactly right, elrond. This is the Bush depression. It's also Obama's desperate attempt to pull us out.

Still can't come to grips with what you wrought? Obviously not.

Let me ask you something, elrond...name me, troglaman, one thing that went right during the last eight years. One.

2:37 AM  
Anonymous elrond hubbard said...

t-bag,

name me, troglaman, one thing that went right during the last eight years. One.

Bush's successes were few but not non-existent: 1)The Medicare prescription plan is up and running and saving me $$$. 2)Reading and math scores have improved among minority children under Bush's "No Child Left Behind"education plan. 3) Bush's tax cuts did spur spending, the economy did recover from its post 9/11 hit. 4)Up to later 2008,the Bush administration did maintain one of the lowest unemployment rates in recent history, at or about 5% (6% is considered full national employment). 5)No domestic terrorist attacks since 9/11, several plots have been foiled.

Still, Bush's policies (exacerbated by the Dems) contributed to the recession. Obama's disastrous policies will plunge us into depression.

4:28 PM  
Anonymous Classic Liberal said...

1)The Medicare prescription plan is up and running and saving me $$$.

... at MY expense elrond -- you're NOT welcome! I can't believe you're praising Bush for expanding everyone's dependence on the welfare state.

It just proves that "special interests" are us! "I'll go along with your boondoggle if your go along with my bailout."

By the way, your "success" #4 is due to the Federal Reserve's "easy money" inflationary policies that were established long ago (ca. 1913).

You want to cure unemployment? Ban unions, repeal the National Labor Relations Act and dismantle the National Labor Relations Board! They are the biggest creators of unemployment and underemployment with their government-backed and enforced repression of competition in the labor market.

6:13 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"Still, Bush's policies (exacerbated by the Dems) contributed to the recession. Obama's disastrous policies will plunge us into depression." elrond

I'm down with the first statement.

But I'm compelled to remind you that "disastrous policies" precluded Obama. Your disastrous policies.

Get Rush to run. I beg you.

3:47 AM  
Anonymous elrond hubbard said...

I'm compelled to remind you that
"disastrous policies" precluded Obama.


Bush's disastrous policies haven't "precluded" Obama from implementing his own, uniquely* disastrous, policies.

*Unique to the USA; they were previously tried in Italy back in the 1920s and 30s and, most recently, in Venezuela.

The abyss beckons.

2:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 1:50 is a faggot!

Andrew
Charge Shot!!! poster

(Come and visit my site fags!)

6:22 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home