The Crumbling Cult of Obama

Sorry guys, there are no more kings

The romance is gone. But don't worry. It's not him; it's you.

It turns out we are the ones who failed Him. We weren't prepared for a mega-dosage of awesomeness. We were too dimwitted to grasp the decency of central planning. And the insistence of troublemakers to engage in debate and vote, in fact, is the most serious threat to this nation's future.

In a recent New York Times piece, Drew Westen, a professor of psychology and a Democratic strategist, wrote that the American public had been "desperate for a leader who would speak with confidence, and they were ready to follow wherever the president led." Do Americans really have some innate autocratic tendency that makes them desperately seek out a half-term senator "wherever" he may lead?

Charles Fried, a professor at Harvard Law School, recently echoed Westen's authoritarian sentiment in a Daily Beast piece, titled "Obama Is Too Good for Us," wherein he disparaged a system that allows mere simpletons to transfer their free market absurdity to Washington through elections. Similarly, Jacob Weisberg of Slate wrote that because of "intellectual primitives" on the right, "compromise is dead" and "there's no point trying to explain complicated matters to the American people. The president has tried reasonableness and he has failed."

"Reasonableness," you'll remember, is shoving a wholly partisan, Byzantine restructuring of the health care system through Congress in the midst of an economic downturn. But chipping a few billion off a $3.7 trillion budget in exchange for raising the debt ceiling is an act of irrationality that has, apparently, sucked the very soul from the American project.

The sight of a crumbling Cult of Obama—and with it the end of the progressive presidency—has many on the left so frustrated that they simply dismiss the very idea of ideological debate. To challenge the morality and rationality of Obamanomics only means you're bought, too stupid to know any better or, most likely, both. A slack-jawed hostage-taking saboteur.

Armed with this unearned intellectual and ethical superiority, it is not surprising to hear someone like John Kerry reprimand the media for even covering conservative viewpoints. It is predictable that the Senate would "investigate" a private entity like Standard & Poor's for giving an opinion on American debt that conflicted with its own. (Remember when not listening to the Dixie Chicks was a "chilling of free speech"?)

Obama himself blamed the volatile stock market on the "prolonged debate over the debt ceiling...where the threat of default was used as a bargaining chip." So it's not the job-killing policy or another $4 trillion of debt in two years that's problematic; it's the insistence of elected officials to represent their constituents that's really killing America.

Following the lead of the Environmental Protection Agency, Education Secretary Arne Duncan recently used this imagined "dysfunction" as an excuse to try to unilaterally implement comprehensive education "reform" by bypassing law and using a waiver system. Why? "Right now," Duncan explained, "Congress is pretty dysfunctional. They're not getting stuff done."

Hate to break the news to you, Arne; for many Americans, stopping this administration from "getting stuff done" is getting stuff done.

The Founding Fathers rightly feared that the purer the democracy the more susceptible voters would be to the emotion of the moment and the demagogues who take advantage of it. Needless to say, we are democratic enough to get the politicians we deserve.

But debate is not dysfunction. Feel free to bemoan the fact that the American people are not automatons, but "getting stuff done" is not the charge of the Constitution. Neither is having a king, though sometimes you get the feeling that a lot of folks who believe in power as the wellspring of morality are really annoyed by that fact.

David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Blaze. Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Max||

    The cult of Harsnayi could fit in a Volkswagon.

  • Old Mexican||

    Arf Arf Arf!

    Shhht! Shut it, Max! We have company! Go! Go outside, now!

  • Tony||

    Geez Max you react like someone insulted you boyfriend!

  • Trident||

    Probably.
    But that's because the kind of people who read or listen to his work, tend to be people who haven't shut down their brains, got down on their knees, and sang the unconditional praises of an Almighty One as if he's the second coming of Jesus Christ.

  • Tony||

    Nobody acted that way, but of course the other side is eager for the actual second coming of Christ and seem to be gleeful about helping the world along to apocalypse.

    I think all people put too much faith in the president, including you guys, who seem to think he's responsible for all your problems.

  • the real O2||

    but not any solutionz

  • Quetzalcoatl||

    OR [JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERBS]!

  • ||

    I also blame Bush for all my problems.

  • ||

    My life held back because of, in this order:

    1.) Bush
    2.) Obama (first year in office)
    3.) Alfonso Soriano
    4.) My Freshman printshop teacher
    5.) The guy that ran into my car 10 years ago.

    (I have only paid attention to politics for 9 years.)

    ARGGGGG!

  • "Nobody acted that way."||

  • Don||

    Those are hot!

  • Rev. Blue Moon ||

    What is with the one with Stalin and Hugh Laurie? That is the weirdest one.

  • Bill||

    It has been the nearly identical policies of Bush-Obama that are the root of our problems.

    I don't like the band Rush that much but this reminds me of the lyrics to Tom Sawyer about God or Government. Can someone help me out?

  • Concerned Citizen||

    "though his mind is not for rent
    to any God or government"

  • Neil Peart||

    "His mind is not for rent/to any God or Government."

  • mad libertarian guy||

    "No, his mind is not for rent
    To any god or government.
    Always hopeful, yet discontent,
    He knows changes aren't permanent,
    But change is."

  • Joe||

    Except for the jerk who thinks we need Obama because Americans are secretely craving some sort of Führerprinzip.

    It takes a leftist to buy that kind of thing to such an extent that they believe their own deflection statements.

  • Maxxx||

    Progs always go to the presidents don't really matter all that much meme after their guy has fucked everything up.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    + eleventy

  • Chris Matthews||

    Something ran down my leg, and it wasn't a thrill.

  • Old Salt||

    Was it warm and brown?

  • Mike M.||

    Kill yourself.

  • Old Mexican||

    To challenge the morality and rationality of Obamanomics only means you're bought, too stupid to know any better or, most likely, both. A slack-jawed hostage-taking saboteur.


    Or the all purpose end-all of all civilized discourse:

    You must be a racist!!

  • Rachel Maddow||

    What is it with you guys and the 1964 Civil Rights Act?!

  • JoJo Zeke||

    The whole "Young Elvis Costello" look. What's up with that, anyway...?

  • Art Vandelay||

    Every time I see Maddow on TV, my first, immediate reaction is: "What the hell is Dennis Mitchell's father doing on my screen -- ?!?"

  • Greer||

    I"m old enough to get the joke.

  • George Wilson||

    I'm old enough to be dead.

  • William Frawley||

    Get in line, buddy.

  • ||

    Pikers!

  • Rachel Maddow||

    I'm hip; I'm cool. My audience demographics are college students and people who came of age during the "Shoegazing" era.

  • ||

    "She wears underwear with dickholes in 'em."

  • ||

    +1
    oh look its boy george

  • the real O2||

    and those w advanced educations

  • ||

    I can never be disappointed by Barack Obama. I pity anyone who can.

    -jcr

  • Trident||

    I always expect him to be either a complete dumb ass, or an arrogant, condescending jerk off.

    He has yet to disappoint me.

  • Michelle Obama||

    Huh. Try sleeping with him, sometime.

  • Andrew Sullivan||

    True dat.

  • Fillmore Butz||

    Yeah, maybe. But look at what he has to work woth.

  • Michelle Obama||

    He keeps trying to fuck my fat rolls.

    Now where's that double cheeseburger?

  • the real O2||

    his sperm tastes like the sweet nectar of the gods

  • OO||

    ^homo spoofer^

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Who can tell the difference?

  • Larry Sinclair||

    Hated it.

  • ||

    "It is predictable that the Senate would "investigate" a private entity like Standard & Poor's for giving an opinion on American debt that conflicted with its own."

    Aren't those the same bozos that investigated the ratings agencies last time--because they bowed to pressure and weren't really independent?

    So, what, now how the ratings agencies rate treasuries--the world would be better off if that were a popularity contest?!

    "Obama himself blamed the volatile stock market on the "prolonged debate over the debt ceiling...where the threat of default was used as a bargaining chip."

    The stock market volatility over the last five trading days is a direct result of events in Europe--especially Spain, Italy and now France.

    If Barack Obama is so out of it, that he doesn't know that?

    Then he's far too incompetent to be the president of the United States.

  • Joe Biden||

    Then he's far too incompetent to be the president of the United States.

    "PRESENT!"

  • ||

    He's not running against Greeks and Portuguese officials next year.

  • mr simple||

    Racist!

  • ||

    I could almost go conspiracy theory with the implications of this. Did the government put pressure on the rating agencies to overvalue MBS for Fannie/Freddie/everyone-must-own-a-home purposes?

  • the real O2||

    the AIG & CUNA lawsuits cite only [LYING & MISREPRESENTATION] by BoA & Goldman to investors & rating agencies.

  • Trident||

    "Then he's far too incompetent to be the president of the United States."

    You can't think of a laundry list full of other reasons for this to be true?

  • ||

    Better yet, didn't the congress CREATE the NRSRO (natinally recognized statistical rating organization)?
    There probably hasn't been such shock at one's own creation reining down havoc since:
    Frankenstein?
    Cher?
    health care reform?

    feel free to add your own examples

  • Obama's Mom||

    I can think of one.

  • Bush's Grandma ||

    Only one?

  • DLM||

    If Barack Obama is so out of it, that he doesn't know that?

    No president can know everything. Either Obama has crappy advisors or he doesn't listen to them.

  • ||

    That one was pretty basic.

    If the man is so self-absorbed that he thinks markets around the world are rocked by his speeches?

    ...when they're really reacting to what's going on in Europe?

    That's more than just not knowing everything--that's completely missing some really basic and important shit!

    It's been all about Europe for the last five days--ALL about Europe.

  • Barrack Obama||

    Make no mistake.. I do not have a problem with teabaggers, although I admit that the hair in my teeth is at times uncomfortable. Eat your peas!

  • Toolbag||

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....story.html
    Standard & Poor’s, the agency that downgraded U.S. Treasuries, went out of its way to stress its faith in politicians in Paris to compromise on a plan to reduce French debt.

  • Mercurus||

    I just hope nobody shoots the SOB....

    A landslide loss on Nov. 4 would be much more satisfying than impeachment or shooting him in the street.

    After all, we're not a third world country...yet.

  • sarcasmic||

    What if someone whacks both him and Mr Hairplugs?
    Then we'd have a genuine bonerfied prez.

  • ||

    It did wonders for my image! If I'd served out my full term, everyone would just remember me as the asshole who lost Cuba.

    Love,

    Jack.

  • ||

    Uh, Ike lost Cuba.

  • ||

    Um, Meyer Lansky lost Cuba.

  • Concerned Citizen||

    Uh, Fredo Corleone lost Cuba.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    And when the Castro Brothers finally lose Cuba, watch for the people who cry and wring their hands in utter despair.

  • Joe||

    Actually Meyer Lansky tried to buy a passport from my dad.

  • k2000k||

    Think he is referring to bay of pigs.

  • ||

    Remember how JFK's incompetence as a PT boat captain got spun into him being some kind of war hero?

    -jcr

  • ||

    Ughh I know. You don't get points for rescuing your crew after you steered the fastest, most maneuverable craft in the fleet in front of an enemy ship.

  • ||

    I am hoping the incoming Prez finds a stash of goat porn videos with Obama's DNA on them. Just so we don't have to have 30+ years of this ass moralizing on every issue that comes down the pike.

  • Michelle Obama||

    That's not a goat!

  • DLM||

    I just hope nobody shoots the SOB....

    Don't give his reelection committee any ideas.

  • Chris Matthews||

    He's just too good, too pure for this wretched, blasted heath of a world! YOU NEVER REALLY LOVED HIM, ANY OF YOU -- !!!

    [::flings self down onto bed, sobs brokenly into fave plush animal::]

  • Tony||

    There, there Chris let me comfort you.

  • Old Mexican||

    Oh, Chris.... Your life oh so full of disappointments...

  • More Chris||

    Just leave Barry ALONE!!!!!!!!!

    [Screams into webcam, snot running down nose]

  • ||

    Nicely done!

  • ||

    Where's June Cleaver when we need her? She'd make little Chris feel better.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    The Way Florence Henderson made Barry Williams "feel better"?

  • The Press||

    Yes, we did! We're still in the tank for him, we promise! Didn't you notice how we tried to blame the whole debt and downgrade debacle on the Tea Party? We love the messiah!

  • OBASSEIAH||

    Amen Amen I say unto thee, thou arst forgiven for thoust know not what thee do.

  • goneGalt||

    Thanks be to you, but you still suck.

  • Spock||

    "He's just too good, too pure for this wretched, blasted heath of a world! YOU NEVER REALLY LOVED HIM, ANY OF YOU -- !!!

    [::flings self down onto bed, sobs brokenly into fave plush animal::]"

    LMAO!!!

  • Eric||

    I voted for him, and am not happy with much that he has done.
    However, if given the choice between him and anyone in the current GOP crop(sans Gary Johnson), he most likely has my vote again...

  • Shorter Eric||

    [::reinserts ball gag more firmly into mouth, anticipates approach of The Gimp from behind::]

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Or, you can just do like I typically do, and write in someone. It's not like you have to beholden yourself to the official names on the ballot.

    If you think the choice is going to be a shit sandwich and a bottle of piss, then what's the point in even voting?

  • Partisan||

    Just because the two party system isn't perfect doesn't mean you should throw away your vote on some third party!

  • Eric||

    Will do...as long as I can find a Republican to do the same so that the net effect of my write-in isn't a vote for Michelle Bachmann

  • shorter Eric||

    Yay Team Blue!

  • Eric||

    It really depends upon the day. Today like to think of it as the inverse - Fuck Team Red!

  • Tony||

    You can hate the system and still be aware of how to work within its limitations. You only really get to vote for one team or the other. Your own ego doesn't get a vote.

  • HermanLame||

    Eric, I hope you remember those words when Obama is elected to a second term and, absent having to consider public opinion for a reelection bid, REALLY let's loose and shows his true colors.

  • Eric||

    I'll take that possible future over the one offered by Bachmann, Perry, or Palin.

  • ||

    Are you that stupid to believe that there would be a difference?

  • Tony||

    There wouldn't be a difference if you take the perspective "there will still be a government and I will still be a pissy ass queen about it." But yes I think it's clear that having an educated person rather than a religious fundamentalist lunatic will somewhat matter.

  • goneGalt||

    No it won't.

  • HermanLame||

    And what about the possible future over the one offered by Paul, Johnson, Roemer, or Karger?
    And yes, I think there is a difference even between BPP, Romney, etc. and a second Obama term. As I said, he's not worried about running for another term, so if he wants to outright socialize medicine, nationalize industries, or put forward whatever foolish central-planning scheme he wants, he's going to be FAR more brazen. All that's stoping him is getting the votes, and who knows, maybe he might do it through executive order. The damage he could do is far worse than the damage a neocon or a religious nut could do. Don't take this as defending the religious right, I have no kind words for them, but to vote on social issues like that when Obama stands to do likely irreversible damage doesn't strike me as smart.

  • ||

    I'd love to see an educated person in the white house. Specifically, a board-certified obstetrician.

    We've had quite enough of these pseudo-intellectuals with degrees in how to pretend the constitution doesn't say what it says.

    -jcr

  • ||

    Tony is talking about credentials, not education. You know what they teach you at Harvard law school? Contracts, torts, property, and in years 2 and 3, totally useless shit like gender and the law, etc. In other words, nothing useful to a future president. Oh and by the way, Obama majored in poly sci in undergrad, that haven of math-averse, pre-law students everywhere. So I suppose he learned how to get elected. And I don't want to leave out the deep learning he undoubtedly gained by writing two books about himself. It is obvious that the overarching lesson of modern education -- self-esteem -- was not lost on Obama.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Yes because his intellectualism has done fucking wonders.

    Intellectuals have done far more damage to America than any other demographic. Every bad policy and policy decision has come straight from the halls of intellectualism. Every. Single. One.

    Being able to read and discuss Foucault's Pendulum does NOT qualify one to make public policy. In fact, thinking that oneself is somehow better qualified should be automatic disqualification.

  • Tony||

    What does qualify one to make public policy? Having 'common sense'?

  • ||

    Unqualified commitment to leaving people the fuck alone and not stealing their stuff.

  • ||

    What does qualify one to make public policy?

    Knowing the difference between right and wrong would be a good start.

    -jcr

  • Eric||

    "Being able to read and discuss Foucault's Pendulum does NOT qualify one to make public policy."

    Neither does being in the military, but you won't see that sacred cow slaughtered on the Right, will you?

  • John Kerry||

    Shut up.

  • ||

    Yeah, but it IS a great book for both those who love conspiracies and those who hate them ! Win !

    And you have to admit it, Obama isn't really educated in a normalhe can talk (off a teleprompter), but he doesn't actually SAY anything.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    But yes I think it's clear that having an educated person rather than a religious fundamentalist lunatic will somewhat matter.

    "I'll just completely ignore the last 2.5 years and think that they're any different from the eight years before that."

  • JoJo Zeke||

    "I'll just completely ignore the last 2.5 years and think that they're any different from the eight years before that."

    +1,000,000,000

  • ||

    yes, I see the difference that having a constitutional scholar has made. Now we don't go to war without congressional authorization... oh, wait...

    Oh, and the 14th amendment allows the president to borrow as much money as he'd like. That was a doozie too. At least that one didn't result in any actual unconstitutional activities by the executive...

  • You should consider suicide||

    ""there will still be a government and I will still be a pissy ass queen about it."

    Nice of you to admit it.

    "I think it's clear that having an educated person rather than a religious fundamentalist lunatic "

    So, you're also suggesting he vote for someone other than Obama. Good for you finally coming around.

  • You should consider suicide||

    ""there will still be a government and I will still be a pissy ass queen about it."

    Nice of you to admit it.

    "I think it's clear that having an educated person rather than a religious fundamentalist lunatic "

    So, you're also suggesting he vote for someone other than Obama. Good for you finally coming around.

  • DLM||

    I'll take that possible future over the one offered by Bachmann, Perry, or Palin.

    And what future might that be? (Your hysterical fantasies don't count.)

  • The Underground Conservative||

    I won't.

    Seriously, you think four or more years of President Downgrade would be better than a Perry, a Bachmann or a Palin administration?

    You're nuts. Think about that seriously instead of reacting with the usual smarm. Imagine Our Lord and Savior unchecked by the voters ruling by fiat and executive order. Imagine the devastation The Anointed One could bring ... and then imagine the real possibility that He might not leave just because the Constitution says He has to. Since when has the Constitution mattered to him? He supported that dictatorial thug in Honduras that wouldn't leave even though his term was up. Every person He admires is a dictator or a Marxist thug.

    Anyone — serious anyone — would be an upgrade over President Downgrade.

  • Mike Judge||

    I beleive that's spelled "downgrayedd"
    ...
    with two "d's" for a "double-dose" of his "pimping action"

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I still hear bullshit like "Ron Paul caused Obama to get elected" from right-wingers who STILL don't get the idea of a primary election, apparently.

  • ||

    Why a republican? I used to be one, then along came the Tea Party, and it made me wonder... well I can't buy the Christian right denial of equal rights to gays, or the feds telling women they can't eliminate a fetus (although I agree a bit on certain restraints). So where can I go? Hmmm... what's a Libertarian?

  • JD the elder||

    A while back I went to the polls with the intent of writing in a name. What I discovered was that the poll workers had absolutely no idea how to handle that request.

  • Fillmore Butz||

    In my state, the have a blank line to write one in.

  • ||

    The electronic machines are actually pretty simple to "write in" on, if tedious. I wrote in "Proposition Nineteen" for the PA House seat where the Dem was running unopposed (there weren't any numbers).

  • You should consider suicide||

    "the poll workers"

    "The electronic machines "

    Learn to read fuckwit.

  • sarcasmic||

    A lesser of two evils is still evil.

  • Tony||

    You don't get to opt out of these choices. Welcome to being a grownup.

  • Attila the Huh||

    Huh?

  • sarcasmic||

    Tell me, what other sage wisdom does your mommy impart upon you before she tucks you in?

  • Tony||

    Sometimes she says: "Don't come in my mouth, honey."

  • Tony's Mommy||

    Most of the time, though: I gargle. With gusto.

  • ||

    Grownups do what they want Dad. When I get there I'll eventually realize how full of crap you were.

  • Trident||

    Eh, yes you do.
    You never heard of the concept of "not voting"?

    Anyone who votes for Obama, votes in favor of everything he does (the same goes for Team Red). You cannot wash the blood of people he'll continue to bomb off your hands now that you know his foreign policy is a carbon copy of Bush's.

    You can opt out of choosing either evil. Those that don't, have no excuses.

  • Tony||

    What does not voting accomplish? Giving a boost to your own self-esteem for being pure doesn't help anyone or stop any wars.

  • sarcasmic||

    Voting does? Go suck a dick.

  • In Time of War||

    I voted last election. What wars have stopped since then?

  • Trident||

    It helps me have a clear conscience.
    You statists should try it sometimes, especially considering that without statists there would be no fucking wars launched at all.

    Here you are, someone who supports an act (voting) that is needed to start wars, telling me to commit the same act in order to stop them.

    But in the meanwhile i find it hilarious that you think voting apparently will stop wars in the first place.
    And here i was thinking that Arabs are getting assfucked by both neocons and liberals.

    Jesus Christ, Tony. Can you at least bother to check if your arguments have any relation to reality?
    I don't even have to agree with them, just try not to spew any obviously demonstrable horse shit.
    BOTH PARTIES ARE WARMONGERS.

    As far as not accomplishing anything else by not voting. What i want to accomplish, is that there is no more state coercion.
    I can't vote and help appoint a mob enforcer in order to eradicate the mafia. It's an oxymoron.

  • DLM||

    What does not voting accomplish?

    I have to agree % 100. In the current system, third parties are simply not viable. Not voting has the same effect of casting half your vote for one party and half for the other. Anyone who's interested in true change (or prevention thereof) must still work within one party or the other. That is until some critical mass among voters and politicians is reached and a third party becomes an option to replace an existing party.

  • DK||

    Third parties unviable? Tell that to Ross Perot. Or to my old governor Jesse Ventura. Or to Teddy Roosevelt circa Bull Moose. Granted - it takes a big, big problem to allow a third party candidate to actually have a chance. And two of those guys lost their elections. But we may be reaching a point where there are enough people realizing we do have a big, big problem.

    Wow! Just read the last sentence of your post. Sorry for repeating exactly what you said.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    Now that's something that you know absolutely nothing about.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Refusing to vote for Team Red's Evil Hood Ornament or Team Blue's Evil Token Douchebag, is still denying either Team a vote, Tony.

    Jesus, you sound like Hannity on this topic.

  • ||

    Time for a third choice?

  • WTF||

    So you're already rationalizing the fact that you are going back for more ass-raping. "Really, he only hurts me because he loves me!"

  • Ike Turner||

    Bitches always come back for more of the pimp hand. Always.

  • Tony||

    It's... it's like you can actually see my soul...

  • OO||

    no, only boosch can see people's souls like w putin.

  • Skip||

    Bush was trying to compliment a new leader on the world scene and smooth over relations, something the Left always whined that he never did. Yet the Left insanely over reacted to that quote.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Which is odd, considering how much the American left must love people like Putin, deep down...

  • Eric||

    Not quite. I'm rationalizing that if they all suck more or less equally, then I might as well vote for the person I hate least. In this case, Flying Spaghetti Monster help me, it's Obama.

  • Ike Turner||

    Whatever, baby. Now: get back into that shimmy dress I bought you, before I have to maybe give you another little taste, knowhutimsayin?

  • T||

    I'm rationalizing

    Quite furiously, it appears.

  • ||

    On what issue is Obama better than any potential GOP candidate? I notice you haven't confessed to your own political proclivities yet, but to a libertarian he has absolutely nothing to offer. He's terrible on every issue.

  • JoJo Zeke||

    but to a libertarian he has absolutely nothing to offer.

    This. On the issue of economic liberty, alone -- the root libertarian principle -- he is, for all practical intents and purposes, the fiscal anti-christ.

  • Eric||

    But what could the GOP front runners offer a Libertarian? Actually, let me rephrase that - What will the GOP front-runners actually do that's Libertarian?
    The problem is that when you're one of hundreds of legislators from gerrymandered districts, you can do and say crazy shit that you couldn't get away with when you're president. That's why, no matter who we elect, they are not going to tell the country to "suck it up and deal while I cut your medicare, social security, and veterans benefits, while raising the retirement age, and defund the military industrial complex".

    The minute that we elect someone president, they become part of the problem rather than part of the solution. Thus Obama, while faulty to the extreme, is IMHO the best of the bad choices right now. (With the exception of Gary Johnson - who probably won't make it through the GOP primaries)

  • OBASSEIAH||

    Ron Paul is a libertarian, or at the very least a constitutionalist which is a sore sight better than most other repbulicans are demcorats. He is currently polling third in Iowa, which is better than what John McCain was doing at this point in the last election cycle.

  • Eric||

    I may be splitting hairs here, but Ron Paul is a Republican who espouses economic and, to a slightly lesser degree, personal liberty. We'll see where his loyalties are when the bill comes from the cleaners if and when he wins the presidency.
    Just like the left (and middle) is finding out with Obama, beware what becomes of your Messiah when he becomes king.

  • Trident||

    His career-long voting record as a congressman has long since scared any lobbyists and special interests away.

    Barack Obama has always been a fraud.

    Either way, it's for potential Ron Paul voters to worry about. They have no "lesser evil" conundrum to consider, because RP has yet to do or say anything even remotely evil.

  • ||

    RP has yet to do or say anything even remotely evil.

    Except for the stuff about fleet-footed black youths and MLK being a pedophile.

  • neo-confederate||

    but, but king was a cross-dressing pedophile just like hoover said.

  • Trident||

    Ah, the newsletters, i presume?

    How about proving Ron Paul really stated those thing? I don't give a shit about assertions or hearsay from disgruntled people or political opponents.

    According to various people, someone else wrote those pieces and Ron Paul hardly even knew about it.
    So if you claim he did indeed write them, you're going to have to give me more than people with motives to smear him.

    Trust me, i'm open to the truth.
    I don't vote, i'm not a constitutionalist, and i think a Ron Paul presidency is like appointing a libertarian to be captain of the titanic after it has already crashed into the iceberg.
    So i have no reason to deny the truth if he truly did say those things.
    But you'll have to forgive me for not buying the kind of things i'm used to from politically motivated media.

  • ||

    These things were printed in a newsletter titled "The Ron Paul Survival Report" and Paul has acknowledged that he received money from the sales of said newsletter. There were no by-lines identifying another writer.

    It's like having your car ID'd parked outside a bank that was being robbed, picking up the fleeing bank robbers, peeling out and zooming away. Yeah, you can say you weren't the wheelman but you better have a good explanation of who was in possession of your car at the time at the very least.

    So far Ron Paul's story is that someone else wrote it but he won't say who. Some ex-employees of Dr Paul with little reason to defend him have backed up this story and ID'd the writer of the newsletters as -- I don't want to say the name, but another ex-Paul employee who is quite prominent in the paleolibertarian movement.

  • Sploithunter||

    @ Eric
    Are you really fucking choosing Obama over Paul?!?!? You appear to base this decision on your philosophy of choosing the lesser of two evils (which we could debate, but let it stand for now) and a belief that Ron Paul (with a 30 year long voting record as a strict constitutionalist/libertarian) is likely a sleeper agent to push some neocon agenda. Therefore, it is better to choose Obama over Paul, because, who knows, he might be an alien or a democrat in disguise.

    I admit, it is note quite chem-trails worthy, but it is close. I don't know what else to say to you....

  • Bond Market||

    That's why, no matter who we elect, they are not going to tell the country to "suck it up and deal while I cut your medicare, social security, and veterans benefits, while raising the retirement age, and defund the military industrial complex".

    That's OUR job!

  • ||

    Best possible argument for a Libertarian. Nothing from Obama.

  • Nipplemancer||

    If that's your rationale for voting for Barry O'Bama, don't vote at all.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    So Team RED and Team BLUE now amount to "they all"?

  • DLM||

    I might as well vote for the person I hate least

    That's the problem. Too many people vote on the personality rather than the probable effect of that individual actually being elected.

  • ||

    There is no rational reason for voting for him again. His administration is a disaster of biblical proportions.

    If you don't like the idea of one-party rule, vote accordingly. Just don't be silly about keeping one of the worst presidents in our history.

  • Tim||

    Once you've had Barrack you'll never go back.

  • Barack Obama||

    Let me be clear.

    Modulo the typo, I am so using that for my campaign slogan.

  • Mabal Zaharie||

    +1

  • The System||

    That's a good boy.
    It's okay if you're not happy, just as long as you understand voting is obligatory.
    The world will come to an end if you don't screw up America more by voting, even if for people you know to be incompetents.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Eric,

    I voted for him, and am not happy with much that he has done.


    What has he done?

    However, if given the choice between him and anyone in the current GOP crop(sans Gary Johnson), he most likely has my vote again...


    You would vote for King Obama The Vane instead of Ron Paul The Wise?

    Fuck you!

  • Greer||

    You know, I see over and over around here that voting doesn't matter. Yet a guy says he'd vote for Obama and everyone seems to feel that this guy personally will put Obama over the top.

    I didn't vote for Prez last time and probably won't again. I can't with good conscience put a paper in the bin with this guy's name on it, but I don't really think it would matter much if I did (As long as he doesn't get reelected).

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Greer,

    You know, I see over and over around here that voting doesn't matter. Yet a guy says he'd vote for Obama and everyone seems to feel that this guy personally will put Obama over the top.


    Voting doesn't matter in the great scheme of things, but a stupid act is STILL a stupid act. Get it?

  • Trident||

    Voting doesn't matter in terms of change for the better.

    "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal," said Emma Goldman.

    Of course nobody denies that votes still get some incompetent bungling imbecile in the white house, one even worse than the other.

  • Sploithunter||

    I don't care if people vote for Prez, but register Republican and vote for Paul or Johnson. I would personally vote for Paul, but the point to to drive the republican party to our point of view. If Paul/Johnson don't make it, don't vote for Prez or vote third/write in.

    The two party system sucks, but it is what we have. Everyone on the forum, particularly the regulars, take significant time to write and bitch; however, many of you are as bad as welfare recipients bitching that you wish you had work but never looking for a job!

    Get off your FUCKING ASS and do something beside bitch! I wonder if your egos like the shit hole the government has created because it gives your inner self something to be miserable about. You rationalize your not voting because it doesn't matter, but it serves your desire to keep the status quo so that you can have your daily rant. God forbid you actually consider driving to a voting booth, volunteering for a campaign for a candidate you believe in, going door to door and talking about libertarianism, or anything beyond bitching like a bunch of old hags.

  • FlyoverCountry||

    I'm with you on most of this rant. I do feel like I could offer a whole lot more than lurking in these boards and reading about how shitty America is becoming.

    I think, "It is time to get out there and really effect some change in this World!" and then I look around at the 'campaigns' to volunteer for and all hope leaves.

    I continue to work in small ways, talking about libertarianism with my friends and family, mentioning libertarian solutions to folks at work when politics comes up in discussion; but I have not found any reason to get up on the rooftop and scream about it to everyone.

    I think we are still several years, probably at least a decade, away from people honestly thinking hard about the two party system. Until that time, I will come to Reason and lurk on the boards; not only are these good for bitching, they are good for hearing the thoughts and ideas I can't really get anywhere else yet.

  • ||

    What has he done?

    As I recall, everything Bush did, but more so.

    -jcr

  • The Left||

    ... but... but... it's more Mocha-riffic when HE does it!

  • Eric||

    What has he done?

    Too easy...

    You would vote for King Obama The Vane instead of Ron Paul The Wise?

    I'll vote for another goddamn Texan once we've cleaned up the mess left by LBJ and GWB.

    Also, I've lurked on these boards enough to suspect that a "Fuck You" from you OM likely means "I Love You". So right back at you sugar.

  • ||

    Wow, you really are a critical thinker.

    The two presidents from Illinois haven't been terribly friendly to liberty either.

  • ||

    Not sure you can say just two. Reagan was born there, Obama lived there for a while, Lincoln lived there for a while.

  • ||

    I was referring to prezis who were IL residents when elected, which would be the Great Habeas Corpus Suspender and the Great Drone Executioner.

    I'm not a fan of Reagan either but he's in a higher circle.

  • Eric||

    Agreed fully on every statement you just made :)

  • ||

    Tulpa, I knew that you would eventually see the light about that first mass murderer from Illinois.

  • ||

    I though John Wayne was from Waterloo?

  • WTF||

    I'll vote for another goddamn Texan once we've cleaned up the mess left by LBJ and GWB.

    So LBJ and GWB are somehow a good reason not to vote for Ron Paul?

    Brilliant thought process - no wonder you voted Obama.

  • ||

    Who better to mop it up than Paul?

  • Trident||

    Oh, so this whole thing is because you're an anti-Texan bigot.

    Makes sense.

    I guess when a couple of black hoodlums rob you, all blacks should be put in jail?

  • Eric||

    Lighten up. Just felt the need to take a few shots at Texas. It's been getting all uppity of late.

  • Maxxx||

    However, if given the choice between him and anyone in the current GOP crop(sans Gary Johnson), he most likely has my vote again...

    Then you are a dumb fuck.

  • Eric||

    I stand corrected and cut to pieces by the English language which you have so expertly wielded like a scalpel.

  • ||

    Maxxx was clear, concise and correct. Whazza matter, not pseudo-intellectual enough for ya?

  • ||

    "Neither is having a king, though sometimes you get the feeling that a lot of folks who believe in power as the wellspring of morality are really annoyed by that fact."

    IMHO, the sorriest aspect of all of this is that Obama has largely followed and expanded the policies of his predecessor--George W. Bush.

    ...who the Obama worshipers universally abhor.

    Which means for them, it isn't really about public policy anyway--it's about aesthetics. If Barack Obama spoke with a Southern drawl and made an effort to attend NASCAR? They'd hate him for it!

    ...and that's pathetic.

    They don't care if we have a king--it's whether they approve of the king's aesthetic preferences, and that's all they care about.

  • ||

    True. Partisans are so well trained they respond to even the most superficial of dogwhistles. The words pols spew are only there to slightly enhance the aesthetics but in the end what matters is arugula and identity politics.

  • ||

    Somebody call me.

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    ^^THIS^^

    And all the entitled pulically educated white kids can feel absolved of any culpability with the many sins inflicted on blacks. Because of this feel-good "I'm not a racist because Oby's my boy!" smugness, they automatically assume all opposition (REPEAT ALL) is longing for the days of lynch mobs and whippings down on the tobacco farm.

  • Fillmore Butz||

    "Oby's my boy"

    RACIST!@!!

  • the real O2||

    one doesnt have to assume since the RW media bubble provides the proof of their racism

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Mind-reader, eh, OO?

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Ken Shultz,

    IMHO, the sorriest aspect of all of this is that Obama has largely followed and expanded the policies of his predecessor--George W. Bush.


    Even sorrier is the fact that in the same manner that Obama followed must of GWB's programs, FDR had followed most of Hoover's... except that Obama ain't FDR.

  • ||

    It's not about the aesthetics of his southern drawl. It's about the aesthetics of red vs. blue.

    If Obama called himself a Republican, and said and did EXACTLY the same things, the progressives would simply see different things in his words and interpret him as a Christian conservative Uncle Tom.

    I'm entirely serious.

    Obama, like most politicians leaves much of what he says open to interpretation.

    The healthcare bill? Based on Mitt Romney's healthcare bill.

    Iraq, Afghanistan, Lybia? Typical hawkish conservative staces. Same with Guantanamo.

    There really isn'y *anything* in Obama's policies that can be interpreted as something a "corporo-fasict-neocon" wouldn't do.

  • DLM||

    who the Obama worshipers universally abhor

    They only abhor Bush because of his accent and he wasn't afraid to say the "G" word.

  • mr simple||

    You can feel the mounting desperation and hostility of the professional left. Couple that with the recent events in England and I have a strong urge to make sure I am well armed and stocked before next election day, should Obama lose.

  • ||

    Do you fear negro mobbings and riots?

  • goneGalt||

    I'll let mr simple speak for himself. But as for me, I just want to be able to take myself out before being sold into slavery.

  • ||

    With the vocabulary you share, I'm surprised you and Harry Reid don't get along better.

  • ||

    Fuckin' A.

  • Old Mexican||

  • Joe M||

    Leave Britney Obama alone!

  • fish||

    Old Mex you should have read the headline before the editor cleaned it up.

    "Fuck you....we ain't paying any more"!

  • sven||

    For some reason, saying, "I told you so" never gets old.

  • Max||

    Lofasz a seggedbe, Harsanyi.

  • Old Mexican||

    Arf Arf Arf!

    Shhhttt! Shut it, Max! We have company! Go get yourself out, now!

  • ||

    That's some damn fine rant, David.

  • Tman||

    I get so bummed sometimes when I realize how many Reason contributors voted for this idiot.

    Sad.

  • Tim||

    Well think of where we'd be with McCain at this point...feel better now?

  • Bombed Libyan Babies||

    There seems to be a hole in your logic, somewhere.

  • Tim||

    Sorry, McCain called enthusiastically for your blood.

  • Barack Obama||

    That's right! It has nothing whatsoever to do with ME! [::giggles::]

  • Barack Obama||

    Let me be clear. We are only bombing Libya due to the failure of the policies of the Bush administration.

  • George V||

    No Obamacare. Sounds good to me.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    This CANNOT be stated enough.

    The lack of Obamacare is enough to warrant longing for what might have been with McCain even if everything else were exactly the same.

  • Tman||

    McCain is not necessarily a vast improvement, but during the campaign the statist nature of Obama combined with his admittedly redistributive economic plans were so anti-libertarian I just couldn't fathom how anyone claiming to be libertarian-minded could hold their nose and vote for the guy.

  • Tim||

    They were hoping for an end to the drug wars, terror wars and the surveillance state. So much for that.

  • Tman||

    Otter: Flounder, you can't spend your whole life worrying about your mistakes! You fucked up... you trusted us! Hey, make the best of it! Maybe we can help.

  • ||

    those pant creases! and the soaring rhetoric!

  • Fillmore Butz||

    Collective white guilt.

  • Bill||

    They had high hopes on his getting us out of the wars, cutting military spending, decriminalizing drugs, cutting numbers of people sent to prison for victimless crimes, gay neutral policies, fixing Patriot Act, etc. They hoped he really was at least a Civil libertarian.

    Hope floats. (not sure what that means but I saw it in a movie once)

  • ||

    Your something else was floating while viewing Sandra Bullock.

  • WTF||

    Hope floats

    So do turds.

  • Barack Obama||

    So I'm safe either way, then! WOO-Hoo -- !!!

  • AdamJ||

    Probably because McCain went insane, then brought Palin on, and we thought there was a chance we would end American imperialism. How wrong we were....

    Never again.

  • Tman||

    I don't buy the "crazy Palin" argument.

    Palin or Biden? I'll take the moose lady thank you. Biden has trouble operating toilet paper properly.

  • Joe Biden||

    Okay if I plagiarize that one, for future use...?

  • goneGalt||

    Depends

  • ||

    What does Leahy have to do with this?

  • Joe Biden||

    Biden has trouble operating toilet paper properly.

    Hey now, that's not really..SQUIRREL!

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    Yeah, it's always a trade-off between immense piles of rotting dog shit. I mean, we always hear about how if Gore was elected Iraq wouldn't have happened, etc. but that doesn't necessarily mean Gore would have kept us out of a foreign military disaster altogether. Moreover, Gore would have probably helped impose some environmental chains on everything and god knows what would have resulted from that. At the same time...Yeah...Bush fucking sucked.

    With Obama, we've got an inevitably poorly executed health care scheme primed for raping our collective ass AND Libya AND the continuation of bullshit in Iraq AND Afghanistan. With McCain...well ... we would have had potentially even more involvement in Iraq and maybe Iran without the healthcare scheme (or at least this version of it---Bush did give us more Medicare horseshit). In the end, with the types of shitty unprincipled hacks Americans have/could've elected for themselves it's really a wash when it comes to squandered wealth and even the deaths of innocent foreigners(potentially).

    This is why I always vote for ficitonal characters like Scrooge McDuck and Rob Stark (KING IN THE NORTH).

  • Tim||

    Stark? Sure, but you have to admit that Joffrey was tough on crime.

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    Stark was tough on crime (SPOILER WARNING). He killed one of his sort-of relatives for fucking with some POWs.

  • Scrooge McDuck||

    If I won, it would be awesome.

    Awesome.

  • T||

    If we're voting for Game of Thrones characters, I'm voting Daenerys Stormborn. She'd burn the whole mess down.

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    Actually, I do kind of like the implied anarchy of Mance Rayder. Maybe, I'll vote for him come Nov '12.

  • Cersei||

    Vote for me, and I'll blow you.

  • OBASSEIAH||

    Fuck that. Tyrion Lanniser.

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    I may vote for John Galt, if I can get at least 14 other people to do it.

  • ||

    The administration Gore was second in command in had regime change in Iraq as a fundamental policy goal. They also tried to push through much of the Patriot Act (then as purely financial regulation) in the late 90s but were rebuffed by the GOP Senate, led by Sen. John Ashcroft.

    Oh, and if Gore fills the O'Connor and Rehnquist vacancies on SCOTUS, you can imagine what Citizens United and Heller would have looked like.

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    As always, different shades of shit.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    A LOT better off - that's where.

  • Tim||

    Count de Monet: Your Majesty, you look like the piss-boy!
    King Louis XVI: And you look like a bucket of shit!

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082517/quotes

  • Fillmore Butz||

    Thanks. I liked this one:

    Narrator: And of course, with the birth of the artist came the inevitable afterbirth... the critic

  • Fillmore Butz||

    And this one (because it's very libertarian):

    Leader of Senate: All fellow members of the Roman senate hear me. Shall we continue to build palace after palace for the rich? Or shall we aspire to a more noble purpose and build decent housing for the poor? How does the senate vote?
    Entire Senate: FUCK THE POOR!

  • ||

    -10, because that fucking sucked.

  • Fillmore Butz||

    Barakolypse Now!

  • wulfy||

    They are more than annoyed at their decaying power. They are entering second stage of grief: ANGER. Having seen too much evidence that the Obama Cult is crumbling, DENIAL is giving way to angry and patently irrational outbursts:

    1. Christina Romer on Bill Maher: "We're Fucked"

    2. Al Gore: Deniers are full of "Bullshit!"

    3. Joe Biden and several Dem congressmen: Tea Party members are "Terrorists"

    4. John Kerry, David Axelrod, etc: the downgrade was a "Tea Party Downgrade", in a classic case of shooting the messenger who was warning of financial damage.

    The grief is for their recent AND inevitable loss of power. They gerrymandered their districts in such a way that once the Tea Party decimates the moderate districts, all they will ahve left is the radical left districts, with NO prospect of any moderate "Reagan Democrats" arising to reclaim Democratic power.

    They have painted themselves in a corner they will not get out fo for 20 years, and THEY KNOW IT, and ARE GRIEVING. In a schadenfeudal state of enjoyment, I am entertained by their wailing and gnashing of teeth as their designs on tyrannizing the republic wither under libertarian assaults. Well done, so far, folks.

    Now we must finish the job: Eject the king, flip the Senate, take the remaining moderate districts, then set about releasing the entrepreneurs from captivity, scaling back the imperial footprint, and rearchitecting the Federal Hammock into a minimal Safety Net we can afford.

  • ||

    This all sounds great, but then leads me to depressing thoughts of the current crop of GOP hopefuls: Romney? Bachman? Right now I can't see Obama NOT winning another 4 ghastly years of increasing executive power. I gonna go raid the fridge now (at work...)

  • wulfy||

    Any candidate that puts Herman Cain on the ticket will landslide Bam-Bam.

  • OBASSEIAH||

    If the tea party is as strong as some people claim or fear than individuals like Johnson or Paul stand a much better chance this time around. We are still very early in the election cycle.

  • Tony||

    What have Republicans ever done to demonstrate that they are on your side?

    They're selling you a power vacuum when they know perfectly well that there is no such thing. Their only mission is to take power away from people and hand it to corporations. What you mean by "captivity" is that corporations aren't yet allowed to completely make their own law. The idea that the rich and powerful are somehow victims of workers and poor people is the biggest Orwellian rhetorical coup of the modern age in the US. Just sit and think about what you're defending for a minute. Good stewardship of the budget is a talking point, not a policy goal of Republicans.

    I will be a good liberal about it and not say you're ignorant cretins, you're just victims of propaganda. You've been convinced that the only power that exists is government power, but what you're really doing is supporting power that doesn't have to bother with being checked by elections.

  • George Soros' Hand||

    Waitasecond... I wasn't firmly jammed all the way up in there, that time. Start again, okay?

  • Lord Ballsac||

    "...but what you're really doing is supporting power that doesn't have to bother with being checked by elections."

    Nope they are just checked by profit and loss(something that can happen millions of times a day and not a paltry fucking once every 4 measly fucking years), and of course when they lose they will always stay in business and the same retards will always get away with it and they will never have to change their ways at all. I think I read that in a book I saw at Borders...

  • Tony||

    I don't think you get it. Power means something--like the ability to change the supply/demand equation in favor of the already powerful. If you were a large corporation would you try to influence the system to make it more difficult for you to profit, or easier? Would you help engender competition so the market could work its magic (which apparently extends to creating and maintaining a decent society)? Or would you try to stifle competition for your own benefit?

    There's a reason police power was invented. You guys are trying to sell lawlessness for the powerful and want to be patted on the back for loving freedom.

  • Art Vandelay||

    I don't think you get it.

    O, Bitter Irony!

  • A Serious Man||

    This has to be spoof Tony, because no one could be so utterly dense and immune to self-reflection.

    Btw, I think GE will be the first to tell you that the Democrats like to use the power of the state to manipulate the market and shift resources to areas where there is no demand. Can you say fancy, energy efficient lightbulbs that nobody would buy unless the EPA makes them?

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: A serious man,

    This has to be spoof Tony, because no one could be so utterly dense and immune to self-reflection.


    Uh, no - that is him.

  • Tony||

    Why is being cozy with corporations only bad when Democrats do it?

    I have no problem with government supporting certain industries for a purpose. God knows there's money to be made supplying defense policy. A good purpose, that is, not "because they want more profits and fewer constraints."

  • ||

    I have no problem with government supporting certain industries for a purpose.

    Everyone knows, hookers and blow don't pay for themselves!

    -jcr

  • Government||

    DID SOMEONE SAY STIFLE COMPETITION? THAT'S OUR MIDDLE NAME!

    OUR OTHER NAME'S ARE MASS MUDRDER AND REPRESSION!

  • ||

    "If you were a large corporation would you try to influence the system to make it more difficult for you to profit, or easier? Would you help engender competition so the market could work its magic (which apparently extends to creating and maintaining a decent society)? Or would you try to stifle competition for your own benefit?"

    Regulations will stop this!! Pinky promise.

  • Tony||

    What do you think competition (antitrust) laws are about?

    Contrary to libertarian magical thinking, markets only work as advertised when they are actually set up in a way that promotes competition--and private market actors have no incentive to support competition.

  • Major League Baseball||

    What do you think competition (antitrust) laws are about?

    Beats us.

  • ||

    Not to get too serious, but what better regulator is there than competition, IF ITS AVAILABLE? Companys can compete when producing power, but there's only one way (one set of wires) to deliver it. same with railroads vs trains, etc. Along comes technology and we no longer need phone lines. So lets separate the competitive aspects of any enterprise from the inherently monopolisttic, freeing the former and regulating the latter, with regular reviews as technology changes the rules.

  • cynical||

    Sure they do, since they'd rather have all of the pie than split it with other market participants.

    I mean, they don't care about the principle of competition, but they don't usually have any better option.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    "What do you think competition (antitrust) laws are about?"

    They were about the glorification of Teddy Roosevelt who dreamed them up.

    They certainly about any actual monopolistic companies, since there has never been so much as one single monopoly on this earth that wasn't a result of explicit creation by government itself.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Sockpuppet,

    Their only mission is to take power away from people and hand it to corporations.


    Unlike Obama and his team, who took the power from the people and gave it to Goldman Sachs.

  • JT||

    corporations don't exist in a vacuum either. They don't just make money by sitting there and being all corporationy. Not to defend the concept of a corporation in the true sense of the word, but, unlike our government, a business is never guaranteed continued existence.

  • Tony||

    Which is why it's curious to think that the results of supply and demand will provide for a decent society when you can't even predict what they'll do for a single firm. Monopoly power is continued existence that nobody can do anything about (except government). Government gets changed every 2–6 years in this country based on what people want outside of the sphere of the market. The goal here seems to be to turn spending power into voting power, but there's a very good reason voting is divorced from personal wealth: people are more important than markets and their preferences should always come first.

    As you say, nobody is guaranteed a profit, so why do libertarians' every policy choice reflect the desire to maximize profits for the corporate status quo? As if government should be in the business of securing profits for private enterprises rather than the business of governing.

  • k2000k||

    Wrong, natural monopolies get broken all the time. Sony at one time had a virtual monopoly on the mobile media mareket with their sony walkman, not anymore. Kodak had a near monopolu with their kodak film, not any more. Microsoft had a monopoly in the O/S market that is slowly being whittled away. Monopolies by their very nature, without being artifically proped up by the government, are the instruments of their own eventual demise.

  • ||

    Bingo.

  • The Ingenious Hidalgo||

    people are more important than markets and their preferences should always come first

    Even when they prefer to steal from their fellow man. The market, Tony, is the expression of people's preferences: they labour for things they want or things they can exchange for things they want. Wealth flows to things people care about. The market doesn't have preferences of its own - it's not a conscious entity. It's just what happens when people are allowed to trade their wealth freely.

    why do libertarians' every policy choice reflect the desire to maximize profits for the corporate status quo?

    They don't. They reflect a desire for freedom.

  • BakedPenguin||

    What have Republicans ever done to demonstrate that they are on your side?

    Dear Sockpuppet: I don't want a politician on my side. I want them out of my way.

  • ||

    having a politician on your side is like having the mob on your side.

    It's good for the short term as you buy protection and get goodies. But you have to pay in the end - with your life, liberty and self-respect.

  • Tony||

    I'm sure that concern for self-respect will stop corporations from trying to gain an advantage by capturing government power.

    Corporate lobbyists are redundant. It should be obvious that any entity wants less regulation and lower taxes for itself. Anarchy is great when it's just you who gets to enjoy it.

    The truly perverse aspect is that even with a massive and sophisticated lobbying operation that totally ensures that the self-interest of large corporations is more of a priority for government than the interests of the people, the claim is still made that they are too encumbered and that's what the country's real problem is.

  • ||

    Tony, you are a class A dumbshit.

    The word honor and dignity has no meaning to cretins like you.

  • Tony||

    They have no meaning to profit-generating machines known as corporations either.

    I don't trust even the most well-intentioned of persons, politician or otherwise, to use unchecked power wisely, so why do you?

  • Tony||

    ...and yet, I voted for Obama, and my senators and state representatives...

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Okay, fine, Tony.

    Now... tell us why we should vote for Democrats.

  • Tony||

    ::blink::

    ::blink::

    ::blink::

    I... don't understand the question.

  • scythe||

    slowpoke.jpg

  • NotSure||

    Who needs a king when one can have an Emperor !

  • Tim||

    I was expecting more: the Barney Frank Fart interview;

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaG4A0Bm8c4

  • Almanian||

    Well - shyuh - whaddya expect from a reactionary loon (callback! someone called me that yesterday) like David Harasuyyynnii however he spells his fucked up name?

    He's a card-carrying, tea-bagging, rat-fucking racist homophobe, so - DUH - you expected something different?

    Have fun in your echo chamber, libertardianistas!!!11!

  • ||

    No, it's libert-aryans! Racists, get it ?ROFL ROFL ORLFORLFOR

  • Angry Liberal Mob||

    WE MUST BURN THE BEA-TAGGERS!!!!!! THEY ARE TOO DANGEROUS AND BLOODTHRISTY TO BE ALLOWED TO LIVE!!!! WE MUST DISEMBOWEL THEM IN FRONT OF THEIR CHILDREN SO THEY WILL FOREVER REMEMBER THE SINS OF THEIR VIOLENT, BLOODTHRISTY, MOB-LIKE, BEA-TAGGING ELDERS!!!!!!!!!!!!

    BLOOD AND FIRE, BLOOD AND FIRE, BLOOD AND FIRE BLOOD AND FIRE BLOOOOOOOOODDDDDDDDDDDDDDDOOOOOOOOODODOIUA(*&A)(D*&YAOIHUGD;^*TDITUUOQGLKHA

  • Chuck Schumer||

    You Tea Partiers are killing us. I'm going to self-immolate myself on the capitol steps today if you don't admit that Statism is our salvation, and renounce your libertarian blasphemy against your Savior, the State.

  • A Serious Man||

    Um, okay, but you do realize that that's like the bank robber threatening to blow his own head off, right?

  • Blazing Saddles||

    Back off, or the nigger gets it!

  • Almanian||

    "debt reduction" is just code for "kill the poor"! You bastards!

  • ||

    I thought it was a dog whistle for "I hate black people".

  • Almanian||

    No, no - that would be RACIST! And we can't have that...

  • ||

  • ||

    That is a damn catchy tune.

  • Janean Garafolo||

    You racist terrorist assholes don't fool me. Wanting "Liberty" and "Fixing the Economy" are just excuses to cover for your real desires: hating and lynching the First Black President. I bet you have your hoods and ropes ready when he comes to your state to campaign next year.

    Goddam libertarian Nazi's! Don't you see that to love freedom is to hate our Almighty Government, our Lord and Giver of Benefits, Who Loves Us so much that he gave us his only Son, Barack Christ, who is sacrificing his Presidency for our Sins of Greed!

  • ||

  • JoJo Zeke||

    You're just lucky nobody here ever tries spoofing you, in order to make you sound silly.

  • ||

    Well said, even for a right-wing shill / Koch brothers minion ;-)

  • Kim Jong-il||

    If Barack every wants some advice, I'm here for him. I myself always ask why everyone around me is so fucking stupid.

  • Matt Damon||

    Are we soul mates? 'Cause I think maybe we're soul mates.

  • Matt Damon||

    The intrinsically paternalistic nature of the North Korean regime has made a paternalistically intrinsic intrisic paternalistic paternalism attitude the norm, when really we should be intrinsically intrinsic in our efforts to paternalistically BROKEN SENTENCE CANNOT COMPUTE

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Charles Fried, a professor at Harvard Law School, recently echoed Westen's authoritarian sentiment in a Daily Beast piece, titled "Obama Is Too Good for Us,"

    Barack Obama is not a skillful strategist like Bill Clinton. He is not a gifted rhetorician like Ronald Reagan. Nor is he a bold and inspiring leader like Abraham Lincoln. And he can’t seem to shake himself loose from the strings that attach him to the trial lawyers, to big labor, and, surprisingly, to the standard banker-economists who got us into the mess we are in now. But he is an honest man. He is intelligent, analytical, and knowledgeable. And he tries hard to think through the dilemmas which confront us and to tell us clearly and straightforwardly what he wants to do and why he wants to do it.

    Harvard. Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

  • ||

    100 megatons. Otherwise, some of the cockroaches will slither away and survive.

  • Tony||

    in a Daily Beast piece, titled "Obama Is Too Good for Us"

    The man's a prophet, I tell you. A prophet!

  • ||

    Honest? The guy has lied to us pretty much every time he's opened his mouth. Unbelievable, the distortion.

  • ||

    Charles Fried is a former justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. He was appointed by that self described "libertarian" William Weld.

    Fried is a guy who has been in and around government most of his adult life. If one is an Ivy grad, an Ivy prof and public sector parasite, one should be fed to the ovens without any further ado.

  • Almanian||

    But he is an honest man.

    That's head-snappingly ignorant.

    He is intelligent, analytical, and knowledgeable.

    No. No, he is not.

  • Eric||

    I hate to interrupt the ad-hominem attack circle jerk here, but can you expand on how Obama is not intelligent, analytical, nor knowledgeable? Because unless you know him and can prove it, I'm pretty sure that his resume inarguably proves otherwise.

    If you're going to critique the man, start with competency. That is the trait that should be under scrutiny here. It will also separate H&R comments from the manure found at WorldNetDaily.

  • ||

    How is "competent" versus "intelligent" a meaningful distinction? The end result in both cases is the same. Would it make you feel better to know that the totally incompetent President in office is in private an enormously brilliant man? It wouldn't me.

  • Eric||

    Point taken completely, however someone has to take a fucking counterpoint here. Jesus Christ, there has to be distinctions between Libertarians and the modern crop of Republicans...Right? Or should I take my ball and go home?

  • ||

    If making distinctions from Republicans means making meaningless points that Democratic shills like Tony make, then maybe you should take your ball and go home.

  • Eric||

    I don't think that's the original Tony. But I've always wondered why you all hate him so much. He's articulate and provides you someone to argue with. If the counterpoints go away it would be a boring forum.

  • The Ingenious Hidalgo||

    The problem with Tony, though, is that you can explain your position to him a dozen times and he will still misrepresent it - not restate it less generously, but actually attribute beliefs to you that you don't hold. Then when you put him right he will fail to respond to your arguments, and come back the next week having apparently forgotten everything you said so you have to explain it all over again. And for those of us who use debate in order to give ourselves opportunities to discover our mistakes, it gets tiresome - not to mention nobody likes having their position misunderstood.

  • JoJo Zeke||

    Yuppers. (e.g.: "Libertarians =/= Republicans." Seriously, how many times has he had this patiently explained to him...?)

  • JoJo Zeke||

    Critical logic FAIL. Being resolutely against allowing the current maniac another four years in which to unswervingly violate every last known libertarian principle of economic liberty =/= "no distinctions between Libertarians and Republicans."

    But you knew this, of course.

  • ||

    So by your definition one can't criticize anyone unless you truly know them?

    "I hate to interrupt the ad-hominem attack circle jerk here, but can you expand on how Lenin is not intelligent, analytical, nor knowledgeable? Because unless you know him and can prove it, I'm pretty sure that his resume inarguably proves otherwise."

  • Eric||

    Wrong. If I say "Lord Hummungus has a small penis because his name implies a freudian shortcoming requiring overcompensation". I am simply being and asshole making ad-hominem accusations to make myself feel better. However, if your wife says the same thing, it's likely true. Same goes for talking personal shit about politicians. If Obama is unintelligent, I'd really like to know why someone thinks that. Not just hear them spout it off without anything to support the accusation.

  • WTF||

    If Obama is unintelligent, I'd really like to know why someone thinks that.

    Um, because of his observable actions/failures/screwups/results? I mean, who are we going to believe, the narrative or our lying eyes?

  • Eric||

    Those are policy failures, and they are arguable failures outside of politically driven circles. They do not equate to Obama the man being unintelligent.

  • Affirmative Action||

    I'm pretty sure that his resume inarguably proves otherwise

    *Ahem*

  • Alex||

    I'd say that Obama's nonsensical rant about how ATMs and other automation is one cause of unemployment (thereby defying both liberal and conservative economists who agree that productivity gains, such as automation, are a net plus) is an example. Besides having the grasp of the issue like a 5 year old, Obama a week later gives a speech touting investments in robotics.

    The guy is credentialed, but he's a grade A fucking moron. Just b/c one goes to law school doesn't mean shit. I knew a ton of idiots in law school (and I'm not excluding myself.)

  • The Extra 7 States||

    We're certainly not complaining because we wanted to be recognized. Thank you, Obama!

  • Emporor Hirohito||

    Yeah, and Obama recognized my starring role in signing my country's surrender declaration on the battleship Missouri!

  • FlyoverCountry||

    Come on now, you guys are just a bunch of Rethuglicans!

    Just because he is wrong all of the time about history, economics, geography and health care doesn't mean he is stupid. That's just a conservatve meme.

  • ||

    I thought being a "gifted rhetorician" was one of the things that the masses loved about the anointed one? The whole "He can speak using big words, not like the chimp from Texas." meme that was going around. Of course most people saw through that once they saw a non teleprompter lead speech.

  • Tony||

    You have it backwards. Unless he's practiced a particular speech many times, I find Obama quite inept at using a teleprompter. When you catch him just talking he comes across as fully equipped.

    The "Obama is stupid" campaign on the right is slightly unconvincing considering the characters you offer up, and besides, most of their supporters consider being college educated is a bad thing.

    I think the "Obama is stupid" thing is leftover from the well-worn Republican strategy of tarring opponents with their own liabilities. John Kerry's military service compared to Bush's was neutralized in this way.

    The point is, you don't graduate magna cum laude from Harvard or edit the Harvard Law Review if you're stupid. Though it's quite possible to make Cs at Yale and be stupid, as long as your last name carries the weight of 'Bush.'

  • ||

    Tony if you are over the age of 35 and still talking about your grades in college, you are probably stupid.

    The great thing is that Obama is ending any credibility people of your ilk will have for at least a generation. So, just keep mindlessly defending him. Whatever you do, don't realize you have a problem because then you might solve it. And that is the last thing the world needs or wants.

  • Almanian||

    John, you could start a comedy thing paralleling whatshisname:

    "If you're talking about your college grades and you're over the age of 35...."

    "If you still live in your parents' basement and you're over the age of 16...."

    "If your name is Tony...."

    Think about it - I think you have a winner on your hands.

  • ||

    It could be the "you might be a redneck" for the age of Obama.

  • Almanian||

    "The White Collar/White People Tour"

    You, Dennis Miller and Nick Gillespie. Nick would just stand there and model The Jacket. You and Miller tell jokes. IT WOULD KILL!!

  • ||

    Get together with the Stuff White People Like guy.

  • WTF||

    Tony if you are over the age of 35 and still talking about your grades in college, you are probably stupid.

    All else is superfluous.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Tony if you are over the age of 35 and still talking about your grades in college, you are probably stupid.

    re: Obama, grades

    WHAT grades?

  • Tony||

    Grades in college are a not insignificant indicator of whether one is intelligent.

    But this dichotomy is pretty common. The self-made guy who succeeded all the way to the top on his own is a Democrat, and the guy who got affirmative action all his life because he was born into the right family is a Republican "defender of the productive class."

    I don't admit to having a problem because the only possible solution to it is a right-wing theocrat/soulless corporate zombie in its place.

  • ||

    Tony, the Democratic party is full of idiot sons. And Obama never did anything after college besides fail as a community organizer and adjunct professor. That is it. The rest of his career is based on people like you making yourselves feel good by saying "wow isn't that black man smart".

  • Tony||

    Bush never did anything after college except fail at business then fail at being president, so what's your point?

  • ||

    Bush was a two term governor of Texas you fucking nitwit. And Bush won re-election to President. Face it Tony, obama is going to be remembered as the biggest failure since Hoover and Buchanan.

  • Tony||

    Yeah he had 8 long years to fuck up the country. I remember, I was there. Both the right and the left seem to think it's Obama's job to fix all of that immediately as if Bush's failures somehow weren't quite as massive as they were.

    It's Republicans wet dream to make Obama a failure, and it's not like they're keeping that a secret. Forget a little partisan bias, why is the most basic patriotism optional for you guys depending on the letter next to the name of the guy in charge?

  • ||

    Every one of Bush's major policy initiatives had significant Democratic support. And further the Democrats owned Congress for the last two years. The Democrats own what happened under Bush just as much as he does.

  • WTF||

    Forget a little partisan bias, why is the most basic patriotism optional for you guys depending on the letter next to the name of the guy in charge?

    Remember when dissent was the highest form of patriotism? And questioning the opposition's patriotism was "ZOMFG BUSHITLER"? Seems like it was only yesterday.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Both the right and the left seem to think it's Obama's job to fix all of that immediately as if Bush's failures somehow weren't quite as massive as they were.

    Kind of hard to read this without a chuckle. Obama has taken what Bush has done and escalated it to new heights.

    Bush: Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003

    Obama: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010

    Bush: War in Afghanistan and Iraq, both with Congressional approval.

    Obama: "Kinetic military action" in Libya without Congressional approval.

    Bush: Extraordinary renditions.

    Obama: Extraordinary renditions and assassinations of American citizens.

    Bush: Allows cartels to buy weapons and arrests them.

    Obama: Allows cartels to buy weapons and take them back to Mexico.

    Tony, face it. You voted for W with a tan.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    It's fucking telling that you STILL think any of us here support Bush's policies.

    This ALONE should disqualify you from the conversation. You've shown that to you, outside of the world of Team RED and Team BLUE, nothing exists.

    You're a fucking tool.

  • Tony||

    I am talking to John, not the general population, who I've been told enough are definitely not on anyone's team, as if they deserve praise for rendering themselves useless.

  • WTF||

    the guy who got affirmative action all his life

    You think black guys don't get affirmative action? Do you even think about what you're writing?

  • Concerned Citizen||

    Yeah, and being able to pilot a fighter jet was just handed to him.

  • Tony||

    Did I say that? I said Obama didn't get affirmative action, while Bush did--the kind you don't even need a law for.

  • WTF||

    I said Obama didn't get affirmative action

    That is the point. Fucking reading comprehension. How does it work?

  • ||

    Gee Tony, I guess that means Democrats who were born rich like Roosevelt don't count.

  • Tony||

    Being rich and a good leader aren't incompatible. It's when your only claim to leadership is your last name is when we have problems.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    "I said Obama didn't get affirmative action"

    You don't know that.

  • JoJo Zeke||

    Grades in college are a not insignificant indicator of whether one is intelligent.

    Provide working link to complete transcript of Obama's grades in college, or shut the fuck up.

  • Almanian||

    most of their supporters consider being college educated is a bad thing

    [citation needed]

    And

    The point is, you don't graduate magna cum laude from Harvard or edit the Harvard Law Review if you're stupid. Though it's quite possible to make Cs at Yale and be stupid...

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! The irony - it BURNS...

  • Eric||

    I don't think that Bush was stupid, but if I had the gilded silver spoon that man was given, I'll bet I'd have done better than C's and being a male cheerleader. I'm just saying, if Bush was given Obama's childhood, I seriously doubt that he would have made it to Yale.

  • ||

    We have never seen obama's undergraduate grads. And that is a counter factual anyway. You have never met Bush and are convinced he is stupid. Yet, most of what people think they know about Bush is untrue. This is a guy who invited historians to the White House just because he wanted to talk to them. Bush is also a voracious reader.

    I have never met Bush. But I can say that some very smart people like Bernard Lewis have met him and will tell you he is very smart.

    I have never met Obama. I am sure by some measure he is smart. But, he also seems to be guilty of all of the things that people accused Bush of. Obama seems to completely lack intellectual curiosity. What does the man read? Has he ever read or seriously interacted with people who disagree with him? If he has, he didn't learn much. He seems to completely lack the ability to put himself in his opponent's shoes and understand and respect opposing views. He also seems to have very little understanding of the country at large. He lacks in other words basic skills necessary to be an effective President.

  • Tony||

    Funny cuz the left is completely exasperated by Obama's apparent constant need to negotiate with people whose only goal is tearing him down.

  • ||

    That is because the left is nuts and are angry he hasn't declared himself dictator for life. Back in the real world among the sane people, we can see Obama for what he is.

    And furthermore, think about what you just said. You don't want him to even negotiate or give even an inch to a party that represents a huge swath of the country and currently holds the majority in the House. Thanks for finally coming out and admitting what fascist, authoritarian, undemocratic fucks you and your ilk are.

  • Tony||

    No more so than you guys are when an (R) is in charge. Probably a lot less, I'd wager.

    Regardless of what I want, Obama has given much more than an inch in every negotiation--hence the complaints from the left. Policy-wise he's a moderate Republican. You're only complaining because the voices on the radio told you what to hate and how to hate it, forget the why.

  • ||

    Bush passed bills that love them or hate them got support from both parties. Both Democrats and Republicans in large numbers voted for The Patriot Act, The Wars in Iraq, NCLB, Medicare Part D. The idea that the parties didn't work together or that Bush shut out Democrats during his Presidency is just a lie.

    All of those things I listed were the result of contributions from both parties. Obama can't get anyone to support his policies because he is a terrible politician and has no idea how to work with Congress. He could have easily gotten support for things from Republicans like the moron twins from Maine, if he had even the slightest bit of competence as President.

  • Tony||

    So now we're measuring competence on how much Republican support Obama can get? But they've stated in plain English that their number one priority is making him fail...

  • ||

    Yes Tony, Presidents have to work with the other party and make the entire country feel they are represented. That is part of the difference between a successful President like Reagan or Clinton and a failed President like Obama or Nixon. If you totally piss off and alienate a huge section of the country, you have failed as a leader you nitwit.

  • Tony||

    Obama is working with the other party, many people feel to a fault. It's they who are explicitly not working with him, and to claim ignorance of this is just not convincing.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    "Obama is working with the other party, many people feel to a fault. "

    Uh Huh.

    That's why he and the Democrats jammed Obamacare though despite the fact that the majority of the population was against it at the time - and is even MORE SO now.

  • Concerned Citizen||

    "I do think that at some point, you've made enough money." B.H. Obama

    This statement cannot be topped.

  • Eric||

    "Obama seems to completely lack intellectual curiosity. What does the man read? Has he ever read or seriously interacted with people who disagree with him? If he has, he didn't learn much. He seems to completely lack the ability to put himself in his opponent's shoes and understand and respect opposing views. He also seems to have very little understanding of the country at large. He lacks in other words basic skills necessary to be an effective President."

    Where are you getting this? With all due respect, is this some form of cognitive dissonance that comes from only consuming conservative narratives? John, from what I've seen on these boards you are crazy smart, but I don't think that we can have a rational discussion. You're meme on the "Left" is as oversimplified and prejudiced as the same meme spouted by leftists.

  • ||

    I will tell you where I am getting it. First, he tells the Republicans "I Won". You can't do that. It just pisses people off and shows no class. Then he lets Pelosi and Reid put together a stimulus with no support from the other party. He could have stepped in and played good cop to their bad cop and people would have love him for it. Instead, he took what they wanted. He then crammed Obamacare down the country's throat without a single Republican vote. You can't fuck with people's healthcare without it being at least in some measure bi-partisan. No other program that large has ever been passed without some support from both sides. You will never convince me that he couldn't have gotten Snow or one of the moderate Republican Senators to vote for it if he had been more flexible. Or if not, just walked away like Clinton did.

    Further, the guy has never, despite his allegedly great speaking skills, moved the polls an inch after a major speech. He just doesn't get major parts of America. He doesn't know how to talk to them. Contrast Obama with Clinton. Clinton could go to Davos and convince people and could walk into a Barbeque in rural Texas and at least having them not hate him when he left. Obama has none of those skills. And those skills come from empathy and the ability to intellectually understand your opponents. Obama has none of that.

  • JoJo Zeke||

    Genuinely "smart" people understand that the economic liberty of the individual is the fundamental basis from which all other societal liberties inevitably extend. Does Obama understand this? All available evidence strongly indicates that, no, he most assuredly does not.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    I'm just saying, if Bush was given Obama's childhood, I seriously doubt that he would have made it to Yale.

    You mean being raised in an upper-middle-class household and sent to good schools? How on earth would Bush have survived?

    Seriously, the only real difference between Bush and Obama, besides the skin color, is that Bush didn't call his grandma "Mommy" and his Mom by her given name.

  • Eric||

    Sorry. Not even close. The Bush clan uses the word "Summer" as a verb. Upper-middle class doesn't compare to son of an Ambassador/Governor/Vice-President/President.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Upper-middle class doesn't compare to son of an Ambassador/Governor/Vice-President/President.

    It's pretty damn impossible to pretend that Obama would have gotten very far if he had been raised in Compton rather than in Hawaii by his bank-executive grandmother.

  • hmm||

    Whole lotta Obama bashin' lately. You racists are showing your colors.

  • OO||

    oh noes. cant be racist cause, cause libtoids immunize themselves by randomingly posting [RACIST] on different threads.

  • ||

    Hey that's racist.

  • PoonTang||

    Nope, just Ebonics.

  • Trident||

    Our colors?

    You have a problem with us showing our colors?

    Are you some kind of racist?

  • Paul||

    It turns out we are the ones who failed Him. We weren't prepared for a mega-dosage of awesomeness.

    When I read this sentence, I hear it in Jack Black's voice.

  • MacKlingon||

    WE are not worthy, please sing with me:

    God save Barack the King,
    Long live our noble King,
    God Save the King!
    Send him victorious,
    Happy and glorius,
    Long to reign over us,
    God Save the King.

    O Lord, our God, arise,
    Scatter his enemies,
    And make them fall,
    Confound their politics,
    Frustrate their knavish tricks!
    On him our hearts are fix't,
    O save us all.

    O grant him long to see
    Friendship and unity,
    Always increase:
    May he his septre sway,
    All loyal souls obey,
    Join heart and voice, huzzah!
    God save the King!

  • ||

    Obama and his gang will be kicking for many years to come as long as open-borders libertarians are OK with the importation of lower-IQ, lower-future-time-orientation Mexicans into the US.

    Q: What is the best way to get more voters in a democracy?
    A: Change the demographics!

    How deluded must you be, to belong to a self-defeating ideology (liebertarianism only appeals to high-IQ people; how on Earth does lowering a nation's IQ still further increase the odds of people voting for someone like Ron Paul?)

  • sevo||

    Eugenick|8.10.11 @ 3:35PM|#
    ..."lower-IQ, lower-future-time-orientation Mexicans"

    Cite?
    Or just plain racism?

  • DLM||

    Two comments.

    Obama's position is like that of a comedian who tells a joke and it bombs. The audience just has no sense of humor. (I'll leave it to other to point out whether Obama is in fact a comedian.)

    By "threat of default" what he really meant a threat to have a little less pork to spread around.

  • HMFIC||

    I'm voting for Obama again. If anything for demographics sake. It's not like the country is going to end or something or that if Ron Paul were made president he would do anything radically different than anyone else elected to the job. Ronny is not a messiah. Eventually taxes will go up on the rich and deeper spending cuts will be made. But our government was designed for stability not for radical change, and that's where its strength lies. We will get through this though.

  • Barack Obama||

    Gooooooooooooooood boy.

    Now: roll over.

    Beg. Beg.

  • sevo||

    HMFIC|8.10.11 @ 5:20PM|#
    "I'm voting for Obama again.....[drivel]"

    *THAT* is one of the most inane comments I've every has the displeasure to read.

  • King Ludd||

    Get pissed. But I will be canceling out your vote. I'm from Ohio.

  • sevo||

    They told me if I voted for Barr, we'd have war and a screwed-up economy.
    They were right.
    (sorry if I missed an earlier post)

  • The blaze?||

    The blaze, seriously? Maybe Reason can get someone from WorldNetDaily or Infowars as well. Does even handed journalism exist anywhere?

  • The New York Times||

    Does even handed journalism exist anywhere?


    No.

    I mean, yes! Uh... No.

  • Old Mexican||

    Dear H&R posters,

    Did you have fun feeding the sockpuppet? Have you learned yet?

    It took me time to learn my lesson - I must confess. But will 325 inane posts be enough for you to learn to STOP FEEDING THE SOCKPUPPET????

  • Jim||

    First thing, repeal the 17th. States gotta help roll back this crap.

    Uninformed voters asking Congress to do it ain't gonna get it done.

  • ||

    Libertarians. Getting closer to actual political relevance and advocating not voting....Wonder why this fracturing third party never took off? Also what about Perry? Yeah he's flawed. Everyone is. But some politicians are more flawed than others. Consider if Carter had bet Reagan in 80 or if Mondale had been elected in 84? What if Clinton had lost to Dole in 96? Things would be considerably different. Barry does shockingly seem to converge with Bush, but that's because Bush was a moderate and Obama's a spineles asshat when it comes to actually having principles about foreign policy. If Calvin Coolidge had lost to Davis or La Follete the course of American things would not have turned out the same. Perhaps because it's still in current events you can't see this, but, believe it or not, elections have consequences.

  • قبلة الوداع||

    thank u man

  • mbt zapatos||

    It's disgraceful what union leaders have done to the American labor movement since the days of Reagan and Meany.

  • nike shoes||

    So cool!

  • قبلة الوداع||

    thank u

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement