Displaying 0 To 0 Of 0 Comments The Court Ruling that Could Kill ACA I didn’t know you were in Ohio, Monica! That’s great. Unfortunately I was gerrymandered out of Marcy’s district by those “lovely people” who were voted in in 2010. I miss her so much. Totally ethical and so hard-working. She’s done so much to try to help this area. And — yes — it’s a sign of Iott’s level of intelligence that he thought he was going to take that seat away from her. He lives in a total fantasy world. But then — he was born into money and has never had to work a day in his life. A perpetual child. Also from this area is the notorious “Joe the Plumber.” Don’t even get me started on him! 😆 » Posted By kesmarn On July 13, 2014 @ 7:48 pm Monica, Chomsky put it in a nutshell (with emphasis on the “nut” part) when he referred to the Rand Paul (Ayn Rand/Koch Bros) current brand of libertarianism as “savagery.” The word “libertarian” might have had a more benign meaning in Europe at one time, but once Rand and the Kochs seized on it, it became the monstrosity that Chomsky says even most corporations would “never allow to happen. Because it would completely destroy the economy.” It seems to be a political stance that says that if you have a problem with mice, the solution is to burn the house down. Oh, and btw here’s a link to the “How to Sell Libertarianism” article that some were interested in: https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/lying-to-liberals/ In that article is a further link to the guide for the “salesmen” selected to spread the faith: “Marketing Libertarianism,” by Moshe Kroy: http://64.62.200.70/PERIODICAL/PDF/Reason-1977feb/30-32/ Modern American libertarianism strikes me as less a political philosophy than a religion — or maybe more accurately — a cult. In a discussion elsewhere, I asked a group of a half dozen libertarians whom they planned to vote for in November. Just to see if they had any actual candidates in the pipeline. Not a single one of them could name one name. Not one. Even I was surprised. Their most common answer was “anyone but the incumbent.” Do they have any clue of what kind of psychos and nincompoops they could get elected with that plan? Just as an example, here in Ohio Rep. Marcy Kaptur — an experienced, brilliant and compassionate person — was a few years ago up against Rich (“Nazi Boy”) Iott. A complete knucklehead, who spent his weekends playing dressup with a lot of other fantasists (WWII re-enactments in which he played a Nazi) and who had not the faintest notion of what policies he supported in any area. The only thing he “knew” was that “guv’mint was bad.” What would the “vote out the incumbent” plan have gotten us there? Certainly not any improvement. Thank goodness, Kaptur crushed him in the election. Although they were very attention-grabbing — his supporters were extremely small in numbers. And I suspect are even smaller now. » Posted By kesmarn On July 13, 2014 @ 7:05 pm Monica, thanks so much for these valuable links. I glanced through a few pages and –wow– talk about beyond cynical… » Posted By kesmarn On July 13, 2014 @ 10:37 am Diane, with all due respect, your circular “logic,” leaves me with no choice but to leave the discussion. Your position seems to be that if the whole problem can’t be solved perfectly, there’s no point in doing anything. As in — “only” $150 dollars in SS survivor’s benefits is worse than none at all. That makes no sense. You plead your case as a high school dropout and then suddenly shift ground and talk about your six years in college. Every time a point of yours is successfully refuted, you claim a different point of view. One day, you’re saying people should settle for $5/hr jobs.Then when someone asks a legitimate question about living on that wage, you say “good workers” will always make more. That’s a dodge. (How good were the wages for “hard workers” on plantations in the South in 1850?) You say that everyone should be able to save, but then you say that you don’t make enough money to buy food. I don’t mean to be unkind but how much are you saving each week for your own later years on that income? Yet others are supposed to do it. You’re right. There really is no reason to continue to respond to your comments. With all due respect, I suspect you’re here out of boredom and are basically just engaging in relatively empty argument to pass the time. Either that or — more likely — to proselytize rather than to discuss. The “cognitive dissonance” charge is so old it’s growing mold. I’ve heard it from so many people on the right — when the well runs dry — that I could recite it by heart. I wish you all the best. But I am done. There will be no more responses from me to anything you write. If it makes you feel better you can tell the other Libertarians in KY that you won. Godspeed. » Posted By kesmarn On July 13, 2014 @ 6:57 am Thanks, Diane. I do know how old the Constitution is. But of course, it was a rhetorical question. The point being that if just the age of a document (37 years in the case of the Libertarian handbook) is enough to invalidate it, then by the same logic a 227 year old Constitution should be totally out of date and irrelevant. » Posted By kesmarn On July 13, 2014 @ 6:39 am You’ve got it, Sally! There is no example of a successful, functioning Libertarian state anywhere on the globe. » Posted By kesmarn On July 12, 2014 @ 8:50 pm Diane, it’s small consolation to me and many of the voters I know that the end of Social Security and various social support programs will be occurring “gradually” under a Libertarian regime. Why would we vote to stick it to our own children and grandchildren? I suppose Ayn Rand would say that Darwinian survival is their problem and they need to look out for themselves, but most normal people have more empathy than that. Besides which, I’m baffled as to how even younger people who are hard working and thrifty are going to make it in a Libertarian world. Let’s take a hypothetical: Say we have a 30 year old widow with a 4 year old child. In Libertarian Land (LL hereafter), she’s not going to get SS for her daughter because it’s gone. She will have to work, But since there is no minimum wage, she has to take that $5/hr job (the one that is better than not working at $15/hr.) So her full time wage amounts to $200/week. Let’s say she’s very lucky and finds a day care that will take her daughter for $100/week. (Which does not exist in the real world.) She won’t be getting federal assistance with her day care because that program (which creates dependency) has been phased out by the Libertarians. So she has $100/week left for other expenses. If she takes on more hours and/or another job, her daycare expenses will go up even more and she’ll hardly see her daughter at all. Her mom is living, but can’t help with child care because she’s still working. Can’t retire. Because Social Security is gone in LL. It would help if she could get food stamps, but they create unhealthy dependency too. So they’re gone. If she’s lucky enough to find an apartment for $350/month (Again — not likely in the real world.), this leaves her with $50/month for food, clothes and transportation. She gets food from the local churches — but they have to limit it to one bag a month because there are so many “no-minimum wage” workers in LL. What the Libertarians have failed to explain to this mother is exactly how she’s supposed to save up enough to “take care of herself” in retirement. Or for that matter — even to live long enough to get there without Obamacare (which they’ve also gotten rid of). One thing she knows for sure, though. When it all falls apart and her life collapses in illness and debt, the Libertarians will know who’s to blame. Her. Final thoughts. As I mentioned before, I’m fine with Libertarians putting up whomever for any office they want — as long as they are very up front about all the programs they plan to get rid of. I really dislike stealth agendas. They show contempt for voters. But I think the Libertarian agenda is completely impractical and unrealistic, frankly. And I’m extremely relieved to see that the party has never gotten more than 1% of the vote in any presidential election. To be candid, I hope they never do. I think it would be the most damaging thing to happen to the country since the Civil War. Truthfully, I probably don’t have a whole lot more to say on this subject. I could never even consider voting for a party that takes — fundamentally — the same attitude that Britain took during the Irish potato famine. Let them starve. It will be an edifying and educational experience for them. They’ll learn the value of work. » Posted By kesmarn On July 12, 2014 @ 8:13 pm Sue, that’s one thing I had meant to mention in my comment above. The mere fact that the handbook on how to manipulate liberals is 37 years old is hardly an argument that it isn’t taken seriously by Libertarians today. After all, how old is the Constitution? » Posted By kesmarn On July 12, 2014 @ 6:50 am Diane, thanks for taking the time to respond at length. And it’s good to hear that at least you’re okay with keeping the FBI and the CIA. I know some folks who veer extremely close to the total anarchy end of the Libertarian spectrum, and I think we’d be in Somalia for sure if they get in the driver’s seat. How about the FDA and the public schools? Are those acceptable? OSHA? We already know that you’re not in favor of the minimum wage, Social Security or Medicare. It’s interesting that you (and by “you” I mean that I’m making a sort of extension to Libertarians in general because I do believe you’re trying to represent the whole party to a degree here) feel that government is such a potential source of “corruption” that it needs to be monitored and regulated closely. And yet imply that corporations aren’t (potential corruptors) and don’t (need regulation). I suppose that Libertarians would argue that the Invisible Hand automatically takes care of corporate corruption. The theory being that corrupt corporations are always found out and they inevitably go out of business in a free market. Sigh… if only. Not in this world, unfortunately. But then I can hear the Libertarian argument that “we’ve never really had a true free market.” Perhaps. But we never will either. Not with the Kochs in charge. The truth is, the game is rigged. But the threat is not from a corrupt government. (Except for the SCOTUS, which I will grant you is corrupt with its current make-up.) It is from people like the Kochs who spent $14 million trying to defeat my Senator — Sherrod Brown — by meddling in an election in a State in which they are not even residents. Why do they want to throw out my senator? And Ohio is not the only State in which they’ve meddled. The game is rigged on Wall Street because Anthony “Koch-owned” Scalia’s son Eugene Scalia is working tirelessly to sabotage Dodd-Frank reform measures on Wall Street. Nice “free market” principles going there, with a Scalia-Koch partnership! The game is rigged because favored firms on Wall Street provide ultra-high speed trading opportunities to insiders and skim off billions to go into the pockets of day traders. But let’s get rid of the “big government” SEC that might stop it, because that is “too much regulation.” Interesting how all the parts of the government that allegedly need to be lopped off are the ones who might just happen to put a dent in the obscene level of profits the Kochs, Waltons and other dynasties might enjoy. The bloated and highly profitable Defense Department seems to be relatively safe – although the uber-wealthy are currently more interested in selling arms to both sides of conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere, while hiding behind a Rand Paul front of “pacifism” here on the home front. This is what I mean by bait-and-switch. Not that you personally are doing that; one person hardly could pull off what they’re doing. But I’m very much afraid you may have fallen for it. The Libertarian Party I’ve seen wears a PR version of a hippy costume that screams “peace,love and weed,” in order to win votes, but acts like a thug when it comes to the poor, the disabled and the elderly. It’s a good thing that you got a decent lump sum settlement from what must have been a very bad accident. But I suspect the Kochs would like to do a version of tort-reform and/or revision of employment benefits (especially union ones) that would make getting a settlement like that almost impossible for anyone down the road in the future. I’m glad that you met with compassionate and humble people at the churches where you’ve gone for help. But I can tell you that I personally know people who’ve had to sit through humiliating lectures on how “you have chosen a life of poverty for yourself because of your inability to manage your money and because of your own poor choices.” This — to a 60 year old woman who had worked like a dog all her life and then had the nerve to develop liver failure. And this same “pastor” then announced that he was about to leave for a vacation in Tahiti and if she had only run her life more wisely, she would be rich like him. Did his kids have a nanny? Indeed they did. And he drove a Lexus and wore a Rolex watch. And our United Way is so totally overwhelmed here… All I can say is “good luck” to anyone who has any hope of getting on their waiting list. This goes for housing assistance, health care, home winterization, You name it. Reaganomics have virtually destroyed this rustbelt area. No, I would never call you a liar, Diane. I honestly don’t think you are. I think the trouble is — and I’m sorry to say this — that you have believed liars. Libertarianism is long on rhetoric and appeals to gun-rights, marijuana and isolationist activists but short on practical programs to help the working poor and the disabled poor. My friend with liver failure has no settlement to fall back on. She wouldn’t be able to begin to buy jewelry making supplies (and please understand that I’m not putting you down for either of those things, just saying her circumstances are different). All she has is SS Disability and Medicaid. And all she knows is that the Libertarians want to take that away. At least that’s what it says up there on the platform that the Kochs wrote. Can anyone assure her that they won’t? » Posted By kesmarn On July 11, 2014 @ 6:59 pm Sue, exactly. The tactic of bait-and-switch implies that a salesman has a shoddy product to sell and has to use deception to sell it. When a party has to use a stealth campaign to trick voters into going along with something they normally would reject, what does that say? » Posted By kesmarn On July 11, 2014 @ 10:36 am I am sorry to hear of that, Diane. And it’s good to hear that you’ve gotten yourself back into the middle class with no help from anyone. But it’s also clear that — even though you are a high school dropout — you’re hardly lacking in intelligence or verbal skills. That’s truly a blessing. But not everyone has been so blessed. And those people do need help. It seems unfair to ask them to go to their local church and plead for assistance in person — especially if they’re agnostics or atheists. There’s a certain semi-anonymity to government programs like SNAP and assistance with health insurance that take the “tin cup, hat in hand” aspect out of asking for help. And the standards are more objective. The poor don’t have to worry that some judgmental person is going to decide that because they’re overweight, they don’t need food assistance. Or because they have a tattoo, they are not the “deserving poor.” You never know when you’re going to run into Lord or Lady Bountiful at the local charity who will say “no” just because their kids’ nanny happened to be sassy that day. » Posted By kesmarn On July 11, 2014 @ 9:53 am See my reply to your minimum wage answer below, Diane. Thanks. » Posted By kesmarn On July 11, 2014 @ 9:35 am In that case, Diane, I hope that Libertarian candidates will be extremely open and frank about campaigning on that as well. Again — I think bait-and-switch stealth campaigning shows a lack of confidence on the part of the Libertarian Party. I really believe that the very same platform planks that attracted you in 1980 should be pushed for today — loud and strong. Every Libertarian should be out there saying: NO minimum wage NO Social Security NO Medicare NO Obamacare NO public schools NO FDA I genuinely want to see what the reaction of the vast majority of the American public would be to a truly honest statement of those policies would be. I suspect it would be a resounding NO! But running on a pseudo-hippie “peace, love and weed” platform and then pushing the Koch agenda once in would be pretty low. I hope that’s not the plan. » Posted By kesmarn On July 11, 2014 @ 9:32 am Awesome, Sally! And you’re right. Once you unleash the Greed Hounds, it doesn’t matter who’s allegedly “in charge,” because misery and chaos will inevitably ensue. Isn’t it interesting how they seem to feel that the very wealthy can invariably be trusted to behave in honorable, ethical and compassionate ways? No gummint regulation needed. But the poor always need to be punished, deprived and “motivated” externally to “do the right thing”? Because they’re apparently so “innately depraved.” Just born that way, I guess… 😉 » Posted By kesmarn On July 11, 2014 @ 8:55 am Monica, thanks so much. I’m sure you’ve probably seen this Libertarian platform from 1980 (when Diane says she first discovered Libertarianism), but for those who haven’t, here it is: [img]http://politicsbyjustin.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/koch-libertarian-plan.png[/img] Don’t we all have to ask ourselves how serious anyone can be about living in a country without law enforcement agencies like the FBI? (They may not always have been saints, but — really? Don’t reform them? Just get rid of them?) Or the Department of Education? Ohhh– and how about that nasty FDA? Wouldn’t want those pesky food inspections now, would we? And of course, everyone will be fine without Social Security and Medicare. Retirement is overrated anyway. (We all would love to have an 80 year old nurse with Parkinson’s starting our IVs because she can’t afford to retire.) Libertarianism is Fantasy Politics as nearly as I can tell. It seems to be the day dream of the politically naive… “Ahhh… a world completely without enforceable rules…! Wouldn’t that be lovely?” But in real life, that doesn’t produce Utopia. It ends up as something more like Somalia. Or Lord of the Flies… » Posted By kesmarn On July 11, 2014 @ 7:04 am Right you are, Sally! There is no example of a functional libertarian society. In fact, the societies that have the least income inequality, the best educational outcomes, and the healthiest populations tend to be the northern European socialist ones! » Posted By kesmarn On July 9, 2014 @ 11:18 am The old saying used to be “there are no atheists in fox holes.” In Rand’s case, apparently there aren’t many libertarians among the dead broke. When she ran out of money, she called on her Uncle Sam. » Posted By kesmarn On July 8, 2014 @ 1:31 pm That’s one great documentary, ladies! » Posted By kesmarn On July 8, 2014 @ 1:18 pm Thanks so much for posting, Monica! » Posted By kesmarn On July 8, 2014 @ 8:31 am Ran out of room below, Diane, but all I can say is that I think the Libertarians should definitely run for office and specifically and overtly state that their goal is to get rid of Social Security, Medicare (and I would assume Obamacare, SNAP, and other safety net programs). No stealth campaign. Just say it loud and proud. I’ll be interested in seeing the public reaction to that. » Posted By kesmarn On July 8, 2014 @ 8:29 am How about the Libertarian position on a minimum wage then, Diane? » Posted By kesmarn On July 8, 2014 @ 8:24 am Well, wikipedia might want to revise their info on the Cato Institute then, because they “credit” (or blame) Charles Koch for being the founder. The Cato Institute is an American libertarian think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C. It was founded as the Charles Koch Foundation in 1974 by Ed Crane, Murray Rothbard, and Charles Koch,[6] chairman of the board and chief executive officer of the conglomerate Koch Industries. I’ll grant that it is a well-known think tank. McDonald’s is a well-known restaurant as well. When it comes to quality? Well, they both have their issues. And we all do have to love Koch code. “Individual liberty” often means “I don’t pay taxes and I do carry a gun. But you don’t get any food stamps.” “Limited government” translates: “Koch industries can pollute and no regulators had better get in our way.” “Free markets” can mean “Crush unions and abolish the minimum wage.” and “Peace” means “Just sell the weapons to both sides and let me reap the profits, but don’t funnel money that could be lining my pockets into a war effort.” Looks good on paper, though. » Posted By kesmarn On July 8, 2014 @ 8:21 am “The last thing human beings need encouragement for is selfishness.” There it is, Homie, in 10 words! » Posted By kesmarn On July 7, 2014 @ 8:51 pm Good point, Sue. If Libertarians have strong negative reactions to being classified as being on the right, it makes no sense to run under the banner of a party that makes no bones at all about being on the right. » Posted By kesmarn On July 7, 2014 @ 8:12 pm Thanks for the info, Sue. And when Koch ran for office, their party platform specifically said — in writing — that their goals included getting rid of Medicare and Social Security. Is that still part of the Libertarian platform? » Posted By kesmarn On July 7, 2014 @ 7:38 pm Searing Truth, you make good points. I must say that to me the Libertarian party looks like the party of anarchy. If their “principles” gained widespread acceptance, we’d be looking more and more like Somalia by the day. » Posted By kesmarn On July 7, 2014 @ 7:30 pm Any organization that was initially founded and funded by Charles Koch is going to have an uphill credibility battle on many fronts, though, Diane. » Posted By kesmarn On July 7, 2014 @ 3:22 pm The 2018 Congressional Republican Orientation Handbook Just found your comment this evening, Cyndi! Well done for the KY pork barrel procurements there, Mssrs Paul and McConnell! And that Vitamin D fortified wax means that you can now also dispense with that pesky SNAP program. Win-win. For the austerity team anyway… » Posted By kesmarn On July 1, 2014 @ 10:45 pm PDL, this is just awesome! Especially Joe Arpaio as sergeant-at-arms! Too funny. I wonder, though, if the GOP might need to add a section on medical care to this handbook as well. Since by 2018, the postal service is a thing of the past, we can only assume that they’ve also succeeded by then in repealing Obamacare. And since all DC and area hospitals would have vanished due to bankruptcy caused by those inevitable Paul Ryan austerity measures, we can only imagine that any Congresspeople experiencing health problems would need to be flown directly to the Mayo Clinic — which by this time would have been bought out and completely privatized and would hence be known as the Kraft Mayo(nnaise) Clinic. It would accept only Congressmen and investment bankers, who would be among the small percentage of the population who could afford the $500,000/day room rates. Ordinary citizens who experienced health problems would be issued the standard fifth of Jack Daniels along with a bullet to bite. Thanks for a great read, PDL! 😆 » Posted By kesmarn On June 28, 2014 @ 6:12 pm Republicans to Sue Obama For Not Being Republican I just wish there’d been something like this kind of vigilance when Dubya took it upon himself to fight an entire trillion dollar war “off the books.” If that isn’t a use of executive power that the founders never, ever intended, I don’t know what is. And talk about a “pocket book” issue! I would think that any true conservative would have been and would still be outraged about that. We’ll all be paying for that massive and lethal blunder for years to come. » Posted By kesmarn On June 28, 2014 @ 9:18 amComments Posted By kesmarn
«« Back To Stats Page
Home Stats