Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Anything else you want to talk about.
Post Reply
Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Garyt » Wed Apr 01, 2015 3:06 am

Byron, I look at fact, not rhetoric. I'll look at what seems to work best based upon the facts. Have you noticed that the Scandinavian countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden) are almost always in the top 10 best nations as far as standard of living and other factors? They have a high standard of living, high education system, free health care, and low crime rates.

There was something that Bill Maher said that made sense to me -
Maher then argued “so what’s happening is, the Democrats are proposing to nibble around the edges of our middle-class problem, and the Republicans are pretending to care while they go back to servicing eight rich d*ckheads who own coal mines, and no one is telling the truth, which is that the large, thriving middle class that America used to have didn’t just appear out of the blue. It was created, using an economic tool called Socialism. I know, we never use that term here in buzzword nation, but that is exactly what our government did after World War II, it taxed the rich up to 90%, and massively redistributed that money through the GI Bill so that more than half the population benefited from free college, free job training, cheap mortgages, and much, much more. Yes, for a brief, shining moment, we were Finland. Now, we can debate whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing to go back to, but what is beyond debate is that that is what happened, the 50’s and 60’s are the era of Socialism in America.”

He continued “a middle class is actually not the normal byproduct of capitalism. Ask any historian, a middle class is actually a fluke in history, like in the 14th century, a middle class was created in Europe when, during the Black Plague, a third of the population died.”
It makes sense. Look at unbridled capitalism such as in the 1890's-1910's, the "Gilded age" I think it is sometimes referred to as. The wealthy had wealth beyond belief - but for the common man it was terrible.

I don't think you can argue that these are not socialistic programs - things like worker's compensation, overtime compensation and other labor laws, the GI Bill, Unions and other factors led to a great strengthening of America's middle class. That middle class is again dying out in America, or at least rapidly decreasing.

Of course, it cut into the profits of the Barons of the Gilded age, as they could not run labor under their virtual slave labor methods, but it was better for the common man.

A "strong" America - what does that mean? That our wealthy are the wealthiest in the world, or that our general population is wealthy? We are the first, not the second.

Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Byron Angel » Wed Apr 01, 2015 11:33 am

..... Bill Maher is a media "personality". He is certainly entitled to his opinions, but he is hardly to be considered a qualified (or unbiased) observer of American history, economic or otherwise. His glib and shallow commentary is proof of that. It is also proof that it is not easy separating propaganda from history. I suggest that an expansion of reading horizons might prove beneficial - a good start might be the Federalist Papers, then "The Road to Serfdom", Friedrich von Hayek. This is about a very great deal more than taxes and economics.

Then investigate the underlying ideology of "The New Left" - i.e., their ultimate goal. Of course, if you like the idea of Soviet-style socialism - where the state effectively supercedes and replaces all existing human institutions as the source of authority, morality, economic control ... and your once "inalienable" rights are translated into revocable privileges granted by the afore-mentioned state - well then, we probably don't have a lot of common ground.

B

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Garyt » Wed Apr 01, 2015 6:55 pm

Then investigate the underlying ideology of "The New Left" - i.e., their ultimate goal. Of course, if you like the idea of Soviet-style socialism - where the state effectively supercedes and replaces all existing human institutions as the source of authority, morality, economic control ... and your once "inalienable" rights are translated into revocable privileges granted by the afore-mentioned state -
That statement - So where do you get your ideas that the style of "the new left" as you say is soviet style socialism? That is a huge jump there. It's a huge jump done intentionally I think to scare people. I think many who mention soviet style socialism have deep fears based upon cold war era Russia. I few important things - Socialism is NOT communism. The USSR could was really a dictatorship, despite claims of communism or socialism. The did use a communistic/socialistic method of managing state assets, but it was really a dictatorship. And the US right now is really a Financial Oligarchy.

I think an effective method of government/economy mixes capitalism with socialist checks and programs. The Roosevelts were actually champions of Socialism to a point, Teddy with his work to break up monopolies and help bring to an end the gilded age, and FDR with his socialistic programs of the New Deal to help bring this country out of depression. The Roosevelts used "American Socialism", which is a lot different than the Soviet Socialism you speak of. :D

Why don't we look at European Style, such as GBr, Germany, France, or the Scandanavian Countries? For the common man, it's pretty good. Free Healthcare, Free Education, good wages. Throw in the fact the public transportation is far better and you wonder why the US gets such a poor bang for it's buck. Look at after tax wages from an average family, but then take off a good $10,000 at least that that american family will spend on insurance premiums, co-pays, and deductibles.

And these countries do it with (gasp) more than 2 political parties! :shock: I guess it can work to have more choices than 2 politically.

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Garyt » Wed Apr 01, 2015 7:11 pm

Bill Maher is a media "personality". He is certainly entitled to his opinions, but he is hardly to be considered a qualified (or unbiased) observer of American history, economic or otherwise.
Except for the fact that he is rather spot on here. Attack the message, not the messenger. Too much focus on attacking the messenger would make it seem you would have difficulty contradicting the message.

I do not consider myself a Democrat or a Liberal. Some of my viewpoints on things like immigration are very right wing, but I do right now believe in amnesty for those that are here and employed. As far as immigrants go though, I believe that birth in the US should not confer citizenship based upon birth in the US, using the terms of Jus sanguinis instead.

I consider myself a populist, and look to what is good for the majority of people as a whole. I have sometimes seen Populism defined as agreeing with what is popular among the people, though that may not be in their best interests. That is not the type of populism I support, as that type of populism is easy to make happy with bread and circuses.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Dave Saxton » Thu Apr 02, 2015 1:53 am

Maher is entitled to his own opinion but not to his own set of historical facts. Oh my... I don't even know where to start. :shock:
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.

Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Byron Angel » Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:54 am

..... David Saxton put it well - "I don't even know where to start".

I've read Marx, Lenin, Gramsci, Alinsky. I've even held my nose and read Chomsky and Zinn. Have you ever read Plato's Republic, or the Federalist Papers, or Gibbons' Decline and Fall, or anything by Hayek or Von Mises, or even David Horowitz? What about Mitrokhin? Consider expanding your horizons. My impression is that you have grown comfortable living on the "progressive plantation" ..... that's a place where "truth" is defined as whatever best advances "the cause" - I believe that was Lenin's definition.

B

Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Byron Angel » Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:59 am

The great socialist mantra - "From each according to his abilities. To each according to his needs."

Who decides what your needs are?
Do your desires and ambitions have any standing in such a worldview?
Would you contribute to the best of your ability if you felt that you were not being fairly compensated?

So many questions ...........

B

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Garyt » Thu Apr 02, 2015 6:17 pm

Well, I guess a good way to start would be to explain how the socialistic practices in the US are more in line with USSR socialism than they are with European Socialism or even the Socialism of "The New Deal".

I would be interested in any logical explanation .

I might add - I love a site like Factcheck.org. They break down political statements and claims and put them thru a factual based "litmus" test if you would. They will contradict both dem and repub statements - it's the best thing I've seen for taking the spin off things and looking at them as they truly are.

I hate the spin that portrays Obama as a despot, stepping over the constitution as he desires.

Did you know that as of 9/25/2012 (the most recent date I found as a comparison) Obama had issued 139 exec orders, at the same period in their presidency George Bush had issued 160?

Again it reminds me of what a local conservative politician had to say about a different matter. "The facts are liberally biased" :D

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Garyt » Thu Apr 02, 2015 9:27 pm

Here is a more recent article, looking at the amount of executive orders written per year. It's amazing, the current conservative spin is that he is out of control and behaving as a dictator with his excessive use of executive orders - heck, he is destroying the fabric with his abuse of executive orders, right?

However, the facts of the matter strongly differ with that spin.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... decessors/

Rounding the numbers, we are looking at this per year:

Obama 34
George W Bush 35
George Bush 42
Clinton 46
Reagan 48
Nixon 62
Johnson 63

So if we look at the facts, which unfortunately rarely matter to people, "King" Obama has used the executive order less than any president in the last 40-50 years.

I wonder if Rush knows these facts and chooses to ignore them - of if he is just that uninformed.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Dave Saxton » Fri Apr 03, 2015 4:48 am

Byron Angel wrote:.....or even David Horowitz?
Horowitz would be a good place to start indeed in this case.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.

Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Byron Angel » Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:18 am

GaryT - Do you seriously propose to debate the politics of our time based upon a comparative numerical count of executive orders? LOL. Does it not strike you that the natures of the executive orders are of immensely greater import than the simple numbers thereof?

We could have a more useful discussion if you were to expand your reading horizons a bit. But you seem unwilling to move in that direction. Perhaps you think you have it all figured out already; if so, good luck on that.

B

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Garyt » Fri Apr 03, 2015 7:03 pm

GaryT - Do you seriously propose to debate the politics of our time based upon a comparative numerical count of executive orders?
No. What I thought I was doing was debating the claims that Obama made excessive use of executive orders that as repeated over and over by the right. I was being rather specific.

Indeed the specifics of the orders make a difference. Would you care to enlighten me specifically how they differ from prior executive orders? I'm all ears.
We could have a more useful discussion if you were to expand your reading horizons a bit.
Maybe that's the issue - you can't see the trees for the Forest (yes, I intentionally changed things up on this). To be a fan of national healthcare one does not have to embrace marxism. I could go on and on, but I think you get my point.

What I've mostly gleaned from this "debate" is that any viewpoint that could be construed as liberal or socialistic is inherently wrong. Not for any reason that the specifics of the issue is wrong, but just that anything that has any basis in liberalism or socialism is wrong.

Then we can accompany saying it's wrong with some scare tactics of calling it USSR style socialism, much in the same way the Conservative pundits are trying to compare the recent Iran nuclear negotiations with Chamberlain's dealings with Hitler.

But I see very little if no specifics on any issues as to why the conservative viewpoint is correct - merely the statements to the effect that liberalism/socialism by nature is wrong, and again, not specifics why they are wrong, they just are.

Try looking at things with an open mind, if you are capable. I share some of Rand Paul's thoughts on immigration, which is pretty far right. There are other areas where I embrace some conservative views, and in relation to our economy, I think the idea of capitalism with the government providing controls and socialistic practices is good - a marriage of both worlds.

And really, that stance on the economy is pretty well the stance of many American from both the liberal and conservative side. I think most everyone is OK with some socialistic practices and restrictions upon capitalism - such as workers compensation, minimum wage, overtime pay.

Without these I think we would see a reversion to working conditions similar to the Malaysian sweat shops that Nike uses in it's globalization of it's work force. Interesting, an American based company that out sources it's work to in essence working slaves. But I digress.

It's not IF controls and socialism are needed, but how big of a dose, I think most would agree. You may have some hard line capitalists like those at Nike who would prefer unrestrained capitalism - but I would hope they would be the clear minority.

Steve Crandell
Senior Member
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Steve Crandell » Fri Apr 03, 2015 8:55 pm

Garyt,

I admire you for your persistence, but I'm afraid it is ultimately pointless with this group. I normally ignore topics like this and I suspect there are others who do as well. Military forums tend to have a lot of ultra right wing posters. Twenty years ago I would have been numbered among them.

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Garyt » Fri Apr 03, 2015 10:38 pm

Thanks Steve :D

I kinda figured military forums would appeal to the ultra-conservative.

I just was hoping though that those who can speak with great detail regarding very detailed and factual information regarding the specs on a ship would also speak of specifics in a political debate, you can't really debate glittering generalities.

Surprising or not as it may seem, I was of a much more conservative bent 20 years ago as well. To me though, part of it is my views changing a bit - the other part is the extreme polarism that has become more an issue over the last 20 years, where the Republican party I see now practices absolutism far more than it did in the past. I also sense more xenophobic behavior from the "new" Republican party.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Senator Ted Cruz for US President?

Post by Dave Saxton » Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:13 am

Are you on the side of liberty or on the side of tyranny? It is really no more complicated than that.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.

Post Reply