So out of the blue a friend emailed a chain letter spreading negative propaganda about Barack Obama. I guess that he wasn't aware of my political views; I'm a huge supporter. I sent him a left-leaning article to which he wrote back more of his thoughts. So last night I wrote a rather lengthy response.
I figured that I would post the conversation here since I spent so much time writing it. It is also posted on my other blog mikesabat.wordpress.com (I'm testing out typepad right now).
My comments are in blue.
OK, so I don't really have the time but I'll take 10 minutes while my food cooks to respond. I may throw some facts in there. What that means, is provable truths, not opinions or conjecture.
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:56 AM, J wrote
holy fuck, you send me a jack cafferty article to rebut my opinions? that guy has his wax-filled head so far up his dark blue democrat ass that he shits blue donkey candles. you watch keith olberman (and the bull-dyke that fills in for him) too? hilarious. nothing like liberal propaganda to brain wash you. So one thing that puts me off is when someone argues a reasonable opinion with personal critique. The fact is that whether what you say in the above paragraph is true or false. Please don't forget you started this discussion with a chain email written by one Carol Kalwa from West Virginia. She didn't seem too unbiased.
whatever though. people have different beliefs. i personally do not feel government should provide a welfare state where all people have equal access to everything and everything is a right. that's communism. i feel things are earned with hard work. I agree with some of this, but I don't see any relevance here. Are you projecting that Barack Obama is trying to turn the United States into a welfare state? What exactly is a welfare state, a state with welfare? How do you come down on the Bear Stearns and other bailouts? That's welfare. It doesn't help people get by though, it just helps the rich stay rich.
Are you just referring to welfare in the Boyz in the Hood
sense? I don't think anyone is for increasing nominal benefits for non
working people. It's an old stereotype that democrats raise taxes and
spend a ton of money and republicans are fiscally conservative. It's a
standard trick of the Republican party to use an issue like this to
convince you to vote a certain way. I'll bet you haven't thought of
welfare since 04. In fact, our last Democratic President pushed welfare
responsibility to the states. Article by a religous group.
despite being poor and struggling and never having health insurance - i have never once looked for a government hand-out, nor have i desired one. it is not government's job to maintain my lifestyle, my health, or my income. democracy is what we use to form our government. capitalism is what we use to regulate our markets. you should not mix the two. This is a good point, to go back to the welfare question regarding Investment Banks and Mortgage Banks. Now capitalism has a risk reward trade off that has to remain in balance for it to work. Simply put, you make money when you do things right, and you lose money when you do things wrong. The banks made a lot of money (taking on huge risks). Those risks turned out to be bad and now the government is bailing out those banks - they are not seeing the downside of the errors of investing on that risk.
If
we don't bail them out, the economy heads for a deeper recession. If we
do bail them out we have really fucked the system, and the next time
they'll take even bigger risks because everyone understands that there
is no chance of loss. Where do you stand on this welfare? I don't know
how either candidate stands on this, I don't think it matters. I'm just
bringing it up to illustrate 2 points. 1. Welfare is needed in a
civilized society. At any extreme (welfare people smoking crack vs.
welfare billionaires) it doesn't make any sense, but it probably does
some good in the middle. 2. Macro-economics in the worlds biggest
financial and consumer markets is not a simple formula.
i.e.: why is healthcare a right? No one ever said it's a right, but the constitution does guarantee life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are getting close on the healthcare issue. why should it be given to everyone by the government. When you take out the profit that health insurance companies need to make, it becomes more efficient for the government to purchase insurance in bulk or administer the system themselves. it is not their job. it is a service, a product - it is part of the free market. So are roads, real property and the fire department. Do you think the only people that should be educated are the ones that can afford private schools? Should I have to pay someone to stay up while I sleep in case a fire starts so they can put it out. In any of these cases does a free market make this a better country. The fact is that my examples seem absurd because they go against the status quo - why change things if they are working. But healthcare isn't working. 47 million Americans were uninsured in 2007. We cannot keep up in a competitive world if we don't have a workforce. if you can afford something - you get it. if not, well, that's darwinism -- you couldn't figure out a way to be able to purchase that service (you are a shiftless retard) you don't get that service.
i want government out of my life. i don't want people telling me how to live. i don't want the government limitting my lifestyle and choices by taking my money out of my paycheck. the more and more this country leans to becoming an entitlement state - the more control we give up and the more dependant we are on the government. eventually, piece by piece the government comes to rule and control the people. Democracy is just the opposite, people are supposed to rule the rulers. they technically work for us. No argument here, except you're voting for the wrong candidate. You should be supporting Ron Paul (I did, I've donated multiple times). He's a libertarian (republican) and a major change that makes a lot of sense for a bloated country. The GOP never promoted him because of his stance against corporate handouts and wasteful spending. Did you know that he is the only congressman that gives money back to the federal govt every year because he finds a way to spend less? Google the Rosa Parks story, it's great. By the way, he'll be protesting the RNC convention in 2 weeks.
I guess this
is the part that I should bring up the Iraq war and the Trillion
Dollars spent on logistics and wasteful no-bid contractors. The war
that's gotten us nothing except massive losses of blood and treasure.
Back to your previous point about services and products should the
government be providing freedom (service/product) for other country's
citizens. And for that matter should they be providing protection
(service) for us?
my basic thought is that government has done nothing right. name one institution that they have created, controlled, and managed well. there is not one. why would you want to give them more control, more money? why would you let them control healthcare? even the Canadian healthcare system sucks... waiting for procedures. Any evidence? I lived in Canada and know multiple Canadians that love it. Do you know one American that loves their health insurance company? gov't telling you what you can and can't get, and when. that is why they all come down here for services. Again man, this is really outdated stuff, like McCarthy era. Republicans have overturned the fourth amendment, search and seizure. Republicans have taken away the right of Habeas Corpus, right to be chargesd and a speedy trial. Republicans have spied on the citizens through the telecoms and then provided immunity to the companies that helped them. Obama was a civil rights attorney and it's my hope that he'll restore my rights.
one thing that i could agree on is that the ultra rich maybe should be taxed more... they do have soooo much! but, then, you limit the money (the capital available) for the projects that you and i want to put together. VC will dry up. capital will dry up. entrepreneurship will dry up. that will kill the middle class... fewer jobs. same things happen when you tax business more. Again, you really can't take a simple view of macro-economics. Do you think that it's right that Warren Buffet (an economic adviser to Obama and the world's richest man) pays a lower tax rate than his assistant? link. Maybe if the rich are taxed more and the poor are taxed less they can put more money into the service economy and strengthen the middle class? By any measure the middle class has eroded greatly over the last 8 years of republican economy. The "money in the system explanation just doesn't make economic sense, but too long to explain. I've attached a diagram of the McCain/ Obama tax plans by income bracket. Sorry no source.
i dunno. that's what i think. do i want someone to give me all sorts of shit so i never have to worry about anything ever again? sure i do - just like every other lazy asshole out there. but what is best for me right now is not what is best for this country, it's development, and our freedom. think it out logically to it's end - these are the conclusions i have reached. and i have educated myself on any opposing opinion out there that i could find and i still cannot find significant evidence to dispute my findings. Barack and Biden (my call for the Dem VP - you heard it here first) have never talked about handouts. Ever. Whether or not people are listening, I don't know. A quote from Barack, "We are the people ones we've been waiting for" link. He is saying what you're saying - the government isn't going to do this for you, you need to do it for yourselves and your country (my interp). He's not just saying it, he's walking the walk. He has built the most efficient, sizeable and impressive campaign ever assembled. Millions of people are volunteering donating money and turning out at local events to discuss politics and the future of this country. Isn't that what we need? A motivated populace to turn this ship around (because it's fucking sinking right now)? Isn't two million mobilized people a start, a movement worth joining. Anyone can sit around and bitch about what's wrong (and most everyone does) but if you're not willing to suit up and do more, do you really deserve to be heard?
but i am sure we will agree to disagree. people do love free shit and less responsibility. and this country is (NOWADAYS) filled with a bunch of whiners and sissies who don't want to work for their stuff. so, we have the democrats to represent them. that's the beauty of democracy - or it's major failing... You're right, the country is a bunch of whiners, except for the people that aren't. I think you're just really dealing in outdated assumptions about the parties.
I don't think Barack Obama is going to fix this country, but I do think that he will employ some smart policies to move things in the right direction - using technology to instill transparency and speak directly to the American public; restore basic civil liberties and constitutional rights; restore our credibility with allies - but most importantly people will get involved in their government and he will inspire the next generation.
Regarding McCain, I don't know anything about him, and I don't think you mentioned him once?? i don't know his policies and I'm not sure that he does. link. It's just plain incompetence. Did you know McCain doesn't know if condoms protect you from Aids. Shit, that's the last time I go to Haiti.
this blog has no journalistic integrity. it is a cherry-picked version of a rather in-depth political debate. it is a shame that mike has debased that exchange and attempted to prove his points without posting my facts, ideas, and theories in their complete form.
see mike's other blog, (and the comments following it) to see the full version of this debate.
mikesabat.wordpress.com/
Posted by: therealissues | August 27, 2008 at 03:08 PM
this blog has no journalistic integrity. it is a cherry-picked version of a rather in-depth political debate. it is a shame that mike has debased that exchange and attempted to prove his points without posting my facts, ideas, and theories in their complete form.
see mike's other blog, (and the comments following it) to see the full version of this debate.
mikesabat.wordpress.com/
Posted by: therealissues | August 27, 2008 at 03:09 PM