even harder to tell how much he'd actually be able to accomplish IF he does get elected... the GOP could abandon him if he pushes his libertarian ideas too strongly and if he doesnt, the Libs will never catch up with support
i do like how he's had enough of the bipartisanship
thats something i never understood why people were strongly supporting.... i mean you take the time to campaign for and elect someone who has the same virtues/values/ideas you have and then you want them to go an compromise on all of it????
no thanks
Well the idea is kind of like a negotiation for a big Boxing Match.
If one side wants more money and is overpricing themselves, and the other guy thinks he should get more also, and no "compromise" is made (like a 50-50 deal), then the fight doesn't happen period. So in Political terms, you end up looking good, with your hands clean without having accomplished anything.
Which is what Ron Paul is sort of good at. Dennis Kucinich was viewed similarly as Ron Paul (someone with consistent principles/ Rigid Ideology), even though he is a opposite Liberal. Like Ron, he kept preaching Single Payer System, but then he went and compromised on Obamacare. Maybe he got tired of preaching and finally did something that he thinks would lead towards Single-Payer, or maybe he got bought and paid.
Either way, the only way to get it your way is in a Single-Party system, where you overthrow everybody with opposing views. And we all know that's not good thing.
Brokering a deal is the best & only realistic way in this country. You can hope that the compromise will eventually lead towards what you want, all the way.
Brokering a deal is the best & only realistic way in this country. You can hope that the compromise will eventually lead towards what you want, all the way.[/SIZE]
the unfortunate thing is, the winner in the "deal" is ALWAYS govt
its always a trade off, each side gets more than they give up... its more of a "lets do BOTH" instead of lets do neither etc
we lose, govt wins and the politicians can keep telling us they're fighting for us
The problem with libertarians is that they're spineless pussies who hide behind ideology all day long.
They can quote Robespierre and Ayn Rand all day long while pretending they get it but when it comes to street action and getting rugged they're nothing but a bunch of nerd fakers.
They would rather know about the principles of liberty than to actually go out and get their damn hands dirty.
the unfortunate thing is, the winner in the "deal" is ALWAYS govt
its always a trade off, each side gets more than they give up... its more of a "lets do BOTH" instead of lets do neither etc
we lose, govt wins and the politicians can keep telling us they're fighting for us
That's the System for ya.
As Carlin said, it's all Bullshh wrapped up in Red, White & Blue.
But that's Human nature. Naturally, we always have to split up into different groups. Or take one group and split into Sub-Groups. It happens in Religion (i.e. Muslims with *****e Vs Sunni or Protestants Vs Catholics in Christianity etc,.) Or if we skip religion and go into complete Nonsense (Street gangs) West Vs East, Bloods Vs Crips for territory in the streets of Compton.
Even if Libertarians took over the U.S. tomorrow, they'd find a way to Split into two Sub-Groups and start a Political & Cultural whatever War.
Comment