# This One's for The Obama Loyalists, Pay Attention. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 19, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784 "2010-08-19T20:08:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/81 "2010-08-19T22:26:53Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > The libertarians and many conservatives as well were very critical of Bush and the Republican party for many years. I believed (and still believe) that Bush was the worst President in modern history. Give me proof that the motivating factor in these protests is race. That’s easy - all those libertarians and many conservatives you mention _didn’t protest_ under Bush. Or Clinton either, for that matter. Or anyone. So even if they were unhappy about those other guys, there is obviously and provably something _different_ about this one, that inspires them to take to the streets. Oh gee, what could it be. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/82 "2010-08-19T22:26:59Z")
[QUOTE=jrodefeld] 1. The Federal Reserve is an inherently immoral institution that enriches bankers and destroys the value of our money. [/QUOTE] To go along with Honesty’s query, why is the FR ‘inherently immoral’? What does ‘immoral’ even mean in this context, and why is morality an issue in any case? How has it enriched bankers and destroyed the value of our money? What do you base this assertion on? And, as with Honesty’s question, what do you propose to replace it? -XT ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/83 "2010-08-19T22:32:32Z")
> [@villa](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > 1. One protest was at least 15% African American. Another rally I witnessed many Hispanic voters in the ranks. Yet another was filled with many college age protesters signifying a significant youth demographic. > > > > 2. There was very little mention of Obama specifically. I heard much about Congress, some complaints about the spending and plenty of blame for both parties. > > > > 3. The tone was distinctly Libertarian. I heard no social conservative issues like gay marriage, abortion, religious issues, or anything of the sort. It was focussed on balancing the budget, cutting spending, ending the bailouts, and following the Constitution. I heard some complaints about the Federal Reserve. I even heard some complaints about the war in Afghanistan and of our foreign policy in general. There was also a distinct opinion that Obama’s economic policy has failed and will continue to fail going forward. > > 1. You see, I just don’t believe you on this. I’ve been exposed to the tea baggers when they came to DC, and man, it was whiter than a Nascar crowd. > > 2. Again, I don’t believe you. The signs I saw, and the conversations I was subjected to when the asswipes invaded my bar focused heavily on Obama. > > 3. I’d give this more credibility if the same people had given a shit abotu deficits and the war when a white Republican was President. But they weren’t demonstrating in DC then. 1. Well, I do live in California. The point is there is the true grassroots, and the Republican financed and subverted Tea Party. There are a lot of people who don’t fit in to your stereotypes who are angry and protesting. The true grassroots liberty movement started as a support for Ron Paul in 2007. Virtually all political commentators at the time remarked on the diversity of the crowds he attracted. That has changed somewhat. 2. You don’t have to believe me. You had a very limited exposure to certain groups of people. My experience has been different. 3. Many people DID care about the deficits under Republicans. See, the problem is you cannot deal with the criticisms. Its like attacking the messenger, instead of dealing with the message. We need to cut spending and balance the budget or we will face a calamity that will be worse than anything we have seen in our history. Yeah, some people are hypocritical when it comes to being consistent on issues of debt and big government. I wasn’t hypocritical, neither was anyone I know. You need to deal with the facts rather than criticizing those who are delivering the facts. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/84 "2010-08-19T22:33:58Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Its not random. You are all doing everything possible not to actually try to understand what I wrote. My argument is incredibly strong, if you would actually take the time to read what I wrote. I agree with the OP, Obama is doing a very nice job and we are lucky to have him at the helm during these difficult times. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/85 "2010-08-19T22:38:16Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > > > It’s a reference to some independently verifiable source, offered in defense of an implicit charge of asspullery; but that’s not important right now. > > Looks like I picked the wrong day to stop sniffing paint thinner. Not if you want to make sense of the OP. I was about to post “I bet DT didn’t know he had such a fan” on the other thread, but it got closed on me. As for the OP, if I might quote Willy the Shake, “Brevity is the soul of wit.” Not much wit in the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/86 "2010-08-19T22:38:19Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > I am a libertarian. I have ALWAYS been about less spending and deficit reduction. I agree with you. The question is, how to do it? In my (somewhat uninformed opinion), I would: –Pull the military out Iraq and Afghanistan –Reduce the defense budget –Reform Social Security –Reform Healthcare (yeah…again. :sigh: ) –Raise taxes Those all sound like fairly progressive things to do, eh? ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/87 "2010-08-19T22:38:28Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Page 3/3 > > Think about this: > > \*\*From the Revolution to 1913, the value of the dollar went _up_ 7%. > > From 1913 to now, the value of the dollar went down 96%!\*\* > > When the dollar goes down, prices go up and the people become poorer. Like I said earlier, wealth is transferred from the poor to the wealthy. This is far from convincing. Where do I begin? Just once, I’d like to see someone talk about the aggregate inflation affecting the dollar, over nearly a century, AND acknowledge that every other national currency in the developed world also underwent similar if not worse inflation. Around the time when FDR devalued the dollar to 1/35 of an ounce of gold, the UK devalued sterling by nearly half. Traditionally, a pound had been worth about $5, but now it was only worth about $2.75. This wasn’t just an American thing. And overall from 1914 on we have not been sliding into poverty, but wages and salaries have more than kept pace with inflation. Of course I don’t mean during recessions and depressions, like right now, but over the long term it’s true. What, do you think a hot dog vendor in 1920 got $8 an hour, or $64 a day? Of course not, because that would have been equivalent to three ounces of gold and worth a fortune. Nobody made $64 a day, in those times, except for CEO fat cats and others who for some reason could command such a salary, like celebrity actors and entertainers. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/88 "2010-08-19T22:41:34Z")
> [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > I went to a Teaparty meeting here in Houston. It was in a public, taxpayer built, park downtown but they had erected a cute little fence around the actual meeting site. So I looked in for a while & listened to a few rants. > > The rants were mostly anti-immigration, legal & otherwise. The crowd was blindingly white. Quite remarkable in such a diverse city. > > I’ll let the Economics Scholars deal with your massive wall of text. In the meantime, please detail your formal education in the subject. Also, summarize your life experience. > > Long, long ago I actually debated, in High School. I was shanghaied into it since I was taking Speech & half the girl’s debate team ran off to Greenwich Village to be a Beatnik. I was dreadful; with a better partner, my partner won a bunch of tournaments in later years. > > However, I did learn that debates have structure. You make a few points (which we wrote on note cards in those long-ago days). Then there are rebuttals, answering the opposition’s points. And maybe a summary? All with time limits. We did not drag a tome to the front of the room & proceed to orate for hours. > > If you want people’s attention (rather than derision) edit your OP’s. > > Oh, and as a Texan, I’ve been laughing at The Pauls for a long time. Well, I’ve actually only been laughing at Ron; I thank you for introducing me to the hilarity that is Randall “Rand” Paul. Oh, you’ve been “laughing” at Ron Paul, have you? What did you find so hilarious? His consistency? His respect for the Constitution? His opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? His defense of Civil Liberties? What is Ron Paul so wrong about? As to the format, I’ve addressed this already. The purpose was more to get some things off my chest rather than strictly adhere to the format of a formal debate. Let me ask you this. Hypothetically, if we experience hyperinflation and our currency is destroyed, will you repent and admit that perhaps Ron Paul was right? ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/89 "2010-08-19T22:46:30Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Funny how libertarians seem to omit Alan Greenspan and his group who actually got in power and blew it all up. Ten years ago they touted him proudly. But he got power and proved how stupid and unworkable it was. You really don’t know anything about libertarians and especially Austrian economists if you think that. Greenspan was most responsible for the creation of this crisis. That is why I want to get rid of the Federal Reserve system so Fed chairmen, in a secretive manner, can’t destroy the economy. Watch this video of Ron Paul questioning Alan Greenspan in 2000: ![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/i2AqGQirW1Y/maxresdefault.jpg)https://www.youtube.com/embed/i2AqGQirW1Y?feature=oembed&wmode=opaque ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/90 "2010-08-19T22:48:46Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Let me ask you this. Hypothetically, if we experience hyperinflation and our currency is destroyed, will you repent and admit that perhaps Ron Paul was right? If we don’t, will you admit that perhaps Ron Paul (and you) were wrong? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/91 "2010-08-19T22:49:24Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Let me ask you this. Hypothetically, if we experience hyperinflation and our currency is destroyed, will you repent and admit that perhaps Ron Paul was right? Repent? :dubious: There is a difference between a political position and a religion. Sometimes. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/92 "2010-08-19T22:52:05Z")
The problem I have with everyone who defends the good intentions of the Tea Party protestors is where were they from 2000 to 2008? Why weren’t they marching when George Bush set record deficits, vastly expanded government powers, and started (and bungled) two wars? None of that set them off but within a couple of weeks of Barack Obama taking the oath of office they were marching in the streets. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/93 "2010-08-19T23:17:45Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Oh, and since the original thread was aimed at me for some bizarre reason; “Obama loyalist”? _Me?_ I’ve been bashing him from his inauguration on. I’ve never liked him. Nor have a great many people on the left, nor have a great many people who have the opinions on the teabaggers and Republicans that you are arguing against. You don’t need to be an “Obama loyalist” to see those scummy idiots for what they are. No, you are not an Obama loyalist. But you are a liberal. The point was that in the past you characterize libertarians as inhumane, not caring about the poor, etc. You believe that the thought of ending Social Security and Medicare is unthinkable and cruel. Also, I’m sure you believe in some form of “Big” government, meaning high spending and lots of regulations on the market. You have no trust in Free Markets. If, however, you don’t like FDR and Lyndon Johnson, then I completely mis characterized you and I apologize. The point was the fraudulent banking system and public debt is far more damaging to the poor and middle class that any supposed benefits we get back from government. That is my assertion and I took great care to lay out how the poor would be far better off in a libertarian society without no public debt and a small government and no central bank. You can respond to those specific points at your leisure. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/94 "2010-08-19T23:22:09Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > What? > > It’s a reference to some independently verifiable source, offered in defense to an implicit charge of asspullery; but that’s not important right now. I know what cite means. What is that poster referring to? That is my point. If he said, you claim this, can you offer a cite or supporting evidence to support that specific claim, I would know what the hell he is talking about. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/95 "2010-08-19T23:26:35Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > For now, however, school is in session. I want to raise a few issues for all of you and I am looking forward to your feedback. > > See, here’s the problem. You don’t want feedback. You want to lecture. > > There are some actual libertarians on this board, and plenty of posters who, like me, lean libertarian. But no one comes here to be lectured. Well, I DID want to lecture, but not to libertarians. The tone is directed towards only a small segment of posters here who I feel have no understanding of economics and US history. Defenders of Obama, Keynesians, Progressives, etc. Those who believe the lie that the government is going to be able to take care of us and the welfare state is viable and we need massive government regulation of every aspect of the economy, etc. I understand why some may be put off by the tone. I meant no offense. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/96 "2010-08-19T23:28:36Z")
I mean this in the most constructive way possible if you really want to provoke honest discussion don’t be condescending and talk about how you are educating folks and how your intelligance is superior. Mmmm-kay? ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/97 "2010-08-19T23:34:59Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > I don’t know any of you personally, but I will wager that most have never attended a Tea Party rally. You likely have never even talked to a participant. To make such blanket statements and accusations against so many people is beyond irresponsible. You should know by now that the media’s portrayal of reality is frequently not accurate. I have made a point to attend a few rallies and protests to gauge for sure the tenor of the political climate in 2010. I live in California and yes there are Tea Party protests in California. A few things that I noticed: > > 1. One protest was at least 15% African American. Another rally I witnessed many Hispanic voters in the ranks. Yet another was filled with many college age protesters signifying a significant youth demographic. Dude, seriously? [This video](http://www.cbsatlanta.com/video/23168078/index.html) is from the big Tea Party Tax Day protest in Atlanta, where over half of the population is black (57% or so in the city). I did see one black guy looking at all the crazy white people, and there are probably a few black journalists that I didn’t see, as we have a ton of them, but black **protesters** are harder to find than Waldo in this. If you saw 15% in California, this video should look like an NAACP convention. It doesn’t. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/98 "2010-08-19T23:37:27Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, now, if the Austrian School is enjoying a rebirth of interest, why is that? If they are presenting us with timeless principles of economic truth, why should they ever have been out of favor in the first place? Has some exciting new experiment in economics verified their previously unacceptable premises? > > And while I accept that it is possible that the 'bagger with the picture of Obama as a witch doctor with a bone in his nose is thoroughly conversant with the distinctions between Austrian and Keynesian Economics, I kinda have my doubts. No, I don’t think that many Tea Partiers understand the distinction between Austrian and Keynesian economics. But some do. I think we should elevate the smartest minds to be the face of the opposition, not routinely promoting the most uneducated, bigoted people of any group. The media will only focus on the racists or the backwards militia member in an effort to discredit the whole group. Then you all think you know who these people are. As for Austrian Economics, it was pushed to the side through an unprecedented propaganda campaign and a Federal Reserve which bought out the economics profession. Government wants to expand its power. It is not favorable to a philosophy which restricts its power. The resurgence is happening because it correctly predicted the crisis and it is easily understood by the common person. It advocates a reduction in spending and a correction of the markets. Keynesian economics advocates government stimulus and increased deficits, which will only make the problem worse. When you have a thirteen trillion dollar deficit, massive government spending makes no sense. Austrian economics offers a compelling alternative that people can understand. Plus, since Keynesian economics has been in vogue for decades, Austrian theories can hardly be blamed for our current problems. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/99 "2010-08-19T23:40:59Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > You believe that the thought of ending Social Security and Medicare is unthinkable and cruel. I’m curious how you think this is _not_ the case. As with the fed, the question becomes “what would you replace it with”? Suppose for a moment that Ron Paul is elected Emperor and with a wave of his hand dismisses Social Security and Medicare. People relying on a check? Poof: no check. People heading to the hospital? Poof: no hospital. Okay, that’s done. Now, what does he do with these people instead? If the answer is “The free market will provide”, then the reaction of people not in your religion is “Like hell it will”. People who have at least a high-school level of understanding about the free market know full well that it is _perfectly_ happy to cut the lower end of the population loose with nothing. The market is amoral and the market is merciless - especially to those people who have fallen on hard times, much less those who are _perpetually_ on hard times. So. Let us reiterate: “The free market will provide” is _exactly synonymous_ with “let them starve and die in their ovn filth while I sit in my ivory tower and laugh at their fate.” I think a relatively strong case can be made that this qualifies as “unthinkable and cruel”. If you do _not_ propose “The free market will provide” as your answer to the disbanding of Social Security and Medicare, what do you intend to put in their place instead? ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/100 "2010-08-19T23:46:04Z")
So you intended to direct your posts to liberals, yet you post this: > [@](#): > > When Nixon was sworn in (1969), the national debt was: $354,000,000,000 > When Reagan was sworn in (1980), the national debt was: $908,000,000,000 > When Clinton was sworn in (1992), the national debt was: $4,065,000,000,000 > When G.W. Bush was sworn in (2001), the national debt was: $5,760,000,000,000 > When Barack Obama was sworn in (2009), the national debt was: $10,124,000,000,000 Trying to show that Democrats have huge debts. But the chart is not honest. It is more show the results of a presidency than damning one yet to begin. It actually shows that after a Republican presidency, the debt increases dramatically compared to a liberal president. Your scare tactics would have been less effective had you been more honest and said: "After the following presidents, the debt was: Nixon ~ +200% Reagan ~ +340% Clinton ~ +42% Bush ~ +100% Obama started with $10 trillion. If he keeps it under 20 trillion by the time he leaves, he’s automatically better than any recent Republican president at managing the economy and the national debt [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=6)