# 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:** 6
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/101 "2010-08-19T23:48:30Z")
> [@Grey](#): > > Oh good - Austrian economics. I was worried that might not crop up. Oh, it had to be in there… I love this sort of i-know-i’m-right infodump. Should I do one from the SocialDem/Green side? ---
**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, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/102 "2010-08-19T23:50:47Z")
> [@Grey](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > What does that mean? I have thoroughly read Austrian literature and I am convinced that it is superior to Keynesian theories. Many others think the same, that is why it is experiencing a resurgence in popularity. > > > > If you have real criticisms, I can address them. > > Well any discipline that opts out of utilizing empirical data for axiomatic theorizing doesn’t get very far with me. A discipline’s alignment with common sense has nothing to do with the actual validity of the discipline. > > As an aside, is there ever a moment where US wing nuts find a happy medium between rending clothing over the collapse of the _Republic_ and piggish jingoism? See, thats the problem. Mises’ magnum opus is called Human Action because he argues that human behavior is too complex and irrational to be understood using mathematical theories and centrally managed. In fact, Keynesians use complex mathematical models to cover up the fact that their ideas are so irrational that even a child could understand how ridiculous they are. A scientific gloss does not impress me. Common sense and self evident axioms are critical to the study of human beings and their desires and behavior. The value of money is critical. The issue of morality and power is paramount. Read _Human Action_ and you will be sure to be blown away by Mises’ intellect and reasoning. The central issues are this: 1. We (the Austrians) want to limit government power and maintain the value of the currency. 2. We want a low public debt and to maintain an accountable government by allowing people to exchange their paper money for gold should they lose trust in their government. 3. We understand that paper money always self destructs throughout history. This is easily understood to a student of economic history. The nations with Sound Money survive and thrive. The nations who embark on inflation and fiat currencies self destruct under an avalanche of debt. You are asking me to give up on this rational, common sense, to embrace a bullshit economic school that uses a scientific gloss to convince me that deficits don’t matter and we can survive indefinitely on the “creation” of wealth through a printing press? Are you kidding me? Think about what you are really saying. ---
**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, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/103 "2010-08-19T23:55:47Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > 1. We understand that paper money always self destructs throughout history. This is easily understood to a student of economic history. The nations with Sound Money survive and thrive. The nations who embark on inflation and fiat currencies self destruct under an avalanche of debt. You do realize that _most_ countries have fiat currencies, right? When do you predict this self-desctruction will occur? 1950? 1970? When? ---
**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, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/104 "2010-08-19T23:58:47Z")
> [@Tastes\_of\_Chocolate](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > I would also be curious to learn where you get your news from. From my experience, people are conditioned through the media construct of left vs right to believe things that are untrue and to take sides in a political fight where they will always come out as the loser. It is impossible for me to undo all this programming and propaganda in one post (or many posts), so allow me to suggest some resources and individuals you may follow to become more astute as well as cautioning you from looking at certain mainstream outlets that will not inform you. > > \*\*Avoid these political media outlets: \*\* > > > > New York Times > > Newsweek > > Washington Post > > Time Magazine > > Wall Street Journal > > Fox News > > MSNBC > > CNN > > ABC News > > NPR > > There are others, but don’t watch or read the above and think you are being informed. > > > > **Individuals and Outlets You Should Follow:** > > > > Russia Today > > Gerald Celente > > Ron Paul > > Peter Schiff > > Tom Woods > > Marc Faber > > Jim Rogers > > Lew Rockwell > > > > **Websites You Should Visit:** > > > > http:/Mises.org > > [http://Wikileaks.org](http://Wikileaks.org) > > [http://breakthematrix.com/](http://breakthematrix.com/) > > [www.Rense.com](http://www.Rense.com) > > [www.Campaignforliberty.com](http://www.Campaignforliberty.com) > > [www.reason.com](http://www.reason.com) > > Can you please explain why your approved sources of news are the “correct” ones? > From your list: > Gerald Celente - Fas appeared on Oprah, The Today Show, Good Morning America, CBS Morning News, NBC Nightly News, Fox > > Peter Schiff - appears on CNBC, Fox, and Bloomberg > > Marc Faber - multiple appearances on CNBC > > Jim Rogers - was a moderator on a WCBS program and was a regular guest on Fox > > If your approved list of pundits appears on the disapproved media outlets, then why is one approved but the other not? > > You need to establish the credentials of your approved reading list. This is a fair question. I would consider most of the mainstream networks and outlets to parade propaganda and bullshit to their audiences. Sometimes they do have good guests on, but not enough to make it worthwhile. I would suggest you don’t watch these networks, but catch the youtube of someone good who gets interviewed by these networks. This is just my opinion, but the people I listed are very smart, have gotten predictions overwhelmingly right and are non partisan. I would add G Edward Griffin to that list. He wrote the definitive book on the Great Depression called _The Creature from Jekyl Island_. There are plenty more good sources. I haven’t even gotten into the book list I would recommend. If you are interested, simply pay attention to those guys and visit the websites. See if they are right. Follow their track record vs the mainstream outlets and judge for yourself. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/105 "2010-08-20T00:09:04Z")
> [@Lightnin](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > The purpose of this thread is not to criticize Obama. > > Did you even look at the title of the thread? 'Cause I see Obama’s name right up there. > > Or is this only supposed to be critical of those of us who are foolish enough to continue to defend him against the constant bleating from the other guys? 'Cause I’ve said it before, and I’ll (no doubt) say it again- “We never said Obama was perfect. We just said he was better than the other options.” And so far, that still holds true. Better than who? I believe that if McCain was elected in 2008 literally nothing would be substantially different policy wise. The media would just spin things differently. The “lesser of two evils” mentality is destroying this nation. Peoples standards are so low. There are enough betrayals from a liberal perspective for all of you to be marching in the streets next to the tea partiers. But you won’t because you are scared to death of a president Sarah Palin in 2012. This has got to stop. I don’t need to do this but I will: We still have 80,000 troops in Iraq. Obama has doubled the contractors in Iraq. We have massively escalated the war in Afghanistan. Guantanamo Bay is still open He supports bailouts of Wall Street His economics team is stacked with insiders and cronies like Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, Alan Goolsbee, and others All his economic predictions have failed so far. His economic policies have failed. We still have renditions and secrets prisons. His health care bill is a giant corporate welfare check made out to the Insurance and Pharmaceutical industries * * * There is plenty more I could go into. How can you defend the guy? ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/106 "2010-08-20T00:14:19Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > 1. I was hoping that those who support Obama and are committed liberals would address the critique I have made of their ideology in how in affects the poor and its relationship to fiscal reality. > > What makes you think that many committed liberals have anything more than tepid support for Obama? He is certainly no liberal. No, but liberal frequently want MORE government intervention, MORE welfare, MORE spending, etc. If you don’t consider Obama a liberal, fine. I call him a Corporatist. That is the most accurate description for him. I am referring to what liberals would see as their ideal, which from my understanding is completely impossible both economically and logistically. Don’t liberals want universal health care? Don’t liberals want high regulations on the market and a large welfare state? Don’t liberal support Keynesian economics and Central Banking? Most do. So, respond to my criticism of what you think is your ideal government. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/107 "2010-08-20T00:14:38Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > In fact, Keynesians use complex mathematical models to cover up the fact that their ideas are so irrational that even a child could understand how ridiculous they are. Okay, this confuses me. If the underlying ideas behind Keynesian economics are so dumb even a child would laugh at them, then why do so many economists agree with Keynes? Are they deliberately endorsing theories that they know will be destructive to the economy? Why would they do that? How would destroying the economy be of benefit to them? ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/108 "2010-08-20T00:16:20Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Oh, and since the original thread was aimed at me for some bizarre reason; “Obama loyalist”? Me? > > In fact, the concept of “loyalists” is rather alien, in general, to the sorts of people who supported Obama. It’s Republicans who promote the idea of “My country (or President, or whatever), right or wrong”. The attitude that got Obama elected, though, is more “My country, as long as and to the extent that it’s right”. When Obama (or any other president) gets something right, he should be applauded for it, and when he or any other president gets something wrong, he should be criticized for it. If he gets enough more things wrong than right, he should be voted out of office. That is very reasonable of you. I agree completely. Obama, in my mind has gotten pretty much everything wrong. That certainly doesn’t mean if we vote him out of office his replacement will do any better. That hasn’t been the trend in the past. ---
**Author:** ![Algorithm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/algorithm/32/12204_2.png) [@Algorithm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algorithm)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/109 "2010-08-20T00:23:24Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > We still have 80,000 troops in Iraq. Obama has doubled the contractors in Iraq. So [this article](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11020270) is wrong? ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/110 "2010-08-20T00:24:43Z")
> [@Gagundathar](#): > > I voted for Mr. Obama because he was the smartest and most progressive person on the ballot. > It wasn’t as if I had a lot of choice in the matter. > I could choose to vote for Mr. McCain who had already had his political spirit broken back in 2000 when the former POTUS was hoisted to power, or Mr. Bob Barr who spent the majority of his public life fighting a ‘war’ against drugs and failing mightily in the process, or Ms. Cynthia McKinney who is, in my opinion, one of the least sane people that has ever made it to a presidential ballot. To say that Barack Obama was the best choice from this motley crew is damning him with faint praise. > > But nevertheless, I appreciate the trouble you went to in crafting your manifesto. I wish you well in your continuing struggle against reality and hope that you will find whatever it is that you are searching for. Well, I voted for Nader. Would you say that Obama is better than Ralph Nader? If you mean struggling against reality in that I should just hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils, I completely disagree. People need to find more ways to be involved in overthrowing this system that voting every four years. Its ridiculous. By the way Bob Barr, who ran as the libertarian, claims he has come around and now understands that we need to get rid of the war on drugs. He was heavily criticized by libertarians for his well known conservative stances in the past. He went out of his way to show he has seen the light on this and other issues. I wasn’t very impressed with him. Most libertarians were too busy fighting for Ron Paul in the Republican Primary to pay attention to the libertarian party. I wasn’t impressed with Barr. Thats why I voted for Nader. The more I hear him recently, the more I think that Bob Barr is better than most. Everyone can make mistakes. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/111 "2010-08-20T00:28:47Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > [QUOTE=jrodefeld] > You don’t have to. No one is forcing you to participate. You could choose only a small part of what I wrote to debate if you want. Is there a problem with reading comprehension around here? An educated person could read and understand what I wrote in ten to fifteen minutes. Whether you visit the websites is up to you. As John said, you seem to be trying to lecture everyone, not really debate anything. Your OP seems like standard Libertarian whacknuttery to me, and I’m actually somewhat sympathetic to a libertarian viewpoint. It’s funny that you originally pointed this at DT, since he actually isn’t much of an Obama fan. -XT [/QUOTE] Standard Libertarian whacknuttery, huh? Okay. You don’t have to go into great detail, but why not tell me how far off I am in my assessment of the facts? You could make an effort. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/112 "2010-08-20T00:32:45Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > > [@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. > > No, your argument, to the extent you have one, is weak. And timid. It is a little, crying girl on a field of angry, savage men. Men who are chock full of steroids, trained for aggression and indoctrinated in a cult whose only theology is hate. > > Your argument is being run under their cleats and can only manage gurgles as their powerful calves push her into the turf. > > And on the sidelines, you wave your pennant and cheer. But she’s already dead. This is hilarious. Its not worth responding to. You should be a comedian. ---
**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 20, 2010, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/113 "2010-08-20T00:37:24Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Better than who? I believe that if McCain was elected in 2008 literally nothing would be substantially different policy wise. The media would just spin things differently. Except that I severely doubt that the health care bill would have happened under McCain. And I suspect he would have handled foreign diplomacy quite differently as well. > [@jrodefeld](#): > > The “lesser of two evils” mentality is destroying this nation. Peoples standards are so low. There are enough betrayals from a liberal perspective for all of you to be marching in the streets next to the tea partiers. But you won’t because you are scared to death of a president Sarah Palin in 2012. This has got to stop. What do you suggest we do, then, if not vote for the guy who’s the closest to a reasonable candidate? ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/114 "2010-08-20T00:40:17Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > 1. I was hoping that those who support Obama and are committed liberals would address the critique I have made of their ideology in how in affects the poor and its relationship to fiscal reality. There are actually a few possible points of discussion. Cutting spending vs big government progressivism. > > Question: why can’t the government cut spending and be progressive? It can. I believe I am very progressive. I am referring to the progressivism that gained popularity in the mid 20th century that emphasized massive growth of government, the welfare state, entitlements, regulation of the market, etc. I believe these things are the opposite of truly progressive government. The Founders of this nation were the true progressives. They established the first government that emphasized individual liberty and free enterprise. A progressive society would evolve towards greater liberty, more freedom, more peace, more tolerance and greater equality of justice. Instead the brand of progressivism that was common in the mid 20th century was a progressive loss of liberty, more economic inequality, more wars, more authoritarianism. This is not progressive in my mind. A truly libertarian society would be progressive. We could once again be the example of human liberty that would be the envy of the world. ---
**Author:** ![Patch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a183cd/32.png) [@Patch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patch)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/115 "2010-08-20T00:42:02Z")
> [@mlees](#): > > Where can I get the cliff notes? Maybe those **were** the cliff notes. :eek: ---
**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 20, 2010, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/116 "2010-08-20T00:46:28Z")
[QUOTE=jrodefeld] Standard Libertarian whacknuttery, huh? Okay. You don’t have to go into great detail, but why not tell me how far off I am in my assessment of the facts? [/QUOTE] I realize you are being overwhelmed by posters responding to you and you attempting to respond to them, so I’m going to wait to see if my later questions and some by other posters are answered before answering your question here. I admire the fact that you are attempting to engage what is, for all intents and purposes a hostile audience, and you are doing so in a cool and calm manner (by and large :p). I know how that can be, especially when pretty much everyone in a thread is against you, and a lot of folks are hounding you to respond to THEIR posts, right now! To be brief, from what little I’ve read so far leads me to strongly believe you are one of those Libertarian types who see conspiracy everywhere in the government, want the US to get back on something like the gold standard, etc etc…to me, that is ‘Standard Libertarian whacknuttery’, since I don’t find it reality based. As I said, I actually have libertarian leanings myself, but I think that the big ‘L’ Libertarians are nearly a religious sect in their fervor and are completely out of touch with reality…POLITICAL reality…in this country. To my mind, real solutions to our real problems entail working from within the system, not solutions that entail the total destruction of the system and the supposed rebuilding of a better world. That smacks of the same kind of whacknuttery that the Communists got in 1918 and are still going through in some parts of the world. I’m going to let it go at that for now, because you are making a good faith effort to engage a number of posters, and, honestly, your efforts would be better spent engaging them than me on all this. I would appreciate if you could answer my later question at some point, but it’s not really critical. FWIW, I’ll be following the discussion. Good luck with this…you are going to need it around here. 😉 -XT ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/117 "2010-08-20T00:47:15Z")
> [@](#): > > 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. The difference between liberals and conservatives isn’t that liberals believe in large government while conservatives believe in small government. In fact, liberals and conservatives both want a government of about the same size. The difference is that liberals want good government, while conservatives want bad government. Moreover, “small government” and “free market” are far from synonymous. See, for example, Cap and Trade. Liberals want to expand the government in such a way as to replace our current socialist energy industry with a free-market energy industry, but the people who claim to hold the free market sacred and to denounce socialism are fighting it tooth and nail. As to the OP itself, have you ever read Borges’ short story “The Library of Babel”? The premise is, it’s a library that contains, not just every book ever written, but every book that could possibly exist: Every sequence of letters in order is in one of those books somewhere in the library. In order to contain all of these books, the library must, of course, be unimaginatively vast… But it contains no information whatsoever. One could, in fact, greatly increase the information content of Borges’ library by burning the vast majority of the books in it. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/118 "2010-08-20T00:51:53Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > I don’t need to do this but I will: See, I knew if you put your mind to it you could make specific claims. They’re almost all wrong, though. > [@](#): > > We still have 80,000 troops in Iraq. Obama has doubled the contractors in Iraq. There are currently 56,000 soldiers, or rather there will be after they rotate out. > [@](#): > > We have massively escalated the war in Afghanistan. Obama ran on that. Also, if we left Afghanistan right now it would fall to the Taliban. That’s bad. Really, you should look it up. > [@](#): > > Guantanamo Bay is still open Because the Republicans are hysterical pussies and drummed up mouthbreathers against this. > [@](#): > > He supports bailouts of Wall Street The wall street bailouts were necessary. I thought you understood economics? > [@](#): > > His economics team is stacked with insiders and cronies like Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, Alan Goolsbee, and others So? I’m pretty sure they understand economics better than you do. > [@](#): > > All his economic predictions have failed so far. His economic policies have failed. Like keeping us out of the depression? As for the prediction, you’re probably talking about keeping unemployment low. That was a prediction made on info we had at the time. When the more accurate info was available, it was worse than we thought. > [@](#): > > We still have renditions and secrets prisons. That does suck. But he’s cut them down. > [@](#): > > His health care bill is a giant corporate welfare check made out to the Insurance and Pharmaceutical industries That allows millions of people to access health care and actually costs _less_. > [@](#): > > * * * > > There is plenty more I could go into. How can you defend the guy? Because your attacks are laughable. ---
**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 20, 2010, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/119 "2010-08-20T00:52:40Z")
[QUOTE=Chronos] The difference between liberals and conservatives isn’t that liberals believe in large government while conservatives believe in small government. In fact, liberals and conservatives both want a government of about the same size. The difference is that liberals want good government, while conservatives want bad government. [/QUOTE] 😛 I’m sorry, but you weren’t serious, were you? Liberals want good government, while conservatives want a bad one. Really? -XT ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/120 "2010-08-20T00:53:24Z")
Ah yes, Austrian Economics. Isn’t that what Arnold used to stabilize the economy of California? Your ‘what-ever-it-is’ has a few good points, wrapped up in nonsense. You have highlighted a number of actual problems, then place the blame on random people and philosophies. You don’t offer any solutions. Your own history of events demonstrates that changes in political philosophy don’t make a difference. You specifically note that the presidents who embraced the largest parts of your philosophy increased the national debt the greatest. 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 So why aren’t you arguing for Clintonian economics? Sorry, but this nonsense makes the diatribes of one of my evil twins sound like the epitome of reason. So display some backbone and pose your issues one at a time so we can tear them apart. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=7)