# 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:** 7
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/121 "2010-08-20T00:58:10Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > 1. We (the Austrians) want to limit government power and maintain the value of the currency. You obsession with gold won’t “maintain the value of the currency”, and libertarians want to hand all freedom, money and power to the wealthy. I have no interest in living in your dystopic hell. > [@jrodefeld](#): > > 1. 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. That’s silly, as has been pointed out to you before. First, there’s not enough gold, second because if the government isn’t trustworthy what make you think it’ll give you that gold on demand, and third because what use to you do you expect that gold to be? Most people would respond to your attempt to pay for something with gold with a demand that you come back with real money. > [@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. Pure nonsense with no evidence behind it. A faith statement. > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > [@pedescribe](#): > > > > 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. Wrong; they are the only kind that works. Which is why you oppose it; like all libertarians you talk about freedom and equality, but you want to create a neofeudalistic state of lords and serfs. > [@jrodefeld](#): > > 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. They were slaveowning genocidal scum. Freedom and prosperity only for rich white christian men may be libertarian but it isn’t progressive. > [@jrodefeld](#): > > 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. Hardly; we’d be a plutocratic hellhole, with millions starving and millions more enslaved. Or we’d just collapse into Somalia on a larger scale. As a libertarian I’m sure you’d prefer either result over what we have now. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/122 "2010-08-20T01:09:08Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > To make such blanket statements and accusations against so many people is beyond irresponsible. What beyond irresponsible? Meta-irresponsible? Yes, I only read as far as this part. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/123 "2010-08-20T01:11:38Z")
I have one question – has there ever been a time in history in any modern post-industrial state in which the economy and public policy operated reasonably close to Austrian principles? If not in what time and place did the economic system and public policy get closest tonoperating under Austrian principles? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/124 "2010-08-20T01:14:25Z")
Where do you guys get the silly notion that you deserve to keep every damn dollar you earn? ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/125 "2010-08-20T01:19:23Z")
> [@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. A Jon Stewart moment, thanks for the laugh. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![sleestak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/919ad9/32.png) [@sleestak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleestak)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/126 "2010-08-20T01:34:05Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Where do you guys get the silly notion that you deserve to keep every damn dollar you earn? Where do you get the silly notion that you have a right to money others have created? Slee ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/127 "2010-08-20T01:37:59Z")
Well, there’s ten minutes of my life I’m never going to get back. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/128 "2010-08-20T01:42:04Z")
> [@sleestak](#): > > > [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > > > Where do you guys get the silly notion that you deserve to keep every damn dollar you earn? > > Where do you get the silly notion that you have a right to money others have created? Because people should pay what they owe. And everyone owes society in general; even the existence of money itself depends on the larger society. And because such an individualist position is logically inconsistent; if he shouldn’t pay because he doesn’t owe other people any consideration, then those same other people don’t owe him any consideration and might as well take whatever they please from him. Of course, such “rugged individualists”\* hypocritically only want such a lack of concern for others to be respected when it’s how they treat others; not when it comes to how other people treat them in return. - Quotes, because in reality they are neither rugged nor individualists, just parasites who want the government to protect them from their victims even while they refuse to pay for it ---
**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, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/129 "2010-08-20T01:50:50Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] Where do you guys get the silly notion that you deserve to keep every damn dollar you earn? [/QUOTE] From the same place as the wingnuts on the other side who think they ‘deserve’ ever dollar they can take (from someone else, and in the name of the people, of course). Luckily, cooler heads have prevailed so far, and so we get to meet somewhere in the middle of those two ridiculous extremes. Happy days, ehe? -XT ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/130 "2010-08-20T01:59:32Z")
I have several questions about the OP. I hope he can explain himself in depth. 1. While not all Tea Partiers are racists, why does it seem that racists attracted to the Tea Party? 2. What are your views on Michelle Obama taking a vacation in Spain? 3. Name three issues that Ron Paul has been wrong about. 4. What is your favorite American movie? 5. If the OP were a member of Congress, and a bill came up to extend the Bush tax cuts without offset, so that the deficit would continue to increase by trillions of dollars, and the OP was the deciding vote, would you vote for or against the bill? 6. Does the OP believe that the Federal Reserve is guilty of “criminal” acts? That’s a good start. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/131 "2010-08-20T02:07:46Z")
It works much much better if you do in a Jerry Reed voice, like the intro from Lord Mister Ford. “So listen up, son, I’m about to sing you a song” 😃 ---
**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, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/132 "2010-08-20T02:16:28Z")
Another point: You want to be able to trade in your paper money for gold, since you don’t trust the government? Fine, you can do that. Private industry has already seen to that problem: In any city in the country, you can find a place that’ll give you gold in exchange for your paper money. What’s that? You want the government to take over that function from private industry? What do we call it again when the government takes over functions from private industry? And you want to always be able to get the same amount of gold for your paper money? Why, don’t you have any faith in the free market? That’s what determines the price of gold now. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/133 "2010-08-20T02:16:53Z")
whenever someone who knows a lot less about a subject than I do starts off by telling me they are going to educate me…that’s when I stop reading. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/134 "2010-08-20T02:23:05Z")
> [@bdgr](#): > > whenever someone who knows a lot less about a subject than I do starts off by telling me they are going to educate me…that’s when I stop reading. Why??? That’s when it really starts to get fun. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/135 "2010-08-20T02:56:19Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > > [@Grey](#): > > > > 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. Actually I’m saying that starting from axioms and wandering to conclusions without empirical evidence in a social science is much like mental masturbation - pointless. By the way did you Austrians (cheeky labeling yourself in such a grand manner) notice that the territory to the north has reduced it’s _ **debt** _ and run a surplus for about a decade before the economic collapse? The fact is US politics and global commitments (and temptations) makes it very hard for any government to restrict spending. Presidential authority means nothing in relation to domestic spending. Coherent party platforms and programs barley crawl out of their cradles before being consumed by the political reality that the legislative branch is run by hundreds of independent actors, not 2 or 3 parties. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/136 "2010-08-20T03:04:58Z")
**Der Trihs** , you are out of line. Any more attacks on “groups” that are clearly surrogates for your opponents in discussion will get a Warning. **jrodefeld** , your misguided attacks on **Der Trihs** will also stop. Clearly, you and he disagree, but clearly you have no idea what his actual beliefs are. This goes for everyone else, as well. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![The\_Facts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bb73d2/32.png) [@The\_Facts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Facts)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/137 "2010-08-20T03:30:04Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Page 1/3 > > I haven’t posted on here in a while, yet I have been reading through some of the threads on this site and some of the comments have left me quite discouraged for the future of our nation. I am directing this thread to the “Obama loyalists”, for lack of a better term. From certain members, I have witnessed a stunning lack of understanding of even basic principles of economics, a naive faith in public institutions and authority, and a world view and understanding of US history no doubt shaped through decades of propaganda and misinformation. It is quite sad, actually. I am directing this thread towards the education of these members who remain enamored with the possibility of “change” and “hope”, even at this late hour. The most tragic element of the willful ignorance or blind loyalty to a political party is that those of this mindset will be hurt the most when the most negative repercussions of current government policies come to fruition as this crisis deepens. I hope I can open some eyes and turn a few of you towards the truth. > > **On “The Opposition to Obama”:** > > Many on this forum seem to parrot the line that all opposition to Obama in the Tea Parties or the grassroots is based upon racism, religious extremism, or xenophobia. You characterize the opposition almost exactly as outlets such as MSNBC do, as far right “extremists”, always “exclusively white, older” and “dangerous, armed, militia members”. Possibly they are “unhinged”, or “domestic terrorists” who could snap at any time and turn into the next Timothy McVeigh. Obviously, most of this is fear mongering and scare tactics to keep otherwise sympathetic people from engaging with the members of these protests. In reality the “opposition” to Obama is very diverse and includes many people who have never in their lives been associated with the Tea Party, such as myself. Are there some of these extreme elements in this country? Certainly. But they are a very small percentage and to the extent that they do exist, I am reminded of a saying by the brilliant and stunningly prescient Trends Forecaster Gerald Celente, who says “When people lose everything and they have nothing left to lose, they lose it.” Meaning, there is a profound anger toward the incumbent politicians that manifests as yelling at town hall meetings and some make a spectacle of themselves and go overboard. I don’t intend to defend every action of the protesters, but the reasons for the anger is very valid and have nothing to do with the color of the President’s skin. > > 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. > > 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. > > 4. Of the protests I have attended and some that family members and relatives have attended (in different States), I know that they are not affiliated in any way with the Republican Party. Obviously the GOP will try to woo these voters, but many operationally are more interested in defeating the establishment backed candidates and running on their own platform. There are even Tea Party candidates running as Independents. > > 5. Sarah Palin’s popularity is VASTLY overestimated by the mainstream media. They are trying to create a excitement for her that for the most part doesn’t exist in most parts of the country. Even those that I talked to who liked her were happy for her to remain a sort of conservative “celebrity” rather than someone they considered a serious person for higher office. Nobody thinks she is qualified. The people I heard mentioned were Ron Paul, some economic intellectuals like Mises and Hayek, as well as founders such as Thomas Paine, Jefferson, and Madison. I feel like Palin is designed to feed into this media storyline that portrays very simple minded, anti intellectual social conservatives as the main people in this movement. > > 6. I came away convinced that by 2012 this “revolution” will expand beyond the confines of “conservatism” and even the tea party label to become broader and more inclusive. The reality on the ground is so far from what you may have seen on tv that it can be staggering. > Some rallies in some parts of the country include some of the more standard conservative voices in the country to be sure. But there are people who don’t attend any of these rallies who are upset and would easily join a third party (or movement) that isn’t attached to the stigma associated with the Republican Party. This is what is happening. As I said before, I am not a Tea Party member. I am not a conservative. > > **I am a rationalist, an anti war libertarian, and an intellectual. A seeker of truth.** > > The truth is that we are living in a fantasy world. Our welfare/entitlement programs are insolvent. Within a couple of decades they will face a shortfall of tens of trillions of dollars. The housing bubble is bursting and the dollar is collapsing. We are borrowing billions from China everyday to continue our extravagance. We are escalating our commitments in Afghanistan, bombing Pakistan and threatening Iran. We’ve known for a while that we cannot fund our government and its obligations, yet all our political class can come up with is more of the same. > > I find it funny in a depressing sort of way that those who really have a problem with the above, those who see us speeding towards the cliff and advocate that we change directions, that is, _really_ cut spending and rethink the role of government in modern society in relation to fiscal reality and common sense are considered not just right wing, but far right, fringe, lunatic and crazy. Thats what I have noticed. That is the dominant theme in the grassroots in this country right now. There are many differences between grassroots groups in race, age, religion, state, etc. The unifying theme is concern about the debt, the unfunded obligations and a recognition of the need to have a smaller government in light of the ongoing financial crisis. The day of reckoning is here and people are recognizing this. > > Yet certain members of this forum, with a broad brush, label all these people this way (from another thread): > > > [@](#): > > > > The Republicans have been sucking up to the fringe lunatics for decades, and at this point have pretty much merged with them. They were pretty loud during the Clinton years; it’s not so much they just recently appeared, as it is they had 8 years with a Republican government and had little reason to get worked up. > > > > As for why they’ve decided to run candidates instead of running around in the woods in camos or hiding in bunkers waiting for the United Nations to come eat them, my theory is that they’ve finally achieved enough prevalence in the Republicans to pull it off. Or think they have. The crazies have been moving in, the moderates and pragmatists have been fleeing, and the crazies think they can kick out the party elite and make the party wholly theirs. > > And: > > > [@](#): > > > > The “Tea Party” is a collection of ignorant bigoted lunatics, many of whom are supported by by the same government they hate so much. “Get your government hands off my Medicare”. They’re idiots. Bigoted, thuggish idiots. They are enraged that a black man is President, and they believe an incoherent mishmash of nonsense that is neither self consistent nor has anything to do with reality. > > I sincerely hope that most here do not truly believe this kind of hyper partisan generalizations. You all should learn to lay off the destructive red state/blue state bickering and articulate your views with more care, more thoughtfulness. > > I have read many comments from various members who will defend Obama to the very end, and many have responded to my posts in the past. I find it fascinating to understand how one comes to believe the things some of you apparently believe, and what education or societal stimuli have shaped your world view. From my perspective, through my years of research and delving deeply into the various subjects, I can see very clearly the devastating effects of government policy and the culmination of the disastrous modern trend of runaway government spending, endless stimulus, globalization and the impoverishing of the poor and middle classes through inflation and debt. It saddens me to see people so obviously in the dark about the nature of the times we live in. Perhaps you could lay off the knee jerk partisan stuff and enlighten us on your more broad understanding of political issues and your educational background? I’m sure it would be fascinating. > > 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. > **Lesson 1: “Big” Government vs “Limited” Government:** > > It seems to me that those who could be considered loyal liberals scoff at anyone who seems to be anti government or believes in small government, as if this is such an absurd point of view that it barely merits discussion at all. The perspective that perhaps we should shrink government spending or cut back in an effort to regain solvency is hardly broached in liberal circles I know of. The discussion is the need to provide “Universal” health care to everyone who needs it, and the desire to implement new social programs and agencies to combat any number of perceived threats or societal problems. Although there may be a token discussion on a few things that would merit cutting (like the Defense Budget), hardly ever is the discussion on cutting spending overall. In fact, from my discussions with many of my liberal friends, I have come to the conclusion that: > > The term “Progressive” means year by year expansion of government power and authority over all aspect of society and that any resistance or desire to “roll back” in a significant manner this power is considered a threat to this mindset. > > It is a fallacious argument to equate expanding government power with “progress”. This is absurd. Progress comes through the evolution of culture and principles of the people toward a more enlightened, kinder society than the one that came before. Many times we have not progressed, but rather devolved as a society. For example, our standards of education have dropped drastically in the last fifty years. Health care also has gotten worse. We have obviously not “progressed” despite dramatic increases in government control over these two areas. > > I feel like libertarianism is the truly progressive movement that seeks to progress humanity out of the dark ages of totalitarianism and authoritarianism into the light of human liberty, equal justice, non violence, tolerance, and egalitarianism. > > In terms of “Big” Government vs “Limited” Government, I propose the followed two principles all rational beings should be able to acknowledge: > > **1. No matter what one thinks of the role of government, the functions that it takes on must be fully funded without dangerous levels of debt and inflation.** > > And: > > **2. We recognize government as a potential threat to liberty, therefore we “limit” government to a set of explicit functions (no matter what they are or how many) that they may engage in. We are vigilant in the enforcement of these limits.** > > How could anyone disagree with these two principles? The first is the one I want to explore, because anyone who knows basic arithmetic can easily figure out that our government is completely insolvent and we have no choice but to cut spending drastically, including “sacred cows” like Medicare and Social Security. > > As to the second point, the document that is supposed to limit the federal government is called the Constitution. We The People, being sovereign free individuals, delegate certain limited authority and responsibilities to a central government. Everything not expressly delegated, is reserved to the states or to the people. Now, you could argue that we need to _change_ the Constitution. If you desire to have government take on new and expanded functions, we must amend the Constitution. There is no way around it. Our government should evolve slowly and deliberately, with much caution and respect for human liberty. This is how our system is supposed to operate. > > As far as the debt is concerned, I want to give you a few numbers to think over: > > The National Debt = $13,330,000,000,000 (Thats Thirteen Trillion Three Hundred and Thirty Billion) > > Look at this graph of the monetary base over time (number of dollars in circulation): > > [http://www.chartingstocks.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/money-supply.gif](http://www.chartingstocks.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/money-supply.gif) > Now, consider the rate of increase in the national debt over the last few decades: > > 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 > Now, in eighteen months the national debt has gone up by more than three trillion dollars! The numbers aren’t working. The early stages of hyperinflation are here. Don’t you see that the rate of increase has been exponential? The Federal Reserve has more than doubled the money supply since 2008. > > The system is being held together only by the fact that many don’t understand how bad things _really_ are, so a residual confidence remains in the system. > > What the liberals need to understand is this: > > **The era where the American people could be sold on the idea of massive government interventions like The New Deal or The Great Society are finished. Nobody believes in the promises of politicians any more. The era of frugality and government reform (meaning cutting spending drastically) is here to stay. That is what the electorate wants.** > > The liberal, Keynesian arguments that deficits don’t matter and we could afford the welfare state and entitlements are being exposed. The people with credibility are the Austrian economists and those who warned of the long term consequences of the mentality that we could create wealth out of thin air and give everyone a house and health care are being vindicated. > > So, regardless of whether you and I would agree on exactly what the government should be involved in, you should see that we should cut back immediately, balance the budget, get back to a solid fiscal standing, and restore solid economic growth. Then we can have our debates within the context of reality. > > Because, really, isn’t it wrong to promise people a government service that you know you won’t be able to deliver? It takes three pages to say “I hate our black president?” ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/138 "2010-08-20T03:58:02Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > The purpose of this thread is not to criticize Obama. The purpose is to critique the ideology of his “Progressive” supporters and their inability to comprehend the growing movement concerned with fiscal restraint and “smaller” government. And also, to show how the Progressive ideology and Utopian notions that characterized the theory that government could provide a “safety net” and take care of everyone is being exposed. Here;s where I think a lot of people have it wrong and panic. With cries of socialism and wealth redistribution they assume that taking care of everyone is the ultimate goal. The goal is for society to function better as a whole and sometimes that means those that have helping out those who have not. It means creating more jobs that pay some kind of living wage and education and health care available for more people. There are no easy answers or idealisitic principles that solve the problems. We have to adjust and react to a changing society. I have to agree with others that it seems suspect that we didn’t get this outrage over a years long god awful war as the deficit rose. Now a little over a year into a crisis he didn’t cause we get tons of outrage. I do understand that for a lot of people it’s for he government in general and I agree. Too many elected offcials are bought and paid for in both parties. However, I also see a lot of blame heaped on the democrats by people who mistakenly think restoring corrupt republicans to power will fix things. It won’t. The GOP has demonstrated that many of them don’t give a dam about actually solving problems. ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/139 "2010-08-20T04:07:08Z")
I would really like to debate some of the points in those posts, but they’re presented in a format that discourages serious discussion. I guess I’ll start at the beginning. In the 1/3 post, you said you attended a Tea Party rally that was 15% black. If we are to accept this as true, you’ll have to give us something more than your word to prove it. I have seen tea party rallies, as my state (Nevada) is particularly active in tea party politics, and I saw nothing but a sea of white people. I have never seen a youtube video or news media photograph or video depicting a tea party rally as having more than a seriously tiny minority of nonwhites, and I am unaware of even a single black person with a significant leadership role in any tea party organization. This doesn’t make the tea party a necessarily racist movement, of course, but it is certainly not significantly representative of nonwhites. In the same post, you make observations that seem to imply the tea party movement is outside of demcorat/republican politics, and has equal disdain for both sides. This is not unusual for political movements. So many of them claim to be bipartisan or nonpartisan, but as is typical for such movements, the tea party can not make that claim legitimately. The only data available for the political beliefs of tea party members is a group of studies done by the Winston Group, which doesn’t even deny its Republican bias. Even those studies show tea party members are three times more likely to self identify as Republicans than Democrats (about 57% vs about 17%). Tea party members are 8 times more likely to self identify as Conservative than Liberal (about 66% vs about 8%). 71% of Tea Party members have a “favorable view” of Republicans in general. 75% of Tea Party members have an “unfavorable view” of Democrats in general. Tea party members are astronomically more likely to get the majority of their news from Fox and talk radio than the average person. And all of that was found in a study performed by an organization with a conservative bias, who were doing the study for the purpose of proving Tea Party members were just average citizens! They are absolutely not representative of average Americans. They are representative of Conservative Americans. So now the question is, why would a Conservative, primarily Republican group even WANT to portray itself as nonpartisan? Why do people arguing for the Tea Party deny the purpose of their movement? Is the Republican or Conservative label so poisoned that Conservative Republican groups don’t want to wear it? ---
**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 20, 2010, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/140 "2010-08-20T04:35:49Z")
> [@Mosier](#): > > So now the question is, why would a Conservative, primarily Republican group even WANT to portray itself as nonpartisan? Why do people arguing for the Tea Party deny the purpose of their movement? Is the Republican or Conservative label so poisoned that Conservative Republican groups don’t want to wear it? I think it’s more a matter of trying to look unbiased. By claiming to be nonpartisan and independent, the Tea Party makes its complaints about the Democrats appear to be made of some higher principle than party politics. But as I noted above, it’s no coincidence that the Tea Party sat quietly at home through the eight years of the Bush administration and then started calling for public demonstrations sixteen days into the Obama administration. There’s a lot of astroturf showing through their grass roots. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=8)