4 ms·

And unionism, protectionism, and high taxes. Oh, I'm sorry, did I stumble into the wrong party? Where's the party for people that support an open country with

And unionism, protectionism, and high taxes. Oh, I'm sorry, did I stumble into the wrong party? Where's the party for people that support an open country with strong privacy rights and a dynamic business environment?

ojbyrne 18y ago
You did, actually. But you have creationism trailing behind you. Like a big superhero cape.
- Prrometheus 18y ago
  What?
  - ojbyrne 18y ago
    Unions, higher taxes, whatever, just don't compare to Guantanamo, Rendition, and Creationism. And its not entirely clear he'll fix those, but there's hope.
    - Prrometheus 18y ago
      Obama voted for Bush's FISA bill. He voted for the PATRIOT Act II. He voted to continue the war. He chose as VP the guy who claimed to have written much of the PATRIOT Act to pass in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing. I don't trust Obama on those issues at all, given his record. Bringing sanity to the war on terror isn't that important to him. McCain also said he would close Guantanamo and end torture. I'm sorry, but this party looks like a bunch of folks obsessing over a pretty politician who is moderately awful on the issues after 8 years of one who was completely awful on the issues, and not nearly as pretty. And you should care about unionism. The 94% of Americans who aren't in unions are going to be fleeced by protectionist bills to pad the pockets of the powerful unions that support the Democratic Party.
      - krschultz 18y ago
        Well if you are going to call out Obama for those votes, don't quote McCain as opposing Guantanamo Bay when he voted FOR waterboarding. I agree that for me, torture trumps unions. I don't like unions, but they are fading. Torture is just unacceptable.
        Prrometheus 18y ago
        The unions will not fade. Their biggest membership comes from federal government workers, whose numbers burgeoned under Bush and are bound to grow under Obama. Also, union firms like GM are getting $billions from the Federal Government to make up for the fact that they can't turn a profit on the market (the airlines did this, too). Tax money will keep them alive even if they are the dinosaurs of the marketplace. When anti-China tariffs come down the line, you can thank the unions. Obama will not deny them. You can also nix the idea of school choice under an Obama administration, since the National Teacher's Union is a strong supporter of the Democratic Party. It's no wonder that Obama's plan for education is basically "more money! more money!". The unions couldn't have written a more favorable plan themselves.
        davidw 18y ago
        The unions have been fading, though. Under Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, and onwards I'd rather have weak, declining unions than strong anti-science conservatives like Ms. Palin running loose.
        lliiffee 18y ago
        I think you are wrong about schools. Obama repeatedly mentioned support of Charter schools (though not vouchers) in the debates. He specifically mentioned Michelle Rhee in DC as doing good work, which is highly encouraging to many of us who think Democrats have been on the wrong side of the education debate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Rhee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Rhee PS, I think you are right about "card check", which seems to me like one of the most important issues in this election which has gotten approximately zero public debate.
      - 18y ago
    - wensing 18y ago
      'Fix' Creationism? How do you fix a belief? By keeping it out of schools?
jobeirne 18y ago
The Libertarian party: we'll be waiting over there with the whack-jobs in the Green party until America's ready.
- ksvs 18y ago
  When America's ready for your policies, the major parties will steal them piecemeal.
  - SwellJoe 18y ago
    That would be lovely, thanks.
- wheels 18y ago
  In Germany if you do an across the board left-shift there's an analogous party structure: - Social Democrats (Democrats) - Christian Democrats (Republicans) - Liberals (Libertarians) - Greens (There's also an additional Marixst party.) Here the Greens and the Liberals (note that "liberal" outside of the US implies classical liberalism) grew up a lot as being a part of main-stream politics. I really wish that were possible in the US because it forces the other points in the political spectrum to actually deal with reality and softens their rhetoric in a pragmatic, but effective way. German Greens nearly as crack-potted as American ones as a result.
jhancock 18y ago
The right to create unions is a fundamental American protection. I realize in our lifetimes we have seen some unions become more of a problem then a benefit. This is what happens to most institutions as they become too big and "crufty". Sometimes you swing too far in one direction. The system corrects itself. But to trash one part of the constitution while savagely protecting another part is simply unacceptable. Its all or nothing. And so far as protectionism goes. This is just another feeling that I am certain _most_ Americans will start swinging in the other direction on. The next year will see China<->U.S. sentiments on both sides growing very tense. And high taxes? Get this straight: When the FED/Treasury "prints" money, that is a tax!!! And the last 8 years we've seen massive amounts this form of debt.
- Prrometheus 18y ago
  I have no problem with unions as such. However, I do have a problem when they use their concentrated political power to get themselves government favors at the expense of the rest of the country. Bailouts for failing industries and protectionist measures benefit unions while harming the nation as a whole. They expect the Democratic Party to sacrifice the interests of the nation for their benefit, and it looks like they will get their pound of flesh. In addition, unions have many legal rights outside of a normal, voluntary gathering of people. In many states, they can force new employees of a company to join. Democrats are currently pushing for legislation to eliminate secret ballots for the formation of unions. When employee preferences are no longer secret, they can be coerced and threatened into supporting the union, which should enable Democrats to increase their union base. In addition, unions can force their employers to bargain with them by law, instead of by voluntary agreement by both parties. Federal law prohibits its agencies from paying contractors less than the union price, which is often high above the market price of similar services. It is no coincidence that heavily unionized sectors of our economy tend to be failing, bloated, and stagnant. The big ones are undoubtedly a negative influence on American society. And they undoubtedly run the economic program of the Democratic Party; it surely isn't run by any coherent economic school of thought that I can recognize.
  - redrobot5050 18y ago

ojbyrne 18y ago

You did, actually. But you have creationism trailing behind you. Like a big superhero cape.

Prrometheus 18y ago
What?
- ojbyrne 18y ago
  Unions, higher taxes, whatever, just don't compare to Guantanamo, Rendition, and Creationism. And its not entirely clear he'll fix those, but there's hope.
  - Prrometheus 18y ago
    Obama voted for Bush's FISA bill. He voted for the PATRIOT Act II. He voted to continue the war. He chose as VP the guy who claimed to have written much of the PATRIOT Act to pass in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing. I don't trust Obama on those issues at all, given his record. Bringing sanity to the war on terror isn't that important to him. McCain also said he would close Guantanamo and end torture. I'm sorry, but this party looks like a bunch of folks obsessing over a pretty politician who is moderately awful on the issues after 8 years of one who was completely awful on the issues, and not nearly as pretty. And you should care about unionism. The 94% of Americans who aren't in unions are going to be fleeced by protectionist bills to pad the pockets of the powerful unions that support the Democratic Party.
    - krschultz 18y ago
      Well if you are going to call out Obama for those votes, don't quote McCain as opposing Guantanamo Bay when he voted FOR waterboarding. I agree that for me, torture trumps unions. I don't like unions, but they are fading. Torture is just unacceptable.
      - Prrometheus 18y ago
        The unions will not fade. Their biggest membership comes from federal government workers, whose numbers burgeoned under Bush and are bound to grow under Obama. Also, union firms like GM are getting $billions from the Federal Government to make up for the fact that they can't turn a profit on the market (the airlines did this, too). Tax money will keep them alive even if they are the dinosaurs of the marketplace. When anti-China tariffs come down the line, you can thank the unions. Obama will not deny them. You can also nix the idea of school choice under an Obama administration, since the National Teacher's Union is a strong supporter of the Democratic Party. It's no wonder that Obama's plan for education is basically "more money! more money!". The unions couldn't have written a more favorable plan themselves.
        davidw 18y ago
        The unions have been fading, though. Under Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, and onwards I'd rather have weak, declining unions than strong anti-science conservatives like Ms. Palin running loose.
        lliiffee 18y ago
        I think you are wrong about schools. Obama repeatedly mentioned support of Charter schools (though not vouchers) in the debates. He specifically mentioned Michelle Rhee in DC as doing good work, which is highly encouraging to many of us who think Democrats have been on the wrong side of the education debate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Rhee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Rhee PS, I think you are right about "card check", which seems to me like one of the most important issues in this election which has gotten approximately zero public debate.
    - 18y ago
  - wensing 18y ago
    'Fix' Creationism? How do you fix a belief? By keeping it out of schools?

jobeirne 18y ago

The Libertarian party: we'll be waiting over there with the whack-jobs in the Green party until America's ready.

ksvs 18y ago
When America's ready for your policies, the major parties will steal them piecemeal.
- SwellJoe 18y ago
  That would be lovely, thanks.
wheels 18y ago
In Germany if you do an across the board left-shift there's an analogous party structure: - Social Democrats (Democrats) - Christian Democrats (Republicans) - Liberals (Libertarians) - Greens (There's also an additional Marixst party.) Here the Greens and the Liberals (note that "liberal" outside of the US implies classical liberalism) grew up a lot as being a part of main-stream politics. I really wish that were possible in the US because it forces the other points in the political spectrum to actually deal with reality and softens their rhetoric in a pragmatic, but effective way. German Greens nearly as crack-potted as American ones as a result.

jhancock 18y ago

The right to create unions is a fundamental American protection. I realize in our lifetimes we have seen some unions become more of a problem then a benefit. This is what happens to most institutions as they become too big and "crufty". Sometimes you swing too far in one direction. The system corrects itself. But to trash one part of the constitution while savagely protecting another part is simply unacceptable. Its all or nothing. And so far as protectionism goes. This is just another feeling that I am certain _most_ Americans will start swinging in the other direction on. The next year will see China<->U.S. sentiments on both sides growing very tense. And high taxes? Get this straight: When the FED/Treasury "prints" money, that is a tax!!! And the last 8 years we've seen massive amounts this form of debt.

Prrometheus 18y ago
I have no problem with unions as such. However, I do have a problem when they use their concentrated political power to get themselves government favors at the expense of the rest of the country. Bailouts for failing industries and protectionist measures benefit unions while harming the nation as a whole. They expect the Democratic Party to sacrifice the interests of the nation for their benefit, and it looks like they will get their pound of flesh. In addition, unions have many legal rights outside of a normal, voluntary gathering of people. In many states, they can force new employees of a company to join. Democrats are currently pushing for legislation to eliminate secret ballots for the formation of unions. When employee preferences are no longer secret, they can be coerced and threatened into supporting the union, which should enable Democrats to increase their union base. In addition, unions can force their employers to bargain with them by law, instead of by voluntary agreement by both parties. Federal law prohibits its agencies from paying contractors less than the union price, which is often high above the market price of similar services. It is no coincidence that heavily unionized sectors of our economy tend to be failing, bloated, and stagnant. The big ones are undoubtedly a negative influence on American society. And they undoubtedly run the economic program of the Democratic Party; it surely isn't run by any coherent economic school of thought that I can recognize.
- redrobot5050 18y ago