Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414
wow, you waited a whole 4 posts to contribute your usual "you are so dumb, why would you even bring up such a stupid point of discussion, and therefore we shall not talk about this any further" post. as the discussions here fall into the shitter and the number of contributors dwindle, the moderators might wonder how to return to constructive political debate and encourage participation. since you are down to only two gluttons willing to endure your self-indulgent, mightier-than-thou, conserva-bashing - i certainly hope you have the introspection to recognize yourself as a major part of the problem.
|
As I've said many times before whenever this sort of victimization pops up, you get out what you put in. The idea that the secret to active and exciting contributions is to accept at face value assumptions that go against the historical record is nonsense.
To put this in a different way, if I started a thread saying that Obama is the new Reagan, because just like Reagan Obama wants to regulate a bunch of industries, I'd be called out on it, and rightfully so. First because Obama is not trying to pass massive regulations (though some people might argue that he is, which could be an interesting argument), and second because the Reagan presidency was known precisely by its DEregulation of many industries.
Obama can't at the same time be a far left socialist and a new Hoover. Obama can't be at the same time a reckless tax and spend democrat and a new Hoover.
Is there an argument to be made for Obama being like Hoover is certain respects? Sure. But that argument involves admitting things that go in the exact opposite direction of where Ace wants to take this. It involves saying things that Obama, like Hoover, is too concerned with deficits, or that Obama, like Hoover, should have passed a larger stimulus bill. Claiming that Obama is like Hoover because he was too meddlesome and wanted the state to play too active a role in the economy is a falsification of history. It would be like claiming that FDR was a supply sider who only cut taxes and let the markets fix themselves.
And I have no problem engaging conservative points of view. Gary Becker, Richard Posner, Mankiw, Lee Rockwell, and even "pop conservatives" like Megan McArdle generally have interesting things to say. I have a problem engaging the Rush Limbaugh point of view of the day. Whether or not that is a true "conservative" position can be debated, but it is undeniable that he is at least a self-proclaimed conservative.