http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY


But nobody listened

They still won't, as a matter of fact, he would probably have a crosshair if he were around today.

It was JFK's speech that people talk about...even Google has dedicated it today.

Both Ike and JFK were good leaders....

They still won't, as a matter of fact, he would probably have a crosshair if he were around today.
Sure. his repub party was not the repugs we know today.  He's probably rolling over in his grave, or wishing he had run as a dem

But nobody listened

They still won't, as a matter of fact, he would probably have a crosshair if he were around today.


Sad but true. Maybe he saw the whole Vietnam fiasco coming.   :(

Today Ike would be a liberal to match any liberal here.

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." 

Sure. his repub party was not the repugs we know today.  He's probably rolling over in his grave, or wishing he had run as a dem


Today's Republican Party is a Neo-Con Party. It evolved in many ways and shapes, like the Democratic Party as well.

Today's Republican Party is a Neo-Con Party. It evolved in many ways and shapes, like the Democratic Party as well.


The Repubs got hijacked by the religious right and are now a party without any anchor, adrift in the morass of conflicting right wing idiocies 

Ike was a warrior...and Ike was a grownup.  We don't have much of either in the government today.
>:(

Ike was a warrior...and Ike was a grownup.  We don't have much of either in the government today.
>:(


Karma for this! Ike did what he did, that's why they liked Ike!

Karma for this! Ike did what he did, that's why they liked Ike!


What he did, with the help of Bradly and Patten, was defeat Hitler.  That made him a national hero (Omar wasn't interested and although George would have been, he died), so naturally Ike got to be president, and like any good soldier, he hated war, unlike Georgie.  And he became the nation's grandfather.  And that's why we (I was just a kid) liked Ike

That's the thing...Ike was quiet, he did his job well, he had countries visit him, too bad there's no presidents like that anymore...the closest was JFK and Reagan, but they too fell short....

That's the thing...Ike was quiet, he did his job well, he had countries visit him, too bad there's no presidents like that anymore...the closest was JFK and Reagan, but they too fell short....


I beg to differ.  Ike was not very charismatic, which JFK was, but Ike was what was needed at the time, ie after the war the country needed to take a breath.  Reagan was a confirmed ideologue, which Ike wasn't.  Ike;s greatest achivement was the massive infusion of gov'y $$$ into the economy via the interstate highway system, something Prs jelly bean would have violently opposed.  Big differences.

I beg to differ.  Ike was not very charismatic, which JFK was, but Ike was what was needed at the time, ie after the war the country needed to take a breath.  Reagan was a confirmed ideologue, which Ike wasn't.  Ike;s greatest achivement was the massive infusion of gov'y $$$ into the economy via the interstate highway system, something Prs jelly bean would have violently opposed.  Big differences.


That's why I said...both fell short. JFK was popular because of his Charming looks, he too was a WWII vet, and Reagan may now have more popularity in Eastern Europe than in the States.

You'd probably like Ron Jr.'s book...and I'd like to know why Ron Jr. chose to be a Liberal, and that's what's good about the U.S....we have Freedom of Choice.

That's why I said...both fell short. JFK was popular because of his Charming looks, he too was a WWII vet, and Reagan may now have more popularity in Eastern Europe than in the States.

You'd probably like Ron Jr.'s book...and I'd like to know why Ron Jr. chose to be a Liberal, and that's what's good about the U.S....we have Freedom of Choice.


Chose is probably the wrong word.  I didn't wake up one day and decide to be a Marxist, I came to it through much study, of Marx, history, and lots of conservative writers, even Barry Goldwater.  Its a matter of intellectual development and analysis.  So rather than freedom of choice, its freedom of thought

Chose is probably the wrong word.  I didn't wake up one day and decide to be a Marxist, I came to it through much study, of Marx, history, and lots of conservative writers, even Barry Goldwater.  Its a matter of intellectual development and analysis.  So rather than freedom of choice, its freedom of thought


Yeah...we have freedom of thought too.

I was once a Republican, then I voted Democrat, and decided to now be a Libertarian...I think I should look up Libertarian Opinions sometime....

.I think I should look up Libertarian Opinions sometime....



Good idea.  If you are going to identify yourself with a group it is good to know what the group stands for.

Good idea.  If you are going to identify yourself with a group it is good to know what the group stands for.


Also being in Cleveland, Drew Carey is a Libertarian, I'll even give you some parts of Libertarian...

America's Heritage

Libertarians believe in the American heritage of liberty, enterprise, and personal responsibility. Libertarians recognize the responsibility we all share to preserve this precious heritage for our children and grandchildren.

Free and Independent

Libertarians believe that being free and independent is a great way to live. We want a system which encourages all people to choose what they want from life; that lets them live, love, work, play, and dream their own way.

Caring For People

The Libertarian way is a caring, people-centered approach to politics. We believe each individual is unique. We want a system which respects the individual and encourages us to discover the best within ourselves and develop our full potential.

Principled; Consistent

The Libertarian way is a logically consistent approach to politics based on the moral principle of self-ownership. Each individual has the right to control his or her own body, action, speech, and property. Government's only role is to help individuals defend themselves from force and fraud.

Tolerant

The Libertarian Party is for all who don't want to push other people around and don't want to be pushed around themselves. Live and let live is the Libertarian way.

I think this party is for me....I'm not 100% righteous on this, but give me time. I'm STILL young.

Also being in Cleveland, Drew Carey is a Libertarian, I'll even give you some parts of Libertarian...

America's Heritage

Libertarians believe in the American heritage of liberty, enterprise, and personal responsibility. Libertarians recognize the responsibility we all share to preserve this precious heritage for our children and grandchildren.

Free and Independent

Libertarians believe that being free and independent is a great way to live. We want a system which encourages all people to choose what they want from life; that lets them live, love, work, play, and dream their own way.

Caring For People

The Libertarian way is a caring, people-centered approach to politics. We believe each individual is unique. We want a system which respects the individual and encourages us to discover the best within ourselves and develop our full potential.

Principled; Consistent

The Libertarian way is a logically consistent approach to politics based on the moral principle of self-ownership. Each individual has the right to control his or her own body, action, speech, and property. Government's only role is to help individuals defend themselves from force and fraud.

Tolerant

The Libertarian Party is for all who don't want to push other people around and don't want to be pushed around themselves. Live and let live is the Libertarian way.

I think this party is for me....I'm not 100% righteous on this, but give me time. I'm STILL young.


I don't know where you got this, but every political party from the furthest to the right to the furthest to the left would tell you that these are their principles, but the devil is in the details. 

Who gets to define "America's heritage"?

"Free and independent" sounds good, but again we need specificity.  Free not to support public schools because my kids are all grown (my check book would like that but it would be unpatriotic)  There are many more examples and much need for specificity.

There a some self proclaimed libertarians on this board.  Their hero is an Ayn Rand character called Gualt, who couldn't give a flying f**k about anyone but himself.  Check out their posts. But of course every party claims to care, like GWB's "Compassionate conservatism"

Toleration requires more than lip service, it requires deeds, which means ending Jim Crow and segregation even though it wasn't popular in some quarters.

You need to go deeper than a few bullet point before you "chose"  political perspective or party.  You might try reading history beyond the presidents, and you might try reading political science and social theory/philosophy.

EDUCATE YOURSELF

I don't know where you got this, but every political party from the furthest to the right to the furthest to the left would tell you that these are their principles, but the devil is in the details. 

Who gets to define "America's heritage"?

"Free and independent" sounds good, but again we need specificity.  Free not to support public schools because my kids are all grown (my check book would like that but it would be unpatriotic)  There are many more examples and much need for specificity.

There a some self proclaimed libertarians on this board.  Their hero is an Ayn Rand character called Gualt, who couldn't give a flying f**k about anyone but himself.  Check out their posts. But of course every party claims to care, like GWB's "Compassionate conservatism"

Toleration requires more than lip service, it requires deeds, which means ending Jim Crow and segregation even though it wasn't popular in some quarters.

You need to go deeper than a few bullet point before you "chose"  political perspective or party.  You might try reading history beyond the presidents, and you might try reading political science and social theory/philosophy.

EDUCATE YOURSELF


Uh...

This was from the Libertarian webpage...not wikipedia.

Really...it is....

http://www.lp.org/our-history

If you think I don't know my asshole from a hole in the ground when it comes to politics, then let me quote from Sergeant Schultz....

jzYpADZiv00 :D

I don't know where you got this, but every political party from the furthest to the right to the furthest to the left would tell you that these are their principles, but the devil is in the details.  


Second.


There a some self proclaimed libertarians on this board.  Their hero is an Ayn Rand character called Gualt, who couldn't give a flying f**k about anyone but himself.  Check out their posts. But of course every party claims to care, like GWB's "Compassionate conservatism"


1) It's Galt.  (But you're right, he didn't :)
2) LOL, so true.  GWB's "Compassionate conservatism" sucked us economic conservatives in the same way "Family values" sucks in the pro-lifers.  It was code for "No Child Gets Ahead", farm subsidies, a bloating of Medicare, and pork, pork, pork for all.  


Toleration requires more than lip service, it requires deeds, which means ending Jim Crow and segregation even though it wasn't popular in some quarters.


And ditto DADT.  Which, interestingly, most of the hard right are against.  


You need to go deeper than a few bullet point before you "chose" political perspective or party.  You might try reading history beyond the presidents, and you might try reading political science and social theory/philosophy.

EDUCATE YOURSELF


Second.  Make up your own mind, and ignore fanatics of all stripes.  (I was gonna say "present company included", but as ideologues go, we're all pretty damn moderate around here.  We disagree, but we don't seek to lock each other up in re-education camps.)

Read Rand for the lulz and the epic rants (she may not have been a great novelist, but damn, could she rant!).  Read Hayek and Marx (and Friedman and Keynes - umm, help me out, Carlos?  Keynes probably isn't far enough left to counterbalance Friedman.  How 'bout Chomsky, although he's more about politics than economics) for the economics.  Read JS Mill and Rawls for the political philosophy.  

Merely reading bullet points instead of primary source material is like buying a car based on how cool the advertisements are, or voting for a candidate based on whether or not he/she looks Presidential Enough on TV.

And Ike?  Ike's speech kicked ass.  Too bad almost nobody listened, and of those who did listen, most were content to let another old soldier - ironic, given what eventually happened to MacArthur - fade away.

Second.

1) It's Galt.  (But you're right, he didn't :)
2) LOL, so true.  GWB's "Compassionate conservatism" sucked us economic conservatives in the same way "Family values" sucks in the pro-lifers.  It was code for "No Child Gets Ahead", farm subsidies, a bloating of Medicare, and pork, pork, pork for all.  

And ditto DADT.  Which, interestingly, most of the hard right are against.  

Second.  Make up your own mind, and ignore fanatics of all stripes.  (I was gonna say "present company included", but as ideologues go, we're all pretty damn moderate around here.  We disagree, but we don't seek to lock each other up in re-education camps.)

Read Rand for the lulz and the epic rants (she may not have been a great novelist, but damn, could she rant!).  Read Hayek and Marx (and Friedman and Keynes - umm, help me out, Carlos?  Keynes probably isn't far enough left to counterbalance Friedman.  How 'bout Chomsky, although he's more about politics than economics) for the economics.  Read JS Mill and Rawls for the political philosophy.  

Merely reading bullet points instead of primary source material is like buying a car based on how cool the advertisements are, or voting for a candidate based on whether or not he/she looks Presidential Enough on TV.

And Ike?  Ike's speech kicked ass.  Too bad almost nobody listened, and of those who did listen, most were content to let another old soldier - ironic, given what eventually happened to MacArthur - fade away.


Actually, Freedman and Keynes make a good contrast.  Hayek and Marx too (the place to start is "Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy, about ten or so paragraphs in, It starts "In the social production of their lives...)although both can be very dense.  Other must reads are C. Wright Mills, and not just The Power Elite, although that's essential.  But $$$ to doughnuts hes not going to read any of it.

Actually, Freedman and Keynes make a good contrast.  Hayek and Marx too (the place to start is "Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy, about ten or so paragraphs in, It starts "In the social production of their lives...)although both can be very dense.  Other must reads are C. Wright Mills, and not just The Power Elite, although that's essential.  But $$$ to doughnuts hes not going to read any of it.


I'll read it the next time I get to a Library...or sometime this spring.

So maybe for now, I'll stick to being an Indie until I read more into this.... ::)

I'll read it the next time I get to a Library...or sometime this spring.

So maybe for now, I'll stick to being an Indie until I read more into this.... ::)


Yeah, right, like I said

I'll read it the next time I get to a Library...or sometime this spring.

So maybe for now, I'll stick to being an Indie until I read more into this.... ::)


A lot of these works are in the public domain. So here's one Library, comin' up.

Some of these works aren't in the public domain in every country, but a little googling can work wonders. 

For basic poltical philosophy, I'd go with the old high-school standbys: Orwell's 1984 and Huxley's Brave New World.  Easy reads, they get their respective points across, and they're arguably (when combined) the 20/21st century equivalent of Machiavelli's The Prince.  (Much like Machiavelli, they weren't intended as HOWTO guides for governments, but that's how history played out.  And the language is a lot more accessible to the modern reader than any translation of Machiavelli's.)

If you want a ripping yarn about objectivism, save yourself a few weeks and do Rand's novella Anthem (which can be read in an afternoon) instead of Atlas Shrugged (which is worth reading, but will take you a week or two).  If you're after the same thing about libertarianism, skip Rand altogether and mainline some Heinlein: The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.  If you like the Heinlein, go for the Illuminatus! trilogy, but keep in mind you won't get all the jokes unless you've read at least a few chapters of Atlas Shrugged.  (In R.A. Wilson's universe, the analogy to Objectivists are Christian religious fundamentalists instead of Atheist religious fundamentalists, riffing on jokes that refer to Rand's Atlas Shrugged and another joke based on Pynchon's Crying of Lot 49.)

And if you liked the crazy plot twists of the Robert Anton Wilson stuff?  Do some Thomas Pynchon.  Gravity's Rainbow is light on the politics, and is just awesome reading.