September 27, 2011
– Comments (13)
OK, I couldn't resist. You wore me down and deserved my Rec.
> OK, I couldn't resist. You wore me down and deserved my Rec.
This. The relentlessness of college-age enthusiasts could wear down Mt. Everest. I'm tired of seeing politics on CAPS, but this was charming.
It seems you are taking a one-liner a bit out of context. "Not all cultures are equal."
If just told that one line, I bet most people would disagree with it.
However, if you really think about it and say hmm.. is American culture, which embraces equality equal with many other cultures around the world that treat women as second-class citizens (among a host of other harms against individual rights)? I would say absolutely not!
Also, Ron Paul has no shot at winning. It's true. I admire y'alls passion, but he can't win. You'd be better off campaigning AGAINST Obama (or supporting Romney/Perry).
I agree with XMFConnor (and yes, even with Bachmann) on the culture point.
Perhaps XMF missed these posts:
Why not Romney
and why not Perry
Maybe you should make a Why Not Obama video. : )
^ FleaBagger, O I have seen them haha. I just don't agree with them. I could make a compelling Why NOT Ron Paul as well filled with one-liners, but it wouldn't serve a purpose. No candidate is perfect. In politics, candidates routinely have to make concessions in order to win elections.
Romney or Perry is our best bet to beat Obama in 2012.. for better or worse, Ron Paul has no shot
"our best bet to beat Obama" and do what?
I don't know who "we" are that need to beat Obama at all costs.
Don't vote. It only encourages them.
In an environment where just about any Republican can beat Obama (and any would definitely be better than him), we have the luxury of picking the best we can, instead of settling for the most electable.
Ron Paul is that man. Liberty takes some getting used to. It's more adult than many can stomach right away. It sounds strange until you think enough about it. But it's right. So he's right, as his record proves, voting against taxes every time, against unbalanced budgets every time, against the Patriot act. (See why he gets the moniker "Dr. No"?)
Bachmann is a distant second for me, but second place nonetheless, and it is disheartening to hear unfounded criticisms. It is robustly obvious that not all cultures are equal. It's just not PC to say so. Do we really want to succumb that level of thinking?
Spend your time extoling the virtues of your favorite candidate, not tearing the others down except when they most deserve it, and then do it tactfully. That way, whoever wins is more likely to be guided by the best in each of his or her defeated rivals, as he's heard their supporters loud and clear and not been put off by them.
If the Federal Reserve is abolished, the Patriot Act repealed, our soldiers brought home, and the budget balanced, I don't care who's in the Oval Office.
^ David, still think every culture is equal, that all values are equal?
heheNice video. Bachmann has no chance (i hope!)
Bachmann was using culture in a very vague and unclear sense. Looking at "cultures" sees people as a collective group, rather than placing maximum importance on individual liberty. Certainly there are values and ideas that I find preferable to others, that's not what I was disagreeing with.
When you look at people in terms of collectives, you are minimizing the importance of individual liberty. This is how Bachmann claims "terrorists" have no constitutional rights, etc. Vague notions and explanations of "culture" are convenient ways for government to overstep its boundaries and destroy individual liberty. Native Americans certainly didn't have a "culture" that the federal government appreciated, for instance.
The key is that "culture" itself is not the issue; individual liberty is. It is meaningless and VERY dangerous to categorize people based on "culture" or some other collective group. That is the instrument of tyrannical leaders and regimes, not a free society. A free society sees people as individuals, not as part of a collective group.
I don't see people as part of a culture, I see people as individuals. From this perspective, Bachmann's statement is dangerous and very limiting. She will not receive my support.
Oh, well if you say Ron Paul can't be elected, I guess I might as well sell out my principles and vote for any of the warmongering, flip-flopping, unprincipled sellouts that are currently being offered to us.
Ron Paul, in a recent poll, beat Obama 51% to 49%. Romney was the only other GOP candidate who beat Obama. Paul has strong support in Iowa and many consider him the new frontrunner in Iowa. Of course he's electable.
I'm voting my conscience, and I encourage you to do the same. Saying "anyone is better than Obama" is a ludicrous argument. Vote with your conscience, vote for principle, and vote for someone who cares about liberty and actually takes the Constitution seriously.
I consider every single major GOP candidate as significantly better than Obama. I don't see how that is a ludicrous argument.
Comparing Ron Paul to Obama is not the point because he will not face off against Obama. He won't. You can post videos and videos (and I applaud you for being so passionate and active), but I am concerned about the result of who will be the next president. We can disagree, but I would be willing to bet that it will not be Ron Paul because he is very unlikely to win mainstream GOP support. Therefore, I consider smearing the other GOP candidates (such as Romney) to be counter-productive.
In terms of Bachman, you took a soundbite of her and then said she was vague about her context. You assumed the worst context rather than giving the benefit of the doubt.
Maybe individual liberty is your personal take on what she said, but she said cultures are not equal. Cultures encompass a whole host of values and I certainly agree with her that all value sets are not equal.