Obama, Get Your Ass Back to DC & Deal w/ Terrorism

[BT]

But generally, it goes from good to bad - not the other way around. 

Nixon came back. Palin has nowhere the baggage that Nixon had. What she does have is a better understanding of the national press.

If she runs in 2012 she could just as easily win the election as lose, depends on what is going on with the economy and other kitchen table issues.

[Plane]

By Prime Time I was not referring to the Presidency.  Sarah, having been a governor, is probably better prepared to lead than Obama.  I was referring to the campaign trail, where you have to convince people you can lead.  She lost credibility when she stared at Charlie Gibson like an idiot when he mentioned the Bush Doctrine. 

What is the origin of the phrase "Bush Doctrine"?

[BSB]

What has been exposed isn't some Nixonian personality problem, or the shortcomings of a rookie brought up to the bigs too early, even if that's true. What has been exposed is poor judgement, a lack of professionalism, an inability to take advice, sloppy management skills, and more. She unelectable as a presidential candidate.

[Universe Prince]

Libertarianism demands a confluence of circumstances that plain never conflate in the wild.

Oh dear. Dick brought his truck of adult male bovine excrement. Thankfully, he tends to announce this up front with comments like the one quoted above.

You don't get to economic liberty by opening your borders to populations with a habit of voting themselves public services. You don't get less government by attacking the relationships that people have relied upon as an alternative to government. You don't get liberty by undermining the institutions that have secured us any liberty at all. Realistically, civilization has been a story of people giving up their individual liberties in the interests of maintaining civil society, not by asserting their individuality to the point of making civil society impossible.

Thank you, Dick, for illustrating a point I made to Rich earlier in the thread.

See, Rich? Dick thinks libertarianism is people "asserting their individuality to the point of making civil society impossible." He even goes to far as to set up this entirely false dichotomy of "people giving up their individual liberties in the interests of maintaining civil society" and people "asserting their individuality to the point of making civil society impossible." Apparently, either one wants to maintain civil society Dick's way, or one wants to make civil society impossible, with no room allowed for any other options. Apparently, Dick thinks free trade in goods and labor creates a loss of economic liberty. Supporting more people having relationships that people have been relied on as an alternative to government is really, by Dick's accounting, an attack on those relationships. And if we follow Dick's logic, the most civil society of all is one where individual liberties do not exist. I'm sure Dick will deny some of what I said, but, Rich, his attitude is far more representative of the general Republican response to libertarian ideas than is yours.

[BSB]

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child, I was a libertarian as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

[Kramer]

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child, I was a libertarian as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

how's that hope & change working for you?

[Universe Prince]

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child, I was a libertarian as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

You have my pity. You're clearly a confused person. You'd have to be to believe things like liberty and human rights are childish concerns.

[BSB]

Well first of all UP I didn't say you were childish. I said Libertarianism is childish. So I see no need for you posting that I personally am confused, or that you have pity for me personally. Not very libertarian of you, rather "upity" at first blush in fact. 

Second, Libertarianism is hardly the only political platform that takes liberty, and human rights seriously.

[Kramer]

Well first of all UP I didn't say you were childish. I said Libertarianism is childish. So I see no need for you posting that I personally am confused, or that you have pity for me personally. Not very libertarian of you, rather "upity" at first blush in fact. 

Second, Libertarianism is hardly the only political platform that takes liberty, and human rights seriously.

democrats are childish

[Universe Prince]

Well first of all UP I didn't say you were childish. I said Libertarianism is childish. So I see no need for you posting that I personally am confused, or that you have pity for me personally. Not very libertarian of you, rather "upity" at first blush in fact.

You say what I believe is childish, but you didn't mean anything personal by it. Now pull the other one.

Your "witty" little paraphrase of Paul seemed supercilious, but you're objecting to me being supposedly uppity. So you don't like it turned back you. Huh. Go figure.

But maybe you're right. Perhaps I should simply have said something like "Bless your little heart, aren't you clever?"

Second, Libertarianism is hardly the only political platform that takes liberty, and human rights seriously.

I am sure it isn't. But you seem to think the game is to feign superior maturity by being condescending about what other people think. That's okay, because I can play too.

[BSB]

"You say what I believe is childish, but you didn't mean anything personal by it.."

That's exactly right. I don't know about you, but most people I know don't consider themselves to be their political take.

[BSB]

another poster "democrats are childish"

"Libertarianism is childish"

Big differnce.

[Universe Prince]

I don't know about you, but most people I know don't consider themselves to be their political take.

Oh, I don't either. But I've been around enough to know when someone uses 1 Corinthians 13:11, or a paraphrase thereof, in a derogatory manner, it generally carries the meaning, "I'm mature, and you're childish." If that was not your meaning, I suggest you phrased your thought poorly.

[BSB]

"I suggest you phrased your thought poorly"

I suggest you brought your own take on the phrasing. Further evidence of that would be the fact that you never even asked me why I think Libertarianism is childish. You were only concerned with your point of view.

[BT]

What has been exposed is poor judgement, a lack of professionalism, an inability to take advice, sloppy management skills, and more. She unelectable as a presidential candidate.

Be nice to have some examples of these fatal flaws, so we can see how similar faux pas affected successful candidates.