I just... don't understand how professional politicians can't understand something so basic about how the governments and economies work. How is it that these people have never opened a book about this shit?
Because the United States has always paid out on it's debt, treasury bonds are essentially the stable lifeblood of the world economy. In a way, it's not even debt; it is basically the US Government operating as the world's largest bank, and the act of issuing a treasury bond is an investment that pays off for both sides of the equation! You have this incredible economic machine of, essentially investing in the government, and a bunch of idiots want to, deliberately, create a run on the largest bank in the world. Some of them have gone and said a default would be a good thing, even though they must have advisers telling them it would basically destroy more or less 40% of the economy flat out.
Yeah, it's total satire. This is the same place that published the headline "Americans Divided over Which Animal Should Maul Congress" without any data.
You could be cynical and assume they are shorting the currency. Someone probably is. Regardless, I think it is more about saving face right now, the GOP can only survive this if they get a "victory" and making the US default counts as such. As long a they have something tangible, they can blame the democrats.
In fact the more serious the consequences of the default (USD devalued, country in economic shambles) the better, because historicaly that is when right wing populist parties thrive. That is one of the reasons why European countries (note, Geramany especially) were, and still are, eager to help Greece out instead of letting it go down the toilet. The populist parties decry this help but so far cooler heads have prevailed (also because our radical right wing is only one party of many and in the overall minority).
As for activism and Scott's attitude, I can completely understand it. My dad took me to demonstrations in Germany when I was five years old and even though I have grown up with activism and it has given me an excellent social conscience, nowadays I sign the petitions but rarely go out in the streets. Of course living in Finland, one of the most egalitarian and progressive societies known to man, there may not be much need to do that, but even here there are right wing policies slowly inserting themselves into our collective asses.
And that's what it is. You live in the USA, the greatest country in the world, with a dick up your bottom. The problem is that it went in there so slowly that you never really realized it and now Scrym can spout sweet nothings about freedom of speech as if they are saying "Eh, at least they use KY".
I'm a pragmatist, I would not expect any other country to do better than the US, were they given the power and eminence of the US. What I do expect, is a better response from intelligent people living there than "well, we'll never be able to change it anyway". How is that Rationalist Pragmatist Party going Rym? Now would seem a good time for you to have set that up a couple of years ago.
Yeah, it's total satire. This is the same place that published the headline "Americans Divided over Which Animal Should Maul Congress" without any data.
EDIT ninja page.
I didn't actually see that. But still, see above comment about one's views being indistinguishable from satire.
I just... don't understand how professional politicians can't understand something so basic about how the governments and economies work. How is it that these people have never opened a book about this shit?
Dude, you think that's bad? Rand talks about how much he hates obamacare, when he Basically doesn't know what it actually is. Not that we shouldn't expect that, considering that he also talks about how much he's against the national debt(but he doesn't know what it is), he talks about the Federal Reserve(which he doesn't understand in the slightest), He talks about rights(his opinions on which are largely intelligible gibberish). If anything, Rand is following his father's footsteps of being the most consistent man in congress - Consistently delusional, clueless, and out of touch with reality, but consistent none-the-less.
I think the Borowitz Report is a satire column.
Oh yeah, so it is. Well, that's embarrassing.
Still, if one's views are indistinguishable from satire, that does say something about one's views.
Is it the politician's view or your view of the politician?
Steve, we're talking about someone whose greatest political victory is a 13 hour filibuster against Obama's use of drones and claimed they be used in the US, when within the same month, he was talking about using drones to protect US border, against criminals in the US, and to spy on US citizens. Who talks about minority rights, which he doesn't know a fucking thing about, and who has also defended his father's racist screeds, and who opposes all anti-discrimination laws. Do we really have to answer this, or do we just want to take a guess?
Me, I fucked up and missed that one thing was satire - Which you have to admit, doesn't happen very often. Rand's Entire world view is simply fucking idiotic, often self-contradictory lunacy that is indistinguishable from satire. It's a horrifying idea that this idiot was voted in as the city dog-catcher, let alone a fucking senator.
I would note the cost to even run for office is starting to get crazy, I'm starting to see local council races (part time jobs that pay like 2,500 dollars a year) spending over 100k this year... That's just crazy. (that's my hometown of Horsham) when I ran in the small borough of Hatboro next to it, it cost about 4k a few years ago.
Also just looking at the title of the paper and any headlines around the article usually help find satire as well :-p
Coming from the bloke talking down to me about being informed, when he can't even tell you the first thing about any political system outside the one he's picked sides in.
Yeah, I fucked up, I don't recall hiding that. You want to be a smug prick about it to try and big up yourself, then fuck you. Pardon-the-fuck out of me for taking an interest in your fucked up political wasteland without bowing fealty to you, oh great wise one.
The one thing I refuse to do is donate money to anyone related to our two major parties, or any fringe party. Money is not the answer, and even my fairly substantial contributions would be literally meaningless in the face of what is actually spent on the national and even state level.
I still think religious institutions shouldn't be allowed to donate to political campaigns.
Agreed.
You want your special religious tax status? No commercial projects, no political interaction.
Really, we should go one step further. Religious institutions should have zero special exemptions, and should be forced to incorporate like any other entity following all of the rules they do.
That's what caused the crazy "IRS is targeting Tea Party groups!" controversy. The IRS was instructed to keep groups that were explicitly political, whether liberal or conservative, from getting tax free status.
Stop trying to rationalize why you believed the satire to be true. Let it go, stop digging the ditch deeper.
Rationalize? Nothing of the sort, I already know precisely what that is - I'd never heard of The Borowitz report before, nor the titular Borowitz, and since it seemed to be pretty much exactly in line with Rand Paul's beliefs(wouldn't be the first time he's expressed dissatisfaction with the result of the previous hearing), and it was in The New Yorker, I assumed it was accurate. Bad assumption, as it turns out.
It's the Daily Show but... Their political interviews tend to be so good. Not the satirical pieces that are shot and edited for effect but their actual sit down and talk across the table ones. Which says a lot...
The Daily Show and the Colbert Report have a lot more earnest and a lot more credibility than the actual television news, satire or not. Satire is the vehicle, but their positions are really anything but.
It's the Daily Show but... Their political interviews tend to be so good. Not the satirical pieces that are shot and edited for effect but their actual sit down and talk across the table ones. Which says a lot...
Yeah, that's true. I appreciate the link that I can actually view, Comedy Central normally has geo-blocking. I actually linked to a transcript of this same interview above for that reason.
Sorry for kicking off on you dude. Not really appropriate for the situation. I should've stepped back first, I didn't, my mistake.
Though it does gall me when he calls himself an eye surgeon. He also claims to be a board certified ophthalmologist, but he's only certified by the board of an association of seven people, which he founded, and of which he's the head of the board. And this asshole is - or rather was - cutting on people's eyes, certified as qualified essentially only by himself. Politics aside, that's just fucking wrong.
That doesn't mean they have credibility. I've stopped watching Daily Show altogether because their positions and expressions of it are so cringe-worthy cookie cutter and repetitive. Colbert I still watch, because he more elegantly expresses those cookie cutter repetitive opinions, and because he is hands down the best source for analysis regarding the Catholic Church. Just because someone has more credibility than someone else doesn't mean they're a good source.
The opening segments are a mixed bag. Some are over the top satire while others can be a straight up straw man. They also use a lot of false equivalency arguments in their bits. Funny as hell but logically bad.
I felt the recent one on USAID and shipping missed the mark completely. Might be because NPR recently did some in depth reporting on the issue and their bit was just so completely wrong as to be infuriating.
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Greg. I think the level of analysis you're looking for is a level that would cause a very large majority of the nation to tune out in boredom. The proliferation of an important message is sometimes more important than the details when you're dealing with a population of hundreds of millions.
Comments
Still, if one's views are indistinguishable from satire, that does say something about one's views.
Because the United States has always paid out on it's debt, treasury bonds are essentially the stable lifeblood of the world economy. In a way, it's not even debt; it is basically the US Government operating as the world's largest bank, and the act of issuing a treasury bond is an investment that pays off for both sides of the equation! You have this incredible economic machine of, essentially investing in the government, and a bunch of idiots want to, deliberately, create a run on the largest bank in the world. Some of them have gone and said a default would be a good thing, even though they must have advisers telling them it would basically destroy more or less 40% of the economy flat out.
What the fuck?!?
EDIT ninja page.
In fact the more serious the consequences of the default (USD devalued, country in economic shambles) the better, because historicaly that is when right wing populist parties thrive. That is one of the reasons why European countries (note, Geramany especially) were, and still are, eager to help Greece out instead of letting it go down the toilet. The populist parties decry this help but so far cooler heads have prevailed (also because our radical right wing is only one party of many and in the overall minority).
As for activism and Scott's attitude, I can completely understand it. My dad took me to demonstrations in Germany when I was five years old and even though I have grown up with activism and it has given me an excellent social conscience, nowadays I sign the petitions but rarely go out in the streets. Of course living in Finland, one of the most egalitarian and progressive societies known to man, there may not be much need to do that, but even here there are right wing policies slowly inserting themselves into our collective asses.
And that's what it is. You live in the USA, the greatest country in the world, with a dick up your bottom. The problem is that it went in there so slowly that you never really realized it and now Scrym can spout sweet nothings about freedom of speech as if they are saying "Eh, at least they use KY".
I'm a pragmatist, I would not expect any other country to do better than the US, were they given the power and eminence of the US. What I do expect, is a better response from intelligent people living there than "well, we'll never be able to change it anyway". How is that Rationalist Pragmatist Party going Rym? Now would seem a good time for you to have set that up a couple of years ago.
Me, I fucked up and missed that one thing was satire - Which you have to admit, doesn't happen very often. Rand's Entire world view is simply fucking idiotic, often self-contradictory lunacy that is indistinguishable from satire. It's a horrifying idea that this idiot was voted in as the city dog-catcher, let alone a fucking senator.
That and following the rule of multiple sources.
Also just looking at the title of the paper and any headlines around the article usually help find satire as well :-p
Yeah, I fucked up, I don't recall hiding that. You want to be a smug prick about it to try and big up yourself, then fuck you. Pardon-the-fuck out of me for taking an interest in your fucked up political wasteland without bowing fealty to you, oh great wise one.
More money isn't the answer.
Stop trying to rationalize why you believed the satire to be true. Let it go, stop digging the ditch deeper.
You want your special religious tax status? No commercial projects, no political interaction.
Really, we should go one step further. Religious institutions should have zero special exemptions, and should be forced to incorporate like any other entity following all of the rules they do.
http://m.comedycentral.com/tds_video.rbml?id=exclusive---rand-paul-extended-interview&weburl=http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-12-2013/exclusive---rand-paul-extended-interview/&alt=http://m.comedycentral.com/tds_video_index.rbml&cid=300
Sorry for kicking off on you dude. Not really appropriate for the situation. I should've stepped back first, I didn't, my mistake.
Though it does gall me when he calls himself an eye surgeon. He also claims to be a board certified ophthalmologist, but he's only certified by the board of an association of seven people, which he founded, and of which he's the head of the board. And this asshole is - or rather was - cutting on people's eyes, certified as qualified essentially only by himself. Politics aside, that's just fucking wrong.
I felt the recent one on USAID and shipping missed the mark completely. Might be because NPR recently did some in depth reporting on the issue and their bit was just so completely wrong as to be infuriating.