Reply With Quote
15 minutes?
you gotta be kidding.
Be afraid of Rand Paul, people...he is an Anarchist!
The Left is the Right is the Left.
15 minutes?
you gotta be kidding.
@ 7:16, the fear begins.
@ 8:10 it gets waist deep. It lasts from that point till the end.
Not going to watch it.
Summarize if you want.
If they called Rand paul the antichrist they're pretty LOLable.
not antichrist. anarchist.
left is the right is the left. is the right again.
Based on what in that interview?
Left says "Doomsday!"
This guy says maybe or maybe not.
The question remains is whether Rand Paul is posturing as so many elected officials do before voting on the debt ceiling issue.
Of all the six or more new Republican senators, Paul is the least likely to waiver between politics and principle.
By failing to increase the debt ceiling, the government will no longer be able to borrow and pay its bills and risk its credit rating to drop to unaffordable interest rates.
This may or may not be a doomsday scenario, but it is not an exhilarating example of democracy in action when one man elected by 100,000 or so people in a small state affecting the lives of 330 million Americans if not the major industrial nations in the world.
http://themoderatevoice.com/91010/ra...-global-chaos/
Last edited by Parker2112; 11-03-2010 at 02:09 PM.
Based on the use of fear mongoring to control popular opinion. The same tactic that the left so hated during the Bush years.
Its not an interview. Its Rands victory speech... followed by the sky is falling. Rand Paul is going to push the world into a Mayan doomsday scenario.
well....he is an eye doctor....so i guess his vision is clear.
my bad I read antichrist.
Im sure thats what Olberman was thinking, lol
An article about their embarassing coverage last night
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/ente...ion_night.html
MSNBC: Embracing the fear factor on election night
If you look at no other cable TV coverage of election night, you need to see this from MSNBC. It is the reaction of a the panel that spent the night at a desk analyzing the results for viewers.
Some might call it an anchor desk, but I would not debase the word "anchor" by putting it in front of a desk that includes folks offering this kind of analysis. The team includes: Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Lawrence O'Donnell and Eugene Robinson.
This is their reaction Tuesday night to the victory speech of Rand Paul, the new U.S. senator from Kentucky. Check out O'Donnell's words, in particular, against MSNBC's claim that Fox News, not MSNBC, is the cable channel trafficking in fear. O'Donnell says Rand is now "empowered" to "creat a worldwide despression."
Talk about the apocalypse on election night brought to you by your friendly cable TV analyst. I'm not kidding, check it out. (If you don't want to hear Paul's speech, move the button ahead and start the video at the 8 minute mark. O'Donnell is in full flower by the 9 minute mark. I promise you will stay to the end to hear all the madness from MSNBC's panel of "expert" analysts.)
I really would like to hear the folks who tell me MSNBC is a real news channel explain this kind of analysis. I can see Jon Stewart's speech has really made a difference at MSNBC.
I watched MSNBC most of the night. Matthews was so pissy
The Libertarian platform is much more anarchistic than most Libertarians admit to.
Oh so you mean the Left is finally taking a page from the playbook of the Right...
Very true. There must be some regulation to keep away from anarchy.
This is false. As stated by someone who has no knowledge ow the party.
Libertarians believe we should take all the power that we clutch in our federal security blanket, and leave it to states and local governments.
Positives:
-local gov is better suited to be a problem solver for local issues
-local gov is composed of locals, and is thus better in tune with locals
-local gov is composed of locals, who can be reigned in by local citizens.
-this arrangement avoids having laws imposed on citizens by strangers whose office is thousands of miles away, and who are subject to constant national/ international interests/pressures.
It would result in more gridlock amongst the states, but it would not result in "anarchy."
And the fed govt would be relegated to its originally intended purposes.
it would exist. at the state level.
Parker, some of the platform ideas the Libertarian Party has, would be anarchistic. Read them carefully and consider the ramifications:
Libertarian Party Platform
I'll take that back. The platform for 2010 has apparently been reworded, and doesn't carry that flaw any longer.
Well, awright!
It's very convenient to be able to reword the do ent containing your core values as time goes by. I'm sure any similarity with moving goalposts is merely coincidental.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
