an unconventional view on the economy

But many things "appear" to you that don't necessarily have any hold to reality.

I know, keep crying and pounding the floor about how you, Ron Paul, and Uncle Milty are liberals! Rest assured. You're a Cunt.

So far no one has ventured forth except JJ. And I still want to know what makes him think that your argument. :chirpchirpchirp:

Indeed. These conservatives have so little insight into their own character!

4: Blindness To One’s Own Failings And To The Failings Of Authority Figures Whom They Respect— RWAs are more likely to:

* Believe they have no personal failings.
* Avoid learning about their personal failings.
* Be highly self-righteous.



Textbook.

I've lost track of what is being disputed, but if the question is whether RP's economic policies are liberal of not, they are.

What makes me think that is the fact that free markets are liberalized markets.
I am also not getting sucked into the vortex , taking sides, or looking to be called a cunt for 6 pages.

Mao is right.

The definition of liberalism that I accept may not conform to that of American popular culture, but it is the definition of the word as understood by John Locke and Adam Smith. I never redefined the word; I challenged the popular definition. But for the purposes of this thread I have said that I will accept the popular definition.

Accusing me of being a bedfellow of the Republicans could not be further from the truth. And as I explained before, Democrats are in bed with Republicans much more than Ron Paul. Libertarian economics, save some deregulation favorable to influential corporations and rhetoric, is not embraced by the Republican party. I will once again cite Noam Chomsky: Democrats and Republicans are two factions within the business (fascist) party. The difference that I observe is that Democrats embrace a higher level of socialism and regulation. Both serve the interests of the wealthy elites through strong government intervention in the economy. That is fascism. It does not resemble libertarianism in the slightest. The objective of libertarianism is diametrically opposite to that of fascism.

But I can answer, refute, counter, etc. anything you say.

You are unable to do the same. Even for the simplest of questions or points.

You FAIL. Then you turn to deflection, tears, and holier than thou pronouncements of your imagined intellectual prowess.

pps:

Unlike others in this thread, I am not perfect.

Your answers, refutations, counters, are not necessarily legitimate just because you think they are. That is a simple concept that I would expect someone with your magisterial intellectual stature to grasp.

Clipping excepts from Wikipedia that may or may not be in an appropriate context is a dubious manner of argumentation. Writing out your own thoughts would lend respectability to your arguments.

So then you've missed the central argument.

This isn't Europe, and he agreed to the accepted definition.










Cunt!

Of course not. Making your inability and unwillingness to come forth with your rapier intellect, knowledge, education and "maturity", all the more puzzling (telling).




Here Puss-Puss, here....!

:hw:

I do not intend to dodge anything. My question is a legitimate challenge to his boasts of intellectual superiority. What a man reads says a great deal about him. He should easily be able to answer the question.

No, the question is whether RP is a liberal. But you are free to rim Mao all you want. Just remember to be consistent. Obama is right wing now and you cannot call him liberal. Good luck :bigup:

You established the use of wiki in this thread, Genius.

pps:


You agreed to the definition contained therein.

pps:


Sorry the chosen contextual material of the debate refutes your debunked mewlings, but.....

pps:



*FLUSH*
:crapper:

What a stupid cunt ! Declare victory some more, asswipe, and while you're at it define the Socialism that is part of your Liberalism.

That is no measure of intellectual superiority.

How about it, idiot...is Obama no longer a liberal?

Spare the rim shit, if I think the dude's right, I'ma say it-- RP is an economic liberal.

What more "legitimate challenge" exists than a debate of ideas and logic on equal terms (excepting your obvious handicap of course).

Oh wait, but you lose that one....so.....quick, deflect!

You possess the whole of what you "know", and I possess the whole of what I "know". Everything we've both read and retained is in our arsenals.

What's the problem?

Our minds have clashed on the field of ideas, and your argument has been left for dead, that's what!

:hw:

:burst: Don't you get it? Fdup is so smart, he knows the difference between the way "liberal" is defined here and in Europe. It only took him two nights and god-knows how many smilies to make his point. Now watch the douche-bag spew a string of self-congratulatory posts to justify the ridiculous investment in time.

No, he is a fascist.

It was a point made from the very start our discussion, and one made many times before in this forum.

But don't let that stop you from exposing your own ignorance and looking a fool!

Its the god-given right of every conservative cocksucking cockroach!

That question has been addressed. According to the popular American definitions, he votes for liberal social policies and economic policies that do not conform to either definition. He is most accurately described as libertarian. Libertarianism has been known as liberalism for most of modern history. The exception is the United States this century. For that reason I described Ron Paul as liberal. There should be nothing more to say about Ron Paul in this thread.

So you are a supporter of his then?

Idiot.


.

WGAS?
I never redefined the word; I challenged the popular definition. But for the purposes of this thread I have said that I will accept the popular definition.[/QUOTE]
Back to that again. You refused to provide a definition and then cried for hours. Not a mark of intellectual superiority.

Sure...I wonder why RP did not almost run as a Dem. You know they are both so equal.

I don't think so. And I think that his GOP candidacy demonstrates that. But we all know that you are more concerned with dogma than reality so I guess this ridiculous assertion seems reasonable to you.

As I already said...that makes no difference in the real world. Corporations run this country. That you continue to pretend they don't is not a mark of intellectual superiority. Right wing authoritarians flock to libertarian philosophy. If, as you claim, they just don't understand it then that is your problem. There is a reason all the "true conservatives" who abandoned the GOP gravitated to the RP candidacy. What do you think attracted them? His dashing good looks?

I respect Noam. Do you think he votes libertarian?

I understand all that. But the fact is that libetarianism does not resemble reality. What it does resemble is another way to GOP endswith a dogmatic means. But that is in the real world. Not where you and your definitions evidently live.
But I am sure all the right wing reactionary gun nuts are just mistaken. They don't see anything they like in the strict conservative ideals that RP espouses. It is a fluke that stormfront loves RP. These are all unfortunate coincidences. :drool:
It is my anecdotal mistake that every libertarian I have come across opposes Obama far more than McCain. I know that wasn't true for you was it?