2012 is fast approaching...

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Thursday, September 1st, 2011 2:58pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter blankfist.

The problem is that the two branches of Civil Liberty and Small Government are opposing objectives because Bureaucratic corruption aside, the government plays a role in representing and protecting the liberty of the people.

The left likes Civil Liberty, but doesn't believe the massive base of working class individuals can protect themselves from the rich and powerful barons and corporate warlords that develop in the power vacuum without central government.

The right likes the idea of small government purely because it gives more power to the rich and powerful barons and corporate warlords. They manipulate the concept of 'civil liberty' that individuals do not need the government to limit the control of the rich.. while unspoken is interpretation that this is fend for yourself or die trying world.

The Left won't accept giving up control will give more civil protection, but the right can give lip service to civil liberties and ignore it as 'aspirational' when need be.

The American "right" doesn't like small government. It's a talking point, yes. But never is it put into practice.

*controversy = argument, debate, etc.

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by MrFisk.

I really cant stand John Stossel.

Soooooo, both sides receive massive amounts of money from the rich and powerful but one of those sides is moral and the other not... because, why?

Why do you think welfare was created by a bunch of rich, racist white guys? Could it have been, instead of goodness, a corporate money laundering scheme? I mean it goes straight from the most poor of souls--barely keeping them afloat. Not to mention limiting them-- and straight to businesses.

I would say Walmart is very happy with this program and the people it helps are barely scraping by. I would also add that those rich people also put into place our justice system, which further makes the poor dejected…

Or better—--look at corn subsides… Goes straight to big corn, puts small famers out of business. But does it help the poor? You bet your fucking ass it “helps!” More than welfare any day of the week. It reduces the price of all food by leaps and bounds. That’s millions of restaurants too. But is it for you and I? Even though it benefits us? Fuck no… It means more money for the fat cat.


>> ^raverman:
The problem is that the two branches of Civil Liberty and Small Government are opposing objectives because Bureaucratic corruption aside, the government plays a role in representing and protecting the liberty of the people.
The left likes Civil Liberty, but doesn't believe the massive base of working class individuals can protect themselves from the rich and powerful barons and corporate warlords that develop in the power vacuum without central government.
The right likes the idea of small government purely because it gives more power to the rich and powerful barons and corporate warlords. They manipulate the concept of 'civil liberty' that individuals do not need the government to limit the control of the rich.. while unspoken is interpretation that this is fend for yourself or die trying world.
The Left won't accept giving up control will give more civil protection, but the right can give lip service to civil liberties and ignore it as 'aspirational' when need be.

@Lawdeedaw I was thinking ideologically. But in practice you're right.

Perhaps the right is more open about supporting 'successful individuals and companies' above those on struggle street. But the left has the same dirty secrets and financiers and make more pious but expensive sounding promises they never actually come through on.

But how do we get away from this bureaucratically corrupt version of democracy to a system that better allows decisions that benefit the people as a whole - and takes power away from those who have unfair influence?

If you ask a conservative or liberal or left libertarian or right libertarian, they will all tell you they overwhelmingly support small business. The doctrines of these respective factions are also supportive of small business. If you could force our elected officials to all take lie detector tests, I'm certain that almost all of them support small business in their hearts too.

So, if everyone supports small business, then why does government seem to be a never ending stream of corporate wars, no bid contracts, bailouts, austerity, corporate tax giveaways and subsidies? If everyone supports the little guy, then why does he always get fucked over in favor of big money?

Because multinational corporations hold our government's balls (and ovaries) in a financial vice. Because multinational corporations fund our elections and control our media.

Step out of line and you find yourself with no election funds or bad press or a sex scandal or a real estate scandal, or perhaps a faulty engine on your campaign leer jet. Any dirt you may have on you in life is sitting in a filing cabinet, waiting for the day you fuck up, at which point you are booted from office and humiliated in front of friends, family, colleagues and constituents.

Time and again we see idealistic politicians full of hope and promises become corporate lackeys after they are sworn in. Does this have to happen to Ron Paul too before market libertarians figure out that our campaign finance system is fatally flawed? It's funny to see all of these anti-democracy, anti-two party system market libertarians all of a sudden hyping on a Republican candidate for the 2012 elections. It's funny because you seem to believe we live in a democracy - which you supposedly hate.

It's not the people. it's not the ideology. It's not even the politicians. It's the system. The system is fucked. There is no hope for the kind of serious change we need in this country until we unfuck it. And for it to be unfucked, we the people need to do it for ourselves. We can't sit around waiting for political surrogates to do this work for us. We need to demand it in large numbers, and to strike and protest for as long as it takes until it gets done.

And time is running out. The deficit grows. The temperature of the globe rises. Our jobs are being shipped off to the 3rd world. Our money is being shipped off to Caribbean tax shelters. We need to act soon. At some point it will be too late.

>> ^blankfist:

The American "right" doesn't like small government. It's a talking point, yes. But never is it put into practice.

@dystopianfuturetoday, you know I'm in your camp, but that reads like a tea-party manifesto. It emphasizes deconstruction without worrying about our lack of agreement on the subsequent reconstruction. In some ways, I'm with @raverman. We need to sort out the ideological differences we've laid bare particularly over these past few years. That's why I think publicized presidential debates between Ron Paul and Barack Obama could be good for the country. IMO, you'd get some good, honest, civil discussion. It would give Paul the opportunity to bring Obama to task on some of the issues where he even loses the left; and it would give Obama an opportunity to talk to the rightwing frankly about the mapping between economics and reality.

Plus, I don't think Paul can win the general anyway. I'll concede that it would be disastrous if he did. Who could he take as a running mate?

Ultimately, I think the crux of the ideological issue is the absoluteness of private property "rights," and the mechanism of common ownership.

My cat's breath smells like cat food!

>> ^raverman:
@Lawdeedaw I was thinking ideologically. But in practice you're right.
Perhaps the right is more open about supporting 'successful individuals and companies' above those on struggle street. But the left has the same dirty secrets and financiers and make more pious but expensive sounding promises they never actually come through on.
But how do we get away from this bureaucratically corrupt version of democracy to a system that better allows decisions that benefit the people as a whole - and takes power away from those who have unfair influence?


Easy enough---vote for the unique candidate. It's hard to notice him let alone tell if he is real. It doesn't matter left or right or even the dreaded "third party." Do it for the rest of your life if you can. I will teach my children this and try to have them do the same. But never, ever tire of the vote.

Just make sure it's not the greasy carsalesman...for me I vote Ron Paul on the right, Nadar on the 3rd party, or Kucinich on the left. In Florida, it was Charlie Christ. So few, but that's because they lose; after all, the nice guy finishes last... So fuck the game, I will cast my vote with the reset button.

Do it and worry about the future later. It cannot be any worse to elect someone you disagree with but who is different. As I have said, "Vote for an honest man and you may not get what you want. Vote for a liar and get what you deserve."