The Year of the Tea Party Part Deux?

[Reub]

The Tea Party, with Obamacare and runaway illegal immigration as the tailwind have taken out one of their highest ranking "mainstream" Republicans:

http://www.newsmax.com/

"In the most stunning upset of the midterm election season, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was crushed in the Virginia Republican primary Tuesday by little-known tea party-backed challenger Dave Brat.

With 90.2 percent of the vote counted, Brat had 55.4 percent to Cantor's 44.6 percent."

"Brat, an economics professor who's never run for public office, has been a relentless critic of the better-financed and far-better-known Cantor — who had been considered a potential future House speaker — for spending too much time in Washington and losing touch with his conservative base at home."

Is this the beginning of a repeat of the 2010 Tea Party landslide? Is Obama really a Tea Partier with all of the help that he's providing them?

[MachineGhost]

Well, something has to start happening soon if a third party is going to be a major force in two more years.  Cycles do not lie.  I just rather it be something more interesting than Tea Party conservative populism ("Keep your damn hands off my SS check!").  But maybe they'll evolve to be more libertarian and attract broader support, otherwise I see a split within the Republican Party coming which won't bold well for either half.  Yet, I can't quite recall how inter-party splits affect the electoral collage as compared to the [meaningless] popular vote.  Anyone?

[Benko]

Good chance amnesty for illegals is now radioactive, which is a good thing. 

[WiseOne]

Not sure these election results imply anything about immigration reform nationally.  I do agree with MG that it's almost like there are three parties now, not two.

Apparently Eric Cantor was having difficulty telling his constituents that he was against "amnesty" (local hot button issue) while at the same time telling the rest of the country that he is pro-immigration reform/legalization, as this is a popular stance nationally.  Tough position to be in.  Good for his district, telling the guy who's too busy on the national stage to pay attention to the people who voted him in, for giving him the boot!

I really like the idea of having an economics professor in Congress, although I do hope that his exclusive focus on immigration was simply a judicious use of limited campaign funds, and not an indication that he'd be a one-issue congressman.  Refreshingly, his website nowhere mentions wanting to encroach on personal liberties (by which I mean "banning abortion/birth control" and other such Republican-like thinly veiled attempts at defining a state religion).  That's consistently been a huge roadblock preventing me from ever wanting to support a Republican candidate.  I remember having nightmares after reading Margaret Atwood's Handmaid's Tale, because it was a quite believable representation of what the Republican party considered to be a utopian society at the time (and many still do, I think).

His Democratic opponent is a sociology professor in the same college.  That's going to be WAY fun to watch. 

[MachineGhost]

Not sure these election results imply anything about immigration reform nationally.  I do agree with MG that it's almost like there are three parties now, not two.

It looks like the fireworks is just getting started!  http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... de#r=lr-sr

[MachineGhost]

I can't believe the "crony capitalism" meme has now reached the highest echelons of politics.  Hot diggity damn!

[moda0306]

Yeah, this is great stuff.  Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy than Cantor. 

http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkb ... -business/

While everyone is focused on Brat's critique of Cantor's immigration stance, that attack came in the broader context of the increasingly potent "crony capitalism" theme. For instance, Brat went after Cantor specifically for his support of strengthening the H1B visa program, a policy especially favored by tech companies such as Facebook since it allows them to hire more engineers from overseas. Critics have said that the program allows firms to seek cheaper labor to maximize profits and puts foreign workers ahead of Americans.

A nicer guy?  I guess I haven't followed him in too much detail, but he is on my short list of most nauseating politicians working in government today based on what I've heard from him.

His replacement appears to be the odd combination of Christian and Ayn Rand disciple. I am interested in hearing more about Brat, though.

[doodle]

I would vote for Satan before I ever voted for Cantor. Thrilled to see that schmuck go...of course, he will probably continue to hang around inside the beltway as some high paid lobbyist.

This is just another example of how our gerrymandered congressional districts are leading to more and more extreme candidates. Cantor was simply out-republicaned by an even bigger loony

[moda0306]

A nicer guy?  I guess I haven't followed him in too much detail, but he is on my short list of most nauseating politicians working in government today based on what I've heard from him.

Diagnosis: MSMOTF

(moda sarcasm meter on the fritz)

  That's correct ... sorry Moda, I should have put in a sarcasm emoticon.  Maybe this one: 

Woah. I thought one of us was going Craaaazy. Next thing I know people are going to be praising Harry Ried as the best leader in the US government...

[Reub]

Why are some on here so eager to bash Cantor, Bush, Boehner and yet give Obama, Hillary, Kerry, Hagel, Wasserman-Schultz, Pelosi, Reid, etc. a pass? Yes I mean you.

[Reub]

I learned a while ago that leftist ideologues are not worth debating. They tend to launch personal, ugly attacks at the drop of a hat and never base their positions on logic. This is why I explicitly avoid engaging them directly as it is pointless.

[Benko]

Most of us are not tied to the left or the right;

You may not be (no clue), but there are plenty on here who are often/usually left of center who don't like to admit it.  Of course Alinsky would approve of that.

On the other hand: "Cantor, Bush, Boehner and yet give Obama, Hillary, Kerry, Hagel, Wasserman-Schultz, Pelosi, Reid,"

I'm right of center and am not fond of any on the list (though not all for the same reason).

[Kshartle]

The left-right paradigm doesn't make sense to me. To me it's more or less a scale of how much people beleive in freedom vs. control.

If the scale was 1-10 in favor of authoritarin control of humans you've got the communists at a ten, the fascist nazis around 9, the dems around 7-8, the repubs around 5-6, various forms of libertarians from 2-4 and me and the anarchists at 1.

So from over here at one it's sometimes very tough to tell the difference between republicans and dems unless they are on opposite extremes (5 vs 8 ). They have more in common than not though so it's always funny to me to see arguments and name calling between the two.

I identify more with the repubs because in general they beleive in property rights and many of them are libertarians who just sell out and vote for big government guys to avoid the bigger government dem. At least they are usually honest about this. If you ask a repub if they really like Bush, or McCain or Romney it's often "Well he was the lesser of two evils' It's like they had to plug their nose to vote for them.

Contrast that with the Clinton-Obama voters. They think these guys are their messiah/dad and they will save the world. It's totally delusional and seems equal parts immoral/authoritarian/childish. It's like they're trying to vote for a parent to set the house rules and make sure they get fed and brother and sister are disciplined or something. It's all based on threats and the ends justifying the means.

The left-right nonsense trys to paint these groups like they're opposites and everyone is some degree of one or the other. It's totally false. My republican grandparents think I'm a college braiwashed liberal and my socialist friends think I'm a right-wing nazi. They're trapped in a false paradigm and can't see how similar the so-called "right & left" really are. 

[Benko]

The left-right paradigm doesn't make sense to me. To me it's more or less a scale of how much people beleive in freedom vs. control.

You might be interested in this: he chose not one but two traits
"Attitude toward the State," and
"Attitude toward planned social progress".

Pournelle political axis
http://www.baen.com/chapters/axes.htm

[Kshartle]

The left-right paradigm doesn't make sense to me. To me it's more or less a scale of how much people beleive in freedom vs. control.

You might be interested in this: he chose not one but two traits
"Attitude toward the State," and
"Attitude toward planned social progress".

Pournelle political axis
http://www.baen.com/chapters/axes.htm

I just skimmed it. i have to dissagree. "Planned" social progress is really "Forced" behaviors and ignoring of human rights. It's no different from "Attitude towards the State" because it's a 100% statist belief that progress is measured across a society and should be planned (enforced).

Almost everyone has different things they want the state to force everyone to do. Just because some people dissagree on the details doesn't mean they aren't kindred spirits when it comes to big picture. It's like saying people are the polar opposites because one wants to go to BK and the other to McDonalds.

[MachineGhost]

The left-right nonsense trys to paint these groups like they're opposites and everyone is some degree of one or the other. It's totally false. My republican grandparents think I'm a college braiwashed liberal and my socialist friends think I'm a right-wing nazi. They're trapped in a false paradigm and can't see how similar the so-called "right & left" really are.

[img width=800]https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3532/40 ... 3d9e_o.jpg[/img]

[moda0306]

Reub,

You aren't a good practitioner of logic.

Sincerely,

Logic



I'm amazed at how much bad logic there is out there parading as air-tight deductive logic, and whose practitioners use it like a rhetorical club in debates. They just look silly. (Ad hominem... Oops). Perhaps, as annoying as it is, some should just stick to hyper-partisan, passive-aggressive, hyperbolic statements and loaded questions, and not lecturing others on the use of logic.

[Kshartle]

Reub,

You aren't a good practitioner of logic.

Sincerely,

Logic



I'm amazed at how much bad logic there is out there parading as air-tight deductive logic, and whose practitioners use it like a rhetorical club in debates. They just look silly. (Ad hominem... Oops). Perhaps, as annoying as it is, some should just stick to hyper-partisan, passive-aggressive, hyperbolic statements and loaded questions, and not lecturing others on the use of logic.

You guys are doo-doo heads. So am I.

Now that that's settled.....................

[Xan]

Reub,

I'm usually totally sympathetic to your viewpoints, and I often wish that things were so simple.  Your rant about "leftist ideologues" is all too often accurate, when we're talking about maybe Michael Moore or various talking heads.  But painting Desert and Moda with that brush is a little much, don't you think?  I haven't ever seen them resort to personal attacks, and as far as logic goes, Moda especially makes really, really good use of it.

It's okay to admit when they're right.  It doesn't automatically make you wrong, although you might be slightly less certain than you were before.

[moda0306]

Reub,

You aren't a good practitioner of logic.

Sincerely,

Logic



I'm amazed at how much bad logic there is out there parading as air-tight deductive logic, and whose practitioners use it like a rhetorical club in debates. They just look silly. (Ad hominem... Oops). Perhaps, as annoying as it is, some should just stick to hyper-partisan, passive-aggressive, hyperbolic statements and loaded questions, and not lecturing others on the use of logic.

You guys are doo-doo heads. So am I.

Now that that's settled.....................

Yes... Well the left-right divide is basically a prioritization of HOW you like your government control... Not whether you like it.  To a degree I'd say anarchists have some answering to do on this as well, but for the moment I'll concede that they are truly on the other end of the spectrum... Advocating for abandonment of "the state."  As much crap as I give you in discussing the true nature of property, force, morality, etc, it gets really interesting when avid foreign policy hawks start throwing the term "statist" around.

The typical left-right divide really doesn't get us very far. It also creates a "team" mentality that further dumbs people down... (Instead of researching an issue, assume the guy on "your team" has it right and advocate whatever the party line is).  This really quelches intellectual curiosity.

[moda0306]

Reub,

I'm usually totally sympathetic to your viewpoints, and I often wish that things were so simple.  Your rant about "leftist ideologues" is all too often accurate, when we're talking about maybe Michael Moore or various talking heads.  But painting Desert and Moda with that brush is a little much, don't you think?  I haven't ever seen them resort to personal attacks, and as far as logic goes, Moda especially makes really, really good use of it.

It's okay to admit when they're right.  It doesn't automatically make you wrong, although you might be slightly less certain than you were before.

To be fair, I resort to what could be considered personal attacks... But I think they were very pertinent to the topic at hand. Naturally, Reub disagrees. 

Thanks for the shout-out though. 

[Kshartle]

Whenever someone dissagrees with you must always say they are on a rant, or spouting, or spewing.

Do not ever acknowledge they are making an argument.

If possible make up a ridiculous argument and atribute it to them then demolish it.

Also call them names as much as possible and write that other posters agree with you, in your opinion.

Be sure to cherry-pick any data point that is correlated with a theory that you have and conclude it is proof you are correct. If possible include a chart as this invalidates all logic to the contrary.

Then suggest to them they should read "How I found Freedom" because clearly they have mental issues, I mean, they dissagreed with you right?

PP debate success 101 

[Reub]

To be fair, I resort to what could be considered personal attacks... But I think they were very pertinent to the topic at hand. Naturally, Reub disagrees. 

Xan, what were you saying about personal attacks? That's usually the only way that those on the left know how to "discuss".

[moda0306]

Reub,

Resorting to a personal judgement that is pertinent to the topic from time to time is HUGELY different from that being "the only way I know how to discuss."

One big problem I see out there is that there are people making VERY good arguments, but because they've resorted to "personal attacks" from time-to-time, their opponent, when unable to form a valid argument, basically crawls behind the "OMG they called me a name... I'm not gonna debate them" excuse.

I throw out snark, to be sure, but I certainly get into meaningful discussions as well.  Your choosing to avoid the latter because of the former is your own problem... not that of me not being able to make well-thought-out arguments.


And to back up from this discussion a little bit, I see very little correlation between right/left and smart/stupid or snarky/polite or honest/dishonest.  I know some truly disgusting conservatives, and extremely hard-working, moral, family-values conservatives.  I know very good liberals, and some very skeezy ones... this whole "this is the only way they know how to debate" business is garbage. 

[MachineGhost]

I'd say anarchists have some answering to do on this as well, but for the moment I'll concede that they are truly on the other end of the spectrum... Advocating for abandonment of "the state."

All anarchists are "deep anarchists", whether they know it or not.  What this means is the "state" is a hallucinotion that others believe in and use coercive force to specifically make it reality.  After all, the "state" does not literally exist.  It is a meme.  But this is a little too "New Age" for almost all people, so it is more comfortable to debate philosophy and logistics.