A Problem of Shrinkage

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Because they aren't going to fund my hobbies, etc. What does it matter anyway?

You're not a very good Marxist if you're going to betray your principles so quickly and without cause...

[CountArach]

You're not a very good Marxist if you're going to betray your principles so quickly and without cause...

If I have no choice but to betray my principles in order to get by in our current society then I'm afraid I am forced to betray my principles. I'm opposed to working in retail for anti-consumerist reasons and management is now making me work to upsell products and sell inferior stuff that have higher profit margins. I oppose both of these but given that I haven't got the qualifications for anything else I haven't got a choice. I could not work, but then I wouldn't be able to get to University without living at my parent's expense... which I am also opposed to.

But anyway, that's straying way too far from the topic and I don't feel I have to answer questions about my morality to you.

[Lemur]

American Conservative examines why, exactly, some Republicans have decided that Iran is the greatest attack issue evar:

One reason why Cantor and Pence have been demanding that the President take a stronger public line in support of the protesters in Iran is that supporting Mousavi’s voters openly is the emotionally satisfying, easy, almost mindless thing to do, so it is very appealing for opposition figures who have no ideas. But there is more to it than that. All of this comes back to the problem of Republican denial about why they lost power. They are supremely confident about their views on national security and foreign policy, and they cannot conceive that a majority of the country would reject them because of the policies they advocated and enacted. Worse still, they remain wedded to the hectoring, moralistic and aggressive approach of the last administration, in which sanctions and condemnation are the only “soft” tools they understand. They are so wedded to this approach that that they think this is not only the best kind of foreign policy, but that anything other than this is fecklessness and surrender. To a disturbingly great extent, replacing the current leadership may not have much of an effect on shoddy foreign policy thinking on the right, because the rot is so deep and widespread, but it is particularly important that Republicans in positions of responsibility at least attempt to play the role of credible, informed opposition, which may sometimes mean acknowledging that the President has handled an issue correctly. It will also mean building up the credibility and knowledge to challenge and resist the President if he embarks on misguided or irresponsible courses in the years to come. Cantor and Pence have shown this week that they do not have either one.

[AlexanderSextus]

Ron Paul could not win a national election. Ever.

why not?

and if this is actually true, then i'd be completely content with the fact that the GOP has no chance in hell of being a major party anymore.

i'd like to see a DP vs LP ticket in the future.

[CountArach]

why not?

He earned more money than most of the Republican candidates and yet he did not even come close to winning a single state in the primary. His policies just aren't popular at all - there are very few Americans who would willingly have his economic policies - such as the gold standard.

Further, the number of libertarians (Who one would naturaly assume would dominate the Ron Paul campaign) in the country are incredibly low:

Libertarian voters make up 4% of the nation’s likely voters and they favor Barack Obama over John McCain by a 53% to 38% margin. Three percent (3%) would vote for some other candidate and 5% are not sure. These results, from an analysis of 15,000 Likely Voter interviews conducted by Rasmussen Reports, challenges the conventional wisdom which assumes that strong support for a Libertarian candidate would hurt John McCain.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Some people beleive that Americans are generally stupid and emotional. Those same people now believe that The Republican party "Doesn't have a chance in hell of becoming a majority party". That doesn't really equate.

As long as there are stupid constituencies, they will elect stupid representatives. Hopefully, the GOP can return the Democrats to that status and start coming up with ideas of their own. They won't be able to do it using emotion and lazy patriotism.

[Hosakawa Tito]

One of the GOP's biggest problems is that they set themselves up to fail by always claiming the moral/ethical/family values/uncorruptible/small unintrusive government/I'm more patriotic than thou
high ground, and then inevitibly not delivering on it. The ratio of moral/ethic/policy failures is comparable to Democrats, but the high horse hypocracy and bald use of said "values" for purely political gains doesn't fool too many people. They need to stop listening to the radical/rabid dog neo-con fringe like Gingrich & Company and instead provide reasonable,logical,fiscally responsible opposition where it should be applied; the massive increase in budget spending and increase in federal government. Leading by example would be a nice start.

[Adrian II]

American Conservative examines why, exactly, some Republicans have decided that Iran is the greatest attack issue evar [..]

I hold a different view. Mousavi's unexpected success in the Iranian elections and the enthusiasm of his followers is in many ways a result of Obama's new policy of reconciliation toward Iran. If Obama succeeds in breaking up the hard-liners' hold on Iran by continuing this policy, the whole Republican outlook on today's world and the Middle East in particular will crumble. And I won't shed a single tear if they shrink beyond recognition. They've done enough damage.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I hold a different view. Mousavi's unexpected success in the Iranian elections and the enthusiasm of his followers is in many ways a result of Obama's new policy of reconciliation toward Iran. If Obama succeeds in breaking up the hard-liners' hold on Iran by continuing this policy, the whole Republican outlook on today's world and the Middle East in particular will crumble. And I won't shed a single tear if they shrink beyond recognition. They've done enough damage.

I agree to some extent. Youths are obsessed with not feeling left out when other youths do something percieved as cool. Iranian youth is no different. Americans elected a "cool" candidate that wanted a reconciliation - Iran is stuck with a dumber and more hostile version of Bush. The youth is tired of being a repressed laughing stock to other youths and became uppity.

The outstretched hand is just a symbol of the change, imo.

Republican hostile strategy of war had nothing to do with Iran, or for that matter North Korea. I never wanted war with either of them. I have always hoped that this type of activity was inevitable. I support war in Iraq because the conventional part was going to be a cakewalk (it was) and good practice - Plus eventually they will be better off. Human beings have a problem with altitute - especially fighting wars in high altitude - especially fighting second world nations who are accustomed to it. Iran is the one of the last small nations that we would want to confront. There is simply no political or temporal payoff and the people have more freedoms there than they did in Iraq, anyway.

I don't dislike Obama's policy toward Iran - it is just a new way to acheive a collapse of the theocracy without war which is a shared goal, lets try it.

[Adrian II]

I don't dislike Obama's policy toward Iran - it is just a new way to acheive a collapse of the theocracy without war which is a shared goal, lets try it.

As usual you and I find common ground in international concerns, in the larger picture so to speak.

[ICantSpellDawg]

As usual you and I find common ground in international concerns, in the larger picture so to speak.

Weird! hehe

[Crazed Rabbit]

The Republican rebirth seems like it's not going to emanate from South Carolina.

That's most unfortunate, considering the governor there, Mark Sanford. He's a guy who leans libertarian and is probably one of the great hopes for revitalizing the GOP with a platform based around the present and not a rehash of Reagan (that the GOP failed to follow through on anyways).

CR