General Discussion

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts) Sat May 11, 2013, 03:34 PM May 2013

when Glenn greenwald and Libertarians attack.

Ok, my point is this, facts are facts, and if even a complete asshole says 2 plus 2 equals four, it is a fact. Me personally, I think it is ironic that the GOP attacks over benghazi, when THEY cut the funding for it. But I also think that the real scandal is that Hillary and Obama decided that we had to be involved in the first place. Gadafi was an asshole, but like Hussein before him, his departure let the Ben ladin style Jihad take power.

That being said, if you think I will ignore the facts that Libertarian motives are naive at best, wicked at worst, you have another thing coming. If GG wanted to make his point, he did not have to supprt the Fox News brigade, nor support a racist that wants to overturn the Civil Rights act like Ron Paul.

Let me be blunt, even if you hated Obama, even if you hate all Dems and GOP, would you really want to hitch your wagon to people like this?

and if you do, I have every right to suspect your judgement skills.

18 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

when Glenn greenwald and Libertarians attack. (Original Post) DonCoquixote May 2013 OP

Greenwald's support for the Paul brand of MineralMan May 2013 #1

Greenwald is a supporter of Rand Paul? Since when? dkf May 2013 #2

look here DonCoquixote May 2013 #3

Try this link: MineralMan May 2013 #4

Hmm very interesting. dkf May 2013 #7

So based on what you quoted are people now going to hate Grayson, Frank and Kucinich? cui bono May 2013 #8

More like ProSense May 2013 #5

He loved Ron. Now settles for Rand. DevonRex May 2013 #6

again, the sky is blue DonCoquixote May 2013 #9

It is funny and revealing that you would preface your post with "Facts are Facts", bvar22 May 2013 #10

it's funny DonCoquixote May 2013 #12

I have every right to call into question the "purity" of their actions? bvar22 May 2013 #15

Then let me ask you this DonCoquixote May 2013 #16

Now THOSE are facts about ISSUES, bvar22 May 2013 #17

No,I do not DonCoquixote May 2013 #18

+100000 First sign of propaganda: woo me with science May 2013 #13

what is so propaganda DonCoquixote May 2013 #14

Ron Paul, always claimed we need to cut spending but would tack his earmarks to bills he Thinkingabout May 2013 #11

MineralMan

(146,317 posts)

1. Greenwald's support for the Paul brand of

Reply to DonCoquixote (Original post)

Sat May 11, 2013, 03:40 PM

May 2013

libertarianism was the turning point for me. If someone supports that kind of libertarian politics, I can't support that person. It is that simple.

The commons are for everyone, not just those who can afford them.

dkf

(37,305 posts)

2. Greenwald is a supporter of Rand Paul? Since when?

Reply to DonCoquixote (Original post)

Sat May 11, 2013, 03:46 PM

May 2013

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)

3. look here

Reply to dkf (Reply #2)

Sat May 11, 2013, 03:50 PM

May 2013

http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2013/03/glenn-greenwald-rand-paul-may-have-been-right-even-if-he-republican

MineralMan

(146,317 posts)

4. Try this link:

Reply to dkf (Reply #2)

Sat May 11, 2013, 03:52 PM

May 2013

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/31/progressives_and_the_ron_paul_fallacies/

Still, for better or worse, Paul — alone among the national figures in both parties — is able and willing to advocate views that Americans urgently need to hear. That he is doing so within the Republican Party makes it all the more significant. This is why Paul has been the chosen ally of key liberal House members such as Alan Grayson (on Fed transparency and corruption), Barney Frank (to arrest the excesses of the Drug War) and Dennis Kucinich (on a wide array of foreign policy and civil liberties issues). Just judge for yourself: consider some of what Ron Paul is advocating on vital issues — not secondary issues, but ones progressives have long insisted are paramount — and ask how else these debates will be had and who else will advocate these views:

Oh, and by the way, Fuck Ron Paul!

dkf

(37,305 posts)

7. Hmm very interesting.

Reply to MineralMan (Reply #4)

Sat May 11, 2013, 04:44 PM

May 2013

cui bono

(19,926 posts)

8. So based on what you quoted are people now going to hate Grayson, Frank and Kucinich?

Reply to MineralMan (Reply #4)

Sat May 11, 2013, 04:45 PM

May 2013

Well some already hate the Kooch... but the others?

This is why Paul has been the chosen ally of key liberal House members such as Alan Grayson (on Fed transparency and corruption), Barney Frank (to arrest the excesses of the Drug War) and Dennis Kucinich (on a wide array of foreign policy and civil liberties issues).

Greenwald writes some great and informative articles. You can't throw out everything based on a couple disagreements you may have with him.

Who among us is perfect? Who here knows anybody they agree with completely 100% of the time and who never does anything we could be critical of? We can read articles with a critical mind and take from them what we wish. But to throw out everything Greenwald says because you disagree with some of his views is going overboard and doing yourself a disservice. And underestimating your own ability to sift and sort through what you are reading. (there's a better word to use for "sift and sort" but my mind is failing me atm)

I don't know if you, MineralMan, are doing so or if you are just posting that for information, but this is directed at those who are.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)

5. More like

Reply to dkf (Reply #2)

Sat May 11, 2013, 03:55 PM

May 2013

"Greenwald is a supporter of Rand Paul? Since when?"

...apologist.

Glenn Greenwald defend Rand Paul against "Democratic myths"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022485711

Disappointing those who 'stand with Rand'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022742805

Of course, Greenwald no longer has Ron Paul to hype.

The steadfast ignoring of Ron Paul — and the truly bizarre un-personhood of Gary Johnson — has ensured that, yet again, those views will be excluded and the blurring of partisan lines among ordinary citizens on crucial issues will be papered over. That’s precisely the opposite effect that a healthy democratic election would produce.

http://www.salon.com/2011/08/16/elections_9/

Glenn Greenwald meet Ron Paul
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100277632

"Those who don't commit sodomy (aren't) getting AIDS unless they are deliberately infected by a gay"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100276797

Ron Paul Seeks UN’s Help In Domain Ownership Dispute
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022353247

DevonRex

(22,541 posts)

6. He loved Ron. Now settles for Rand.

Reply to dkf (Reply #2)

Sat May 11, 2013, 03:59 PM

May 2013

He's a slimy motherfucking RW libertarian who argued in FAVOR of 3D printer plastic guns last night on Bill Maher.

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)

9. again, the sky is blue

Reply to DonCoquixote (Original post)

Sat May 11, 2013, 04:57 PM

May 2013

regardless of who says it. However, I will be wary of how a libertarian tries to use facts, because ultimately, what they want is not very far from what the GOP wants.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)

10. It is funny and revealing that you would preface your post with "Facts are Facts",

Reply to DonCoquixote (Original post)

Sat May 11, 2013, 07:20 PM

May 2013

and then attack Greenwald on an emotional guilt by association rant.

If you are going to claim "facts",
you would have to take it Issue by Issue,
and stick to the facts.

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)

12. it's funny

Reply to bvar22 (Reply #10)

Sat May 11, 2013, 08:26 PM

May 2013

where I stated that I was against the idea of Libya, but then would call into question why this guy runs to Fox News, and supported the Pauls. If someone supports the Pauls, Ihave every right to call into question the purity of their actions. Just because someone is the proverbial "stopped clock right twice a day" does not mean I ignore the times where they are dead dead wrong, with some of the other posters here have done so admirably (as well as my little "cigar bar" snippet from CNN) Again, any leftist, especially an FDR leftist, would not feel the need to throw the Libertarians a lifeline, especially as they are mad at obama for not being hard enough on the right.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)

15. I have every right to call into question the "purity" of their actions?

Reply to DonCoquixote (Reply #12)

Sun May 12, 2013, 01:05 PM

May 2013

...and THIS?..an admitted Witch Hunt
in a thread that is supposed to be about "facts"?
You can spend your time calling into question the "purity" of other's actions all day long.
I don't really care.
I've been a DEMOCRAT too long to give a sh*t about Purity Patrols.

Again with the fact free emotional attack?

"Again, any leftist, especially an FDR leftist, would not feel the need to throw the Libertarians a lifeline, especially as they are mad at obama for not being hard enough on the right."

Is that just your personal opinion?
or do you have any support for the fact-free rule you just made up?

Bill and Hillary (among others) "run to Fox News" all the time.

Do you also question their purity?

Like myself, Glenn Greenwald has some problems with across the board support for today's incarnation of what once was the Democratic Party.
I agree with many of Greenwald's assessments,
and support his finding ANY avenue to make these public,
much the same as I support several of the Libertarian Positions,
and support their activities to project these issues into the national debate:

*Ending the failed War on Drugs

*Ending the Patriot Act and restoring US Citizens rights under the Constitution

*Ending the Foreign Wars and slashing Pentagon Spending

I'm glad SOMEONE is out there talking about these issues,
because both the Democratic Party & the Republican Party refuse to even discuss them.

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)

16. Then let me ask you this

Reply to bvar22 (Reply #15)

Sun May 12, 2013, 01:41 PM

May 2013

Are you prepared to call GG out on things like this:

http://www.salon.com/2010/01/22/citizens_united/

http://www.alternet.org/story/145610/dennis_kucinich_vs._glenn_greenwald%3A_is_citizens_united_a_deathblow_for_democracy_or_a_1st_amendment_victory

If you are prepared to fight agaibnst him for supporting Citizens United, I can respect you. All the same, I do consider Citizen United a firm line in the sand, as it will ruin any and every attempt to fix anything else. And that is not a fact free rule.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)

17. Now THOSE are facts about ISSUES,

Reply to DonCoquixote (Reply #16)

Sun May 12, 2013, 05:38 PM

May 2013

and your opinion supported.
I also oppose Citizen's United,
as well as the Libertarian calls for a Flat Tax, the Privatization of everything,
and the abolishing of Social programs.

I understand WHY GG opposes any restrictions on "Speech",

"Glenn Greenwald: Well, you know, it was interesting because I was—I agree with Congressman Kucinich completely with regard to the constitutional arguments he was making about the presidential assassination program. If you look at the Fifth Amendment, it really does say no person shall be deprived of life without due process. It says that in clear terms. To me, the First Amendment is just as clear, and it says Congress shall make no law abridging free speech. And as Justice Hugo Black said, I read that to mean Congress shall make no law abridging free speech.

So, I certainly agree that corporate dominance of our Congress—you know, Senator Durbin recently said the banks own the place, an extraordinary statement for the second-highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate to make. I think the corporate dominance of our political process is one of the two or three greatest threats we face. But I also think that whatever solutions we try and find for that need to be consistent with the clear constitutional prescriptions of the First Amendment, and allowing the government to ban or regulate corporations from speaking out on elections, to me, seems very problematic.

So I think there are ways around it. I think public financing of campaigns can equalize the playing field. I think some constitutional amendment might be viable, but I do think it’s a very difficult question constitutionally to allow the government to start saying who can speak about our elections and who can’t. So, I think the First Amendment needs to be just as honored as the Fifth Amendment when we talk about these issues."

http://www.alternet.org/story/145610/dennis_kucinich_vs._glenn_greenwald%3A_is_citizens_united_a_deathblow_for_democracy_or_a_1st_amendment_victory

I'm not willing to condemn him across the board for his opinion about Citizens United,
and then use this as some weapon to taint everything else he has contributed to the national dialog.
However, I have no problem disagreeing with him on this issue.

Do YOU disagree with Greenwald's contention that President Obama's Secret Drone Assassination Program is a Constitutional Excess?

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)

18. No,I do not

Reply to bvar22 (Reply #17)

Sun May 12, 2013, 10:57 PM

May 2013

However, when I deal with Libertarians, I realize one thing, the far right will back them, use them, and, unlike many, the GGs and Naders and Jane Hamshers will gladly TAKE THEIR MONEY and PLAY THEIR ROLE. It would be one thing if they did not, but they do, which means that when the rubber hits the road, they will gladly support the mowing Down of liberals, even if they are too arrogant to realize they are next on the Menu.

Yes, i know you might get tired of hearing me talk about how Florida Talk radio was full of GOP bragging about how they used Nader to win, where you had so many pretending to be "Third Party" to their friends, then brag that they would get their friends arrested now the Bush was in. I have no problem saying 2 and 2 is 4, but I will not ignore that certain people will then turn around and say "and 4= we would be better off letting the GOP guys win."

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)

13. +100000 First sign of propaganda:

Reply to bvar22 (Reply #10)

Sat May 11, 2013, 09:46 PM

May 2013

Demanding loyalties based on people and associations, rather than policies.

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)

14. what is so propaganda

Reply to woo me with science (Reply #13)

Sat May 11, 2013, 10:26 PM

May 2013

about not trusting someone who has attacked leftist policies? As I said in the beginning, the scandal about benghazi was that we were even there, that is to the left of Hillary and Obama, but i do not want GG to take shelter in the left, than attack us, because that strategy has worked wonderfully for the right wing before (like 2010)

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)

11. Ron Paul, always claimed we need to cut spending but would tack his earmarks to bills he

Reply to DonCoquixote (Original post)

Sat May 11, 2013, 07:30 PM

May 2013

Knew was going to pass and vote against the bill but was more than glad to run home with his earmark project and claim "Oh, what a good boy am I". Don't do what Ron Paul wants, he lives his life differently. He traveled on tax payers money but did not seek the cheapest flights. He has horrible excuses for his actions, I am glad he is gone.

Reply to this discussion