Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links

  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...

  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

    • «
    »

    The Great Leader — A Brief Dialogue

    Posted by leifsmith on February 14th, 2009 (All posts by )

    He said, “Yes We Can!” meaning, for each us, “Yes You Will!”

    We answered, “No We Won’t!” saying, to each us, “Yes You Can!”

     

    This entry was posted on Saturday, February 14th, 2009 at 6:25 pm and is filed under Political Philosophy, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

    7 Responses to “The Great Leader — A Brief Dialogue”

    1. Papa Ray Says:
      February 14th, 2009 at 8:15 pm

      Actually he said “Yes you will!”

    2. Andrew Garland Says:
      February 14th, 2009 at 9:29 pm


      Leading the People

      [excerpt] He argued that only a radical change in government would bring about a better society. I disagreed. He said that I should join the demonstrations against the University to end the Vietnam war. I thought a sit-in demonstration against the University was misdirected. I suggested the he should demonstrate against the government; the University was not at war.

      He said that his movement would become stronger, and eventually I would agree with him. I asked, what if I didn’t agree with him, even later? He flashed anger and told me that if I didn’t agree on my own, he would make me agree. I saw that as the end of the discussion.


      A Political Speech: Troubling Times

      [excerpt] It is clear to me, and I hope to you, that the difference between a world of need and a world of plenty, the difference between a world of want and a world of happiness, is the excess profit of that elite. So what if they haven’t stolen their wealth from you; they haven’t shared it with you either. They have paid a small one-third of their income in tax, and it certainly could be a bit more.

    3. derf sedipal aka Fred Lapides Says:
      February 15th, 2009 at 9:47 am

      …and what has the Libertarian or conservative groups offered instead? look at the mess we have after 8 years of bungling.

    4. K.J. Webb Says:
      February 15th, 2009 at 1:31 pm

      This is an argument? It’s what Buckley would call “stealing a base” – offering a sweeping statement we can all more or less accept (we’re in a mess) as proof of an equally sweeping but disputable conclusion (it was the libertarians who got us there). Q.E.D. Wasn’t that simple? We all do this, but liberals are especially prone because everything is self-evident to them. Argument is for sinners, not the righteous.

    5. Andrew Garland Says:
      February 15th, 2009 at 2:06 pm

      To Derf,

      Democrats had a house and senate majority during the last two years of Bush’s presidency. What were the objections to Bush’s economic actions during that time?

      The Dems pushed the policies that created the sub-prime lending bubble and following disaster. I hold Bush partly responsible because he failed to vigorously OPPOSE the Dem policies.

      So, who is more blameable. The Dems who pushed the policies, or Bush who failed to stop them?

    6. hans van der kroef Says:
      February 15th, 2009 at 3:10 pm

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/president-obama-is-litera_b_166152.html

    7. Jonathan Says:
      February 15th, 2009 at 4:06 pm

      To Commenters:

      Please do not respond further to the troll who wants to shift the discussion topic from Obama to Bush. Please also do not respond to this comment. Thanks.

    «
    »