David Azevedo This Weekly Standard article is a long and comprehensive look at D'Souza's book (the origin of this movie) and, from a conservative's viewpoint, thrashes his "leaps in logic" and that form the foundation of his argument. Mainly, D'Souza argues that "(1) if Barack Obama really admired his father, Barack Obama Sr., and wanted to be like him; (2) and if Obama Sr. grew up in Kenya and became an anticolonial agitator; therefore (3) Obama Jr. wants to be an anticolonial agitator, too, and since he’s simultaneously president of the United States, he gets to be anticolonial in a very big way and drag us along with him" Clearly, D'Souza would fail a syllogism class.
David Azevedo Even if you were to believe here the absurd implications from the least credible academic of our time (D'Souza), you're implying here that we should go back to the neoconservative policy of Bush II, since the alternative to Obama is Romney, and Romney has already made it clear he's hiring ex-Bush II foreign advisers. I'll take D'Souza's so-called charges of "Obama anti-colonialism" any day over another "regime change" in Iran.
David Azevedo This is great! Just the kind of politician Stockton needs. I lived and went to high school in the area. I hope he wins--we need someone with an inspiring narrative and commitment to their hometown community.
David Azevedo Such a good article on so many levels--mainly that you're presenting solid, researched ideas and solutions (something we're so sorely lacking these days!). Did I miss it, or did you mention whether or not your plan needs everyone to buy insurance via the now-constitutional mandate?
David Azevedo Perhaps...but for a candidate like Romney, who hasn't exactly stayed true to a leadership vision this campaign, picking Ryan doesn't help (ex: when he says he has a "different budget plan" than Ryan's, but never releases it).
David Azevedo Stockman doesn't really give too much detail in his article, but he's got two lines I really appreciate: "A true agenda to reform the welfare state would require a sweeping, income-based eligibility test, which would reduce or eliminate social insurance benefits for millions of affluent retiree" and "The greatest regulatory problem — far more urgent that the environmental marginalia Mitt Romney has fumed about — is that the giant Wall Street banks remain dangerous quasi-wards of the state and are inexorably prone to speculative abuse of taxpayer-insured deposits and the Fed’s cheap money. "
David Azevedo I see your conservative op-ed and raise you a...conservative op-ed! http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/opinion/paul-ryans-fairy-tale-budget-plan.html?_r=2&hp That's right...Reagan's OMB chief, ripping apart Ryan's budget. Joking aside, this is a GOP I would vote for. With lines like: "Thirty years of Republican apostasy — a once grand party’s embrace of the welfare state, the warfare state and the Wall Street-coddling bailout state — have crippled the engines of capitalism and buried us in debt." Wouldn't you agree?
David Azevedo I want to like the Tea Party--I really do. This country needs a fiscal wake-up call. But the hate and the bigotry turns people like me off to the Tea Party, and undermines their economic argument. Would've really liked your opinion of this in your article. I think a lot of Americans are sold on the economic merits of the Tea Party arguments--but we just can't swallow their social rhetoric (the TP wanting "small gov't at tax time, big gov't in the bedroom").
David Azevedo This is an awful article on so many levels. Your take makes it sound like the water dept. took him from his property and "threw him in a cage" with his permits in hand, "communist"-style, with no due process. Yet your article clearly says Harrington admitted guilt in 2007 and opened his floodgates--then closed them again for the past five years. Makes Harrington sound pretty sketchy to me! Going back on a guilt admittance? Since you then use this overblown assumption to make your broader case that water in general is "private property", I ask: since when does liberty allow one person, unaccountable to anyone, control a resource that everyone agrees is a public good? That sounds like Hobbesian anarchy to me. Is that what you believe in?
David Azevedo Dude. We Millennials gotta keep each other in line. :) We got a lot in common. I want more fiscal responsibility and oversight of government--something many of my Dem. colleagues in CA haven't exactly been good at. But the more that the GOP is mired in their modern prejudice, the less they are competitive, because a growing plurality of Americans (especially we Millennials) are so tired of that bullshit.
David Azevedo As someone aligned with the GOP, if you really believe your party shouldn't "once again be the true champions of liberty" regardless of race, you wouldn't be calling voter ID laws an "afterthought", because it's modern injustices like that that are keeping the GOP branded as the party of prejudice. How will the GOP go back to its roots? How can they go full circle back to the days of Lincoln? Your article doesn't say. Bottom line is: Americans who are the target of prejudice don't give a shit about a GOP who once stood up for them. They need someone to stand up for them NOW.
David Azevedo Whoops! Got too excited, sorry man. That said...Jesse, where did you learn to do research?? There are a billion other variables that make Mexico and other countries have higher turnouts, like: a) Compulsory voting (which, uh, kinda skews turnout rates) b) Free IDs / compulsory IDs (the US doesn't have that) c) Alternative voting methods that make elections more competitive (unlike our First-past-the-post system, which encourages incumbency and, therefore, voter apathy) Come on man. Too easy. I disagree with you a lot but you're better than that.
David Azevedo The GOP deserves its reputation as a racist, bigoted party until it stops speaking like a racist bigot. And I find it interesting that there's no mention of the voter ID civil liberties crisis in this article, even though you say "actions speak louder than words".
David Azevedo Um...either you're agreeing with me (Mitt was a rich kid, so therefore he can't understand poverty) or you're implying I'm a rich kid, and therefore, can't opine about poverty. Can you clarify please?
David Azevedo And to add some historical spice here, when you say "opportunities our parents had", think of the socialist policies like high taxes, free college education (financed by taxpayers) and federally-funded highways--and how our parents benefited from them.
David Azevedo Totally agree with your first point here. But the argument that Romney can understand the plight of persecuted minorities--and deliver them jobs--because he's "been there" just isn't as good as the 99% of your other well-thought-out arguments in your article. As I reference above, he's not been there. To add, his job creation experience has been beneficial for a very small, not-exactly-persecuted minority (can you say that middle- or lower-class Americans got better and more stable jobs through his work at Bain?) which further distances him from "understanding".
David Azevedo If he has a great sensibility, then why is his campaign rhetoric against so many minorities? Why would LGBT, Hispanic, black, and other minority communities vote for a candidate whose rhetoric doesn't sound at all empathetic to their condition? And you can't use the line that "rhetoric is different than action" in defense here, because Mitt is using this rhetoric to, as you say, win the GOP calculus. It won't matter if Mitt really is emphatic. He will be accountable to that calculus if he's elected. It'll own his soul. And to stir up the pot some more, let's think of low-income Americans as a persecuted minority here (victims of 2008). Mitt's not exactly one of them, is he?
David Azevedo Romney upbringing gave him "insight into what it's like to be an under-represented and persecuted minority"?? Name one part of Romney's biography that compellingly supports this claim and I'll agree with you. For me, I define minority persecution as any societal obstacle that prevents you from the same access to life, liberty, and happiness as everyone else. Has Romney ever experienced this because of his religion? To the same level as other minorities in this country? Sorry if I sound incensed, but man, you have such a great article here otherwise, and this phrase really grates on me.
David Azevedo Additionally, it seems to me that it's Obama's personal preference that he's not been having enough dialogue with Congress. Think of FDR, LBJ, Reagan, and Clinton, and how their constant presence on the Hill showed that the Presidency can have a constructive relationship.
David Azevedo I like the theory--I really do. I would love to watch the President get grilled by Congress (it would not only make for great dialog, but entertainment, if we pick up any of the fun of Britain's PMQs). It's important to note though that PMQs in Britain are not dialog, in the constructive sense of the word, because the Prime Minister's power is precisely because he has majority control over Parliament and doesn't need anything from the minority. To build on what I said initially, I fear that the more public the competition between branches gets, the more partisan things will be. You'll have a lot of Congressmembers use the spotlight to take cheap political potshots. Worst case scenario is having "You lie" shouted out 3x times a meeting.