General Discussion

TheKentuckian

(26,314 posts)

79. No, that would be supporting his positions in these areas which is not at all the same thing.

Sat Dec 31, 2011, 09:55 PM

Dec 2011

You are literally saying that if you agree with a politician, ever or at least on a few points that you ENDORSE them.

I bet folks won't be declaring Greenwalds love of Obama if he highlights positions where he is superior to Paul and they shouldn't because it is stupid either way. Obama has some crappy positions and a handful where he let's a Lassiz Fare idiot run circles around him, instead of doing the right things for the right reasons he gives aid and comfort to someone arguably in the right places for all the wrong reasons by creating space for them to operate that you refuse to compete with.

Instead of worrying about this writer you should be moving Obama away from his stupid and anti-freedom positions which would kill the libertarian attraction in the crib.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

155 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Greenwald: Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies [View all] Karmadillo Dec 2011 OP

There's no "context" that makes it okay to praise Ron Paul. TheWraith Dec 2011 #1

Because they're central to Greenwald's case, what complaints about Obama "are either Karmadillo Dec 2011 #3

Gosh, where to begin? TheWraith Dec 2011 #52

Proven because you say so? Maedhros Jul 2013 #155

Yes, all that you said. jaxx Dec 2011 #4

If you get a chance, then, could you respond to post #3? Thanks. Karmadillo Dec 2011 #6

The first 2 paragraphs cited in the OP say it all. jaxx Dec 2011 #38

The factual support makes the paragraphs very convincing. Are there, however, Karmadillo Dec 2011 #42

It's all contrived innuendo. jaxx Dec 2011 #54

It would help if you could point out one specific example that illustrates your point. He's Karmadillo Dec 2011 #65

give it up, they will never give you real 'facts' or even a well-reasoned logical argument stockholmer Jan 2012 #123

Make it real easy for people to understand. Rex Jan 2012 #141

It's nice to hear progressives support Obama. Robb Dec 2011 #2

What world is this guy living in, Obama has a 84% approval rating among Libs/Progressives FarLeftFist Dec 2011 #5

The point is valid but insufficient cthulu2016 Dec 2011 #7

Here's ProSense Dec 2011 #8

If the Publisher of the Nation has also praised Paul for favoring ending preemptive wars & AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2011 #9

Do ProSense Dec 2011 #11

Is Obama horrible based on the actions cited by Greenwald? Karmadillo Dec 2011 #12

Are ProSense Dec 2011 #13

Are Karmadillo Dec 2011 #15

Why are we giving Greenwald a higher authority on these matters than the President? FarLeftFist Dec 2011 #20

I'm not giving him higher authority. He cited a number of heinous actions taken by Obama. Is Karmadillo Dec 2011 #23

But "bad" is in the eye of the beholder, he must be doing something right being he has an 84% approv FarLeftFist Dec 2011 #29

Why does that number never change? sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #63

Where did this "84% approval rating among Libs/Progressives" come from? If true, why AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2011 #28

From a December 2011 Gallup poll. FarLeftFist Dec 2011 #30

Are such polls accurate? Remember the poll in which "Dewey Beats Truman"? AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2011 #57

I see. It's all about personalities and polls. eridani Dec 2011 #92

Can You Show Support Of Those Claims? ProfessorGAC Jan 2012 #119

If you read the article, you'll see Karmadillo Jan 2012 #121

You Didn't Answer The Question ProfessorGAC Jan 2012 #136

Yes, I did. Let me help you. Karmadillo Jan 2012 #137

Paul is a Republican candidate for president. Greenwald is a political sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #22

He's ProSense Dec 2011 #31

You didn't answer my question. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #33

Hmmm? ProSense Dec 2011 #35

Good I would hate to think that such rules would even be contemplated. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #40

Wow ProSense Dec 2011 #45

I don't know what you are talking about. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #51

Well said. nt woo me with science Jan 2012 #116

+1 MichaelMcGuire Jan 2012 #153

Do you agree with Greenwald that progressives find some of Ron Paul views "compelling and crucial"? joshcryer Dec 2011 #70

Yes. Some of his views are compelling and crucial. eridani Dec 2011 #94

Not if you dissect what his views really are, they aren't. joshcryer Dec 2011 #96

I don't care whether his opposition to the War on Some Drugs is sincere eridani Dec 2011 #99

No, I think he is completely sincere. I think he is using Libertarian double speak. joshcryer Dec 2011 #103

Paleocons usually object to the expense of war eridani Jan 2012 #107

That's why banana republic's and colonies usually employ local mercenaries. joshcryer Jan 2012 #108

In Iraq, mercenares get paid 30 times what soldiers do eridani Jan 2012 #111

This about Ron Paul's view on "war." joshcryer Jan 2012 #112

He is against an expensive imperial state eridani Jan 2012 #113

He's against tax paid imperialism, he's not anti-imperialist. joshcryer Jan 2012 #114

Name an empire that has ever survived without taxes n/t eridani Jan 2012 #115

The current empire exists without the paying of taxes. Offshore corporations... joshcryer Jan 2012 #142

So you are asserting that our military industrial complex is not paid for-- eridani Jan 2012 #144

The MIC is hardly responsible for empire. joshcryer Jan 2012 #145

Nonsense eridani Jan 2012 #146

Doesn't explain banana republics, juntas, and dictatorships we've supported over the decades. joshcryer Jan 2012 #147

Sure it does. Ever heard of the School of the Americas? n/t eridani Jan 2012 #149

Sure, connected to the Friendly Dictators. What makes you think mercenaries couldn't... joshcryer Jan 2012 #150

We have an empire, period. What else do you call 800+ military bases? eridani Jan 2012 #151

I'm not saying that, I'm saying that corpratism is tied to it irrevocibly. joshcryer Jan 2012 #152

Yes, he is correct that many progressives, cast aside by their own party, find some of his sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #105

Progressives that "agree" with Ron Paul's views don't know Ron Paul's views. joshcryer Jan 2012 #148

"Is he prone to rigid thinking and spin" suffragette Dec 2011 #43

Me neither, suffragette. This is what makes all these anti-Greenwald posts sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #64

I've noticed not much has been said about the Jeff Connaughton article Greenwald cited suffragette Jan 2012 #125

Well that tells you that his points cannot be refuted. sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #135

Flawed logic should not be used by anyone except when it is used in an ironic way. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2011 #25

Hmmm? ProSense Dec 2011 #32

Like opposing individual mandates and taxing benefits? Those sort of false positions meant TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #101

Buying local is a great idea, and if the KKK endorses it-- eridani Dec 2011 #90

He is simply deluded Ohio Joe Dec 2011 #10

Poor Glenn. Still likes RP even tho he's a huge homophobe. DevonRex Dec 2011 #14

Actually, the "simple-minded" stranger called him an "asshat" and misrepresented his position. Karmadillo Dec 2011 #16

Poor Glenn! He got called an asshat by a stranger on the net! DevonRex Dec 2011 #18

You should be happy he responded. The stranger got DU significant publicity. Karmadillo Dec 2011 #19

So you think Glenn is pretty significant then? BootinUp Dec 2011 #21

I think his reply regarding the "simple-minded" poster at DU will get us far more Karmadillo Dec 2011 #26

Come on dude--- trumad Dec 2011 #36

Just answering a question, dude. Karmadillo Dec 2011 #67

That's why other blogs have made a rule that members not use epithets in their sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #126

Glenn should be writing about Paul's vile homophobia. DevonRex Dec 2011 #24

Gay progressives can only write about the vile homophobia of conservatives? Maybe Karmadillo Dec 2011 #37

You'd think the "death for gays" thing just might have struck a chord. DevonRex Dec 2011 #53

He is one of those rare writers who does not allow his personal opinions to sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #127

He was accused of supporting Paul, that is misinformation and willfully so. TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #59

LOL. DevonRex Dec 2011 #61

He likes some of Ron Paul's issue positions eridani Dec 2011 #91

Is Glenn still trying to perfect Shark Jumping? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz BootinUp Dec 2011 #17

In what way is Greenwald jumping the shark? Karmadillo Dec 2011 #27

glen's trying out his ski new ramp and jetpack this time. dionysus Dec 2011 #41

If I am ever down in the dumps BootinUp Dec 2011 #48

He found a perfect example on DU of what he was saying about the sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #128

!!!!! This. Is. Awesome. Prism Dec 2011 #34

wow! Spazito Dec 2011 #39

You have a way with words BootinUp Dec 2011 #46

Thank you for your nice post! Spazito Dec 2011 #50

Well, to be fair, I did call him an asshat. MineralMan Dec 2011 #55

LOL! I was honestly gobsmacked when I saw the link to your thread... Spazito Dec 2011 #56

Obviously! Wow. You would think that someone that comports himself as such a wordly, Number23 Dec 2011 #71

It's unfortunate that you gave him that kind of fodder to use sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #129

While I appreciate your concern for me, MineralMan Jan 2012 #131

Well, I don't want to be rude, but my comment was not made out of concern for you. sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #133

DU is not a blog. It is a discussion forum. MineralMan Jan 2012 #138

Definition of a Blog sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #140

How so? In what way is he endorsing Paul? I think we disagree on the definition of the word. TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #60

If you do not see the evidence of endorsement of Ron Paul in this opinion piece... Spazito Dec 2011 #62

No, that would be supporting his positions in these areas which is not at all the same thing. TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #79

If you would prefer to use the word "supporting" Ron Paul instead of... Spazito Dec 2011 #85

No, that is another distortion. I was clear that it is the positions being supported TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #109

Not a distortion at all... Spazito Jan 2012 #110

Recommended me b zola Dec 2011 #44

While I see what Greenwald is saying, Paul should be harshly rejected by all progressives Bjorn Against Dec 2011 #47

He must be pretending to be crazy. gulliver Dec 2011 #49

What about workers? TomClash Dec 2011 #58

Those issues are obvious, they do not disappear the points where the broken clock is correct TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #66

"Democrats are foolish to allow civil liberties to be owned by a bunch of anti-government zealots" Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #78

Most people don't post hundreds of forum posts and dozens of blog posts defending broken clocks. joshcryer Dec 2011 #84

Dear Glenngreenwald, aka, idiot. joshcryer Dec 2011 #68

Ah. But is a fact that he advocates those views. He may be insincere. It may be hollow Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #69

At least you concede that the views aren't the same and that Greenwald... joshcryer Dec 2011 #72

He's not defending anyone's campaign rhetoric... (Rolling on the ground laughing!) Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #75

He says that Ron Paul has views that are "compelling and crucial." joshcryer Dec 2011 #77

Yes. Candidate Paul does not flesh out the means but only the ends.(Rolling on the floor laughing.) Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #80

Ron Paul is not going to create "national dialog" on these issues. joshcryer Dec 2011 #81

GG defends that these issues are being brought up AT ALL. Rolling on the floor laughing. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #93

But they're not the same issues. joshcryer Dec 2011 #95

These things are all normal now: Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #98

But progressives are against those things. Meanwhile Paul would just expand them. joshcryer Dec 2011 #100

OK, I'm done kicking this thread. Done with Paul. He's done. joshcryer Dec 2011 #102

Proressives are. But only a few Democrats in government are. Rolling on the floor laughing! Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #104

+1 MichaelMcGuire Jan 2012 #154

Ad hominem attack on Greenwald aside TomClash Dec 2011 #73

I spent 30+ minutes dissecting Greewalds' views on Paul. joshcryer Dec 2011 #74

FYI: bvar22 Jan 2012 #120

What I wrote is what critics of Libertarianism have been writing for decades. joshcryer Jan 2012 #124

Naaa- Unhhhh! bvar22 Jan 2012 #139

So, you don't actually have a substantitive response? joshcryer Jan 2012 #143

Greenwald is not a libertarian. He does not support Paul. And he agrees with some of the issues Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #76

I don't find Paul's views compelling or crucial. joshcryer Dec 2011 #82

I do see the drug war as crucial. More racist than any ignorant Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #86

So you would agree with Ron Paul that no federal regulations should be made over drugs... joshcryer Dec 2011 #88

Nope. But candidate Paul conveniently leaves out the means and champions the ends. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #97

"But candidate Paul conveniently leaves out the means and champions the ends." cpwm17 Jan 2012 #118

Nothing is more racist than the Drug War. Thank you Luminous Animal. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #106

Except bombing brown people on the other side of the world cpwm17 Jan 2012 #117

Yes, absolutely. All our wars are racist a fact that little attention. sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #130

He's got a point, muddied a bit by Paul's underlying craziness. On paper, Obama's taken positions DirkGently Dec 2011 #83

Captain, we've got an Irony Distortion Field dead ahead. nashville_brook Dec 2011 #87

Silence, traitor! Your pedestrian "warnings" destroy morale & insure our defeat! DirkGently Dec 2011 #89

powerful truth-speaking to power,regardless of the usual collaborators wailing & gnashing of teeth stockholmer Jan 2012 #122

For all the wailing and smearing, none of the collaborators even attempted to question the accuracy Karmadillo Jan 2012 #132

All on the front page of GD right now. Do you see the futility? DeathToTheOil Jan 2012 #134