Wow, I wish I paid more attention to politics like you guys so I can vote but time is scarce anymore and I'm not going to vote unless I start researching. :( Actually Iowa screwed up on the vote count. How does a precinct go missing??? How embarrassing yet hilarious. Defeats the purpose of my title although clearly caused a nice discussion. Rick Santorum got it-kick ass. :)

http://iowacaucus.com/2012/01/19/no-official-iowa-caucus-winner-but-santorum-got-most-votes/

Ok. First off we are getting off on tangents. Valid and interesting tangents we can get back into later, but tangents all the same.

Secondly, the format for a debate is usually one person makes a challange; you challanged my understanding of liberty. Then the response/ defense; I defended my understanding of liberty by relating to you that there are many understood philisophical forms of liberty two of them being either positive or negative and responded by asking you to clarify your challange of my understanding of liberty to any of those fields so we could continue debate.

I got off on my own tangent while trying to counterpoint the Corperatism thread of argument instead of keeping it simple. My appology.

So I am to understand you want to express that Negative liberty is the only kind of liberty and succed knowledge of all other forms of liberty to me and debate liberty on a negative aspect?

if that is correct then we can get back into the tangents and I probably will put off my ributal on how my knowledge of liberty goes much further.

-___- The last part was my favourite too

He underestimates our verboseness

Joe put a limit on characters D:

Okay, that's bullshit. Where did the rest of my comment go??

People are innately free until they have something done to them. So yes, liberty is a negative. They don't require money, a job, a house, children or education to be free, they just are, unless the option of getting one of those out of their own free will has been taken away by force. In that case, all taxes offend liberty.

If there were no taxes, or at the most permanently extremely low and flat taxes, there would be no incentive for corporations to lobby the government to change it, to quash the competition (the current tax-rate for 'higher earners' destroys incentive in the middle-class). The largest of large corporations make too much money, invest too much off-shore and are too adept at finding loopholes to be affected by taxes anyway, but the small to middling businesses are absolutely crippled by them. This is the cause of the horrific inequality of wealth, not because the market is too free. Big corporations LURRRVE big, progressive tax if they can lobby the government enough for it to favour them. The last thing they want is for a hundred Bill Gates to come out of nowhere and offer competition.

Which leads us to -

Lobbying: the richest are going to buy the politicians if they have to do it behind the scenes or out in the open. That is an inevitable fact, and there is not much we are going to do about that. What we can do though, is make that inevitability essentially benign by removing the power that the corporations want to exert. People respond to incentives. The government has the power to take wealth from the populace, which gives rich people incentive to buy out that power for their own ends. Corporations, by themselves, do not have this power. If they did, why lobby the government?

Who made corporations people? The government! Why give anybody that power? Why should we give any credence to an institution that gives abstract groups the same rights as individuals, BY FORCE?

Befor

I tend to favor, though not necessarily vote, democrats. Only because when a democrat is President, I generally find that my own family and people I know of more personally seem to do better economically. I don't pretend to to know if that correlation rests on anything real though....

As for Obama being "My buddy" that isn't true. I didn't vote for him the first time and I am most likely not going to this second time either. The only Democrate I've ever voted for was John Kerry. (I wasn't happy about it either!) If you remember my post on here 4 years ago I asked what people thought America was more Racist or Sexist because I am registered as a democrate and would probably vote for who ever would lose against McCain. Until he picked Palin he had my vote probably 60/40.

Positive Liberty or Negative Liberty? Predestination or Free will? Philisophically or Politically? If you want to challange my understanding on liberty pick your battle ground son!

Also Flat Taxes and Lack of regulations isn't Corporatism...it is the life blood of corporate domanance. (that and the destruction of Labor Unions) Citezens united is the famous Supreme Court Decision that gave corporations (originally only legal for 15 years) Legal Personhood and protections under the bill of rights. (thats right Corporations are persons before a Fetus!)

Flat Taxes, Lack of regulations, and the right to pay money to and for elected officials is protected by the first amendment rights! SOOOOO With all the money the poor will now be paying and the less money the corporations will be paying they can spend all their new savings on our officials realection campaigns while workes (american citizens) have to work longer, harder, and more dangerously to pay for their rights to pick our leaders! YAY.

Also Ron Paul doesn't think the 1st amendment applies to States...that is why he wants states to have power so they can further restrict a persons ability to vote (Remember he wants to repeal the civil rights movement) and continue Corporations "Liberty" to lower your wages and discriminate against you on a state by state basis arbitrarily and not have a strong union that can stop that has the ability to fight this tyranny for the past 200 years since the Union won the right to govern over the confederacy...the same confederacy that failed both times it was tried in the states.

MadMarcus misunderstands liberty. Flat taxes and the lack of regulation is not corporatism. You know what corporatism is? It's bailouts and special favours for big corps, like your buddy Obama likes doing.

Government does not progress humanity, people do, and the purpose of government is to get out of the way and let people do it.

jeezum. Politicans much. Jk haha i want to be a senator or a chef. :)

lol, okay I'll read more about Ron Paul.

I hate Ron Paul for the same reasons I hate Muslims. Regressions. I am a humanist. People like me put man on the moon and T.V.s in your living room. People Like Ron Paul would like to take a muligan on the past 200 years of human history. Progression. Just like the muslims I thing all the good is wrong and I will temper it with lies and murder. Blacks shouldn't vote. Gays should submit to the states run by their catholic bushop and get coolaid from the black negro slaves...

The reason I dislike Ron Paul...besides all the usual things that piss me off about the universe. (racism, sexism, isms in genersl) Is his poliscies and history of regressive corporatilism...he is only popular because of the words that come out of his mouth...

I like how Ron Pauls opinions parallel David Duke's.

Ron Paul

About New Hampshire, ah, what was the name of than man that said, "Ron Paul is second, but really, Huntsman is truly second if you remove Ron Paul." Rofl XD