[Peace-discuss] [PBD - Progressive Blog Digest] 5/15/2011 06:52:00 AM

[David Green]

Hi Nick,

I still don't get the relationship between what Paul said and how it was 
characterized. But of course, this isn't at all about parsing the specifics of 
what Paul said or meant. It's about lining up with liberals and conservatives 
who have "sensible" approaches to government, while avoiding the prospects for 
re-alignment in a true anti-war coalition. And it's about keeping the two-party 
corporate system intact. It's pretty clear that you are still down with the 
notion that Obama has good intentions, and honestly, the only reason I look at 
your blog is to marvel at the lack of any breaking point--regardless of Obama's 
consistently despicable behavior--in your ability to excuse Obama and demonize 
his opponents, among which there isn't a "dime's worth of difference." Is it 
gullibility or misplaced idealism? I don't care.

I've recently, even apart from this, been asking myself why the university 
offers so few opportunities for honest and open political debate about these 
fundamental issues. I think I've got my answer. I have to say, honestly, that 
your approach to politics is at bottom extremely childish in your reliance on 
the assumption that your readers share your customary liberal stereotypes of 
those who don't identify themselves that way. You rely, in your own fashion, on 
stereotyping, scapegoats, caricatures, and (when necessary) lesser evilism. And 
yes, you're an elitist of the worst sort. For the record, let me make it clear 
that your approach is every bit as much of the fundamental problem as the Tea 
Party, the Koch brothers, Sarah Palin, and John Boehner. It is, in it's own 
fashion, equally dishonest, and a serious impediment to "progress" if that word 
were to ever be defined in a serious way.

So there's your debate.

Best,

David




________________________________
From: Nick Burbules <burbules at gmail.com>
To: David Green <davegreen84 at yahoo.com>
Cc: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>; Peace Discuss 
<peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Sent: Sun, May 15, 2011 2:08:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [PBD - Progressive Blog Digest] 5/15/2011 06:52:00 
AM

Hi David, 

I am not interested in debating you, but I did read the article and I find 
Paul's position a mixture of things I agree with and things I don't.

I favor some degree of legalization, and I agree that many of our drug laws are 
counterproductive. I also agree that they are disproportionately applied to 
minority segments of society, with disastrous social consequences and an 
unconscionable level of incarceration.

At the same time, I think it is intellectually dishonest for him to say (as he 
does)

You know what? If we legalize heroin tomorrow, everybody`s going to use heroin. 
How many people here would use heroin if it was legal? I bet nobody would put 
their hand up, Oh, yes, I need the government to take care of me. I don`t want 
to use heroin, so I need these laws! . . 

But it`s the concept of legalizing freedom, making choices by individuals and 
assuming responsibility for themselves. And even though that was a special 
statement about how many people would do it if it were legalized, you know, most 
people aren't going to use heroin. More people use heroin because it`s illegal.

I think this is a specious argument. Of course most people aren't going to use 
heroin. That isn't the issue.







On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 1:35 PM, David Green <davegreen84 at yahoo.com> wrote:

Burbules clearly couldn't have read the article, because Paul doesn't say that. 
But Burbules is determined to stick with Obama through thick and thin, which 
includes the destruction of what is left of civil liberties. That includes 
demonizing Paul. But I would be happy to publicly debate Burbules' approach to 
this problem--let's invite him and any other member of the local liberal 
intelligentsia who remain, against all common sense, supporters of Obama.
>
>DG
>
>
>
>
________________________________
From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
>To: todays-news+owners at googlegroups.com
>Cc: Nick Burbules <burbules at gmail.com>; todays-news at googlegroups.com; 
>Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
>Sent: Sun, May 15, 2011 11:03:01 AM
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [PBD - Progressive Blog Digest] 5/15/2011 06:52:00 
>AM
>
>If you read through the establishment-liberal demagoguery here, you'll see that 
>Paul makes a serious point.
>
>He is the only major political figure - certainly the only presidential 
>candidate - who's takes a correct position against the shameful and racist war 
>on drugs. 
>
>
>
>On 5/15/11 7:10 AM, Nick Burbules wrote:
>
>http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/ron-paul-makes-ridiculous-claim-if-hero
>>Ron Paul makes ridiculous claim that if Heroin was legal, nobody would use it
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20110515/553c4ef9/attachment-0001.html>