Partisans Make Us Less Safe

[DixieOfDeKalbCounty]

ive heard theres a law prohibiting the United States government from owning private stock, is there any truth to this? and is there anywhere i can find info on it?

[jblive1985]

when are we gonna get a libertarian in office

[voteDRNO]

SA you nailed it. AGAIN!

[jsh78mang]

Great video SA but your not gonna make many friends telling the truth. LOL Either way dead on! You hit it right in the sweet spot.

[uche007us]

0:40 - 0:50 was a very bad shot of Nancy Pelosi

[Ishpeck]

Actually, Bush's insane spending was way bigger in Medicare than in war. Not that warmongery is justified. Just Bush is as socialist as Obama.

[SpideyNinety08]

My biggest pet peeve with Obama fans is that when I say Obama sucks they immediately throw in my face the fuck ups of Bush without realizing that not only are the problems they throw in my face are usually liberal in ideology and they probably belong to the party that is supposed to uphold that ideology, but that their savior is doing the exact same things as their antichrist and worse. Then their head explodes when they try to concieve the possibility of Bush being a liberal republican.

[kmg501]

It should be prominently noted that Liberal Republicans have always been the main factor that severely hurts Republicans because most people aren't savvy enough to see past the initial label. Here is another example besides the contemporary examples.

wikipedia org /wiki /Nelson_Rockefeller

Liberal Republicans should be exposed at every opportunity & avoided. Even though Obama is a disaster, McCain would have just furthered all the bad elements that real conservatives want no part of.

[SpideyNinety08]

I agree...Bush and Obama are again perfect examples of what happens when liberalism triumphs

[Trollmaster21]

I'm mostly liberal but I got lots of respect for the Southern Avenger. Smart guy.

[6stringgunslinger]

Replublicans or Democrates, They all have one agenda. Complete control.

[massltca]

Very true, both parties want control and your money. The only thing they care about is advancing their political power at the expense of the people they are supposed to be representing.

[vampike]

Hey Jack- Do any of the other Takimag writers Vlog their material like you do?

keep up the great work!

[SirArthur007]

Why do white nationalist males keep whining about the low birthrates to non-whites? It is not our fault your males are incapable of making babies.

Instead of being a crybaby, WNs should spend their effort, money and time in trying to find a cure to the genetic problem WN male impotence.

[grovernors]

Solution?

TONA

[Blue21Films]

Good Job SA. Obama has done horrible damage to the American financial landscape.

[Amy31415]

The best thing about not being partisan is that, while I do mostly consider myself conservative, I can read both "liberal" and "conservative" news sources, usually without my head exploding in rage and understand issues more thoroughly and balanced than those who are partisan.

I have found that Dems are generally less obnoxious than Republicans, Rep's are very good at calling me a liberal cunt for having views different than their own. Though I have been called a militant by a lefty.

[Rockholm66]

Absolutely awesome! Thank you for the commentary.

[PEinHK]

Best one yet Jack!

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss"

[GBanville]

Your editorials are almost always awesome, straight down the line.

[CABALmk2]

Excellent points, SA. Ignore the people who say you're wrong, because it's obvious you're right.

1. Abolish the tax code and institute a flat sales tax. The rich consume the most, so they end up paying the most (like they already do)

2. No more wars of aggression.

3. Convet the federation into a CONFEDERATION, divide power to a great extent.

4. leave the economy alone, even go so far as to illegalize government intervention.

5. Prosecute all criminals in government.

[laviciousness]

And how do you expect a confederation to end the illegal immigration problem when you have some states that want to restrict it and others, like California, that want to provide sanctuary? How about pandemic prevention and control? How about a national defense? Confederation may sound great for some old Dixie nostalgists, but the reality is that we need a big strong national government to tackle certain issues. That's just how it is.

[izzyidl1]

hahahaha, illegalize government spending? its one of the last last resorts for a failing economy, we dont have as much people investing their money, and we buy more imports than we sell exports, so how the hell do u expect, havent u taken a basic economics class? illegalize government spending hahahhaa, the consumer expectations and producer expectations are too low which causes less investing and spending to expand our economy, how bout going to college before posting ur extremist views.

[sarjil]

Izzyidl1 is the perfect example of the college system, a bona fide idiot who is proud of his idiocy to tell some1 else what's an extremist view, & tell others where they could go to dumb themselves down to his level. If all we needed was spending then all of africa could build malls & go shopping & grow rich. People saving money leads to capital formation without which you can't have real economic growth, that capital gets invested by entrapaneurs which leads to greater productivity & wealth

[laviciousness]

Radical Islamists like the Taliban hate us primarily because we are free. Anyone who doubts that needs to remember all those times people got death threats for exercising free speech rights to criticize Islam. There's a reason why Islamists considered the Danish cartoons more offensive than the Iraq War, and it has nothing to do with U.S. interventionism.

[matthiasgoodley]

Yeah you're right, the military intervention the U.S. has done in the Middle East is no reason to be angry. By that reasoning, you wouldn't mind if they decided to build a few military posts in your back yard either.

[laviciousness]

And I'm sure that explains why radical Islamists are problems in France, Sweden, Thailand, the Philippines, India, Caucasian Russia, Xinjiang in China....

Please, open your eyes.  Bad things are happening in this world that are completely independent of our Middle East policies.

[sarjil]

thailand, philipines, china are local problems, islamic action in russia is mainly around chechnya and is more anti- imperalistic in nature than some islamic jihad. Sweden and france's problem are of their own making, let's see let's invite millions of different strangers and lets have a stew who will happily live ever after. Who would have thought bad things could happen from silly childish ideas. those islamists in europe are not really europeans & mostly never will be and so they react.

[matthiasgoodley]

"And I'm sure that explains why radical Islamists are problems in France, Sweden, Thailand, the Philippines, India, Caucasian Russia, Xinjiang in China...." Huh? What's that got to do with my post? You said U.S. foreign policy has nothing to do with why they hate us, which is fucking absurd. And I told you how wrong your reasoning is. You say there are some radical problems that are independent of the U.S.? well congratulations!!! your a smart little guy

[sarjil]

u woud think cold war alliance between islamic world and usa would probably mean that ismaic folks might see something good in usa. And sure the last 50 years of american sponsored invasion, coups, embargoes, asssinations wouldn't piss any1 off becuz america is the indespensible nation!. We are not that free and they don't hate us cuz we are free. I hate many things that are around me, yet i don't do anything while islamists live 6k miles away from us & hate us instead of being indifferent

[RevolutionaryJam]

nationalising? yeah right the word doesn't exist in American vernacular

nationalising an industry implies it would be run for the public good

[killergames187]

God Obama will save us!!LOL.Obama is doing the same thing that Bush was doing fucking all of us!!

[trustusyeahright]

like i said people wanted change we go from one type of things that screw up just a different party

[ArcticSlicer]

This is why I will never register with a political party. Independent for life!

[freshasdida]

You're wrong SA, and I'll tell you why. While you're ready to condemn the Obama Bailout, you and the gaggle of Ron Paul supporters offer no real alternative. Beyond repeating the mantra of 'conservative spending' and 'limited government', what REAL steps would Dr. Paul take to save American jobs and stabilise the economy.

[jamminjago]

Get rid of the income tax, get rid of the corporate tax stop prosecuting the drug war, cut the american empire across the seas, bring the troops home, etc.

[eric710221]

I dunno, maybe getting rid of the fed and stopping printing money like it is going out of style? Of course stoping inflation wont fix anything right?

[vivalabag]

The answer is he would stop throwing billions of dollars around bailout out failing corporations. Bad business models must be liquidated, and the good assets remaining can be taken over by competent people. He would also END the Iraq War and War in Afghanistan and save close to a trillion dollars by closing overseas bases. Obama is increasing war spending. Lastly, he would repeal legal tender laws and end the Fed so Americans could choose to use sound currency that holds its value over time.

[Ovalshine]

Excuse me for a moment...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Sorry. Just surprised you were able to say that with a straight face. jamminjago touched up on the answer and would offer more of a response had it not been for YouTube's character limit.

[freshasdida]

Hm. Another ideological Ron paul supporter. Maybe you misunderstood my question. I understand his emphasis on personal responsibility and less spending. But you must understand that this will do nothing to help the millions of americans who WILL lose their jobs and homes as the recession becomes progressively worse(as it will). Magneto's idea seems to boil down to economic darwinism - let all the local companies fail, while foreign conglomerates take over the supply side Us markets.

[Ovalshine]

Loss of jobs and homes are a cascading effect to irresponsibility. The comforting answer is to rebuild irresponsibility's foundation. Whom you rely on demonizes deflation and demands a fix to what actually is a remedy. As bad as letting companies fail sounds, it's more like exhaling bad air. A loss of jobs and homes that weren't supposed to exist in the first place.

Cruel words, I admit. Ignorance is bliss and comforting words will keep that foundation stable.

[laviciousness]

If the Talban take over Pakistan, then radical Islamists will have the nukes. And all it'll take is one suitcase getting into the U.S. I'm no Republican, but I have no problem with doing what needs to be done to keep that from happening. I'd rather that we take a hit to our global reputation than to see one of our cities going up in a mushroom cloud.

And for good measure, we also need to start severely limiting visas for nationals of countries where Islamism is strong.

[ArcticSlicer]

Pakistan is in the bad situation it's now because of USA foreign interventionalism. If we left well enough along and didn't stick our nose where it didn't belong there wouldn't be an issue in Pakistan right now. If we really want to make our country safer we need to close down the 700-1000 military bases in the 135 countries around the world and bring every single one of our troops home. By beefing up our security at home we greatly reduce the likeliness of foreign invaders.

[laviciousness]

Nope. Pakistan is bad because of factors that are completely independent of U.S. policy. For example, the fact that Pakistan has regularly enabled radical Islamists in their Kashmir fight. Pakistan would have a radical Islamist problem even if the U.S. didn't exist, because its whole reason for being was predicated on the perceived need for an Islamist country. Read the history of the Subcontinent.

[sarjil]

no, musharraf had the nation on the right track b4 throwing in his support for usa, which went aganst the very ineterst of pakistan and have acted as a catalyst event for their situation today. remebr also pakistan has a real enemy India, who is our newest buddy. Our new buddy is good enough to buy nuclear technology from us and india also started her nuclear project with contribution. yes exactly what is the difference between india and pakistan save religion. Absolutely nothing.

[Xasew]

Well if the US wants to prevent the Pakistani state from being overthrown by radicals, I suggest they immediately stop propping that government up. It makes them look like puppets and their credibility is gone in the eyes of their own people(and in the end, that's pretty much all that matters in the long run).

[laviciousness]

I think you got this backwards, since our government's support might be the only thing that is helping the regime keep the radical Islamists at bay. If that government falls, what do you think will replace it? A Jeffersonian democracy?

[Xasew]

We've been here before. Iran from 1953 to 1979 ring any bells? In 1979 they got as radical as they did exactly because of US intervention and support for Shah. And the longer it continues, the easier it will be to get the people to accept an anti-US stance.

Besides, the Taleban aren't going to use that nuke(assuming they even get it). Why would they mess up their perfect situation? Basically controlling two countries and having a nuke to keep people from attacking(Taleban=/=Al-Qaeda btw).

[laviciousness]

Yeah, we've been here before. North Africa from the time before 1801-1805 ring any bells? Islamists hated the fact that non-Muslims used the high seas for trade, so they took our men and made them slaves. The longer we let them do it, the easier it was for Islamists to accept an anti-US stance.

If you think that the Taliban, a group of fanatical demgogues wouldn't use nukes if they believed that in doing so they could bring about an Islamic world, then you haven't been paying attention.

[Xasew]

I haven't been paying attention? Most of these guys are Pashtuns who don't give a damn about what happens outside their country(or tribe, rather), and the top leaders have ISI backgrounds. They're predictable precisely because they aren't just loonies.

Everybody turns politician the moment they get a secure seat in power. After that they look after themselves and leave the ideological stuff to a rhetorical level. They wouldn't commit national suicide, not even for Islam.

[laviciousness]

Not true, they do "give a damn". If they didn't then they would never have left their tribal lands to try to expand into Islamabad. And this is despite the government giving them all kinds of concessions.

As far as that "seat of power" argument, that doesn't work for fanatical ideologues who don't always act as rational state actors. Hitler comes to mind, although Hitler didn't have a religious zeal that these people do. Nor did he have nukes.

[Xasew]

So invading Afghanistan had absolutely nothing to do with them expanding to Islamabad?

Hitler was a dictator and completely insane. The Taleban on the other hand have shown no signs of being insane.

[laviciousness]

Hitler was not "completely insane", at least not any more than a Taleban commander. Do not confuse charisma with insanity. And if you recall from pre-9/11 history, the Taleban have been expansionists even before the invasion. Remember when they had a battle with Iran? They were trying to expand their influence there.

Like I said, there's a lot of bad things that happen in this world that have nothing to do with U.S. foreign policy. The sooner you people get that, the better.

[Xasew]

Hitler was delusional, paranoid and mentally unstable. He wasn't just a fanatic, he was actually sick.

Grab any book about WWII that takes an inside look at the Nazi leadership, and it should be clear to anyone that Hitler was mentally not healthy.

[laviciousness]

No one said he was a stable man, but he wasn't "completely insane" either. if he were, then he would not have been able unite Germany behind his agenda. And certainly, he never thought that strapping a bomb to his chest and blowing up as many noncombatant non-Muslims as he could would get him into heaven. The Taliban seek are fanatics who wouldn't think twice about killing millions if they believed that doing so would bring the world to Islam. Don't presume that they are rational actors.

[steve0281]

Of course they are rational actors. There is no such thing as an irrational actor. It comes down to whether one subscribes to their system of rationality.

[Xasew]

Even if we forget about whether Hitler was in mental health or not, he at least had a reason to believe he could succeed with his agenda. On the other hand, the Taleban know perfectly what using nukes would get them.

They'd isolate themselves completely from all current support and make enemies like never before. And suicide bombings aren't irrational. Definitely not from where they stand.

You're overestimating their fanatism and unerestimating their pragmatism IMO.

[arcanekrusader]

Dude, the people who wrote those books won the war. The enemy will always be demonized. A mental person would not be capable of doing what Hitler did, I'm not condoning him, just being realistic.

[sarjil]

people who give a damn are pashtuns not islamists, the reason the islamists and pashtuns are buddies right now, is cause they are both in the crosshair of pakistan and usa. as soon as we treat them distinctly and treat the pashtuns with actual positive repurcussion instead of bombing their village wedding and calling them terrorists, they would ally themselves with the real terrorists. and apshtuns trying to conquer pakistan is their own amtter none of our concern.

[jimmydemoret]

al queda = al CIAda

[laviciousness]

Yeah, and 9/11 was in inside job. Blah blah blah lol.

[sarjil]

a very bad government full of nutjobs kinda like the Saiudies, bad for her neighbors even worse for her own populaton and would have absolutely no impact on us. their staying in power rests on their providing support for the local populations, not nuking people and getting nuked urself. Kinda like hezbullah, their support is based on their charity work and real concerns for their people not israel per se.

[vivalabag]

Right. Just like the Saddam mushroom cloud. Real believable.

[laviciousness]

Right, because Pakistan doesn't have any nukes. In an alternate universe. Where only clueless people live.

[sarjil]

yes kinda like how super religious racialist israel will never use nukes even if they always state their future usage if attacked on all sides. lol. ether is a huge difference betwenn al qaeda, taleba, pshtuns, pakistan. pakistan itself is mainly composed of tribes who have loose connections based on islam. it is not athreat to others esp usa, if it's left alone cuz they like to fight themselves esp pashtuns.

[pishandchibbs]

It's possible as of now. But after Obama's first four years, I think we're all gonna forget about LBJ/Nixon/Bush in terms of spending.

[BrYanwithaY1986]

4:05 "republicans who excuse such spending as absolutely necessary for national security" -- Sometimes it could be....

4:39 You're just a conservative libertarian

[chewbaca1989]

A: How much do we spend on the National Security apparatus?

B: No freaking duh.

[BrYanwithaY1986]

Good arguments chewy. Except the observations I made still stand :P

[chewbaca1989]

Your observations have -8 thumbs.

But don't let that bother you, I think it's commendable you take a stand.

Our country doesn't need to spend more money.

It's like education, the more you spend the crappier it seems to be, that's just my observation.

Good luck to you.

[BrYanwithaY1986]

-8 thumbs, which I strongly suspect of being from you :) I don't let it bother me, that's just how youtube works.

Especially considering that A was only a common sense observation that most people would agree with, and, again, B was only a common sense observation in a video about....ahem.....people taking all the stances of a party :)

[chewbaca1989]

I didn't touch it, I swear.

Fair enough, good luck to you.

[BrYanwithaY1986]

good luck to you :)

[jjaaee]

sup Bryan

[BrYanwithaY1986]

What's up jjaaee.

I guess people didn't like my comment, I didn't really say anything controvercial. (anyone can hit "reply" just to see it).

The first part was just saying....sometimes it is necessary, that depends on the situation, on which there can be some disagreement.

The second part was just worth pointing out because this is a video about being "partisan"

[jedirhythm]

The "new" preemptive war strategy is not so new.

"Preventative war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing." ~ Dwight D. Eisenhower

[kjb86]

And that's the tooth.

[MagnusIan]

5 stars. Let's hope the GOP gets back to what it should be.

[RealArcalian]

Now all that needs to be done is for people like Ron Paul and you, SA, to realize there is no "Saving the Republican party from itself security". And leave it behind for good.

[exanchorite]

We need a strong 3rd party...and 4th and 5th and 6th party. The are pushing propaganda to make us think there are vast differences on wedge issues that will never be easy to solve. Government should be half of what it is today.

[Starguy1128]

First!