Home of The Chrisif you lived here, you'd be home now
About this Entry
Posted by: thechris38

Visit thechris38's Xanga Site

Original: 11/25/2008 8:12 PM
Views: 67
Comments: 5
eProps: 8

Read Comments
Post a Comment
Back to Your Xanga Site


Tuesday, November 25, 2008

 

I found this article from Reason to be rather interesting.  I just copied and pasted a portion, but follow the link to read it in its entirety. 

Obama's Clinton Problem

Deregulation made the prosperity of the 1990s possible. Just ask Bill Clinton.

...

In the presidential debates, Obama charged that McCain "believes in deregulation in every circumstance" and claimed, "That's what we've been going through for the last eight years."

And as a contrast to the last eight years, Obama said in a speech that his administration would go back to the "shared prosperity...when Bill Clinton was president." When campaigning for the first time with Bill Clinton at a Florida rally in late October, Obama gushed that, "in case all of you forgot, this is what it's like to have a great president."

But now that he has won the presidency and must, as the cliché goes, shift from campaigning to governing, Obama and his economic team will have to face up to a paradox that most of the media overlooked during the campaign. Namely, the Obama campaign's twin messages of bashing deregulation and embracing the Clinton years were inherently contradictory. Bill Clinton signed nearly every deregulatory measure that John McCain backed—the same measures that are now being blamed (wrongly) for helping cause the current crisis. What's more, Clinton administration officials have credited these policies for contributing to the ‘90s economic boom—the very "shared prosperity" that Obama says he wants to go back to....

 Posted 11/25/2008 8:12 PM - 67 Views - 8 eProps - 5 comments

Give eProps or Post a Comment

5 Comments

Visit junshien's Xanga Site!
Hey Chris. Just wanted to say that I enjoyed reading your comments in the revelife post about the fable of Jesus. It seems like far too few are actually well-read and can think rationally.

And you read Reason Online too? Extra props to you. :)

Junshien
Posted 11/26/2008 3:35 AM by junshien Xanga True Member Xanga Lifetime Member - reply

Visit thechris38's Xanga Site!

@junshien - 



I just wish people were more careful about checking their sources. While there's nothing wrong with watching a video on youtube, it shouldn't be used as stand-alone proof for anything.

Granted, I don't think the existence or non-existence of such parallels between Jesus and other gods would do anything to prove or disprove Jesus as an historical figure (I could have discussed this for a while, but for now I'm more interested in seeing if there's actually a primary source where any of this can be found-- if that's not the case, then everything seems to be a rather moot point). This is because evidence doesn't interpret itself; evidence is only interpreted in light of one's underlying premises. With a Christian and non-Christian having different underlying premises on this topic, it shouldn't be too surprising that they could in theory reach different conclusions even if they're give the same evidence.

For example, most non-Christians would look at that evidence (in the case that it did actually exist) and say that the story was merely stolen from other religions. For the Christian, they would probably recognize that their story was never meant to be "original" (i.e. most of them would claim many parts of the story were already prophesied in Hebrew texts that were much, much older). It the story was already revealed to some people, perhaps it shouldn't be too surprising that others had received a similar revelation.

So in the end, those that didn't believe in Jesus to begin with still won't, and those that did still will, no matter what the evidence actually says. And both would be producing valid arguments (however, at least one of them would be unsound).

...

There are several websites that I go to for news/commentary. Granted, I don't have time to read everything on them everyday, but I do tend to skim the headlines and read a couple of articles on each that strike my interest. As far as news I typically look through the websites for CNN, The New York Times, Reuters, BBC News, The Lexington Herald-Leader (our local newspaper), our campus paper, and Fox news. Then I've tried to make it a point to look through the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal (since you have to pay to look at most of that paper), Reason, The Economist, Scientific American, LewRockwell.com, DemocraticUnderground.com, and Townhall.com. Like I said, I certainly don't have time to read everything they all say (and some things probably aren't worth reading anyway), but I like to think they keep me informed and that I hear a lot of different viewpoints that way.
Posted 11/26/2008 1:55 PM by thechris38 - reply

Visit one_eared_batman's Xanga Site!
What an idiot Obama is.
Posted 11/26/2008 4:15 PM by one_eared_batman - reply

Visit Shopgirl0393's Xanga Site!
Ahh, politics. What a many splendored, multifaceted (if you catch my drift) thing it is...!!
Posted 12/2/2008 12:40 AM by Shopgirl0393 - reply

Visit queencleopatra702's Xanga Site!
i tried to read your stuff but we dont have the same interests, im sure u would hate my stuff. u r cute tho lol
Posted 1/4/2009 4:00 AM by queencleopatra702 - reply


Choose Identity
(?)
 
Give eProps (?)
Post a Comment
Add Link | Preview HTML comment help 
Profile Pic:
Default  |  Choose »  (?)



Back to thechris38's Xanga Site!
Note: your comment will appear in thechris38's local time zone:
GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)