Alexander Ryking

laliberty:

highsee:

It’s really quite simple: if you, like me, resent the politicization of what is being taught in schools, then you must advocate an end to the government’s involvement in education. Otherwise, you can expect those who pay into and use the system to want to have a say in how it is run.

See here and here for more.

Science is no more partisan than math; its tenets are not up for a vote. Facts are facts, regardless of whether deluded right-wingers accept them or not. Of course this shouldn’t bother you as I’m sure that — given your hatred of the state in all its forms — you’ll be sending your daughter only to private, corporate-run schools that have built all the roads leading to them and all the stop lights for those roads. Private, corporate-run schools that have their own energy grids and private water/sewage treatment plants, schools completely independent of any local state grids, schools that don’t take a dime of taxpayer money and which charge exorbitant tuition to maintain that practice. Even though corporate education reform has failed miserably. Or maybe you’ll just homeschool her in order to ensure she’s as deluded and ignorant as you, LA Liberty. — Ryking

Seriously?

laliberty:

ryking:

Excuse me? Ron Paul is “the only one in the Democratic Party that understands true racism in this country?” Did Republican Ron Paul forget which party he actually belongs to, or is this just another of his many lies designed to fool the low information, single-issue voters to whom he most appeals? Both “Fuck Yeah Drug Policy” and the libertarian editor (LA Liberty) who promoted this garbage should have known better than to push Paul’s lie about being a Democrat. …

Not among Ron Paul’s qualities is being a slick public speaker. This was the verbal equivalent of a typo. In my reblog, I clarified his [seemingly clear] meaning (as well as corrected an error in the transcription): “I’m the only one up here and [among those] in the Democratic Party [who] understands true racism in this country is in the judicial system, and it has to do with enforcing the drug laws.”

In no way whatsoever was Ron Paul attempting to claim to be a Democrat. I think this is painfully obvious to, well, pretty much everyone.

I mean, a lie? To what end?

Come on.

It’s all well and good for you to imagine what you think Ron Paul meant, but that doesn’t hold any water. Ron Paul said that he’s “the only one in the Democratic Party that understands true racism in this country.” Not only is his claim to be a Democrat an absurdly dishonest ploy to hoodwink low-information single-issue voters who might be unaware of his true partisan affiliation at best (or at worst indicative of a mind too addled by age to assume the Presidency) but his claim that he — who has never experienced racism — understands racism better than those who have is ludicrous. As I’ve stated repeatedly: Libertarians like you underscore my point that devotion to Paul is utterly irrational and a sign of a lack of integrity in his devotees. — Ryking

(Source: fuckyeahdrugpolicy)

laliberty:

ryking:

“If Housepets Were Libertarians.”

If your worldview requires you to see the relationship between the citizen and the state as that of a small domesticated animal and its master, then I can get why you would find it funny to mock the seeming ungratefulness and smug selfishness of us wards of our governmental superiors. Truly, I can almost understand why you would consider acquiescence to, reverence of, and thankfulness for the state and all it does to be virtues.

Actually, it’s neither the cartoonist nor myself that views “the relationship between the citizen and the state as that of a small domesticated animal and its master,” it’s right-wing children like you — hypocrites who enjoy all the benefits of the state but who don’t want to pay for it or abide by its rules — who view it as such. You’re like selfish, spoiled, know-it-all teenagers (who are constantly showing how poorly developed you are intellectually and emotionally). — Ryking

On Fractional Reserve Banking

laliberty:

ryking:

… The Fed is the foundation of our economic system. It keeps inflation down, interest rates moderate, prices stable, regulates and provides financial services to our entire banking system, and thereby ensures the system doesn’t collapse. It needs more regulating, not abolishing.

The Fed is vital to setting Monetary Policy; otherwise, we’d have to return to Fiscal Policy, which requires Congress and the White House to make taxation and budgetary changes through the legislative process — a process that can’t keep up with our rapidly-moving economy. Further, Monetary Policy — unlike Fiscal Policy — is not subject to the whims of a political party.

Your demand that banks no longer engage in fractional reserve banking means that you oppose banks lending money. No more business loans, home loans, student loans, car loans, credit cards. Your ignorance — and your willingness to parrot discredited right-wing talking points that you clearly don’t understand in an attempt to co-opt progressives — is astounding. — Ryking

First, the Fed has accomplished essentially none of what you claim it has….

The Fed does exactly what I explained it does and this is not a matter of opinion, this is a matter of easily verifiable fact. I even provided links to those facts. Further, there are several links to confirm my reality-based description that can be found by others. Once again you show yourself to be a sociopath who will tell easily debunked lies to advance your corporatist agenda, even knowing that others can easily prove that you’re lying. — Ryking

(Source: riverofliberty)

The Quality of the #Politics Tag

laliberty:

I’ve brought up my disappointment with the persistent unseriousness of some of the posts promoted to the politics tag (see here, here, and here). (I also implored the other editors to “like” or “reblog” a post before or after promoting it in order to maintain transparency in the process - and maybe keep editors accountable for what they promote.)

Well, fellow editor Ryking, in addition to reigniting his obsession with slinging puerile insults in my direction, has lately been expressing disappointment as well, going so far as to petition his followers to demand Tumblr management remove whom he inaccurately calls “right-wing editors” from their posts…

I’ve snipped your latest performance of Argumentum Verbosium theater; if others wish to sped eons reading your ponderous TL;DR drek, they’re free to go to the source. I’ll just jump right into rebutting your nonsense.

1) I’m not the one with the obsession here, as evidenced by the many hours you spend writing War and Peace-length posts like the one above to attack me.

2) I agree some (but only three or four at most) of the examples you cited didn’t merit inclusion in the tag as they mocked a candidate’s appearance (McConnell and turtles, Bachmann’s crazy eyes, et. al), but otherwise the posts you complain about offer excellent critiques of right-wing ideology, underscore examples of right-wing hypocrisy, debunk right-wing lies, or otherwise offer some topical middlebrow humor. I make no apologies for occasionally promoting something whimsical.

3) The right-wing posts I — and others — have shredded — have been filled with blatant falsehoods. If you right-wing editors are going to promote your ideology with lies, expect to be called out when doing so.

4) When I say there is a lack of diversity, I mean in two ways (and I also speak for Republican bloggers who don’t wish to named).

First, every right-wing editor is a libertarian save Holzbach, who is a pro-Paul Republican. This concerns other Republican Tumblr users who feel mainstream, pro-GOP conservatism isn’t being represented. They also complain that you right-wing editors aren’t promoting many right-wing posts to the Politics section and believe that they could do the job better.

Second, the majority of right-wing posts that do get promoted by you right-wing editors tend to come from the same small clique: Evil Teabagger, Liberty Idaho, Conservative Brew, and Communism Kills. While I find these low-quality posts laughably bad and easily debunked, others on your side of the aisle are resentful that “bottom of the barrel” conservatives are regularly featured. They feel that right-wing ideology is being given a bad rap on Tumblr because better posts from better writers aren’t being selected.

5) If you don’t like being insulted, then stop hurling insults at others. Or stop hypocritically complaining about it. But I guess asking you to stop being a hypocrite is like asking you to stop breathing.

laliberty:

ryking:

laliberty:

“Given the poor quality of the post, I imagine that the only reason it was promoted to #Politics is that LA Liberty was happy that a right-wing African-American was trashing OWS, as if liberals would be unwilling to rebut or incapable of rebutting your nonsense because of your skin color. Rather hypocritical of him, though, to promote the piece on #Politics when he’s unwilling to like or reblog it.”

— ryking

Seeing as how jeffmiller liked it before it was promoted, it’s pretty clear that Jeff was the promoting editor (it’s not hard to find since it is literally the very first note, though maybe since you block anyone who doesn’t fall in line with your statism, his name doesn’t show up for you?). And that is quite presumptuous to assume that the same editor who implored other editors to like or reblog a post before or after promoting it in order to maintain transparency would suddenly not do so to… what?… hide my opinions from others?

But good for you for completely divining racist aspersions on others on top of a false assumption. Your gentlemanly behavior is always a treat. 

(Also, thanks for bringing holeycynicism’s post to my attention. I hadn’t seen it before but I’m glad to have read it now.)

1) Miller’s name doesn’t appear anywhere to me in the notes on the post when it’s viewed on the #Politics page or in my reblog of the post — even when I’m logged out of Tumblr. I thought that this was because I might have blocked Miller, but he doesn’t appear on my “Blocked” list… nor should that matter when I’m logged out.

2) Given that holeycynicism reblogged your drivel several times that day, it was logical to believe that you had taken notice of him and promoted his latest bit of idiocy to the #Politics page, as it was in keeping with other right-wing nonsense you have promoted to the page on previous occasions.

3) So what if you’ve implored other editors to be more transparent when they promote posts to the #Politics section? It’s not as if you’re not well-known for being a hypocrite.

4) “Gentlemanly behavior?” You’re whining about my tone? You’re pathetic, pretentious, and effete. And still overcompensating, I see, by putting on airs to hide the fact that you subscribe to an inferior ideology. As for my “racist aspersions:” It’s funny that when progressives correctly point out examples of right-wingers using non-whites to give cover to the Right’s racist policies, it’s the progressive who is somehow the racist in that equation. — Ryking

First, the fact remains that it was indeed Jeff who promoted that post. (Here’s another screen-cap in case the one I included in my first post wasn’t sufficient.) So no amount of explanations or equivocations can make your original charge less wrong.

You’ve mistaken my explanation for my mistake as some excuse for why it wasn’t a mistake. Hardly surprising, given the poor reading comprehension skills you’ve displayed in the past. — Ryking

Second and more importantly, re: “It’s funny that when progressives correctly point out examples of right-wingers using non-whites to give cover to the Right’s racist policies, it’s the progressive who is somehow the racist in that equation.” Let’s ignore the your regular false barb of “right-winger” and think this through: Jeff (who is probably one of the most fair editors of #politics) has posted and promoted numerous posts on OWS from a myriad of sources. However, because this one post happened to be penned by a black man, Jeff’s motivations are suddenly suspect. Now, a secondary racist motive emerges. And you know this is “correct” how, exactly? You don’t. It’s specious speculation, at best; though most will see your claim for what it is. 

As always, your mature criticisms are appreciated.

You believe the right-wing Jeff Miller is “probably one of the most fair editors of #politics?” Well, we’ve all seen how silly your beliefs are, and how they’re totally unsupported by reality, so this comes as no surprise. As for Miller’s promotion of holeycynicism’s piece: By any objective standard it is an absurdly bad piece, a poorly written, juvenile rant against Occupy Wall Street that reeks of smug ignorance. While I understand how that might appeal to right-wingers like yourself and Miller, its promotion tells me that either Miller promoted the piece because of its author’s skin color — the way right-wingers promote Herman Cain because they think it insulates them and their racist policies from charges of racism — or Miller’s standards for promoting posts are ludicrously low. The fact remains: It had no business being promoted, and it’s just the latest example of why all of Tumblr’s right-wing editors should be replaced by right-wingers of a higher caliber… unless you pathetic lot are the best Tumblr has to offer, in which case I look forward to mocking you all some more. — Ryking

(Source: holeycynicism)