Slashdot Mirror
Poll Finds 23 Percent of Texans Think Obama is Muslim
A University of Texas poll has found that 23 percent of Texans are convinced that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is a Muslim. Only 45 percent of the people polled correctly identified Obama as a Protestant Christian. Nationwide, the number of people who believe in the "Secret Muslim Conspiracy" is about the same as those who believe that the moon landing was faked (5-10 percent), which makes the high numbers in Texas unusual.
A sample size of 550 gives an error rate of less than 5%, assuming they have randomized it.
See this page for more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_size
Quoting the austrian school in serious economic discussions is like quoting creationists or flat-earthers. It's pseudo-science to a degree that real economists are embarrassed by them.
Liar. Hayek is one of the best known economists in world history, who won the Nobel Prize for showing how government intervention is responsible for the business cycle. He was a member of the austrian school, and his advisor was Ludwig von Mises, a highly influential austrian school economist. A quick Wikipedia search will reveal many other noteworthy economists aligned with the austrian school.
You're probably just another dumbass who thinks the free market got us into this mess, when in fact all we've seen in the last 100 years is an interventionist economic policy based on central banking.
Australia had an openly atheist Prime Minister in the 80's. (Bob Hawke)
Since Hayek died in 1992, he could not possibly have made any statement whatsoever about this particular crisis.
I never said he did.
Hayek showed how the business cycle (i.e., the alternation of expansions and recessions) is intimately related to the government manipulation of interest rates, savings rates, and inflation through the central banks' manipulation of the money supply. This crisis is no exception -- the presence of financial instruments such as credit default swaps makes this scenario more serious, but does not change its fundamental nature.
In a free market model, money should work like any other commodity and derive its value from the market itself. Currencies should be present in many competing forms, and its issuance should not a privilege of the state. In contrast, Chicago school economists (like Milton Friedman, who most people think of when they hear of a free market) advocate government planning and intervention in the form of a central bank, which implies an obstructed economy and not a free market.
The Austrain school of thought which Ron Paul subscribes to studies mathmatical curves of supply and demand and how they should mathmatically balance (when the market is perfect). The problem is market perfection is like a limit in Calculus. You aim for it but its never there. You only get closer and closer to it (for those who do not know what limits are).
For a perfect market you need to have perfectly rational human beings who are well informed %100 of the time. Also in a perfect market there are no monopolies, no barriers of entry, no perfect substitutes, and eveything is always balanced out where if one person ruins the market another balances to offset any correction so everyone is happy in this perfect capitalist utopia.
Here is reality: .. etc. ... and look what they have done? ... uh no. Monopolies are market failures and are not caused by the government. Barriers of entry are the problem by proprietary software or those who have insane power on suppliers
- Economists do not take human/consumer behavior courses. Humans like to shop at the same place which is why chains are so popular and they may not always be the most informed or care if one place has what they need for cheaper. I go to Walmart and thats it
- Investors are not rational. That says it all
- No laws against bad loans and no laws about disclosure of ARMS. Most of the time they are in page 21 of the contract in lawyer speak in very small print and the bank does not mention its an arm. Only WOW 500k for only $1600 a month!!
- Yes its true taxes due change consumer behavior but what are you going to do? Have a volunteer pay system for the military, damns, bridges, hospitals, etc on all public goods?
- People try to get ahead sometimes does not balance but rather tilts the economy so either ther corporations, home owners, or banks try to rig the system for maximum profits which destabilized the market rather than balanced it.
- I do not like what Microsoft and Walmart are doing. I am sure we can just compete agaisnt them and take them down tomorrow right?
So sorry but regulation can be good ... GRASP! . Ronald Reagan may have made it unpopular in the west but the only people who support this system are corporations and investors looking to make a quick buck. Its not socialism or communism to have regulations. People are not rational and do things that harm others and themselves. Normally I like to think if someone is dumb enough to shoot themselves in the foot that is their problem. However, we are all suffering indirectly from what a few irrational people did and that is not fair.
http://saveie6.com/
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=74635 It was a televised interview on ABC.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
Because he is born of a Muslim father, the Islamic world community will claim him as a Muslim. If he denies his Islam roots, they will denounce him as a traitor of the worst kind - a deserter of Islam - an apostate; Sharia Law proscribes severe penalties for this. http://www.peacefaq.com/apostacy.html#hatist Find out more about his Muslim roots http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5544
All this should not make a difference as to whether or not he is qualified to be the President of the US, but it does feed the phobia Americans have toward a different culture and religion, especially in the light of those who abuse and twist it to their own ends. Would it make a difference if he were Hindi or Buddist or Catholic or Jewish?
Vote your conscience and make an informed decision based on your candidates voting history. What kind of decisions does he make? Can he make a decision? Can you live with this? Would you trust the 'football' with him.
Personally, I think this code is ridiculous, but if you're going to cite patriotism and fly straight in the face of supposedly patriotic legislation in doing so, you're doing something wrong. I'm glad to see that not everyone is feverish about putting flags everywhere and on everything, as it cheapens the symbol. How that is unpatriotic, I don't know.
It wasn't the pledge anyway, it was the Star Spangled Banner, and Obama said "My grandfather taught me that you put your hand over your heart during the pledge, and during the national anthem, you sing."