Jesse Ventura Speaks of Torture

[Detroitej72]

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/...ter-board-dick


He definitely speaks his mind. His points about water boarding, Cheney, and Rush are spot on. Unlike the chicken hawk neo-cons, he actually experienced water boarding first hand, and served bravely in the military.

I'm sure Rush and his kind will defend their cowardices and call him all sorts of names, but that is par for the coarse with these people who were too terrified to serve in the armed forces themselves. Cheney himself got 5 deferments because he said he was too busy with other things.

Just remember what they did to war hero John Kerry.

[ccbatson]

He is a left leaning libertarian who has taken too many falls from the top tunrbuckle.

[jams]

He is a left leaning libertarian who has taken too many falls from the top tunrbuckle.

Thank you for proving Detroit72's point.

[Lorax]

He is a left leaning libertarian who has taken too many falls from the top tunrbuckle.

Batts is far-right reactionary who was dropped on his head at birth.

[Pam]

Have you guys heard about the new "ignore" feature? It's quick and easy. Give it a try.

I never paid much attention to Jesse in the past, but I've been enjoying the clips of his talk show visits the past view days.

[ejames01]

There is nothing that he said in that interview that was not true.

He is a left leaning libertarian who has taken too many falls from the top tunrbuckle.

[Islandman]

A Navy SEAL that served during Vietnam telling it like it is. Kudos to him.

[oladub]

Jesse Ventura and FOX's Brian Kilmeade almost come to blows-

http://www.pyrabang.com/view.php?ref...2&visitor=true

[grumpyoldlady]

I voted for Jesse and helped elect him Governor of Minnesota. He tells it like it is. He is a no-nonsense type guy and I wish he'd run and win a higher office. As for the comment about him taking too many falls on his head...we should all have our heads screwed on as straight as he does. He can be off the wall in appearance, but I'd vote for him for president in a heartbeat.

[Islandman]

I second this.

I voted for Jesse and helped elect him Governor of Minnesota. He tells it like it is. He is a no-nonsense type guy and I wish he'd run and win a higher office. As for the comment about him taking too many falls on his head...we should all have our heads screwed on as straight as he does. He can be off the wall in appearance, but I'd vote for him for president in a heartbeat.

[Jimaz]

Oladub's link didn't work for me so here's another:
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/...ools-kilmeade/

[mjs]

He is a left leaning libertarian who has taken too many falls from the top tunrbuckle.

I had to go to Wikipedia to look up libertarianism, right-libertarianism, left-libertarianism, and re-examine objectivism and comparisons of them to understand what it all means. You believe that you're an objectivist, but you seem more of a right-libertarian who mindlessly repeats ultra-conservative sound bites. I finally found why so many Dems and Repubs sound to me like they're at least partially full of it; I'm as left-libertarian as Jesse. I need to read that book.

[rb336]

what book?

[oladub]

Oladub's link didn't work for me so here's another:
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/...ools-kilmeade/

Thanks Jimaz, That is the same video. Jesse started rocking in his chair. I think this interview took place shortly after Hannity kicked Jesse off of his program. The Kilmeade twerp decided maybe that it was a good time to leave an empty chair on stage. I hope that Jesse emerges from his 'looking for the perfect wave' phase and runs for something. He did say he would run for president last summer but only if he had a lot of support and was guaranteed a place in the presidential debates as an independent. It looks like he will settle for the Cuban ambassadorship now. If he doesn't choose to expose corruption in Washington, at least he can popularize surfing in Cuba.

[East Detroit]

what book?

http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Start-Rev...dp/1602397163/

[rb336]

thanks. i'll have to take a look

[ccbatson]

Objectivism does share somethings with libertarianism with the following important differences:

1. Limited government to insure just trade practices protecting individual property rights under objectivism compared to something closer to anarchy under libertarianism.

2. Defense of our interests abroad via military means, if necessary, is congruent with objectivism, not libertarianism.

The second item is where Jess and left leaning libertarians go wrong [[that, and too many piledrivers in the sqaured circle for Jesse).

[otter]

Clearly, everyone who disagrees with you is "go[[ing) wrong" and mentally defective to boot

O.

[otter]

Slimshady,

"left libertarian" is an old descriptor, not something that Bats made up off the top of his head. perhaps you can do some research to learn what it means, eh?

O.

[Detroitej72]

Jesse's to turn the other cheek for me.

Then you would feel very comfortable among the jihadists radical Muslims.

[mjs]

Objectivism does share somethings with libertarianism with the following important differences:

1. Limited government to insure just trade practices protecting individual property rights under objectivism compared to something closer to anarchy under libertarianism.

2. Defense of our interests abroad via military means, if necessary, is congruent with objectivism, not libertarianism.

The second item is where Jess and left leaning libertarians go wrong [[that, and too many piledrivers in the sqaured circle for Jesse).

I can more or less agree, but I'd term it as libertairians believe strong individual rights have to be balanced against community rights. Objectivists believe greed is good; left libertarianists believe competition is good.

I support very few wars abroad with the exception that the US should support UN peace keeping missions provided we aren't expected to carry all the heavy weight. Especially when our interests is code for our Corporate profits.

As to the pile drivers, as I've said to others, personal attacks and name calling weakens your ability to change opinions because it moves the focus from your argument to the messenger.

[Bobl]

Mr. Ventura, as an ex Navy Seal, carries more weight in my opinion.
Mr. Cheney, a five time draft dodger who, when asked about this, replied "I had other priorities.", then became a war profiteer with Haliburton, then shot his friend in the face while "hunting" for tame birds in a fenced in farm lot shows lack of judgement.
They both have enormous egos, but the facts favor Ventura on this issue.

[oladub]

Bats, I read 'Atlas Shrugged' many years ago but I don't remember that it contained the concept of collectively defending 'our interests abroad via military means'. The objectivists instead retreated to their own community thus denying corporate socialists of the ability to harnass their abilities. The problem with your definition is that "our interests" can be whatever those in power want them top be. It might be a better definition of the neocon foreign agenda. Here is a definition of objectivism. I don't think it matches you definition. http://www.answers.com/topic/objectivism

Libertarian is the opposite of authoritarian. Politically, left is the opposite of right. The authoritarian/libertarian spectrum is on one axis while left/right is on the other axis. Leftists tend to be socially libertarian and economically authoritarian. Rightists tend to be more socially authoritarian and economically libertarian.

One problem with your point #2 is that those in power fight too many wars to fulfill their wish list of whatever they consider to be in their interests. They run into someone else who is also willing to wage wars for things that they consider to be in their interest. Libertarians, and I would think objectivists, would instead negotiate mutually agreeable settlements and then start working on their own better solution. For instance, when oil was about $40/barrel Bin Laden said the west should be paying about $117/barrel. The price of oil eventually went over $117 even though we fought wars for our interests. Had we paid more for oil to start with, we could have since gone a long way toward developing energy efficient vehicles and other energy sources with the money we instead spent on those wars.

Jesse is probably more of a social libertarian than an economic libertarian but is more of an economic libertarian than most Democrats. When Jesse was governor of Minnesota, social services and education were not damaged. He approved spending money on light rail. The big change he brought to government was that he questioned a lot of spending that was in the interests of special friends of Democrats and Repoublicans. He broke up the clubbiness and sweeheart insider deals. He and his family were harassed and threatened. The Democrats and Republican establishments mutually hated him. Their attack dogs were the press. I expect a Ventura presidency would follow similar lines. Special interests would run into some libertarian financial sreens delivered to them by a Teddy Roosevelt presona. I doubt that the bankers would like Jesse asking them questions.

[rb336]

If people who call themselves "objectivists" followed that definition, I would have no problem with them. the vast majority of them that I have met [[as well as Ayn Rand) tend to throw out objective data that contradict their core dogmas and think that any thinking that doesn't conform to their dogma is "irrational" or "illogical" or "faulty"

In otherwords, Objectivist "logic" is the most purely subjective system I have yet to come across

[otter]

Oladub,

Good post - but it may have had more complexity in it than bats can handle in one post

O.