Great Clinton quote. Which presidential hopeful can get us out of an economic depression?

The fact that libertarians of the 1940’s were opposed to the “Social Darwinism” of the turn of the century is absurd. In fact the term Social Darwinism didn’t exist until the 1940’s when economists used it to cast aspersions onto the practice that justified imperialism and corporations strong-arming governments to further their aims (hence the von Mises reference).

Duh!

“Economic Darwinism” doesn’t exist. It’s a term I made up to describe what is basically modern day libertarianism because I believe 40 years ex-post-facto, people will use this term to describe libertarians just as libertarians used “social darwinism” to describe unfettered capitalism.

For example, your link for Economic Darwinism points out that Libertarians are opposed to it. It quotes one of the grandfathers of classical liberalism, Ludwig von Mises, saying that social Darwinism contradicts the principles of liberalism, a.k.a. modern Libertarianism.

Such is the legacy of Reaganomics II, a.k.a. Bushonomics

http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/114/bush-legacy-set

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/valley-geeks-party-its-1999/story.aspx?guid=%7BABFFEFA1%2D09C9%2D4976%2DBC7C%2D5CAFA8401E60%7D

It’s a weird feeling reading this article since, had I not been tired and getting sick, I would have crashed “the Crashies” if only to say hi to some friends. My commentary is that the last crash was led by the popping of the internet bubble, my guess is that this one will follow, not lead.

Huckabee is trading at 5% so is effectively out. McCain is beginning to pull away from Romney and Giuliani in such a manner that the organized conservatives have already started to pave track for his presidental run in the press. He’s trading only at 50% though.

In the Democratic party, IEM says it is a two horse race with Clinton at 63%. The general interpret is that the Clinton campaign (and damn near everyone) miscalculated on the impact of the younger voting population in Iowa and have since adjusted their strategy—in the Democrats case a GOTV on seniors and throw some voter suppression/doubt on the young (a tad ironic).

It’s sad, because I think triangulation is a stupid strategy and feel the “Clinton mythology” has been just as bad for the Democratic Party as Neoconservatism has been for the Republican Party. I don’t see people thinking Bill Clinton’s attacks can be good for their party, unless they rationalize that Barack Obama is unelectable. Well, whatever allows him to sleep at night—nobody ever accused Bill Clinton of having an overabundance of political courage.

In the Presidential Winner Take All, Democrats have 60%, which is pretty good for it being so early.

I should note that there is probably some political venom in this analysis so take that with a grain of salt.