You mean the Department of Defense should be defensive? But offense is the best defense!Camaro wrote:QUOTE (Camaro @ Oct 7 2011, 08:37 PM) No way, an actual Libertarian wants nothing more than a defensive force... they are non-interventionists... basically they are the remnants of the Old Republican party pre-1970s.
That calls for a massive reduction in the size of the armed forces. Really it calls for a Swiss style military, but that will never happen.
WTF WTF WTF
*#$@faced $#@!tard Troll
-
germloucks
- Posts: 756
- Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:00 am
- Location: Seattle
Thats a great philosophy for a Corporation.
As far as Ron Paul, despite his conservative-ness, i really hope he gets the nomination. I think right now his campaign is giving it one hell of a fight. As you can see from Poll numbers, the "top tier" is anything but decided. Santorum blew his load early, Rick Perry's bubble seems to have burst, Herman Cain is black, Bachmann is too much like Palin.
Campaign fundraising is a different story though, and almost always the guy who raises the most money gets the win. I think Ron raised 5 million in the 3rd quarter, while Perry raised 15-17 million.
As far as Ron Paul, despite his conservative-ness, i really hope he gets the nomination. I think right now his campaign is giving it one hell of a fight. As you can see from Poll numbers, the "top tier" is anything but decided. Santorum blew his load early, Rick Perry's bubble seems to have burst, Herman Cain is black, Bachmann is too much like Palin.
Campaign fundraising is a different story though, and almost always the guy who raises the most money gets the win. I think Ron raised 5 million in the 3rd quarter, while Perry raised 15-17 million.
Last edited by germloucks on Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Cain being black will not have much an impact on whether or not he gets the nod.germloucks wrote:QUOTE (germloucks @ Oct 8 2011, 04:17 PM) As far as Ron Paul, despite his conservative-ness, i really hope he gets the nomination. I think right now his campaign is giving it one hell of a fight. As you can see from Poll numbers, the "top tier" is anything but decided. Santorum blew his load early, Rick Perry's bubble seems to have burst, Herman Cain is black, Bachmann is too much like Palin.
... however... Cain is the former Chairman of the Kansas Federal Reserve. I would vote for Obama before voting for Cain.
Perry is a hypocrite, what the man says is pretty much the opposite of what he will do. In other words you are probably OK.Heyoka wrote:QUOTE (Heyoka @ Oct 8 2011, 06:18 PM) If Rick Perry becomes our next president I will truly be more scared about my well being than ever.
The man is a bigot. He is $#@!ing evil.
Rick Perry becomes president, I will begin preparation to leave the country, revoke my citizenship and start the process somewhere else.
He is more of a Teddy Roosevelt type than an Andrew Jackson, so your probably OK.
Lol.Camaro wrote:QUOTE (Camaro @ Oct 7 2011, 05:37 PM) No way, an actual Libertarian wants nothing more than a defensive force... they are non-interventionists... basically they are the remnants of the Old Republican party pre-1970s.
That calls for a massive reduction in the size of the armed forces. Really it calls for a Swiss style military, but that will never happen.
Look, a "libertarian" considers that the only valid function of the state is "security", yes? So everything else will be ditched, and the only function of the state remaining will be to tax all you peasants for the protection of the rich. That's the Libertarian ideal, to make you all pay for your own enslavement.
And of course, the state itself can't even be trusted with producing that force. No indeed, all that production will be farmed out to private companies. So not only will you pay for your own enslavement, you will pay for it to be profitable to the very people who have their guns against your head.
That jackboot grinding your face? You'll see the bill for it on your tax returns. Because god knows that's the only "service" your taxes will ever buy you in Libertarian land.
Oh sharp, sharp. You mistake me for a full on Libertarian.SharpFish wrote:QUOTE (SharpFish @ Oct 9 2011, 12:16 PM) Lol.
Look, a "libertarian" considers that the only valid function of the state is "security", yes? So everything else will be ditched, and the only function of the state remaining will be to tax all you peasants for the protection of the rich. That's the Libertarian ideal, to make you all pay for your own enslavement.
And of course, the state itself can't even be trusted with producing that force. No indeed, all that production will be farmed out to private companies. So not only will you pay for your own enslavement, you will pay for it to be profitable to the very people who have their guns against your head.
That jackboot grinding your face? You'll see the bill for it on your tax returns. Because god knows that's the only "service" your taxes will ever buy you in Libertarian land.
On the Federal level I am basically a Libertarian. On the state level I am more of a moderate, my policies as governor of a State would be radically different than my policies as President of the United States.
The Federal government needs to step out and tax less so that the State governments can tax more and provide services that THEIR RESPECTIVE POPULATIONS want.
Well, not really. I didn't say you would do these things I merely pointed to what a Libertarian do. Fact is that Libertarianism is the dumbest political "philosophy", if it can even be granted that distinction, that ever existed.Camaro wrote:QUOTE (Camaro @ Oct 9 2011, 03:23 PM) Oh sharp, sharp. You mistake me for a full on Libertarian.
QUOTE The Federal government needs to step out and tax less so that the State governments can tax more and provide services that THEIR RESPECTIVE POPULATIONS want.[/quote]
The distinction makes no sense to me,probably because I'm not american - and I don't mean that in a flattering way. somehow you lot have allowed yourself to be conned in to the idea that there some sort of qualitative difference between the "federal" government and the "state" government. That and your obsession with the $#@!ing stupid "constitution".
Why would a state government be less oppressive than a federal government - because it serves/controls a smaller population? Well by that measure, in the UK here we have about one sixth of the population of the US as a whole, does that mean I'm six times as free as you are? No, that would be ridiculous.
But while you're all bleating about "states rights" and similar worthless garbage the corps and their lobbyists are turning you into mandatory, contractually guaranteed, "consumers". Not voters, not citizens, just a belly with wallet. I couldn't have invented a better con if I'd set my mind to it.