patrick.net

Simple, it's the "rifle over the fireplace in Act I" principle.

If you see a rifle over the fireplace commented on in a play in Act I, you can be pretty certain it will be used later in the play.

Similarly, we've built a large standing army post WWII, and it WILL get used.

America LIKES having the Big Stick.

There is no public support for reducing military to 5% for purely coastal defense to disable this capability. Sure Ron Paul may TALK about bringing them home and even making some cuts. However he's not going to have support for turning the swords into plowshare from Congress or the populace even if he were really serious about it. Even when we talk about shrinking it the first thing that is trotted out as needing to be independent of cuts is Rapid Deployment Forces, so we can most effectively interfere when we want to. You're really going to tell a generation of ROTC students and current military, hey we're closing all your bases and turning you boys out go find jobs. Support for that will last about 3 seconds when the THEORY meets reality of not having a guaranteed paycheck any more.

its funny cause the top 3 contributors to Ron Paul's campaign:

US Army
US Navy
US Air Force

weird huh?

Not weird at all...... The people who actually fight the oil wars for the U.S., the ones who are in Iran, Iraq. Afghanistan, etc. know how immoral and bogus it is, and want it stopped.

The children of the Senate members, House members, Wall Street creeps and Banksters don't fight our wars. They stay safe at home and make profitable trades on the whole sickening set-up. Sweet.

i know, i was being sarcastic, in reply to Vicente, who is not far off from the truth im sure, but, seems to have given up already on the only peace candidate there is for 2012.

bgamall4 says

Phil has always been anti war. But Ron Paul stands for a lot more than just anti war, and it isn't pretty.

Gary Anderson strategicdefaultbooks.com

This next election is going to be Fabian socialist vs. Libertarian, essentially. Anti-Constitution vs. pro-Constitution.

Why do you like Fabian socialism so much, despite its long history of human suffering and that it will put unelected, corrupt central bankers in an even greater position of power?

Incorrect analysis on the failure of liberalism. Liberalism will let banking systems fail, as has happened throughout history, however, it was the goverment intervention that didn't allow for the collapse of banks and the prosecution of perpetrators of fraud. Banks should have failed, the banksters should have gone to jail, all of which would be replaced by new banks with good balance sheets and new, conservative and trustworthy leadership. I agree with Glass-Steagall, but I think your analysis on Liberalism is incorrect. It was cronyism and regulatory capture that repealed Glass-Steagall and contrinbuted to the crisis.

I agree that Glass-Steagal should be reintroduced without modification immediately.

But I notice that large money center commercial banks are skating. There is enough evidence out in the public domain already to easily get some convictions and win some civil trials. IE Linda Green.

The Admin seems more concerned with ramming a 50-state settlement through that gives a wrist-slap for widespread fraud and doesn't compensate the states for massive losses in court filing fees, much less administer punishment for all the widespread, endemic, not just a few rotten apples but the whole barrel, predatory lending.

Compare this to the much smaller S&L crisis where hundreds of individuals went to the slammer and several substantial operations were wound down forcibly by the state and federal government - in a much shorter segment of time, too.

They aren't even trying. The DOJ lawyer appointed to oversee Wall Street cases is a premier White Collar Criminal defense attorney from a notorious law firm. His claim to fame is defending Enron executives. He was interviewed on 60 Minutes and made it clear that the public could not expect prosecutions of the big boys. He'll probably go after financial advisors with 100 clients over some $25 grey-area annual fee and put him out of business, while BoA (Countrywide) and GS walk.

If the democrats aren't giving me results on some issues, I'll vote for a guy who seems to have a chance of getting me results on other issues I care about.

The only way the Democrats will become a left-wing party again is to receive discipline from voters. When moderate, business friendly democrats routinely lose but left-wing democrats win, the party will shift leftwards. If moderates (who are now well right of center) keep winning, the Third Way "neofeudalism but with gay marriage and legal abortion" buffoons will continue to dominate.

The public is becoming more left-wing, not less. Have some faith: The era of culture war infighting is ending. A poorer yet educated population swings to the left, count on it.

i guess this post was just asking for these arguments.

in my opinion:

I don't beleive in in this "true free markets" crap will solve all our problems. BUT Ron Paul is thee only Peaceful Candidate. and for that he gets my vote.

Noam Chomsky on Adam Smith Wealth of Nations and Markets. Check it out:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/YIpJQEcXP7A

Thanks Vnny for that video.

bgamall4 says

Phil has always been anti war. But Ron Paul stands for a lot more than just anti war, and it isn't pretty.

Gary Anderson strategicdefaultbooks.com

Of course, US military is the world top stimulus package. R.P. definitely wants to cut ALL stimulus packages.

But do not worry, its quite clear by now, Americans want stimuli packages. We'll have an election between Obama and Romney.

Either before the elections or just after we'll have a huge war in Middle East. Soon after American Empire will crash and China will sweep the floor.

Vnny says

Noam Chomsky on Adam Smith Wealth of Nations and Markets.

All this is fine, but we have a simple choice today: Ron Paul or a huge war and simultaneous occupation of Iran, Iraq, about half of Syria and Lebanon with genocide of Shiites there. (The rest of Syria will be handled by Turkey).

The whole thing will be financed with inflating the $US Ponzi scheme to its natural collapse. After its collapse we'll have the single World superpower (Not USA).

Yes, R.P. means a recession. There is no known way to convert a centrally managed economy to a kind of free market without a recession.

"This next election is going to be Fabian socialist vs. Libertarian, essentially. Anti-Constitution vs. pro-Constitution"

No, the next election will be one wing of the Business party versus the other. Industry will be safe and secure.

marco says

The people who actually fight the oil wars for the U.S., the ones who are in Iran, Iraq. Afghanistan, etc. know how immoral and bogus it is, and want it stopped.

We have a all volunteer armed forces, who are very motivated and eager to enlist. Your not going to see many coming home stating it was an immoral or bogus war. Only the idiot Pacifists think that way.

thomas.wong1986 says

marco says

The people who actually fight the oil wars for the U.S., the ones who are in Iran, Iraq. Afghanistan, etc. know how immoral and bogus it is, and want it stopped.

We have a all volunteer armed forces, who are very motivated and eager to enlist. Your not going to see many coming home stating it was an immoral or bogus war. Only the idiot Pacifists think that way.

http://ivaw.org/
yep idiot pacifists all the way

Just as it isn't a democracy if the people are deluded or ignorant, it isn't a "volunteer" military if the members of the military don't have a viable alternative. No money for college, no jobs that pay a living wage, no community organizations to turn to that can help: you don't "volunteer", you "settle".
It is NOT the same thing.

bgamall4 says

casino, but they will strap derivatives to their bodies and implode the entire financial system in order to survive.

So your solution is to put the individuals who very intentionally corrupted capitalism into positions of greater power by creating a 100% Fabian socialist government and letting these same central bankers run the show behind the scenes?

Doesn't sound like you thought this plan out too well... you do realize that for the last 300 years, the central bankers have been funding both sides (and profiting off the interest) of every war, thus causing endless human suffering and misery? This is just the first item on the list...

Why does it make sense to you to put the most profoundly corrupt people on the planet in charge of a worldwide/regional socialist system that greatly reduces the citizens' power to keep the central bankers in check?

You do realize that Saul Alinsky, in his "Rules for Radicals," explains that one of the key Fabian socialist strategies is to corrupt capitalism from within, and use capitalism's own rule book to denounce capitalism and state that it fell by its own hand? This strategy is specific to destroying capitalism to pave the way for Fabian socialism.

monkframe says

"This next election is going to be Fabian socialist vs. Libertarian, essentially. Anti-Constitution vs. pro-Constitution"

No, the next election will be one wing of the Business party versus the other. Industry will be safe and secure.

The 'next?' one? I'm pretty sure that covers the last 5 or 6 at least.