quote:

ORIGINAL: Jack45

Secession movement seems to be growing:
http://secession.net/

Tribalism will be the future of what was America.
It may be possible to keep the framework going for a while but the future is going to be either like Brazil, only with nukes, or outright Communist or Nazi.

In any event this dear nation is going down, of that I am convinced.

It was a great place, once upon a time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jack45

Secession movement seems to be growing:
http://secession.net/

Tribalism will be the future of what was America.
It may be possible to keep the framework going for a while but the future is going to be either like Brazil, only with nukes, or outright Communist or Nazi.

In any event this dear nation is going down, of that I am convinced.

It was a great place, once upon a time.

Please tell me this post is a joke.......please!

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarsBonfire

Hummm... If Jeb did run, I wonder what his campagin slogan would be?

"Jeb Bush: The Third Time's the Charm!"

"Bush: Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"

"Jeb: Here to Finish off America!"

"Jeb Bush: Real American Political Experience!" (R.A.P.E.) Then all of America could cry, "A Bush again? RAPE!"

"Jeb Bush: A Politician of Biblical Proportions!" (After all, the anti-christ IS in the Bible...)

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

Firm

"I'm a firm believer in a good strong defense, but wouldn't have a problem with a lot of downsizing, if all the money didn't end up in wasteful social programs."

As something of a student of WWII history, I certainly concur with the need for a strong defense as perhaps the best way to keep out of wars, although that does assume a modicum of intelligence in the chief executive.

However, I urge you to reconsider what I think is an implicit assumption in your comment- i.e. that we actually have a strong defense.  Because we don't.  Oh, we've certainly spent more than enough money- but it's been a boondoggle and we're continuing to spend money on useless weapons systems ranging from the Poseidon to the F-35 (which Ken and I debated somewhat vociferously a few months back) to ballistic missile "defenses".  Since many of your comments imply a distrust of government- and I always get aggravated at gov't intrusion into our privacy-I suggest that if you think the gov't is incompetent in many things, do not assume that they have been competent in either weapons development or procurement.

The track record of spending on "wasteful" social programs is probably a heck of a lot better in terms of bang/buck than defense.  Of course, I still hearken back to the Rev. Jesse Jackson pointing out the choice between welfare or jail care.  Welfare is cheaper by far- we've got too many people in prison.  And there's a link between crime and economic growth- in a growing economy, crime rates diminish.  In short, spending some money to stimulate an economy, and provide good jobs and an education has been a winning formula for this country for a number of years- till Ronald Reagan threw it in the dustbin of history.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

If you have 100 social programs that fail, you can always close them down, evaluate the errors and try again.

If you have a military that fails, you likely won't get another chance.to try any of those social programs.

If I have to put up with some wastage, I'd prefer to do it in the military than in social programs.  We can't afford to screw that poach even once.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

If you have 100 social programs that fail, you can always close them down, evaluate the errors and try again.

If you have a military that fails, you likely won't get another chance.to try any of those social programs.

If I have to put up with some wastage, I'd prefer to do it in the military than in social programs.  We can't afford to screw that poach even once.

And how much "wastage" is too much?

I mentioned this in another thread recently.

We spent over 9x what China spent in 2008.  China being second to the U.S. in military spending.

Nine times the amount?

I'm all for a strong defense, but when does enough become too much?

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

The percentage of US GDP spent for defense in the last few years is lower than historical averages.

Firm

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

I don't think it's going to matter a great deal in the short term which way the country is moving idealogically. I say that because both ends of the political spectrum have well oiled machines intent on destroying the other side. The gap between left and right in this country is at a point where compromise is a word that no longer exists in either vocabulary. I'm not talking about the general population. Regardless of the abbreviation next to most names in terms of R, D, or I, folks in general mostly just want to get about living life and let the rest live theirs. That concept is lost once you venture into the extremes sitting at either end of politics. What we've done as a country and as a society however, is allow the extremes to influence and drive a large part of the legislative efforts in the past couple of decades.

Generally, I think most people are both fairly conservative. Most want taxes under control, government spending under control, and the role of government to follow the Constitution. Bush tried his damndest to circumvent that particular document. Obama is following that same path. Politics in the last 10-12 years has followed more of a "figure a way around it" philosophy rather than exist within it with some groups insisting it is time for revision. Neither party has delivered when it comes to corralling spending, taxes, or limiting the role of government. Both sides have gone about expanding all three while doing their utmost to distance themselves from the tax and spend policies of the other side.

I also think there's a decent amount of liberal philosophy in most folks in that most don't really care how you live your life, what your sexual orientation is, whether you subscribe to the John Birch Society or Greenpeace. That's not good enough for the extremes of either side though. The problem is, has been, and always will be that those sitting on the ends of the spectrum just damned well can't stand that everyone else doesn't follow the same rules and have become the bullies on a playground where the bulk of the population sort of sits somewhere in the middle and sways back and forth.

Maybe we just need to get out of the way and let the bullies fight it out, and deal with the refuse that's left.

Shrug.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

The percentage of US GDP spent for defense in the last few years is lower than historical averages.

Firm

That's all well and good, but doesn't address the question.

Do we really need to spend nine times the amount of the nation closest to us in defense spending?

Our 2008 military expenditures were more than twice the amount spent by the entire European Union.