I'm just about Getting Ready to give in to this Ron Paul Mania. It's not Because I Entirely Trust him to Run this Country. I Think that his Cuts to Government Programs may be too Deep, too soon, and I don't Trust his Foreign Policy. Though it does sort of Appear that his Cuts are Focused more on the Military and Aid to Foreign Countries, than on things such a Social Security and Medicare. That's actually good. Romney and Santorum may Actually Cut these Things.
The Reason why I might even Vote for Paul is because I would never Want Romney to Win by as Large of a Margin as he Might. The Idea of him Winning the Electoral College Votes by a Land Slide does not at all Appeal to me. Come on, you Guys in these Other States. Vote Against him. Will ya'? I'd Actually Like something that is In-between Ron Paul and some of the other Republicans, yet such a Critter does not Appear to Exist.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
I must admit, the GOP sure has a lot of choices...
Romney IS getting some negative advertising
down there in South Carolina.
Yes, there are a lot of Options, yet when you Talk to Libertarians, they act as if there is only One Option, Ron Paul, and that all of the Others are all the Same.
As to that Romney Ad, it was actually sort of Silly. Is that all the better they can do? I Like the Questioning in Relation to his Flip Flopping on the Pro-Choice/Pro-Life Issue Better.
They don't Appear to have a Terrible Amount of Dirt on him. Even the Socialized Medicine Issue becomes Mute, Providing he Means it when he says that that should be a State Issue and that he does Plan to Appeal Obama Care. Perhaps I'm a Fool for Taking him at his Word and yet I sort of do.
Only One Thing Concerns me, though. I do NOT Want him to Win by a Landslide. He Needs to have Opposition. He Needs to Feel some Pressure from those who Support the Ideas of the Other Candidates. If he is Wishy Washy at all on Certain Conservative Issues, then he Needs to Feel the Pressure from those who are more Conservative.
Oddly, I'm not Sounding much like a Moderate right now, am I? Oh well. So be it.
Actually that ad was a spoof of the
corporate superpacs enabled by the Supreme Court last year. That decision said corporations are
people under the constitution and
can spend unlimited money in support of candidates without revealing their source. Sort of
'We the corporations of the United
States, in order to take over the government from the people..'.
There is a move for a consitutional amendment to overturn the decision. Meanwhile
campaign ads are going to get
quite obscene. The 'right' is in
a conundrum: if the candidate is
far right, the middle will reject him. The middle would also reject
Ron Paul.
Over half of the Federal budget is spent on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Safety net programs.
Our nation debt is in excess of $15 trillion. When you factor in obligations that figure swells to (by conservative estimates) over $60 trillion.
If the country wishes to have any crumb of hope in providing these services to our elderly population then real sizable cuts are going to need to be made.
Ron Paul is the only candidate proposing real cuts. The other candidates are merely proposing reductions in the rate of increases (slowing spending but not actually cutting it).
Further, Ron Paul is the only candidate with the credibility to tackle the Federal Reserve bank. If you understand the Federal Reserve bank and fractional reserve banking then you understand full what the great detriment it is, not only to every individual but, our seniors and aging population who are on fixed incomes.
Their savings is being wiped out as is the purchasing power of the dollar with which they make their purchases.
Ron Paul's plan is to defend this country and its borders not spend hundreds of billions of dollars defending the border between countries in the Middle East. We roughly 900 military bases in over 130 countries. And for what? Why are we subsidizing other countries when we can hardly care for ourselves?
So Ron Paul is proposing we quit waisting all this money, which isn't about defense at all but is instead about military adventurism, and free up financial resources so we can shore up SS, Medicare, Medicaid, et al?
Further, if Ron Paul's foreign policy is good enough for our active military personnel (he receives more donations from active military than all other GOP candidates combined and more than Obama) then it certainly ought to be good enough for you and me.
Be Back Later Today to give an Answer. Feel Free to Respond to each other in the Mean Time.
Without Reading your Link, BB, I'm Tempted to ask what a Supreme Court Decision has to do with Romney, yet the Link may Answer that Question, so I'll just have to Put that on my List of Things to Read. Obviously, it was a Bad Court Decision. I would never be in Support of such a thing.
I've been Finding myself in a Strange Place lately. I Consider myself a Moderate because I'm Opposed to Far Right Libertarianism, yet I'm not Exactly in the Exact Middle any more. I don't Really Think that my Position has Changed. It's just that the Middle Keeps Moving to the Left and so I have eventually Decided to Hold my Ground and to not Keep Moving to the Left with the Rest of the Country.
I'm Actually Finding myself somewhere in-between the Middle and Folks like Ron Paul. He is just a little too Right for me, yet I don't Entirely Trust Folks like Romney either.
What I have Decided is that the Extremists are Necessary in Order to Balance out the Extremists on the Other Side. So, you see, it is not really True that there are not "Moderates" that will be Willing to Vote for Ron Paul, for I haven't Ruled Out Voting for him myself.
Soap,
Interestingly, None of the First Trillion that Ron Paul wants to Cut Out of the Budget the First Year relates to Social Security and Medicare. I was Actually Surprised when this was Brought to my Attention.
I'm not Clear, though, on what he Plans to do in Year Two.
Since People have Paid into Social Security, this is not the Same as other Entitlements. Those who have Paid in, do Deserve to Receive what they have Paid for.
To me, the Phrase "Military Adventurism" Sounds like Hyperbole.
In Relation to Both Deep Cuts and also Foreign Policy, I still wish that there was someone in-between Ron Paul and the Others. To me, it Seems that many of the Republicans may be too Ready to go to War, yet Ron Paul's Casual Attitude about allowing Hostile Countries to go ahead and Build their Nuclear Weapons is Scary.
About the Best that I can do is Hope for a Close Race, so that the One who Wins will have to Bend at Least a little to the Other Point of View.
Oh and Apparently, Newt Gingrich wants to Reduce and Audit the Federal Reserve, so it's not Really True that he does not Plan on doing anything at all.
Romney believes in Greater Transparency and Oversight of the Federal Reserve, yet does not want to End it because he does not Trust Congress to Manage the Responsibility of the Fed. Hmmmmm.
You'll be Proud of me, for I just now Looked that up.
"To me, the Phrase "Military Adventurism" Sounds like Hyperbole."
We have over 900 base in over 130 countries Lista. There's nothing at all hyperbolic about it.
January 17, 1961: President Eisenhower warns us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
And here we are today with nearly 50 US military bases surrounding Iran alone and yet we are once again being preconditioned, just as we were prior to the second Iraq war, that Iran poses this grave danger to us.
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2011/12/06/u-s-military-bases-in-the-middle-east/
"About the Best that I can do is Hope for a Close Race, so that the One who Wins will have to Bend at Least a little to the Other Point of View."
Keep wishing. If history is any barometer it won't happen.
Talk is cheap in Washington Lista. Romney and Newt and the rest will tell you whatever it is they think you want to hear. They're talk doesn't square with their action.
I highly doubt that either Newt or Romney would take a serious look at auditing or ending the Federal Reserve bank.
Newt made a ton of money off of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae who received infusions of cash via the Federal Reserve Bank.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20081125b.htm
And then their's Romney...Bain Capital which received tens of millions of dollars in Federal bailout money as well.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/10538-romneys-skeletons-his-bain-capital-received-millions-in-bailouts
I don't believe either of these men to be genuine in their statements.
Further, Romney's company Bain Capital owns clear channel. Hmm...what benefit might be gained from that?
Among the radio personalities syndicated by Clear Channel or aired on hundreds of stations it owns nationwide are Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, and many others.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/10547-romneys-bain-capital-owns-media-giant-broadcasting-limbaugh-hannity
It may Take me awhile to View and Read all that you have Presented, Soap. For now, I just want to say that Neither Newt nor Romney have Claimed that they want to End the Fed. Newt said that he wants to "Audit and Reduce" it. I Know that you Think that's not Enough, but they are not Claiming to End it, so not Ending it would not Constitute Deception.
I'm not all that Impressed with Romney's "Transparency and Oversight" Statement. As Far as I Know, he has not Even Claimed that he would Reduce it, so Newt's Statement is a little Better in Relation to the Fed.
You are Probably Right, though, in Assuming that this is not the First Priority of either one of them.
As Far as History being a Barometer, Never before in American History, has the Government been so Large as it is now and because of this, it is not Only those on the Extreme Right that are Upset. Moderates are as well. Consequently, already the Number of Votes for Ron Paul is Surprisingly High.
I Chuckle at your List of Radio Personalities Syndicated by "Clear Channel", Soap. I Actually do Listen to and Like most of those that you Listed, so that gives me more Confidence in Romney, not less.
I am sorry, yet not at all surprised to hear you say that.
It is a tool to condition the listeners to think collectively as they come together behind him.
From what I read and hear it seems to be working quite well with a certain segment of the electorate.
RE: "As Far as History being a Barometer, Never before in American History, has the Government been so Large as it is now.." we need observe that also
never before in American history have there been so many Americans, have there been so many vehicles,
so many computers, so much cash locked up by big business, so many
elderly on SS, so many people in prison..or so many 'experts' arguing about it.
"As far as history being a barometer" the fact is there were
more Federal employees, both civilian and military,
during the Reagan administration .
--go figure--
Well, Soap "Among the radio personalities syndicated by Clear Channel or aired on hundreds of stations it owns nationwide are Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, and many others." ..tis why my
big ol Ram 1500 truck radio stays on NPR...
Meh. I have an iPod and a six disc changer.
More for Soap,
The Phrase "Military Adventurism" Implies Motive. If I was to Guess a Motive, I would Guess Paranoia before I would Guess Adventurism. The Motive of Adventure is Empty and Shallow and thus Implies a significant Exaggerated Insult (Hyperbole).
It is Actually Better not to base Political Opinions and Decisions on Guesses about Motives. Is this Military Involvement Excessive? Perhaps, yet any suggestion of a Motive is Likely to be Incorrect Hyperbole.
Also, Just because the Government Decided to Give Bain Capital a bunch of Money, does not mean that Romney is the One who Orchestrated this. This is True of Newt's Good Fortune as well. Sure this Rises Suspicion, but it is not Proof of Wrong Motives. I've been giving them both a Benefit of a Doubt. I don't Jump to Conclusions because I have Found that most of what the Politicians Accuse each other of is Hyperbole in Relation to their Involvement and their Motives.
BB,
"we need observe that also never before in American history have there been so many Americans."
I don't see how that is Relevant, BB. When I Speak of the Size of Government, I am Referring to Percentages and Ratios, not Exact Numbers; that is the Percentage of the Work Force, the Percentage of the Money, etc. etc., in the Government vs. the Private Sector. The Government is too Big, BB. That's simply a Fact.
The Next Comment (Unposted) was Off Topic. If the Author would Like it to Appear Publicly, then you are Welcome to Post your Recommended Book beneath one of the Evolution vs. Intelligent Design Posts. Just Click on the Label. I may Look at this One day when I have more Time, though I'm not sure when that is going to be.
Ok. Here's what I Decided to do...
I have Moved the Off Topic Comment of Satyavati to Another Post...
Evolution/Intelligent Design/Faulty Arguments
There are Several Reasons Why I Chose this one. The Main One is that BB has just Placed a Comment on it as well, which has Started up another New Conversation. Two Other Good Reasons, though, are because there are Currently Only 4 Comments there, Leaving lots of room for some more and this Particular Post was Actually Inspired by a Comment Thread beneath one of Satyavati's Posts. What a Great Way to Continue the Conversation, if she Chooses to do so.
I do Hope that some of you are Taking the Time to Check Out the Evolution/Intelligent Design Link that I just left. Here is a Link that can be Copy Pasted, if that is your Preference...
http://wwwramblingsoflista.blogspot.com/2010/11/evolutionintelligent-designfaulty.html
I've been having an Interesting Discussion with BB-Idaho in that Comment Thread and the Discussion is Current, even though the Post was done on November of 2010.
Stand by for another Post about the Candidates.
"I Think that his Cuts to Government Programs may be too Deep, too soon, and I don't Trust his Foreign Policy."
You are wise. There are way to many statements from Paul that sound like something the leader of Al Qaeda would say.
They have something in common, after all./
Dmarks,
In One of the Debates, Paul Actually said that his Ideal Tax Rate is Zero. Chuckle. Does he Think he is going to Run the Government on Free Will Donations? I guess I don't really Know what his Tax Plan is. Is it Based on a National Sales Tax, instead of an Income Tax? I don't Recall him Mentioning any Specific Tax Plan in a Debate. Perhaps I Missed that one.
Yes, Soap, I'm Uninformed. Sorry. I'm not a News Junky and Believe it or not there are Times in which I am Actually here to Learn, rather then to Preach at People. Remember California doesn't Vote Until June.
Post a Comment