POLITICAL THREAD (PF) ENTER AT YOUR RISK

[HappyGilmore]

Certainly, the re-militarization of Germany put many people back to work and created jobs, but who knew it would have led to where it got to?

The plain truth is that militarization during an economic depression is widely accepted by the public for that very reason.

True. War is good for the economy, but bad for people. I don't think that's gonna change any time soon..

It's not good for the economy, as it does not produce any wealth. It's only good for people who want jobs. Wars are costly and they create debt. I served six years in the military out of a sense of duty and not out of economic necessity as you are seeing more and more today. Peolpe are now being turned away who are turning to the military in increasing numbers out of economic desperation, because Congress can't come together to solve the budget and because the U.S. debt ceiling has reached it's limit. This is not due strictly to our wars of course, as our debt comes from many factors, entitlement-spending and inefficient government bureaucracy being the rest of the pie. The fact remains that war escalates debt, which can hardly be good for the economy when it's debt ceiling has reached it's limit. And now you have Congress fighting over which to cut: military or entitlement. Both need to be scaled back, of course, but Ron Paul seems to be the only member of Congress that understands that.

I agree.  So far I support Ron Paul for the most part. 

I'm not overly political by any means, but generally don't sway with the two major parties, or most of the government.  Lately I've been very much in tune with the Libertarian Party and support them wholeheartedly.  And apparenlty NOBODY has heard of that party, as when I mention it to people they're like, "What's that?"

[Flick James]

Certainly, the re-militarization of Germany put many people back to work and created jobs, but who knew it would have led to where it got to?

The plain truth is that militarization during an economic depression is widely accepted by the public for that very reason.

True. War is good for the economy, but bad for people. I don't think that's gonna change any time soon..

It's not good for the economy, as it does not produce any wealth. It's only good for people who want jobs. Wars are costly and they create debt. I served six years in the military out of a sense of duty and not out of economic necessity as you are seeing more and more today. Peolpe are now being turned away who are turning to the military in increasing numbers out of economic desperation, because Congress can't come together to solve the budget and because the U.S. debt ceiling has reached it's limit. This is not due strictly to our wars of course, as our debt comes from many factors, entitlement-spending and inefficient government bureaucracy being the rest of the pie. The fact remains that war escalates debt, which can hardly be good for the economy when it's debt ceiling has reached it's limit. And now you have Congress fighting over which to cut: military or entitlement. Both need to be scaled back, of course, but Ron Paul seems to be the only member of Congress that understands that.

I agree.  So far I support Ron Paul for the most part. 

I'm not overly political by any means, but generally don't sway with the two major parties, or most of the government.  Lately I've been very much in tune with the Libertarian Party and support them wholeheartedly.  And apparenlty NOBODY has heard of that party, as when I mention it to people they're like, "What's that?"

You may be surprised how many on this forum are familiar with libertarianism. I myself am registered as one, but on the whole I think they are a party without much direction, and I wish they did. Also, they've become the party that Rep and Dems who are disenchanted with their rank and file jump to, which has been to the detriment of the Libertarian party. I mean, you've got Bill Maher who claims libertarianism, when he is obviously a liberal and, with a few minor variations, essentially pushes a lib/dem agenda. If that's what he wants to do, great, and I think he's very funny, I just don't like him representing himself as something he is not.

I do hope that Ron Paul runs, and if he does he will get my vote. There is no way he will ever win the Republican nomination, so his only choice is to run third-party. At the bare minimum want him to get in there, swinging as hard as he can, and really shake things up, and hold our Macchiavellian officials accountable.

[HappyGilmore]

Certainly, the re-militarization of Germany put many people back to work and created jobs, but who knew it would have led to where it got to?

The plain truth is that militarization during an economic depression is widely accepted by the public for that very reason.

True. War is good for the economy, but bad for people. I don't think that's gonna change any time soon..

It's not good for the economy, as it does not produce any wealth. It's only good for people who want jobs. Wars are costly and they create debt. I served six years in the military out of a sense of duty and not out of economic necessity as you are seeing more and more today. Peolpe are now being turned away who are turning to the military in increasing numbers out of economic desperation, because Congress can't come together to solve the budget and because the U.S. debt ceiling has reached it's limit. This is not due strictly to our wars of course, as our debt comes from many factors, entitlement-spending and inefficient government bureaucracy being the rest of the pie. The fact remains that war escalates debt, which can hardly be good for the economy when it's debt ceiling has reached it's limit. And now you have Congress fighting over which to cut: military or entitlement. Both need to be scaled back, of course, but Ron Paul seems to be the only member of Congress that understands that.

I agree.  So far I support Ron Paul for the most part. 

I'm not overly political by any means, but generally don't sway with the two major parties, or most of the government.  Lately I've been very much in tune with the Libertarian Party and support them wholeheartedly.  And apparenlty NOBODY has heard of that party, as when I mention it to people they're like, "What's that?"

You may be surprised how many on this forum are familiar with libertarianism. I myself am registered as one, but on the whole I think they are a party without much direction, and I wish they did. Also, they've become the party that Rep and Dems who are disenchanted with their rank and file jump to, which has been to the detriment of the Libertarian party. I mean, you've got Bill Maher who claims libertarianism, when he is obviously a liberal and, with a few minor variations, essentially pushes a lib/dem agenda. If that's what he wants to do, great, and I think he's very funny, I just don't like him representing himself as something he is not.

I do hope that Ron Paul runs, and if he does he will get my vote. There is no way he will ever win the Republican nomination, so his only choice is to run third-party. At the bare minimum want him to get in there, swinging as hard as he can, and really shake things up, and hold our Macchiavellian officials accountable.

I think Maher is very funny a comedian, yes.  Don't know how much water his beliefs hold.

Personally I'm rather new to the whole political scene.  When I did register to vote, it was Libertarian.  And not too long ago, actually.  Don't know if it's more to do with 'my generation' or anything.  Just never felt a sense to be too actively involved until recently.

[HappyGilmore]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS10Xap4C9w

[Flick James]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS10Xap4C9w

For the moment, Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination, but he will never get it. The Republican rank and file can't accept him because they are no longer believers in an America first republic as they once were. They've embraced globalism and perpetual interventionism. They like that America is the world's policeman and primary muscle of the U.N. Ron Paul is very much an "America First" advocate and a constitutionalist of the highest order, and so is very much on the fringe.

I would guess his strategy is to garner attention through the Republican primary process, then go third-party. I hope he goes third-party. But he will NEVER get the Republican nomination.

[lester1/2jr]

This will at least make the GOP debates watchable. Everyone else says the same things. He's really the only one who brings anything at all unique to the table.

[Flick James]

This will at least make the GOP debates watchable. Everyone else says the same things. He's really the only one who brings anything at all unique to the table.

Agreed. I am actually looking forward to the Republican debates for a change. This could be a double-edged sword, however. The GOP may recognize this as a positive for the rank and file, and it may be, since those tuning in who are doing so out of interest in Ron Paul may jump on the GOP bandwagon. On the other hand, for some it may further stir outrage from those already disenchanted by the two-party system. It will be interesting to see how things will unfold, as Ron Paul's involvement in the Presidential race is certain to carry far more of the already considerable weight it carried the last time.

[HappyGilmore]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS10Xap4C9w

For the moment, Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination, but he will never get it. The Republican rank and file can't accept him because they are no longer believers in an America first republic as they once were. They've embraced globalism and perpetual interventionism. They like that America is the world's policeman and primary muscle of the U.N. Ron Paul is very much an "America First" advocate and a constitutionalist of the highest order, and so is very much on the fringe.

I would guess his strategy is to garner attention through the Republican primary process, then go third-party. I hope he goes third-party. But he will NEVER get the Republican nomination.

I have to find the clip, but I saw somewhere where he said he'd likely run third-party.  Said the Republicans likely wouldn't accept him.  Honestly, I think there's a lot of voters who'd vote his way right now.  Guess we'll have to see how things go in the next year.