Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 Just now, f7ben said: What moto advocates for has never been tried anywhere in the world ever. There has never been a bigger socialist enterprise in the history of the world than the US military. I am all for returning our approach to the military to a strict constitutional understanding and interpretation Exactly what I advocate. Defense of our nation not of the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 1 minute ago, Highmark said: Exactly what I advocate. Defense of our nation not of the world. And if the options were to drastically reduce the size and scope of the government all together along with that I would have no issue with ideas like the of Ron Paul...ie....scrapping government agencies and returning states rights. My issue comes when we get guys talking about cutting social services , scrapping programs that provide domestic value to our citizens etc .....but then they want to expand the military budget with the savings. If the reality is they are going to spend the money then I want it spent making peoples lives better.....not creating conflict That cant be that hard to understand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 Ron Paul is a nut job Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 Just now, Mainecat said: Ron Paul is a nut job Ben No , Ron Paul is a libertarian who values state rights and understands that our federal government is out of control. Ron Pauls ideas would have prevented the worst catastrophies that have occurred in our nation in the last 2 decades. Under Ron Paul there is no housing crash No Iraq and Afghan was and likely no 9/11 No out of control FED reserve printing trillions and devaluing our dollar enslaving us at the same time No Obamacare Just think where our country could be if none of that had occurred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 Just now, f7ben said: And if the options were to drastically reduce the size and scope of the government all together along with that I would have no issue with ideas like the of Ron Paul...ie....scrapping government agencies and returning states rights. My issue comes when we get guys talking about cutting social services , scrapping programs that provide domestic value to our citizens etc .....but then they want to expand the military budget with the savings. If the reality is they are going to spend the money then I want it spent making peoples lives better.....not creating conflict That cant be that hard to understand Its not but the way you go about it in posts is sometimes head scratching compared to explanations in this thread. I simply don't agree with well if we are going to spend the money it minus well be on this. We currently collect over $19K in taxes for every single American and spend over $22K for every single American. All of it is unsustainable and could take down America in the next 25-50 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 13 minutes ago, Highmark said: Its not but the way you go about it in posts is sometimes head scratching compared to explanations in this thread. I simply don't agree with well if we are going to spend the money it minus well be on this. We currently collect over $19K in taxes for every single American and spend over $22K for every single American. All of it is unsustainable and could take down America in the next 25-50 years. Show me a politician that actually wants to reduce the whole size and scope of the USG including the military and who isnt a religious nutbag or beholden to some other retarded special interest and I will get behind them....until then I will advocate for what I see is the best solution. This time around it was Sanders who wanted to protect constitutional rights like the 4th amendment , stop the nation building , clip the wings of out of control intel agencies and spend the majority of the budget on the citizens of this country and things that actually do some good....like healthcare , food and education. Next time around maybe it will be someone like Ron Paul who wants to get the Fed out of states rights and smash the status quo of funneling trillions into idiotic conflicts and eroding the rights of the citizens of this country I think you are smart enough to see where my positions are derived from and why on the surface they may seem to be contradictory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 Just now, f7ben said: Show me a politician that actually wants to reduce the whole size and scope of the USG including the military and who isnt a religious nutbag or beholden to some other retarded special interest and I will get behind them....until then I will advocate for what I see is the best solution. This time around it was Sanders who wanted to protect constitutional rights like the 4th amendment , stop the nation building , clip the wings of out of control intel agencies and spend the majority of the budget on the citizens of this country and things that actually do some good....like healthcare , food and education. Next time around maybe it will be someone like Ron Paul who wants to get the Fed out of states rights and smash the status quo of funneling trillions into idiotic conflicts and eroding the rights of the citizens of this country I think you are smart enough to see where my positions are derived from and why on the surface they may seem to be contradictory Ron and Rand Paul. Honestly American's share in much of the blame. We have continued to put politicians in place that have grown govt. in order to get something from govt. Some what they earned, some what they didn't. Both sides are guilty its just to what extent that is the deciding factor for me. "A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 18 minutes ago, Highmark said: Ron and Rand Paul. Honestly American's share in much of the blame. We have continued to put politicians in place that have grown govt. in order to get something from govt. Some what they earned, some what they didn't. Both sides are guilty its just to what extent that is the deciding factor for me. "A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." I blame right wing neocons 1000x more then those who wanted to vote themselves entitlements ......because the military idiocy and MIC are far far more to blame for our current situation than any entitlement spending Also Rand offered an amendment to expand the military budget beyond what anyone was proposing at the time.....he is a fraud when compared to his father and I would much prefer someone other than him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 10 minutes ago, f7ben said: I blame right wing neocons 1000x more then those who wanted to vote themselves entitlements ......because the military idiocy and MIC are far far more to blame for our current situation than any entitlement spending Also Rand offered an amendment to expand the military budget beyond what anyone was proposing at the time.....he is a fraud when compared to his father and I would much prefer someone other than him. Necon is not just repubs. JFK and LBJ were as big as neocon's as the country has ever had. Necon's are for big military and domestic entitlement spending. Most don't understand that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 sanders is an old man. i would hope he's got some assets. wtf? where is it written that a socialist can't have money? and to say that sanders is uber rich is a fucking joke in today's dayband age. i'm curious about how much money sanders is allowed to have before he's considers a hypocrite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 5 minutes ago, Highmark said: Necon is not just repubs. JFK and LBJ were as big as neocon's as the country has ever had. Necon's are for big military and domestic entitlement spending. Most don't understand that. Neocons for sure are not just repubs...but Neocons are only for entitlements when they can couple equal spending to military and foreign nation building I notice you left the Rand thing alone too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 Just now, ActionfigureJoe said: sanders is an old man. i would hope he's got some assets. wtf? where is it written that a socialist can't have money? and to say that sanders is uber rich is a fucking joke in today's dayband age. i'm curious about how much money sanders is allowed to have before he's considers a hypocrite. if he has more than a few pairs of clothes , a mid 90's corsica for transport and a small mid 50's bungalow to rest in...THEN HE IS A FRAUD !!!!!!!!!!!!!1111 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 1 hour ago, Highmark said: Exactly what I advocate. Defense of our nation not of the world. it's more about the defense of certain stock portfolios than it is defense of the world. defense of the world. what a pathetic lie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) 6 minutes ago, f7ben said: Neocons for sure are not just repubs...but Neocons are only for entitlements when they can couple equal spending to military and foreign nation building I notice you left the Rand thing alone too? True on the first. Didn't get to the Rand thing yet. Completely disagree with his change there but overall he scores much higher than most. Edited July 13, 2017 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 1 minute ago, Highmark said: True on the first. Didn't get to the Rand thing yet. I was massively disappointed when it happened , I wrote him off for good when he offered that amendment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, f7ben said: I was massively disappointed when it happened , I wrote him off for good when he offered that amendment No question disappointing but perfect angels are not out there. Remember Sanders wanted to continue spending huge money on a military plane (F35?) simply because it was being made in Vermont. No perfect angels. http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/12/why-bernie-sanders-is-backing-a-15-trillion-military-boondoggle.html Why Bernie Sanders is backing a $1.5 trillion military boondoggle Edited July 13, 2017 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 Just now, Highmark said: No question disappointing but perfect angels are not out there. That is akin to raping a baby .....not just a minor indiscretion .....He shit all over everything he and his father stood for with that amendment and his offering it was every bit as bad as Bern eventually endorsing Hillary. Its called selling your soul for a shot at whatever you are after and I wont accept it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) Just now, f7ben said: That is akin to raping a baby .....not just a minor indiscretion .....He shit all over everything he and his father stood for with that amendment and his offering it was every bit as bad as Bern eventually endorsing Hillary. Its called selling your soul for a shot at whatever you are after and I wont accept it See my edit on Sanders. He did that way before endorsing Clinton and you were all for him them. Edited July 13, 2017 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 5 minutes ago, Highmark said: See my edit on Sanders. He did that way before endorsing Clinton and you were all for him them. "In the real world, if the plane is built … and if the choice is if that goes to Vermont … South Carolina or Florida, what is your choice as a United States Senator?" he asked. "Do you want it to go to South Carolina? ... My view is that given the reality of the damn plane, I'd rather it come to Vermont than to South Carolina. And that's what the Vermont National Guard wants, and that means hundreds of jobs in my city. That's it." Hardly a tacit endorsement of the plane itself ...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 Just now, f7ben said: "In the real world, if the plane is built … and if the choice is if that goes to Vermont … South Carolina or Florida, what is your choice as a United States Senator?" he asked. "Do you want it to go to South Carolina? ... My view is that given the reality of the damn plane, I'd rather it come to Vermont than to South Carolina. And that's what the Vermont National Guard wants, and that means hundreds of jobs in my city. That's it." Hardly a tacit endorsement of the plane itself ...... Don't matter. If your adamant about reducing the MIC you do it even if it costs your own states jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 Just now, Highmark said: Don't matter. If your adamant about reducing the MIC you do it even if it costs your own states jobs. His support was not over whether the f-35 program would exist ....it was to assure that if it did exist it would be in his state. But either way , it didnt look good for him and while I dont recall knowing about it I would have admonished him for it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 42 minutes ago, f7ben said: His support was not over whether the f-35 program would exist ....it was to assure that if it did exist it would be in his state. But either way , it didnt look good for him and while I dont recall knowing about it I would have admonished him for it Either way he continued to vote for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 11 minutes ago, Highmark said: Either way he continued to vote for it. disgusting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 13, 2017 Author Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, f7ben said: disgusting Yep. Our country's problem is that it will never be an either/or with domestic and military spending or better much less of both. Its further proof why democracies eventually fail because of voting gifts from the treasury. Not just who citizens vote in but how both parties work together in congress to scratch one another's backs. You spend for me and I'll spend for you has got to come to an end. One simple improvement would help immensely. Make bills be single focused. An example is the farm bill includes all food stamp spending. That's fucking insane and allows excuses and cop outs for politicians. Edited July 13, 2017 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 1 minute ago, Highmark said: Yep. Our country's problem is that it will never be an either/or with domestic and military spending or better much less of both. Its further proof why democracies eventually fail because of voting gifts from the treasury. Not just who citizens vote in but how both parties work together in congress to scratch one another's backs. You spend for me and I'll spend for you has got to come to an end. absolutely ....but I think we also need to prioritize things like healthcare albeit I would prefer it done at a state level Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.