|
| Thread: If your still in the BUSH, get out now |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV |
|
dkolb
Promising
Known Hero
Nay Nay and Aslan Protector
|
posted July 08, 2007 04:01 PM |
|
Edited by dkolb at 16:05, 08 Jul 2007.
|
He's not against free trade at all, that's just what his detractor's say.
in fact he said this:
"Free trade, not isolationism or subsidization, is the most moral of instruments between men." -Ron Paul
http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul_Free_Trade.htm
he's rated 76% by CATO which means he's pro free trade!
He's non-interventionist but people get that mixed up with isolationist.
An isolationist is like a turtle who withdraws in his shell and closes all the borders.
A non-interventionist basically just doesn't get tangled up in other countries disputes (like we are now)
And I think it would be alot better to let the individual state handle certain issues and weaken the power of the federal government.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 08, 2007 07:10 PM |
|
|
Did you even read your link? He's voted against free trade all the time. I don't know how he's rated 76% if he votes against it so much. And another reason I don't like him is because he wants a fence on the Mexican border. But he's still better than any real Republican.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
dkolb
Promising
Known Hero
Nay Nay and Aslan Protector
|
|
posted July 08, 2007 07:29 PM |
|
Edited by dkolb at 19:32, 08 Jul 2007.
|
he's not against the concept of free trade is my point.
His problem is with subsidization, and all the extra junk that comes with free trade proposals.
there are some youtube videos where he talks about all this stuff.
To be 100% honest I'm a new convert, I only heard about him 2 weeks ago, but the more he says the more he makes sense. One thing I know for sure is he's all about the open market. so much so that he would have outside companies compete for medical/postal stuff that the government normally does.
But your right he's vicious on the border, and anything you've heard on that is probably true.
|
|
Aculias
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Pretty Boy Angel Sacraficer
|
|
posted July 08, 2007 09:12 PM |
|
|
couple yrs ago he makes a deal to have illegal Mexicans have licenses to work & live out here.
Now he wants them out.
Spending too much money in the process.
I got words for Bush lol.
____________
Dreaming of a Better World
|
|
violent_flower
Promising
Supreme Hero
Almost there.
|
|
posted July 09, 2007 05:01 AM |
|
|
Swampy:
The example that I gave was not to support dragging want a be peacekeepers out of their government building and hanging them, it was to show that a man that was raised with no political saturation in one direction or the other has this outlook. I just think that it speaks volumes about what is really going on in this country as a whole.
As far as a third world country is concerned we are 37th on the list for decent healthcare, we are all over the place in other countries starting thoughtless wars, and are government is the largest employer of illegal immigrants.
This states that on some level, yes we need a revelation, but one that is organized and has purpose and thought to it. We have to look at government officials that hire their own family to serve coffee to them for three hundred thousand dollars a year and ask questions. We need to get more than forty percent of the US population out to the polls to vote and vote with knowledge. We need to teach our children every aspect of the government in schools, including the corrupt side, and give them tools so they can vote properly.
We have a mess to clean up and if we don’t, becoming a third world country may seem like a far stretch but trust me it is right around the corner. We will destroy ourselves and these higher ups will keep investing over seas while our country drowns itself, period.
____________
Learn how to duck and weave because I will throw truth at you all day!
|
|
The_Gootch
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
|
|
posted July 09, 2007 05:10 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Love him or loathe him, he nailed this one right on the head..........
By Rush Limbaugh:
I think the vast differences in compensation between victims of the September 11 casualty and those who die serving our country in Uniform are profound. No one is really talking about it either, because you just don't criticize anything having to do with September 11. Well, I can't let the numbers pass by because it says something really disturbing about the entitlement mentality of this country. If you lost a family member in the September 11 attack, you're going to get an average of $1,185,000. The range is a minimum guarantee of $250,000, all the way up to $4.7 million.
I
f you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed in action, the first check you get is a $6,000 direct death benefit, half of which is taxable.
Next, you get $1,750 for burial costs. If you are the surviving spouse, you get $833 a month until you remarry. And there's a payment of $211 per month for each child under 18. When the child hits 18, those payments come to a screeching halt.
Keep in mind that some of the people who are getting an average of $1.185 million up to $4.7 mill on are complaining that it's not eno ugh Their deaths were tragic, but for most, they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Soldiers put themselves in harms way FOR ALL OF US, and they and their families know the dangers.
We also learned over the weekend that some of the victims from the Oklahoma City bombing have started an organization asking for the same deal that the September 11 families are getting. In addition to that, some of the families of those bombed in the embassies are now asking for compensation a s well.
You see where this is going, don't you? Folks, this is part and parcel of over 50 years of entitlement politics in this country. It's just really sad. Every time a pay raise comes up for the military, they usually receive next to nothing of a raise. Now the green machine is in combat in the Middle East while their families have to survive on food stamps and live in low-rent housing Make sense?
However, our own US Congress voted themselves a raise. Many of you don't know that they only have to be in Congress one time to receive a pension that is more than $15,000 per month. And most are now equal to being millionaires plus. They do not receive Social Security on retirement because they didn't have to pay into the system. If some of the military people stay in for 20 years and get out as an E-7, they may receive a pension of $1,000 per month, and the very people who placed them in harm's way receives a pension of $15,000 per month.
I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and join ranks before they start cutting out benefits and lowering pay for our sons and daughters who are now fighting.
" When do we finally do something about this?"
Lets hope 08 can Initiate!
Love VF *sighs*
Babycakes, I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one.
Quote:
Every time a pay raise comes up for the military, they usually receive next to nothing of a raise.
President Bush's congress gave the enlisted side a whopping 25% increase in salary during his first year in office. Some may argue that that was just to fix the stinginess of the Clinton years but those people don't want to look at the way the Reagan and Bush administration treated military personnel, their salaries, and their pensions.
Quote:
I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and join ranks before they start cutting out benefits and lowering pay for our sons and daughters who are now fighting.
Charles Rangel every year introduces legislation that would bring the draft back with no exemptions. That means the rich and the powerful and the industrialists and those with means would have to put their own children on the firing line. His reasoning is that if the so called elite of the nation, if their children are at risk of dying, our leaders would finally consider war as a last resort.
But it isn't going to happen. Without a draft you have no revolution. Without a draft people can pick up their paper while sipping their coffee and lament the poor and growing group of our nation's military lost in this unprecedented act of aggression by this nation. Without a draft people won't become involved in the political process.
That is the difference between now and then. You saw the real riots in the streets during 'nam when the middle class exemption was lifted. You saw real action taken when the suits and the business class were at risk of being sent over there. As long as there is no draft, demagogues like Limbaugh can preach from their ivory towers about how nice it would be for congressmen to have their own sons and daughters involved in the military.
Never forget, though, it was demagogues like Limbaugh who crucified anyone who questioned the Bush administration in the lead up to this invasion.
As far as the death benefits are concerned Limbaugh knows as well as anyone how to skew statistics. Military personnel are automatically signed up for life insurance that is given at a ridiculously low cost as soon as they start recruit training. Yes they have the ability to stop it but let's be serious here. When you get the call to go overseas and you're about to enter that tax exempt zone and get all the hazard pay and imminent danger pay coming to you, you're not going to quibble over the $16 a month it costs for $300,000. And you're certainly not allowed to deploy overseas without a will written and your affairs in order.
Also, Limbaugh is a member of the party that squawks and squabbles about paying our military more. This is empty rhetoric by the way. Republicans are famous for making sure they're always more pro-military than dems. But don't want to raise the taxes needed to really give that kind of a boost.
One more thing. This is the kind of article that pops into my e-mail every now and then. The people who write this stuff I have a hard time picturing as concerned citizens. More often, it feels like patriotic nonsense.
____________
|
|
violent_flower
Promising
Supreme Hero
Almost there.
|
|
posted July 09, 2007 05:08 PM |
|
|
My concern is not whether Limbaugh has his numbers exact (which this will never take place because even the government skews the number, it's the government for Christ sake). The fact is that this is taking place on some level and it should not be taking place on any level.
I'm not interested in Limbaugh being a conservative goober, that we know he is, my interest is with the families and the soldiers.
Gootch you mention briefly about having a will before they are deployed.First this is not true, you may read this or you may have even been told this in the Marines. However, I have a friend that just did two tours without a will, and I new a solider that lived on base with us that died in Desert Storm without a will. His wife went to 'War' with the grandparents because there was no will.
If some of these things were actually carried out then we may be in a better place.
____________
Learn how to duck and weave because I will throw truth at you all day!
|
|
violent_flower
Promising
Supreme Hero
Almost there.
|
|
posted July 19, 2007 07:57 PM |
|
|
Thats right Gootch you know when to put hands over mouth when your not right. I knew that you sir had it in you to be silent, away with you and your knowledge...
____________
Learn how to duck and weave because I will throw truth at you all day!
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted July 21, 2007 03:56 AM |
|
|
If Bush and John Howard are still in power after these next two elections then there is no such thing as
a) Democracy
or
b) Common sense
There's no question as to whether America should have gone to Iraq. It's obvious. But should they retreat?
Less obvious.
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
The_Gootch
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
|
|
posted July 21, 2007 05:46 AM |
|
|
Quote:
If Bush and John Howard are still in power after these next two elections then there is no such thing as
a) Democracy
or
b) Common sense
There's no question as to whether America should have gone to Iraq. It's obvious. But should they retreat?
Less obvious.
It will be impossible for Bush to be elected to a 3rd term. After FDR died in 1945 the U.S. passed an amendment stating that presidents may only serve 2 full terms.
Yes, without a doubt we should leave Iraq. The neocons' experiment has been a dismal failure.
____________
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted July 21, 2007 11:18 AM |
|
|
It's been a failure but leaving now will end it, surely, but not necessarily solve it...
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
| |
|
|
