Skip to main content

McCain, a firm grasp on the reality of war....

I have listened to the argument that the primary reason people want to vote for John McCain is his firm grasp of what is going on in the Iraq war and his military experience.

Well, let's see. CNN clearly has a different interpretation of the facts.

Now Senator McCain for posting this please do not send your toady Lindsey Graham to steal anymore of my money or go ape-shit crazy on me. Because you have never clearly explained how you will lower taxes and provide full employment, while your advisers plans all include raising taxes and increasing spending, I cannot see how what you say, equals what you can do. But who has that ever stopped before?

What I am unable to reconcile is proposed spending increases in three key areas 1.) health care, 2.) education, 3.) military spending; with the reality that these certainly will benefit a few corporations and raise taxes by up to $2 TRILLION dollars for health care, and at least $917 Billion in projected military expenditures of all of this education get the shortest shrift while increasing the size of the federal bureaucracy at DOE. All these spending increases require 1.) raising taxes, 2.) increased military involvement and production and 3.) less resources for state education departments.

I ask any Republican or Democrat out there explain to me how this is a "Republican" position?

How is this series of policies going to make our country and its businesses more competitive?

Or is it conditioned on an assumed state of protratced aggressive warfare, which will cause all these problems to stop temporarily as other great military Keynesians have tried in the past?

And if that is the case what is this going to do to our country as this article from Le Monde Diplomatique clearly illustrates the gravity of the problems?

Clearly if you can defend these policies you know something I do not know.

To me they seem indefensible.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...