1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Obama and Gun Control

Think Wrote: Feb 04, 2013 12:20 PM
Until the pundits recognize and write and speak on the real issues, it is absurd to think anything will change. GUn control is not about guns - it is about control. Obamacare is not about healthcare (or Congress wouldnt' have exempted themselves and Obam wouldn't be exempting unions). It, too, is about control. The guy just put out a picture of himself shooting a shotgun - and warned people NOT to play with the photograph... Control (this is NOT C. Korea, China, etc., and we'll do what we damn PLEASE with his photos). But what are the pundits talking about? Guns and healthcare. Those are NOT the issue. The issue is CONTROL. The pundits need to pay attention and start writing about the issues - not the distractions.
I'm reading Last's book - excellent. Something he - and others writing about demographics are not writing about in detail (though Last refers to it briefly) is that it is Blue States not reproducing. But the issue of demographics ON voting patterns is not being discussed. Basically, Blue State voters demand entitlements that only can be paid for by taking money from future generations - and Blue State voters are not populating those generations. They are just freeloading today off of the children of those who don't want these programs to begin with - Red State voters. Virtually NOTHING in the Prog platform supports a view that Democrats believe in the future - and they certainly are not populating it.
In response to:

War Is Like Rust

Think Wrote: Jan 31, 2013 12:30 PM
What is missing (continued from below) is the realization that America, when challenged in the future as we certainly will be, will have to react convincingly in order to stop this piecemeal destruction of our freedoms. There is nothing in any muslim country worth the life of ONE post-Enlightenment, modern American. Not a damn thing. If they attack us - nuke them; be serious; understand it is not the opponent's army that makes policy - it is their POLITY, and, as we did in WW2, the polity of our enemy must be destroyed to stop their policy. It's called "Growing up," and America needs to do it.
In response to:

War Is Like Rust

Think Wrote: Jan 31, 2013 12:27 PM
European countries, Japan and Korea all can afford their own defense. Our supplying their guns has allowed them the ahistorical decision of only spending on butter. This is what is crazy. If they continue to choose only butter - and have no guns because we have listened to their demands for ourselves to buy fewer guns, then that is their problem - not mine, and certainly not my son's. As we cut our DoD spending - as we should - these "allies" will have to up theirs - or disappear. Darwin works at the nation-state level, as well, and if these nations make the choice to not defend themselves they will go the way of Georgia - overrrun by an appetite higher on the food chain. Oh, well.
In response to:

15 Lies of Liberalism

Think Wrote: Jan 30, 2013 2:39 PM
Unfortunately the biggest problem - lie - is unaddressed: That Libs care about the future. Look at Bloue State demographics: libs don't care about a future they are unwilling to populate. They steal money from future generations but aren't populating those generations. The idea that they care about debt that burdens them not at all is crazy. yet GOP pols pretend that the Left also cares about our econcomic future. They don't. Time to stop kidding ourselves that they do.
Boehner's bottom line seems to be that the adults on the Right are willing to sacrifice something they like - Defense - in order to get what the nation needs - LESS SPENDING; and that the kiddies on the Left are absolutely unwilling to sacrifice vote-buying entitlements for ANY reason whatsoever. The Left is infantile and it's time this was pointed out LOUD AND CLEAR.
A) Cutting defense ought to be in anyone's plan. We don't need the force we have to defend America or our sea lanes. If Europe and Japan and Korea want to be defended, each is wealthy enough to defend themselves rather than demanding American taxpayers continue to do so. We likely can cut defense by at least a third and increase DoD R&D spending simply by cutting back carrier task force Groups and sub fleets. The Cold War is over and we don't need squadrons of Boomers to attack Iran - or 10 carrier groups. B) One would hope that the Right is able to live with cuts to Defense that are, as pointed out, less-severe than post-WW2, post-Korea or post-Vietnam. It's not that big a deal. Ike was right and we need to recognize it - Finally.
In response to:

Liberalism Versus Blacks

Think Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 12:51 PM
"What is not understandable is how so many liberals can blindly ignore 50 years of evidence to the contrary since then." On the contrary, if Liberals were toa ccept facts, they'd be conservatives. A Liberal MUST ignore facts - it's the only way to subscribe to their ideology.
In response to:

The Right Way to Cut Defense Spending

Think Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 12:46 PM
Reasonable cuts are listed, but the mission can/should also be changed. We defend the entire West. Why? Other nations are wealthy enough to defend themselves. Europe and Japan may be forced to choose between THEIR guns and THEIR butter rather than using OUR guns and spending all THEIR moneyon butter. That's a bad thing? We could halve the force and double R&D and probably immediately cut over 1/3 of the DoD budget. Do we need 10 carrier batle groups to defend the US? No. two dozen SSBNs? No. Several heavy divisions of Army & Marines? No. Can we deter any aggressor with the strategic triad? Yes. We have become what Ike warned us against. And we don't need to continue to be so.
One thing - the elephant in the room? - Barone does not address is this: All previous 76-yr periods also were period of rising populaiton and positive demographics. The Blue-Red demographic split is extraordinary in our cutlure and society - and has yet to be recognized by either our pundits or our governing elites: Blue America does not believe in the future enough to populate it, and the Blue Social model of which Mead writes wil lbe paid for by the children of Red states, whose voters don't want the programs indebting their kids. Only 3 Blue States are at or above replacement fertility of 2.1 live births per woman: NM and NV, at 2.1, and HI at 2.2; small states with little presence on the national scene.
1 - 10 Next