Good luck, man.
I still dream of you driving me across America in a Fiero.
Good luck. It was always nice to read columns from someone on the right that wasn't riding the Glenn Beck bandwagon.
Good luck and Godspeed, Jack. Look forward to staying in touch via your work for Rand Paul.
Ron Liberte = Alinksy #4
Ron Paul killed his own chances. Ron Paul's more like great chum when you fish. Ron Paul never intended to win the Presidency. He did a great job nurturing and farming future blind Republicans at colleges across the country that would be dumb enough to settle for the likes of Rand Paul or Gary Johnson. Jack's just another paid wheel, he'd support anyone he could get a paycheck from.
@ Steven, "Jack did sell out, first to Gary Johnson, and now to Rand Paul". I dont see how this is selling out. Has he stopped supporting the principles that Paul advocates? Of course not. He is now supporting other candidates that's all. Do they all agree with Ron Paul on everything? No, but politics is not about purity and perfection otherwise we would never advance the goal of liberty. Unless you can clone Ron Paul no one is going to advocate everything he supported all the time. Rand Paul is one of the good guys and I frankly reject this attitude that says "Oh well if you dont support not Ron Paul then you hate liberty" This is not how politics works. If the best man is no longer in politics like Ron Paul then you work within the system, like Ron Paul did, to get the next possible best thing. Thats how the real world works. I proudly supported and voted for Ron Paul in the primaries both times but he didnt win. Ok so I go on to the next best candidate. Will there be another Ron Paul? Probably not but that there are other good candidates out there.
I would remind you Scott that no less a libertarian than Mr Libertarian himself Rothbard publicly supported George H.W.Bush and Pat "Protectionist Tariff"Buchanan. He understood the the real world. I agree more and more each day that its insane unfounded conspiracy theories like the Jews are behind this and that and everything else and Obama is a Muslim Kenyan that killed Ron Paul's chances.
As you see Javier. Jack did sell out, first to Gary Johnson, and now to Rand Paul. He's a political opportunist. Ron Paul's campaign staff was riddled with incompetence. Ron Paul could have obtained 5% of the vote and secured funding for the Libertarian movement. Ron Paul bailed out twice.
Too bad Bill Clinton's career ended because of his affair. Oh, wait.
If Bathhouse Barry can get elected after three of this former lovers are murdered just before he starts his presidential campaign, Sanford would have this in the bag....however Sanford's "potential" supporters expect a lot more from a politician than the Obama supporters expect from their "savior"
Remember, it wasn't too long ago that O'bama cut $600B from defense. So most of today's cuts are a result of that reduction, not sequestration.
Since the Federal Government uses baseline budgeting there really is no cut in spending, just a deduction in what each department was to get...as Nathan points out.
That is one reason why conservatives are still upset. We are broke and yet we are still spending at astronomical levels.
Say Dept A was to get a 5% increase in its budget for this fiscal year..and now its only a 2.5% increase. The Feds call that a cut in spending. :)
Rand Paul's Hair is named after Jack Hunter?
What's the deal with Rand Paul's hair, Jack Hunter?
There seems to be a lot of complaining from conservatives, who should be happy with any spending cuts. They keep saying that the cuts are not smart, but each department gets to decide on its own how to implement these cuts. That there is not nearly as much fat in the budget as people thought should be dawning on people around now. These are real cuts, and the pain will be real. Cut more, more pain. There is not nearly as much wasteful spending as people think, and most of the waste is someone's pork, and probably being shielded from the cuts. Enjoy paying the same high taxes but getting less and less for your money...because that is the future that is being laid before you.
Obama ordered the MIlitary to cut those funds for the military education. not the DOD. wise up!
Obama lied again, and was called on it . Now he is only cutting those areas where the regular folks will feel the pain the most. And now he has called for the cutting of education funding for the vets to be stopped, but let the illegals get free support from the tax payers for education.
In the end what we're looking at is that they are making cuts NOW based on the fact they won't be able to spend EVEN MORE in the future. That's like me making $50,000 and cutting back on my grocery budget because my annual raise was only 2.3% instead of 5%. I'm still making $50,000 +2.3%. why am I cutting back on anything simply because I didn't get the additional 2.7%? I can tell you why. Politics. It's playacting smoke and mirrors. DoD was able to choose their cuts(even though in reality they're still getting as much money as they were before, just not as much as they wanted to get in the future), so why is it they chose to cut tuition assistance instead of maybe buying fewer bombs? Because if they bought fewer bombs, no one would care. Same with the White House shutting down self-guided tours. There are other cuts they could've made(even though they didn't have to make any), but they aimed for cuts that they perceived as having the most impact to people that they could then use to foment for support.
It's a game they're playing, and too many folks are buying in.
Please keep in mind that government military spending is often concentrated in certain communities, so you can argue what percent a cut it is, but practically speaking it will be a devistatin cut in some
Places and will barely register in others. While I do think we can find ways to reduce military spending, seeing hard-working folks get 20% pay cuts or laid off
because folks in Washigton can't agree is not the best way to do it.
Baffle 'em with bullshit Krauthammer is at it again. If we are going to compare to the GDP, which is predicted to be around 17 trillion dollars this year, the military budget of 800 billion is only 4.7 percent.
If the deficit is as projected this year, 845 billion, it is only 4.9 percent.
How about some numbers that make sense? If the sequester is 70 billion; and the deficit is 845 billion, than it is a whopping 8.28 percent reduction.
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2016,
Charleston City Paper