The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: fullautovalmet76 on October 22, 2011, 09:09:21 PM
-
I know some don't support Ron Paul because they believe he is unelectable, though I scratch my head when they tell me that having a policy for sound money, strong and appropriate national defense is unworkable, legalization of marijuana, and other items are just not workable. Even one has called him a "kook".
I will admit that his odds of winning the nomination are not good. He has run for the job two times before and lost. But I really believe what he says is the diagnosis and treatment for what ails our country today. The link to the video is below. It's about 60 minutes in length.
-
I'll admit alot of what he says makes sense, but then he says something that is just so bizzare or not explained well that it makes it just to scary to support him.
-
He is the last, best chance for this country. If his ideas are not implemented soon, the days of people like you and me being able to sit around and do this kind of stuff are numbered.
-
Incidentally, he mentions in the video the top three groups who contribute to his campaign are in this order:
1. Air Force
2. Army
3. Navy
I also note Ron Paul gets more contributions from the military than any of the other candidates and Obama.
Souce: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/07/ron-paul-military-campaign-donations-/1 (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/07/ron-paul-military-campaign-donations-/1)
Obviously the people that are actually implementing our foreign policy see that we need a change in direction.
-
I wonder if anybody knows why he gets more donations from active military than all other candidates combined?
-
I wonder if anybody knows why he gets more donations from active military than all other candidates combined?
It's because they like his unrealistic foreign policies.... ;D Or on a more serious tone, maybe they are tired of seeing their friends come home maimed or in body bags for no damn good reason.
-
Maybe its just because they are young and not to bright.
-
It's because they like his unrealistic foreign policies.... ;D Or on a more serious tone, maybe they are tired of seeing their friends come home maimed or in body bags for no damn good reason.
Yeah, I think they are tired of shedding their blood so that the corporate/banking syndicate makes trillions of dollars.
-
Yeah, I think they are tired of shedding their blood so that the corporate/banking syndicate makes trillions of dollars.
So what do you do with them when they all come home? There are no jobs for them. Given the choice I know that I would prefer to stay overseas in combat DOING MY JOB, than to come home to no work and no way to support my family.
-
Yeah, I think they are tired of shedding their blood so that the corporate/banking syndicate makes trillions of dollars.
Spoken like a true civilian.
-
Maybe its just because they are young and not to bright.
While young, most are pretty bright, as I know you are aware (E-3s with BA/BS degrees E-6/7s with Masters). The big draw is the chance to stay Stateside for a while. AF is averaging 250+ days deployed a year. Army isn't any better. Plus the other canidates just don't seem to have the charisma to get anybody really motivated.
It's total crap that he'll "bring them all home." There is no way in hell it would ever happen, we have to much invested. The British government's whole military strength is based on "mutual assistance" from the US/NATO and France. Abandoning allies is what got us into some of this mess in the Middel East, specifically Afghanistan, in the first place.
Yeah, I think they are tired of shedding their blood so that the corporate/banking syndicate makes trillions of dollars.
Have you ever sat down and talked with some of the troops coming back? The ones I've talked with have mostly said they'd go back in a heartbeat because they firmly believe we are doing the right thing. The original reason may have been wrong but we are doing good work and a good portion think leaving is a horrible idea. Nobody WANTS to see anybody getting hurt/killed but there is a glimmer of hope. Looking at kids playing ball where last week everybody was locked inside thier house afraid to look out the window is a powerful scene, and it has nothing to do with corporate greed. It's all about human dignity and freedom, at the personal level.
JC is right, unemployment for recent veterans is double the national average.
-
JC is right, unemployment for recent veterans is double the national average.
And that makes no damn sense to me. If I were an employer, I'd hire a vet even if they were slightly under qualified. Forget patriotism. Its just that with a vet you know they will follow orders, show up on time, have some leadership skills, can improvise and adapt to circumstances, and can be trusted not to raid the till. Anyone else? You are dealing with unknown qualities in these basic areas.
FQ13
-
Funny thing is FQ, that is part of the reason vets have trouble "adjusting" to a civilian workforce. We even talked about it in the seperation seminar before I left Active Duty. You get so used to following instructions, being early (not on-time), and attention to detail that the other employees hate you for it and you get frustrated with thier work ethic, or lack there of.
When I worked for EMS full time my trainer was like that. She was just out of high school (cheerleader,popular girl), maybe 20. Been a dispatcher for about 18 months. Tried to explain to me how I should handle the stress. I laughed, told her she had no idea what stress was. Basically she was a bit of a hag. I finally got tired of her attitude and told her "Look Barbie, you're an F-ing dispatcher not a God. The only time you've left the dispatch center is your annual ride, along where the crews won't let you touch anything. Your more interested in socializing than understanding wha's going on. Try a six month deployment with three months flying COMBAT missions in a place where no one like you, maintaining a picture of what can hurt you and where the friendlies are." I though she was going to faint, but went crying to the Supervisor. He happened to have been a Coast Guard Rescue Swimmer and told her to sit down and shut up, then signed me off to work alone.
-
Funny thing is FQ, that is part of the reason vets have trouble "adjusting" to a civilian workforce. We even talked about it in the seperation seminar before I left Active Duty. You get so used to following instructions, being early (not on-time), and attention to detail that the other employees hate you for it and you get frustrated with thier work ethic, or lack there of.
Bingo..
Today, even after 30 years as a civilian, I expect excellence from those around me including my superiors management! Rarely do I actually get that and end up doing more than what's necessary because of that work ethic that's lacking in the todays workforce. It is extremely frustrating for me, I can only imagine what it's like for a recent Vet upon separation.
We hired a kid about eight months ago, young Air Force E5, smart, likeable and worked his ass off. Had a bit of Iraq imbedded in his abdomen with about 30% disability from the VA. They hired him into the QA department and without any real QA background, he was putting everyone else to shame in a matter of a couple of weeks. As was mentioned, the slob of an inspector who basically couldn't find his ass with both hands and a flashlight started talking crap about him and he was let go about a week after I told them to F-off!
-
JNevis, yes, they are intelligent enough, when I posted that I was thinking of experience.
At 18-21 all you really know is high school and then how ever much service you've had.
No matter how smart they are (or we were) very few have anything to go by beyond the BS being tossed around.
On the other topic, while it may suck to see their buddies killed and wounded, that's the job they volunteered for.
None of them were drafted.
Hopefully 1991 rid us of the ones who"just joined for the free education".
-
JNevis, yes, they are intelligent enough, when I posted that I was thinking of experience.
At 18-21 all you really know is high school and then how ever much service you've had.
No matter how smart they are (or we were) very few have anything to go by beyond the BS being tossed around.
On the other topic, while it may suck to see their buddies killed and wounded, that's the job they volunteered for.
None of them were drafted.
Hopefully 1991 rid us of the ones who"just joined for the free education".
I think you mean 2001. The Gulf War, despite the potential danger was a live fire exercise. No insult to those killed or wounded, but your odds of becoming a casualty were greater if you served on a base stateside (including a cadet a couple of years ahead of me who died when a forklift dropped a pallet it was loading onto a truck) . Not so much inthe conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan.
FQ13
-
Most of the draftees from the end of the draft era left in droves at or during the first Gulf War, since that was around the 20 yr mark. Actually the LAST draftee just retired this year. Drafted in 1972 CSM Jeff Mellinger retired this summer.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/03/last-vietnam-draftee-army_n_889546.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/03/last-vietnam-draftee-army_n_889546.html)
-
The difference between Ron Paul/Libertarian Platform is that if we moved to what we feel would be a reasonable/practical compromise, we would be pulling them away from what most of us would feel was the "(impractical) ideal".
With most other candidates, we would be pulling them towards that ideal.
-
IMHO, Regardless, Someone like Ron Paul, doesn't connect with the majority of soldiers that have been there and done that. Despite good intentions, and his record as an Air Force Flight Surgeon (63-68), there is a separation of the True Patriotism and sacrifice, civilians and 99.99% of any politician will ever understand.
However, perhaps that is why Paul is so popular with younger voters.(Reference to the OP at the Univ. Of Iowa). Moreover, Paul correlates with young soldiers eager to do their duty and get back home to their families and be left alone from undue Gov't interference, (of which, is a good thing).
Paul was/is a "Libertarian" candidate,... in 1988, and other runs, but somehow always falls back to an "R" candidate, after realizing that is the only chance of re-election.
After many Congressional defeats and victories, the term limits he is in favor of, would have left him out of office decades ago.
-
I think you mean 2001. The Gulf War, despite the potential danger was a live fire exercise. No insult to those killed or wounded, but your odds of becoming a casualty were greater if you served on a base stateside (including a cadet a couple of years ahead of me who died when a forklift dropped a pallet it was loading onto a truck) . Not so much inthe conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan.
FQ13
No, I meant 91 when a large number of Guard and Reserve troops bitched about being deployed saying, "I only signed up for the free education, I don't want to go to any war"
Toughski Shitski hot shot, the education wasn't "free".