Replies

I’m retired from the Marine Corps and I plan to vote for Dr. Paul. Many of my friends, also retired military, mostly Marine Corps, also plan to support and vote for him. Including a full bird Colonel whom I used to work for at Camp Pendleton. Does that help answer your question?

And no, I am no part of the weed vote, though I firmly believe we’d be far better served if the WOsD and the DEA/ATF/IRS, etc., were abolished, their agents jailed or executed and their buildings torn down and the land sown with salt.

“I plan to vote for Dr. Paul. Many of my friends, also retired military, mostly Marine Corps, also plan to support and vote for him.”

That just proves you hand out with a bunch of loony veterans. I’m a sane veteran.

“Does that help answer your question?”

Your personal anecdote is an outlier. Most veterans support a strong military and are not big fans of appeasement on terrorism and Iran getting nukes.

So, no. You’re personal story is not inspiring but downright sad.

“we’d be far better served if the WOsD and the DEA/ATF/IRS, etc., were abolished, their agents jailed or EXECUTED”

Executed eh? Yep, you’re a RonPaul loon alright.

I’m retired from the Marine Corps and I plan to vote for Dr. Paul. Many of my friends, also retired military, mostly Marine Corps, also plan to support and vote for him. Including a full bird Colonel whom I used to work for at Camp Pendleton. Does that help answer your question?

And no, I am no part of the weed vote, though I firmly believe we’d be far better served if the WOsD and the DEA/ATF/IRS, etc., were abolished, their agents jailed or executed and their buildings torn down and the land sown with salt.

Please consider righteousness. The libertarian view of morality as a relative thing, i.e., secular humanism, places the righteousness of America and her military at odds with libertarianism, which always intellectually starts out in a good freedom-oriented place and inevitably winds up too far afield towards moral ambivolence.

Please consider that there can be no ambivolence in morality, it is either yea or nay, with ambivolence abandoning morality. Without morality our cause is not just - and popularity is decidedly no certain indicator of morality. Once, as a child in school, all the other members of my class went along with a child who had been scolded by the teacher, saying that she hit him. As I had witnessed this event, I simply told the teacher the truth when she asked me when she took me aside in an "assembly". I heard nothing on the issue until a few years later when it was revealed to me what the other children had done, which I did not know at the time. I very often rub organizations the wrong way because I stick with what is true and right regardless of the the internal organizational consequences.

The whole idea of DADT replacing court-martial was the beginning of the end of morality in the services and I knew that when it passed. The stealth repeal of morality laws throughout America based on the Model Penal Code of 1962 provided the roots of the basis for today's homosexual lobby. As long as morality laws were in place, political activism was inhibited by the fact that politicians would not be openly homosexual. Decline in national morality always portends general national decline.

The positions of Paul on cutting bureaucracy are great; whole departments need to be eliminated. But Santorum also advocates this type of cutting; Paul is not the only candidate advocating cutting of non-defense General Fund spending. And certainly intelligent people realize that any money wasted is money that could have been wisely spent efficiently providing for national defense. America relies on her military for free existence.

Paul's ideas on the Fed being out of control are accurate. Even though a gigantic change in how the Treasury and Fed work is needed, precisely what the resulting organization looks like is the most important question, as an ill-conceived replacement could quite easily be worse. His support for a gold standard reveals that he any many who support him have little knowledge of the history of money. A gold "backing" will not prevent devaluation of the currency; the Spanish empire proves this. As long as the sitting government has control of money creation, devalution will always be a temptation for lawmakers. There is nothing special about gold or any "backing" of currency that prevents the "backing" from being readjusted to devalue the currency. The only thing that stands between sound currency and rampant devaluation is the morality of the politicians of the current generation.

Precious metal salesmen and some who hold gold as in investment are the ones who pitch this economic fallacy that far too many Americans have sopped up. One must bear in mind that the value of gold, right off the bat, would necessarily have to be valued at least 10 times higher than it is the moment the "backing" is introduced. Enough bankers and politicians are fully aware of this so that it remains a conspiracy-theorists dream.

Drug abuse reveals a weakness of character of the type that I'm sure you realize is a fatal flaw in a military group. It's quite troubling that members of the U.S. military no longer understand that free-wheeling moral values and drug use advocated by libertarianism is the hallmark of a military in structural decline. Great American military leaders of the past would be aghast at the decline of Christian moral values that has taken root in our society and seeped into our military. I mean this in no way to disparage America or her military, but as a lone voice calling upon them to repent.

America thanks you for your service.