Military PARADOX
I have no desire to own a gun but I have respect for the right (to own one.)
Personal gun ownership meant that raising taxes for military maintenance was minimal. Conservative posturing is ONLY defensive. That makes Presidents Carter and Clinton the most conservative since President Eisenhower. Aggressive military action makes a liberal gamble toward empire.
The NeoCON administration was the most liberal ever! AND the fourteen trillion dollar debt (mainly by military spending deficit) cannot make the future responsible for what WAS DONE TO them. If weapons didn't make some (phony conservatives) aggressive, an individuals defense would become acceptable socialism (because it isn't financial skimming like insurance has become.)
Because it is a "pooling" of weapons for the common good, there is nothing more socialistic (as commonly understood*) than an army, (*mostly because of the hierarchy of authority.) The tax percentage invested in our military makes us the most socialistic country imaginable.
Insurance is a pooling of money for the "common good" which was how we were tricked into a socialism that gambles with disaster. Only the wealthy (obsessive compulsive hoarders) had insurance before WWII. Prosperity from the ASSURANCE policy, called Social Security (for a good reason,) made US think we could ALL play that game.
Does anyone (really) CHOOSE to not have insurance? You can choose the caveman, the gekko, the stack of bills w/ google eyes, etc. but they are all GEICO, making Warren Buffet super wealthy! Social Security is your right to bare arms in that it is defensive. Republics ARE entitlements (to participate.) Those who would remove entitlements are socialists. What kind of entitlements do you find in the military?
We believe the military projects our freedom but how free are individuals in military service? Ask Bradley Manning about his freedom of speech.
Just by growing the military population weakens the reach of constitutional protection. (not to mention prison growth!)
Military is a "wrong tool" paradox in that we are driving in nails we should be pulling out.
Why not a Department of Peace in The Cabinet?
The right to bare arms is one of those exceptional thoughts, because exceptions were made before rules or we couldn't all be made so exceptional, and rules of military service limit the freedoms of individuality.
Personal gun ownership meant that raising taxes for military maintenance was minimal. Conservative posturing is ONLY defensive. That makes Presidents Carter and Clinton the most conservative since President Eisenhower. Aggressive military action makes a liberal gamble toward empire.
The NeoCON administration was the most liberal ever! AND the fourteen trillion dollar debt (mainly by military spending deficit) cannot make the future responsible for what WAS DONE TO them. If weapons didn't make some (phony conservatives) aggressive, an individuals defense would become acceptable socialism (because it isn't financial skimming like insurance has become.)
Because it is a "pooling" of weapons for the common good, there is nothing more socialistic (as commonly understood*) than an army, (*mostly because of the hierarchy of authority.) The tax percentage invested in our military makes us the most socialistic country imaginable.
Insurance is a pooling of money for the "common good" which was how we were tricked into a socialism that gambles with disaster. Only the wealthy (obsessive compulsive hoarders) had insurance before WWII. Prosperity from the ASSURANCE policy, called Social Security (for a good reason,) made US think we could ALL play that game.
Does anyone (really) CHOOSE to not have insurance? You can choose the caveman, the gekko, the stack of bills w/ google eyes, etc. but they are all GEICO, making Warren Buffet super wealthy! Social Security is your right to bare arms in that it is defensive. Republics ARE entitlements (to participate.) Those who would remove entitlements are socialists. What kind of entitlements do you find in the military?
We believe the military projects our freedom but how free are individuals in military service? Ask Bradley Manning about his freedom of speech.
Just by growing the military population weakens the reach of constitutional protection. (not to mention prison growth!)
Military is a "wrong tool" paradox in that we are driving in nails we should be pulling out.
Why not a Department of Peace in The Cabinet?
The right to bare arms is one of those exceptional thoughts, because exceptions were made before rules or we couldn't all be made so exceptional, and rules of military service limit the freedoms of individuality.
posted by brad4d | 8:23 AM
2 Comments:
I look at the news and think that everyone should own a gun.
because what percentage are crazy, and crazies do what with them? Guns are care-takers not care-givers! I once thought you were more of a care-giver and less reflexively crazy than me...
Post a Comment
<< Home