http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2790170/posts
Can Romney say he wants to increase military spending without coming across as fiscally irresponsible? Isn't our debt a bigger problem than terrorism?
Why do people seem to think terrorism is a bigger problem than debt right now? Is it rational to think that way?
Originally posted by Metal Brain1. Yes, but only because many "fiscal conservatives" exclude the military from any budgetary constraints. Logically, not really.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2790170/posts
Can Romney say he wants to increase military spending without coming across as fiscally irresponsible? Isn't our debt a bigger problem than terrorism?
Why do people seem to think terrorism is a bigger problem than debt right now? Is it rational to think that way?
2. Probably, but you can't take a picture of debt with a suicide bomb belt that will make you do anything but laugh.
3. Because terrorism is a convenient boogeyman - it causes deaths in bunches and that is viscerally scary. Just like we get scared of flying whenever there is a plane crash because many people die in one crash, but we don't think twice about driving when there is a higher chance of you dying in your car.
4. People generally are somewhat rational, but fear causes people to lose their rational decision making ability.
Originally posted by EladarThe Framers didn't even want a standing army; they'd be appalled by the idea that the US now spends more on "defense" they the rest of the world combined.
If I remember correctly, providing for the common defense is directly stated in the Constitution as one of the roles for the US government.
Providing for Social Safety Net programs is not stated in the Constitution.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraSo people are just generally stupid.
Most Democrats and most Republicans.
Now we know why my country is going in the wrong direction, stupid people. It seems those stupid people can see the country is going in the wrong direction but can't understand that it is because of their own stupidity.
Originally posted by EladarSocial security net is a common defense against internal instability. One must balance the internal and the external grasshopper.....
If I remember correctly, providing for the common defense is directly stated in the Constitution as one of the roles for the US government.
Providing for Social Safety Net programs is not stated in the Constitution.
American's need to evolve their understanding of the constitution over time. If they choose to maintain a literal interpretation of every word, they stand the risk of developing a similar closed mindset as has occurred amongst many of the more extreme factions within Islam. While Orthodoxy may have its benefits, as the constitution becomes more sacred, there may be little difference, in terms of intransigent reactionary thinking, to separate the, 'As our Founding Fathers decreed' ultra conservative mindset, from the Jihadist.
It seems fitting that these two mindsets are pitted together in a battle to the finish.