Progressive government engulfing all presidential canidates except Ron Paul?

Question

Progressive government, is change for the sake of change. The argument goes: "Times/technology change so people/government must change also"! Is this both true & beneficial? Times/technology DO change, but people & their "general needs"(maslow's hierarchy of needs) do not change. What benefits then, would a progressive government offer Americans today, can ANYONE answer this question? Representative Paul handily pointed out that our war in Iraq is being funded by the Chinese(trade deficit) our troops being spread out all over the globe(shades of the Roman empire!) are stretched to thin & our federal reserve note(debt based!) is losing more & more buying power. THE republican democrat part(ies?) canidates & goals seem to be becoming undistinguishable from one another. "Can't we all just get along", be like one another is a fallacy. That's why there exists idependent nations, independent states with in a nation, counties & municipalities! Does one care to challenge the above?

Answer 1

To chalenge this?? Hmmmmm, interesting, take the opposite side of the debate for awhile....OK...lets try and see what comes up.

Progressive government isnt change for the sake of change..its change so that the government can better provide for its people. Technology may play a role in this but its not the reason...it only serves as a medium to reach the goal of the reason.

Technology changes to better serve the people steadfast needs. This goes way back to ancient times. First we were nomadic, then we realized that if we grew our own food in a single area we could settle in. Then we realized that if we used tools instead of our hands we could produce food faster. Then we relaizedd that if we use power tools of soome osrt we could mass produce food and thus expand our sphere of influence. So while the basic needs are the same, we are better equiped to address those needs in a more efficient manner with thechnology.

While all of this might happen in a free market - because the government collects taxes it can help speed this up a bit with funding....I didnt say it was right...I said it could do it.

All of this technology tends to "shrink" the size of the world. Not literally but figuratively, as it brings us closer together. The smaller the world becomes the greater the chances of having a single government. Each nation will co-join other nations until eventually you have one world government....dont believe me? - look at the europen union.

Look at our orwellian works and tell me its not already begining to happen. Europa is almost in place. Oceania is already being addressed with talk of a north american union. Its funny how one persons tiatribe agianst the soviet union would become the doctrine of a western world.

All of this will eventually lead to one world order, one world government...sooner or later someone will get smart enough to stop it..but for now - progressive governemnt continues to march forth.


Hmmmm, that was a lot harder then I thought it would be...LOL...wonder why no one else tried - especially the liberal readers in this forum - I would have thought they would jump at an opportunity to try to prove their point of view.

Answer 2

How come Ron Paul was the ONLY candidate to vote against the bill to check those wanting to buy a gun to see if they have documented mental problems?
He must be a maverick if he wants to risk allowing crazy people owning guns!
I agree that our Founding Fathers gave us a Constitution that is based on the principles of FREEDOM and they understood that POWER CORRUPTS.
That must give all potential tyrants a FIT!
I hope THAT portion of his political philosophy is well understood and sticks in the minds of voters.
The constitution is designed to be changed, but must be done with EXTREME care, only when absolutely essential and must always be directed toward keeping Government LIMITED!

Answer 3

by utilizing eliminating the branch of practise and bush's no baby left in the back of software you will see greater money going to greater colleges. you will see happier instructors and directors and an prolonged-late resurgence in the severe young infants of united states of america of america. this might enable ALL scholars to study perfect spelling and grammar! this could be of excellent use to you sooner or later. As an self sustaining, you're probably to bump right into a myriad of frustrations with the neo-conservative pass. stick with your weapons. do no longer permit Fox information and Yahoo! Headlines dictate what you recognize. there are various great firms who can no longer have adequate money to have Ron Paul elected. fortuitously, the Ron Paul pass is lots greater than Yahoo! and Fox information. in any different case, we would have a Fascist state. seem up Fascism on Wikipedia. you will see why maximum of united states of america of america dislikes George W. Bush. in many cases talking, if somebody says something destructive approximately Ron Paul, they're in basic terms uneducated. once you rigidity them to ensure, they're going to substitute their innovations extremely quickly.

Answer 4

You know I won't challenge it. You hit the nail on the head.

None of the differences between the two major parties matter one bit when they're both interested in restricting individual liberties and expanding the powers of government.

Answer 5

I agree. The government has really lost track of itself when issues like abortion take center stage when our nation's dollar is becoming worthless and we're causing a new breed of terrorists in Iraq.

Answer 6

I think it is political cowardly act to shun a truthful person like Ron Paul, whom I wish good luck, please God. He is the real progressive politician.