How does a request for military assistance translate into our military protecting the "free world"? (Whatever that means.)

__________________
No man is an island...
Each man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in Mankind.
And therefore, never send to know
For whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
—John Donne

There are at least a dozen of our allies AT LEAST..that save BILLIONS$ every year not having to support a large army because they know they can count on us to defend them.
One of the PRIMARY reasons WWII is not likely to happen is because the U.S. military will come to the immediate aid of these countries...

Perhaps you missed it - President Bush and Japan met again just this past week formally declaring to Japan that the American military will come to her aid with full force if they were attacked.

Try water.

Luckily i am not a Liberal and get jealous everytime i see someone with more junk than me for it does not bother me that the reality of life is that it is not fair.

Im an adult.

What do you think of an "at-will" unemployment compensation that pays an adult (potential) labor market participant a subsidy (approximately ten thousand per year) to not provide traditional labor to the economy.

I let the bum outside work sleep behind our company sign.

I only threatened to call the cops once when he was slapping his hands together and muttering unintelligible words very loudly.

He is usually gone by morning but we sometimes have to shoo him off when a prospective client is coming by.

What I believe most people on the--in my opinion--wrong side of this debate, view this world as black and white, they seem to believe that we all live with equal opportunity, and treatment. They tend to back their ranting, with equality uber alles. Sure, let's talk equality, if everyone in America was truly treated equally, there would be far fewer problems, and more people would be capable of providing for themselves and their families.

But when people start blaming single mothers for the men they slept with, and that they should be forced to get a job instead of raising their children, I just don't know where their heart is.

Do most of you libertarians feel that the government is holding you down? Are social programs the reason you're not rich?

All this ranting against liberalism is like biting the hand that feeds you. Without liberalism, there wouldn't be a United States of America. How many of you got student loans? You can thank liberalism for that.

__________________
Big Number of 2008
8,217,246
Obama's Margin of Victory

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."

-Thomas Jefferson

I don't think that all the people on the "wrong side" are so naive as you think. Rather, some people believe that some elements of government intervention are more harmful than helpful to the population's welfare. Some government intervention is beneficial, I would say, but many people tend to see modern liberals as as big-government socialists. FDR was a very new type of "liberal" with his threats to trample the Constitution and his advisors' wills to establish a Soviet-style economy.

True; a lot of people show no compassion in trying to empathize with a person's situations. Instead, the mantra of "personal responsibility" is repeated and therefore, no empathy is required. I've just learned about the "fundamental attribution error" described by sociologists - that is, the error to overemphasize an individual's role in the context of their decisions and situation (not that underemphasizing that role is any good, either). But a lack of compassion is not necessarily correlated to one's political views. A lot of conservatives are fond of charity, and I have not met one that believes a minimal social safety net is a bad idea. There are just disagreements on what should constitute that safety net.

I don't think it is that; a lot of people seem to feel that social programs are largely ineffective and costly.

There is a problem with this; the sense of the word "liberalism" has changed since the founding of the United States. Milton Friedman says it well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classic...cal_liberalism

__________________
No man is an island...
Each man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in Mankind.
And therefore, never send to know
For whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
—John Donne

Very well laid out arguement Luap. I always enjoy reading your posts even when I disagree with your positions.

What if that individual could apply for at-will unemployment compensation? That person could then use that money to find a place to live (perhaps with other people) and would spend most of their money in the local economy, possibly becoming a good customer.

We do that, its called welfare

Apparently, welfare is not consumer friendly enough for that particular person. At-will unemployment compensation should be no more difficult to obtain than unemployment insurance.