OT again, again..
Yes, I'm a moderate Republican... call me a pragmatist, if you will, who believes that their are certain places where the public sector can intervene where there is private market failure.
But I certainly do not believe that just because a totalitarian dictator like Castro or Ortega, being able to nationalize personal property in the name of "marxist revolution", provides cause to deny or undermine the private property laws or rights of ownership upon which this nation and classical libertarian economic thought are soundly based. If we don't stand for those principles everywhere, it will undermine our right to assert those values here.
And my views have nothing to do with my military experience. I certainly have not been "brainwashed" as I have clearly stated here when people start freaking about Nuclear spying or the threat of Chinese theft of US secrets. In fact, my beliefs are probably quite contrary to most of the brass at the pentagon, who see a boogie man around every corner.
I focus on deeper themes and underlying perspectives of relative political and physical power, not the trivia.
Why is it that you were unable to provide a more thorough rebuttal to my response to you? Did the comment about Jewish gold confiscated by the Nazis leave you stymied for an adequate counter-argument?
You can see that certain ethnic groups have been provided EXTENSIVE assistance towards recouping damages from expropriation of personal property. Why should the Cubans or Nicaraguans, or anyone else be different solely for the purpose of political expediency?
Regards,
Ron |
