Sometimes I wonder if the same lobbyists that are hired for the
military/industrial complex and cheap illegal foreign workers also pay
columnists like this to "whip up the masses" against each other.A LOT of Americans (with the exceptions of RINO's like McCain,
Lindsay Graham and Hatch) are pretty tired of "nation building" when we
can't even afford to provide basic healthcare or food/shelter for our OWN
citizens.The slogan "America comes first" is really the
slogan of most all rational Americans.The only ones who aren't
behind that effort are the lobbyists for businesses who want to keep the public
"gravy train" coming.
Gerson equates influence with military power. While there is truth in that, the
American example of freedom and restraint gives us moral authority that is
influential as well. The irony is a "Christian" nation that solves every
problem with a gun.
@ Fitness Frank. According to our constitution its not the obligation of the
government to provide basic healthcare, food or shelter for its own citizens.
Those are individual responsibilities. And by the way, the 47% of Americans who
pay no federal income taxes is the real public gravy train! As we are learning
by our exploding national debt there is not enough money in the economy to pay
for healthcare, food or shelter for those who will not do it for themselves.
A nation's ability to exert military power and influence foreign nations is
directly related to its economic ability to pay for the effort.While
the upper economic classes export good jobs to China, the jobs that remain or
are subsequently created don't pay enough to generate sufficient tax money
for our expansive defense capability.Median household income is now
around $50,000 a year, where in 2007 it was $54,000 a year. It doesn't
take a genius to figure out that this exacerbates the 47% freeloader problem
Mountain Man talks about - and gives us less money to pay for the defense
related employees who are dependent upon tax money. Lower incomes
in the middle class equate to less money for military muscle, the capability of
projecting our influence externally.Corporations and the wealthy are
flush with cash. Many of them really don't care about American foreign
policy or democratic values. It doesn't make sense to keep asking the
people who have less to contribute more.
@ "Mountainman" Where in the constitution does it say we should provide
for "nation building" and military intervention in (at last count over
90 nations)around the globe?I AGREE with you that those are
individual responsibilities; EXCEPT - all aspects of the healthcare delivery
system is controlled in some way by the federal government.I'm
not NECESSARILY advocating for the govt. to deliver basic healthcare, food or
shelter for its own citizens. I'm merely pointing out the "upside
down" thinking that we currently are providing much more for other
countries' needs than we should.Simply put, if it were up to
you (never mind the 47% argument, or the "free healthcare" argument)
which would YOU rather do - spend 1 trillion on our own citizens, or 1 trillion
on nation building overseas?