Which Candidate?

Name which candidate has came out and talked about plan to fight cancer, ALS, and Alzheimer’s?


You are more likely to come in contact with one of those than a terrorist or wild man with a gun.

Maybe one did but I missed it.

Crosscheck said:

Name which candidate has came out and talked about plan to fight cancer, ALS, and Alzheimer’s?


You are more likely to come in contact with one of those than a terrorist or wild man with a gun.

Maybe one did but I missed it.

Click to expand...

I'm curious. How are these a "Government" problem?

Did we form a union to cure cancer? ALS? Alzheimers?

Did I miss that in my government class?

Why just those three? How about a cure for the common cold, measles, hair loss...death?

When you can explain why this is a "Government" responsibility, then maybe we can try to answer why candidates aren't coming out to talk about it.

Crosscheck said:

Name which candidate has came out and talked about plan to fight cancer, ALS, and Alzheimer’s?


You are more likely to come in contact with one of those than a terrorist or wild man with a gun.

Maybe one did but I missed it.

Click to expand...

Joe Biden, Oh wait, he's "not running."

Captain Adverse said:

I'm curious. How are these a "Government" problem?

Did we form a union to cure cancer? ALS? Alzheimers?

Did I miss that in my government class?

Why just those three? How about a cure for the common cold, measles, hair loss...death?

When you can explain why this is a "Government" responsibility, then maybe we can try to answer why candidates aren't coming out to talk about it.

Click to expand...

You probably missed it in school but we do have a "Government" Dept of Health and Human Issues. But I know it is more important we spend our money playing Whac-A -Mole in the Middle East.

Crosscheck said:

You probably missed it in school but we do have a "Government" Dept of Health and Human Issues. But I know it is more important we spend our money playing Whac-A -Mole in the Middle East.

Click to expand...

No, it I more important for us to CUT the responsibilities of central government down as much as possible, not add more responsibilities which costs us more.

Captain Adverse said:

No, it I more important for us to CUT the responsibilities of central government down as much as possible, not add more responsibilities which costs us more.

Click to expand...

Yes, lets save that money for being the policeman of others countries who hate us. That was foolish of me thinking of spending it on ourselves.

Crosscheck said:

Yes, lets save that money for being the policeman of others countries who hate us. That was foolish of me thinking of spending it on ourselves.

Click to expand...

Yah, because the South Koreans, Filipinos, Kuwatis, Baltic States, etc hate us sooooo much

Crosscheck said:

Yes, lets save that money for being the policeman of others countries who hate us. That was foolish of me thinking of spending it on ourselves.

Click to expand...

Your problem lies in presenting your position as an either/or equation.

Wherever did you get the idea I support being the world's policeman? If you sift around I'm sure you'll find posts of mine that clearly indicate otherwise.

No, it's not EITHER we save money by not investing in government sponsored medical research OR we spend it on military adventurism.

Nope, it's cut back on government spending in general and focus on the core duties we expect our government to perform. One of those is national defense. So a standing military force just strong enough to deter others from messing with us.

Captain Adverse said:

Your problem lies in presenting your position as an either/or equation.

Wherever did you get the idea I support being the world's policeman? If you sift around I'm sure you'll find posts of mine that clearly indicate otherwise.

No, it's not EITHER we save money by not investing in government sponsored medical research OR we spend it on military adventurism.

Nope, it's cut back on government spending in general and focus on the core duties we expect our government to perform. One of those is national defense. So a standing military force just strong enough to deter others from messing with us.

Click to expand...

I totally agree with you on cutting back on government spending but the lobbyists and corrupt politicians are so embedded together it is near impossible.

My original question came up after listening to a draft dodger president candidate bark about smashing ISIS. Of course that wouldn't involve him or any of his family as none of them has ever worn an US military uniform.

So instead of blowing money over there why not argue for medical research which could actually benefit the taxpayers.

I agree with a strong military defense and we could use that along our borders. Perhaps don't need a wall, we could maintain a standing army patrolling our borders.

Tigerace117 said:

Yah, because the South Koreans, Filipinos, Kuwatis, Baltic States, etc hate us sooooo much

Click to expand...

I stand corrected. Some countries appreciate our money spent there and for us providing them their police force.