First off, let's address that "hung from a tree" bit. Insensitive, much? Oh, but I understand, you're in a dark room in your underwear behind a screen, so it's okay to make incendiary comments like that.
Second, Paul wouldn't be the worst thing that happened to the White House. He might do better than Clinton, even. I think you ought to look more toward Republican opposition of Paul than Democratic. Staunch Dems will be voting the party line, yes, but Paul generated enough interest among independents last election that he may be able to woo some Dem-Indies to his side. If you've been watching the news lately, CNN and MSNBC have been lampooning Fox for sidestepping Paul in the straw poll.
Third, NATO troops are offering weapons and air support to Libyan rebels. Boots aren't on the ground. Our current president has made strong efforts to keep from getting involved in more skirmishes; he's drawn down the troops from Iraq and Afghanistan (waaaaay later than he initially promised, I grant you). If I recall correctly, Paul was as opposed to the wars initially as Kucinich. The only thing I could see him doing was following an Obama doctrine with more gusto and quickness.
Finally, Medicare can't sustain itself under the current structure of our budget. It, combined with Defense, make up over 65% of the budget. Revenue increases, tax hole closures, and infrastructure reorganization of the whole nature of healthcare are the things that will keep the concept of Medicare/Obamacare afloat. Hospitals make too much money on procedures, PharmCos make too much money off life saving drugs that eventually get recalled for life-threatening side effects. I'll grant you, Obamacare wasn't really the solution. Putting a boot up the ass of the Industry is.
Do you think Ron Paul would be a better president than Obama?
← View full post
Wow...
First off, let's address that "hung from a tree" bit. Insensitive, much? Oh, but I understand, you're in a dark room in your underwear behind a screen, so it's okay to make incendiary comments like that.
Second, Paul wouldn't be the worst thing that happened to the White House. He might do better than Clinton, even. I think you ought to look more toward Republican opposition of Paul than Democratic. Staunch Dems will be voting the party line, yes, but Paul generated enough interest among independents last election that he may be able to woo some Dem-Indies to his side. If you've been watching the news lately, CNN and MSNBC have been lampooning Fox for sidestepping Paul in the straw poll.
Third, NATO troops are offering weapons and air support to Libyan rebels. Boots aren't on the ground. Our current president has made strong efforts to keep from getting involved in more skirmishes; he's drawn down the troops from Iraq and Afghanistan (waaaaay later than he initially promised, I grant you). If I recall correctly, Paul was as opposed to the wars initially as Kucinich. The only thing I could see him doing was following an Obama doctrine with more gusto and quickness.
Finally, Medicare can't sustain itself under the current structure of our budget. It, combined with Defense, make up over 65% of the budget. Revenue increases, tax hole closures, and infrastructure reorganization of the whole nature of healthcare are the things that will keep the concept of Medicare/Obamacare afloat. Hospitals make too much money on procedures, PharmCos make too much money off life saving drugs that eventually get recalled for life-threatening side effects. I'll grant you, Obamacare wasn't really the solution. Putting a boot up the ass of the Industry is.