I don't think I made myself clear enough. I meant that Ron Paul and his draconian ideas were prevalent 30 years ago. No one buys a thirty year old car to run a business with, or do they? You need to move with the times and of course, that is now. Going back to he glory days of Reagan and all the other doddles is not the way to go. Ron Paul's ideas and his best years are in the past and in 12 months time, so should he be.
Romney is a doer, you guys say you want compromise, well compromise a little and give Romney a chance. He WILL lower the deficit. He WILL put America back to work. He WILL bring back America`s great standing in the the world. Romney is the only Republican candidate that wants to affect "Fair" trade with China. Mitt is a genuine nice guy, when Perry had trouble remembering, it was Romney throwing him life lines of agency names to help him like "EPA?". Romney is one of the good ones.
Christ - the reports we are getting here about his past does not sugar coat him like you do. You have tuned him up to be like the second coming of Christ. Take another couple of Panadol and lie down before you have a heart attack. He is not that good.
I don't think I made myself clear enough. I meant that Ron Paul and his draconian ideas were prevalent 30 years ago. No one buys a thirty year old car to run a business with, or do they? You need to move with the times and of course, that is now. Going back to he glory days of Reagan and all the other doddles is not the way to go. Ron Paul's ideas and his best years are in the past and in 12 months time, so should he be."
Do you think Paul is a Reagan clone wanting to return to the Reagan policies? Is so you had better find better sources to learn up on Ron Paul.
Our country's government has a severe spending problem and Paul has the most common sense approach to fixing it where as the others all make promises that I'll bet will never come true like Obama's spending billions with the promise of lowering unemployment and creating jobs.
I would think you would favor Paul's views to stop using U.S. tax payer's money to bribe and prop up foreign leaders and try to influence their county's positions. One would think you would favor Paul's belief that the U.S. should not be running around trying to play the policeman for the entire world and that we should close many of the roughly 1000 military bases we have in other countries. Do you not agree with Paul that we should bring home U.S. troops and cut defense spending? Paul is th only candidate in either party warning against saber rattling with Iran over their nuclear program. Paul favors dialogue over force.
"Do you think Paul is a Reagan clone wanting to return to the Reagan policies? Is so you had better find better sources to learn up on Ron Paul. "
Good catch dag. And as you read gough's post you see that he tells us to give Romney a chance and then at the end tells us how horrible he is. I knew there was good Ganja in Oz ,but he must have gotten into a bad batch.
But, anyway, what he says may more show an ignorance of Reagan than of Paul. RR
s handlers and advisors (he wasnever really in on it..which is half a$$ed forgivable, I guess bein' such a good fellar and all)) started us down the most liberal, ruthless and unbridled looting of the public weal we'd seen since the 1830s.
One thing going for us is that we are so rich, so blessed that it took 30 years for it to glare at us.
You'll be glad to know that one of those "sites" that you deplore has a piece in it that directly responds to what you suggest.
The guy (Simon Johnson) should be Sec. of the Treasury instead of Tim Geithner. I have no idea if you've heard of him or not but if you poke around a bit you might find that he gets it pretty good:
A favorite quote, probably worth a tag since it is about change out time-
Adam Smith: "There is a lot of ruin in a nation."
And the context of that statement is that it was made to a young associate who was wringing his hands over the fiscal disaster that fighting with the French and Americans was visiting upon Britain.
When it is the greatest empire in history, there is indeed a lot of ruin before we are ruined. But history indicates that sooner or later we shall be.
3020...did you catch the news reports this AM that President Obama has announced that he is going to make it a high priority to re-orgainze the greater governmetn beauracracy to eliminate overlapping agencies and departments with the intent of streamlining and reducing public expenditures as well as making processes and regulations more uniform and consistent so a person wanting to do something doesn't have to meet himself in the hallway as he goes from door to door?
That needs to be done in my state's government also and our Democratic Governer has charged the GOP House and Senate with coming up with plans to do much the same here. Sorely needed and well warrented, as I believe it is in D.C. also.
So what do you suppose he's up to? What's the catch to or the gimmick in these proposals?
If some savings were realized would you give them credit, or after doing what nobody has had the nerve to do before would it draw your ire because however much it was surely wasn't enough? Even if it was all that anybody had ever done since WW2, as the danged multi-headed monster has grown like a weed?
I suppose it's not much different today, in your eyes, but I know a number of people, good, hardworking people, that lost because of that era. It was the debt that killed them, but that was the beginning of farming from fence row to fence row, and we (farmers) trusted they (CBT&government) told us. Suddenly all these, (surpluses) surfaced, and we (farmers) took in the (_@_) again. No, Reagan didn't do the farmers any favors.