Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well now there at least TWO sane people in Washington, Ron and Rand. Now there's a ticket I could support!
People can talk all they want to about AquaBuddha, and how much of a "redneck" and "backward" Paul is, but this guy (Rand) is an ophthamologist/surgeon, and from what I hear from some of my colleagues and aquaintances from the western end of Ky., and in reports and medical credentials I've read about him, a darn fine one, too, and a pharmacist acquaintance of mine from that end of the Commonwealth could not say enough complimentary things about his meticulous prescribing habits and phone demeanor. Paul is certainly no dummy, except for possibly the fact that he got into politics, and as we all know, in politics we set ourselves up for God knows what and our lives are open to the world to see.
I agree with Rand Paul 100%. I wonder what the voters in Kentucky would say if the Army decided to close Ft. Knox Ft. Campbell and move the Armor School and 101st elsewhere? LOL...he already knows that it would NEVER happen, so that's easy for him to say. Those cuts aren't going to happen in his state.
So while i think he believes in defense cuts as an abstract concept, i wonder how sincere he is.
The meeting point of the extremes on both ends of the political spectrum meets on isolationist foreign policy and weak national security. The idea that America should withdraw from the world.
It is where Paul meets Kucinich.
A principled neutrality, much like that advocated by most statesmen of the Framers' generation, does not involve either 'isolation' or 'weakness'. It requires foresight, prudence and adherence to principle over popular passion.
The meeting point of the extremes on both ends of the political spectrum meets on isolationist foreign policy and weak national security. The idea that America should withdraw from the world.
It is where Paul meets Kucinich.
You made the point for compromise on at least one issue. I agree. We should be able to compromise on reducing our military footprint all over the country. It is a step in the right direction of financial responsibility.
Rand Paul is naive. The US military budget will never be cut. If anything it will continue to grow or the black budget will just get bigger and bigger and there will be less oversight by the American people.
Finally a "Republican" Says what needed to be said.
Time to end the American Empire
WASHINGTON - Republican Sen.-elect Rand Paul says GOP lawmakers must be open to cutting military spending as Congress tries to reduce government spending.
The tea party favorite from Kentucky says compromise with Democrats over where to cut spending must include the military as well as social programs. Paul says all government spending must be "on the table."
Paul tells ABC's "This Week" that he supports a constitutional amendment calling for a balanced budget.
<IMG width="100%" height=0>
News Headlines (http://www.cnbc.com/id/40054591 - broken link)
While I disagree with senator-elect Paul on most of his stances, I like the fact that at least he's being consistent. We'll see how long he keeps it up once he's in office.
While I disagree with senator-elect Paul on most of his stances, I like the fact that at least he's being consistent. We'll see how long he keeps it up once he's in office.
If the apple doesn't fall far from the tree I think we'll see the 2nd most ethical member of the House be sworn in alongside his father, the most ethical member of the House, in January.
No need to get excited. Cutting military spending probably means cutting soldiers' (and veterans) wages and benefits, not cutting money to defense contractors.
No it doesn't. The Pentagon spends billions upon billions for items they don't need.
Defense Logistics Agency had no use for parts worth $7.1 billion, more than half of the $13.7 billion in equipment stacked in Defense Department warehouses on average from 2006 to 2008.
Army parts depots had $3.6 billion worth of unneeded supplies
Navy had an average of $7.5 billion worth of unneeded spare parts
Air Force had some $18.7 billion in unneeded supplies, more than half of its spare parts inventory
The report also showed that more than $700 million in parts for U.S. troops at war were not available when they were needed
This waste is just the tip of the iceberg...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It will be interesting
