angrydragon
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,263
By invading Iraq, Paul says that Bush has betrayed the platform he was elected on in the year 2000. If anyone needs a refresher, during his campaign in 2000, George W. Bush argued against nation-building and foreign interventions. In 1999, he blasted President Clinton for not providing a timetable to withdraw troops from Kosovo, saying, "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is," and "I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn." Bush's rhetoric impressed conservatives who were sick of the costly foreign interventions that were prevalent during the Cold War and to a lesser degree in the 1990s. After the Sept. 11 attacks, however, Bush changed his tune, invaded Iraq, and the rest is history.
Paul is also a vigorous supporter of personal liberties. To this end, he supports marijuana decriminalization and the repeal of the PATRIOT Act. He also advocates for a return to the gold standard, drastic spending cuts in government, and the elimination of the income tax. He wants to slash spending in useless areas such as the No Child Left Behind Act and slowly wean Americans off of the services of our welfare state while returning to a strict interpretation of the American Constitution.
As the campaign continues to progress, it is becoming increasingly clear that there really isn't much of a difference between the two parties. Both sides take special interest money, both sides have no idea what to do about Iraq, both sides have no idea what to do about the deficit and the list goes on and on. It's time we thought about supporting a candidate who doesn't take special interest money, who wants to fix our terrible foreign policy and who wants to make the government more accountable when it comes to balancing the checkbook.
At this point, Paul seems to be the only person who wants to make those changes, so I would urge you to take the time and read more about him and the rest of the other candidates as well. It's our responsibility to choose who the next leader of this country will be, so let's make sure whomever we pick is up to the task.
http://www.dailycampus.com/news/200...ible.Choice.For.President-2914388.shtml&cid=0
Look at Jennifer's comments below. =) How encouraging...
Paul is also a vigorous supporter of personal liberties. To this end, he supports marijuana decriminalization and the repeal of the PATRIOT Act. He also advocates for a return to the gold standard, drastic spending cuts in government, and the elimination of the income tax. He wants to slash spending in useless areas such as the No Child Left Behind Act and slowly wean Americans off of the services of our welfare state while returning to a strict interpretation of the American Constitution.
As the campaign continues to progress, it is becoming increasingly clear that there really isn't much of a difference between the two parties. Both sides take special interest money, both sides have no idea what to do about Iraq, both sides have no idea what to do about the deficit and the list goes on and on. It's time we thought about supporting a candidate who doesn't take special interest money, who wants to fix our terrible foreign policy and who wants to make the government more accountable when it comes to balancing the checkbook.
At this point, Paul seems to be the only person who wants to make those changes, so I would urge you to take the time and read more about him and the rest of the other candidates as well. It's our responsibility to choose who the next leader of this country will be, so let's make sure whomever we pick is up to the task.
http://www.dailycampus.com/news/200...ible.Choice.For.President-2914388.shtml&cid=0
Look at Jennifer's comments below. =) How encouraging...
Last edited:
