What garbage. Kucinich wants Leftists to destroy us from within while we turn belly-up to foreign attack.
Paul believes true free trade and anti-socialism will make us so stron economically it will have a destructive economic effect on foreign tyrannies without us having to go to war.
Disagree with Paul's theories of protecting America if you want, but he acknowledges the need for a strong country and a means to defend it. Kucinich want to dissolve the country in collectivist goo and kill it's very essence. Equating the two is absurd.
It worked so well for the America First folks back in the late 30’s early 40’s ru paul just had to copy it
...Yer right, but,,, save for later response...
...Back to work, fer now...
With who, Iran? He doesn't seem to be too fond of trade with Israel.
So is Ron Paul FOR free trade, or AGAINST it? You sure you’re not talking about a free market? You can have an internal free market without free trade with other nations. If Ron Paul is close to the Founders in beliefs, then he should be a protectionist like they were.
Though its rare to find a pol who doesn't stretch the truth, there are times when you can see that a politician is a charlatan because of the lies he tells about a position, and you can safely surmise that the rest of his positions in that area are pure male bovine fecal matter.
Ron Paul's position on Iraq is what does that for me.
You see, Paul told anyone who would listen that the authorization to go into Iraq was unconstitutional because it wasn't a formal declaration of war, it allowed the President to decide when (or even if!) hostilities would commence, etc. Yet in 2001, the brave, brave Sir Ronald voted for a military authorization that was more open ended, wasn't a declaration of war and didn't even mention what country we would be fighting...and he admitted as much on the House floor before he voted for it.
Paul's foreign policy positions are garbage in, garbage out at best, and dishonest to boot.