Ron Paul 08' was all about "anti-war" and pretty much nothing else.
Bull.
He was about cutting government to the bone. In his mind that meant cutting the military too. That’s where he and I differed. I would’ve gone along with the military cuts IF he first proved to me he was going to do the other cuts first, and then win the war on terror...THEN CUT THE MILITARY. I’d be fine with that. I’d give him his first 4 year term to make good on his promises...win the war, cut the government to the bone, fix the trade imbalance, secure our borders...then if he succeeded I’d give him 4 more years to do his military cuts.
But that’s not what he wanted to do. He wanted to start out by cutting the military. THat’s a deal breaker for me. WHat we’d end up with is spending up the wazoo, unsecured borders, losing the war on terror, worsened trade imbalance, and NO MILITARY. Not a good situation. No ronpaul for me, thank you.
That's incorrect I think. If the GOP runs a liberal like McCain or Giuliani, I won't vote for him. Now I disagree with Ron Paul on his view of Islam, but I'll readily vote for him because of the rest of his platform. He dislikes government as much as Golwater ever did. I find that attractive.
So your saying you love war and all the death and destruction that goes with it?
War may be necessary at times. If we are attacked yes and then only after a formal declaration (as stated in the Constitution for the United States) by congress. Once a formal declaration of war is declared from congress, then the congress should step aside and allow the military to do it's job.
What do we have today or for the pass 50 or so years? We have Americans being sent all over the world to fight every one else's battles. We have an American president asking permission not from congress, but from the United Nations
"...and pretty much nothing else."
I see, so Ron Paul isn't about restoring our country to a constitutional representative republic?