That's where we disagree. You believe Paul is anti-Israel, and I do not. I think he is just focusing on the economic issues and including them along with every other thing that must be cut. I stand to be proven wrong, but I think he would always help Israel IF they needed it. I think he thinks they are well capable of defending themselves against all but a complete attack from China or Russia, and I tend to agree.
I also think you push Paul's comments on Iran beyond his meaning. Is he naive on Islam? I think so, but I believe someone like Newt and some military advisers could bring him around on this issue. I keep hearing him say, "Where have our policies of spending billions and attacking with no declaration of war gotten us?" and "Let's see if the threats might DECREASE by changing tactics and leaving these countries alone for a while."
I think radical Islam is evil, but I think Paul would see that soon enough -- way before the world would end.
He, on the other hand, believes that the economic issues will end life as we know it in America and around the world WAY before a nuclear device will, and I tend to agree with that assessment as well.
Love to see Newt as President and Paul as Vice. But for many reasons, it won't happen. You can find comfort in that, but I find depression, because it means Romney the puppet or OBOY the Marxist. Talk about a rock and a hard place!
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
