Tell me why?
2007-11-10 22:16:00 · 6 answers · asked by Elliott J 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Please, no reference to GWB.
Focus on ISSUES and PHYLOSOPHIES>
2007-11-10 22:23:51 · update #1
I don't see how a liberal would be an improvement. The Bush haters don't realize that when it comes to domestic policy, Bush is a liberal. For example, of all the Presidents since and including JFK, only LBJ increased federal education spending faster than George W Bush, and only Ronald Reagan increased federal education spending at a slower rate than Bill Clinton, when you adjust the outlay totals for inflation.
For the record I am also against the war in Iraq or any other attempt at nation building, because I believe it is way too expensive, and is a drain on our economy. Nevertheless I am very much a conservative like Ron Paul, and not a liberal like Dennis Kucinich. The difference is that Ron Paul and I would not spend the savings from leaving Iraq on any other government program, but would use it to reduce the federal deficit, whereas Kucinich, who is a liberal, would spend the savings on expanding the size of government programs.
2007-11-10 22:32:49 · answer #1 · answered by Robert V 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I believe either Ron Paul or Kucinich should be the next president of the United States. Do you call them liberals? and as to the question of why, it is because they are not war mongers.
2007-11-11 06:26:41 · answer #2 · answered by Avner Eliyahu R 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Our tax policies which support MegaBusiness, the very wealthy and the Global Corporations. Our wandering around in our war in Iraq. We need a solution to health care. We need to work with other nations on dealing with Global Environmental Issues. We need to deal with outsourcing. We need to deal with Illegal Immigration and social issues that have been neglected, avoided or minimized in the past 7 years.
2007-11-11 06:25:10 · answer #3 · answered by k_l_parrish 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
socilaism was not how this country was founded and not how it will survive. a liberal extremist like hillary clinton is quite dangerous to the continued survival of buisness and in no way would i support it.
2007-11-11 06:41:50 · answer #4 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I don't. libberals will preach change, but will not tell you anything that will be changed for the better. the empty rhetoric will be to blame Bush, and demand chance, even if that change is for the worse.
2007-11-11 06:25:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Because if the last seven years is any indication...It is definitely time for a change.
2007-11-11 06:20:29 · answer #6 · answered by Triumph 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋