Rand Pauls says in January he will introduce 500 Billion in cuts, do you...

[sound_of_the_silenced3]

...think that is enough? Rand Paul "We're Gonna Lay Out 500 Billion In Spending Cuts In January"
December 08, 2010 CNN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jctl5psWis

He also said he would vote against Obama's deal because it increases the inheritance tax from 0 to 35%.

Is he doing a good job so far and do you think he will be a good senator?

 

[ndmagicman]

Making a big statement with no details to back anything up with. And what would those $500 billion in cuts entail? Knowing the wacked out mentality of Rand it is most likely eliminate the Dept of Education, Dept of Interior, and all social programs. Like I said big talk but completely unrealistic.

 

[Brayden]

It's $500 Billion in the right direction, so I'm good with it.

 

[Godless Heathen]

Yeah well he also doesn't agree with the Civil Rights Act so it's not like the guy is grounded in any type of reality.

 

[Chewy Ivan 2]

No. I don't think he is doing a good job. If he's serious about getting the deficit under control, he shouldn't defend tax cuts for those who don't need them. He should let the inheritance tax increase.

 

[How would I know]

500 billion is only about 1/3 of Obama's idiotic spending. It's not enough.

 

[Shovel Ready]

It is a good start.

 

[ss794]

He will be a great senator if he does what he says.

 

[John Milton]

He couldn't be any worse than the dead weight currently holding office.

 

[dereich75]

Well, its a good start, even if it probably has no chance of passing. Although I think he ignores the fact that we will have to raise SOME taxes along with mostly spending cuts, if we want deficit fixing to have a chance of actually passing the senate at any time.

 

[bamafanmco]

Not enough, but more than anyone else has proposed, Kudos to the freshman.

 

[Mr Wolf]

He may introduce it but the Republicans in congress will not allow it to come up for a vote. The big spending Democratic leadership in the house was replaced by the big spending Republican leadership in the house.

 

[Alex]

t least he's proposing something... we're never going to get anywhere blaming each other unless we come up with some substantial ideas for ways to cut spending

 

[PoBoy]

Rand Paul is doing and will do a horrible job. He is a social extremist who will lobby and attempt to legislate his morality/religion and force it down the throats of America using the power of law.

He is a libertarian poser.

He is an ideologue without an ounce of common sense.

I am hopeful, as a fiscal conservative/true social libertarian, that Randy Boy gets lots of pub - even Q's like this one. The more America learns about him the more likely he is one and done and an actual statesman can take his place.

 

[Shamus]

NO, not unless it's followed by another 500 billion in cuts in February, and another 500 billion in March, and another 500 Billion in April and so on and so on.

 

[Chin T]

He will be an excellent Senator. The 500B is a start. In response to one comment, we don't need a Federal Department of Education it does NOTHING but spend money and make teachers teach for a test only. After which teachers stop teaching until summer break.
Aside from which, we should NOT have a society in which the Federal Government decides what should be taught. That is the State's job. If you don't like what your state is teaching vote with you feet and move.
Putting Federal control over what should be taught and tested for is the doorway to allowing the Federal Government to socialize and socially engineer opinions and directions. That is not the ideology that the "United States" was created to use. Departments of education belong with the states and the states only.

Let the states compete for better college entries, or more productivity etc. The Federal Government is way to far removed from the classroom in any municipality to be involved nor should hey be, it is a waste of our money.

 

[mattle]

It's a good start. Paul has a real future.

EDIT: @godless--you have no idea what you're talking about do you? Paul is anti-racism (or any form of collectivism), however, he recognizes that businesses should be free to run their business by their own principles, not "society's." He recognizes that a business that practiced racism would fall under market pressures, and behavior does not need to be legislated. But the way you say it sounds so much worse......amazing what a little context adds.