I like that Ron Paul wants to shrink the government including the military. I want our national defense to be that... DE-FENSE, not national Offense!
We subsidize the national defense of rich countries like Germany, France, Italy, Japan, South Korea etc. We have bases all over the world, for what? To play global empire? Do you really think it's worth all the money?
Geographically we are probably at the best spot in the world for "defense". We have Canada to our North, Mexico to our south and thousands of miles of ocean on either side. Are you worried about Canada or Mexico? We don't need to spend trillions on "defense" because we are broke. Maybe if we had the money we could play global empire but we can't. The writing is on the wall buddy. We are running out of money and running out fast. Remember when Bush spend money like a drunken sailor and got us into inimaginable 400 billion-500 billion dollar deficits? Obama makes Bush look cheap with 1.5 trillion dollar deficits. We are driving towards a brick wall and Obama firmly has his foot on the gas pedal.
Since the media has successfully black balled Ron Paul you won't have to worry. But Obama will vastly out spend Gingrich or Mitt. I just believe Newt will do better in debates and he's more willing to rattle the cage once in office. Mitt hasn't shown much of a spine yet. Gingrich called Obama a food stamp president LOL.
The problem with Ron Paul is that he is not for a strong military. At least Gingrich realizes the need for strong defense.
Gingrich does have some balls. I'd agree with you on that. Gingrich is also a great orator and debater. I'm still dreaming of the perfect Reagan type. Even Clinton was great imho. Reagan was a bit more moderate than many would admit. Maybe Gingrich fits the bill.....still a ways away from election day so much can change. I'm still mixed in my beliefs.
Mitt Romney isn't decisive enough. If he's presented with tough choices he'll do what all the other politicans did and he will ignore it.
Gingrich is my #2 after Ron Paul. He's a sleezy politicans, so what? They all are. He'd be a republican version of Bill Clinton. Not a trustworthy guy but he'd do a better job running the country than most of the last presidents in the last 30 years save for Reagan.
Gingrich has balls. He called Obama a food stamp president which I didn't even believe at first. He's more likely to address the tough choices when he's presented with them. He's better in arguments and he'll debate with Obama better.
On one hand I don't like seeing Mitt and Newt fight and give democrats ammo, but I think it makes Newt battle tested. Obama will spend 1 billion dollars in campaign money, they'll have to beat him in debates and Newt has the better odds IMO.