Brownback, Paul Stand Out
Brownback, however, came across with a sincerity that I thought was unique among the candidates who actually had the chance to speak. His response on the Schiavo question was brave in light of the public criticism that came afterwards. He was also the first to mention the flat tax. While I support the repeal of the 16th Amendment, a flat tax is a huge step in the right direction, and in being the first to mention it, in my view he took ownership of the issue.
Rep. Paul was the man shouting, “The emperor’s buck naked!” with regard to big government. He was the only candidate to mention the Constitution, and he talked about the need to make a decision on war rather than authorizing the use of force. You either declare war and go to win or you don’t go at all. Like Brownback, he made taxes a major issue and went the extra mile of advocating the repeal of the 16th Amendment.
To say that we would be “settling” by nominating any of the three leading candidates ahead of either of them would be an understatement.
May 4th, 2007 at 10:55 am
But neither of your candidates you mentioned can win in the general election. Romney was very good, he looked presidential. If he was slick, then do you think Reagan was slick and over polished? Romney has a history of cutting taxes and vetoing over spending. As Romney said, I can’t wait to get my hand on Washington. What has Brownback done to cut pork spending in Washington? He has been there several years and he must have something to show for it. Romney has been governor for four years. During that time he cut taxes, lowered spending, and inspired the state. That is what America needs right now. Romney did very well last night. McCain stood out on the war, and Rudy crashed. But Brownback did not stand out. The GOP would not be settling if they choose Romney.