Both Rubio and Cruz handled their responses just fine, embracing a muscular foreign policy and well-funded military in ways that are nearly certain to be more palatable to Republican primary voters than Paul’s attacks on runaway defense spending.
Advertisement
This prompted Dr Paul to chime in and his comments led to a few interesting revelations. It is meant to offset income and payroll taxes and is considerably larger than the $1,000 credit that is now available. Rubio proposes to increase the child tax credit substantially – but doesn’t tell us how he’s going to pay for it. Paul calls him out for this and unfunded increases in defense spending – and that’s when things get weird and a little angry. Paul, who wants to abolish numerous government agencies and supports using drones to kill people who rob liquor stores, was the only person mildly resembling a voice of reason in the debate; this is how extreme the Republican Party has gotten. It’s a welfare transfer payment.
“I work 30 hours a week and I’m a full-time student”, Poyerd said. This is their money.
“I think his libertarian edge appeals to young people”, said Rilyn Eischens, a University of Minnesota junior.
Rubio hit back by branding Paul an “isolationist”, listing a number of potential and current threats to national security that he argues justify the military budget. “People have not thought about it this way and that’s why I’m challenging people to rethink their presuppositions and rethink what makes America strong and what makes America great”.
Paul: Yeah, but, Marco!
“Marco, Marco, how is it conservative…to add a trillion dollars in military expenditures?”
“We have to decide what is conservative and what isn’t conservative”.
There is much talk of a lack of military “readiness”, much of which ignores the fact that any gaps in training and logistics suffered by our military services could be easily made up by shifting funding from wasteful and unnecessary programs.
“You can not be a conservative if you’re going to keep promoting new programs that you’re not going to pay for”, Paul said.
Rubio’s response, essentially, is that the USA economy depends on the strength of its military. “I’m not. I believe the world is a stronger and a better place when the U.S.is the strongest military power in the world”.
Paul: No. I don’t think we’re any safer – I do not think we are any safer from bankruptcy court.
“I don’t think we’re safer as we get further in debt”, Paul told dozens of veterans Wednesday during a campaign stop in Council Bluffs, Iowa. That’s why you didn’t see many argumentsduring that portion-just one guy saying, “10 percent individual, 16 percent for business” and another saying, “no, 14 percent individual, 14 percent for business”.
“We have a good ground game”, he said.
And on his campaign website, Rubio says he would restore defense spending to the 2012 level, “and begin to undo the damage caused by $1 trillion in indiscriminate defense cuts”.
Advertisement
And James Carafano, vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said Rubio and Paul’s arguments are not necessarily incompatible. They get together and they spend more money on everything.
