Some of you might want to answer this article against Dr. Paul

[deedles]

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/

[Adamsa]

He wouldn't get rid of the income tax immediately, obviously he'd have to cut the federal government down to size so that he could remove it, then it'd be up to the states.

[Sematary]

Dr. Paul has already stated (on several occasions) that accomplishing his goals could not, and would not, happen overnight. He understands, as we all do, that so many people in this nation depend on the government that it would be cruel to take away their government crutch. The pullout from Iraq would begin immediately upon his inauguration but would still take several months as you need to have a plan to do it safely. Removing troops from every other nation on the planet would also be in the plan and so would the end to foreign aid which costs American taxpayers untold billions of dollars. These changes are where the savings would come from. Then there would be the elimination of redundant and unnecessary departments like Homeland Security, Dept. of Ed, etc...
These are all things he would LIKE to do. He would do them over time and make the change necessarily slow to keep throwing a shock into America. Are the exact numbers correct? I have no idea. Does it really matter? Not really. What matters is that we would FINALLY have someone in the Whitehouse who is SERIOUS about fiscal responsibility and restoring the constitution. That IS, after all, what his candidacy is about.

[Dlynne]

It would be great if someone could get an official answer from the campaign. Anybody have access to a staff member? Can the campaign post the answer? That would be really great.

[angelatc]

Yes, it would be very nice to see them publish a response from Congressman Paul.

[jaumen]

I think they are just expressing the same concerns that everyone has with getting rid of an income tax... and no one seems to understand it's a gradual process, not the flip of a switch. For example, when I told my dad about Ron Paul wanting to get rid of the income tax, he immediately asked "and replace it with what?"

People are for the most part comfortable with the income tax, and I think they have a hard time imagining how much different the federal government would be if it was running as it should according to the constitution.

[mrd]

I think they're just pointing out a large discrepancy in a number Ron Paul cited, and using it as a sign indicative of his fiscal sanity. We need this explained.

[Sematary]

I think they're just pointing out a large discrepancy in a number Ron Paul cited, and using it as a sign indicative of his fiscal sanity. We need this explained.

No we don't. If the blogger TRULY wanted an answer, he could call the campaign himself. It's not exactly difficult to get to talk to someone.