You say that you advocate the Founders' view that we need to "stay out of entangling alliances," yet the Founders also created an "entangling alliance" with France during the War of Independence. Do you support that alliance? If so, can you give the conditions under which you support military alliances with other nations?You have advocated time and time again that you support a States' privilege to decide on the matter of abortion. On that note, you authored the Sanctity of Life Act (twice). I understand that the bill states that SCOTUS will not review any cases that involve protecting human life "between conception and birth," and that the States will have complete governance over the issue of abortion if your bill were to pass. However, the bill also attempts to redefine "Person" as human life beginning at conception. If you want the fed out of the issue of abortion, then why did you author the bill that specifically redefines "Person," knowing full well that it would force abortion to be considered murder in all States?You have said multiple times that if we cut back spending to 2000 levels, we would be able to get rid of the IRS. This is factually incorrect, as I'm sure you know (2000 spending levels less 2006 receipts, sans individual income, yielRAB a 381 billion dollar deficit). But this is not what interests me.
Going by the FY2007 estimates, if we abrogate individual income tax, we would have $1.39 trillion to spend. Also, going by FY2007 estimates, Medicare, Social Security, and Debt Interest are $1.255 trillion. Ergo, that leaves us with $135 billion for everything else, including federal law enforcement and military spending. Getting rid of indivudal income tax and replacing it with nothing would BARELY yield a sufficient amount of funRAB to pay our debts. How do you respond to this?