You hit the nail on the head. His solution to all problems is to remove oversight of them. A good analogy is arguing that if we got rid of the police, there would be no more crime. He has a couple of good ideas, and about a thousand bad ones. Unfortunately I think people see things like "end the wars" or "end the fed" or "legalize drugs" and sort of cherry pick his platform and think, wow this is a great guy. But they don't dig deeper and see he also wants to get rid of the department of labor, ie labor laws (child labor, would be ok, no workplace safety laws needed, etc), end the department of education (no more public schools), get rid of the EPA (kiss clean water and air goodbye) to mention a few. He also wants to lower taxes on the one percent to an even more obscene level than it is now (how is this helping the common people? do you still buy the trickle down scam?). I think it would in the end resemble federalism more than democracy, Sort of like the confederacy before the civil war, something puzzling for someone who claims to be a champion of the people. He is trying the same "government is the enemy" propaganda that Reagan used. Never mind that the programs he seems to have targeted the most are the ones that help the poor and the unfortunate, and the ones he wants to leave alone just happen to help the rich. Yes lets get rid of all federal oversight and leave litigation to the states. That way if a paycheck to paycheck worker has a grievance against a corporation or a member of the one percent, he has no federal protections and his one lawyer, if he can even afford one, will duke it out in a state court against a team of corporate lawyers. Yeah, how will that work out for the "common people"? His ideas a not new. He is for liberty for those who can afford it and the rest of us will be non entities. In other words his platform IMHO is like a drop of honey in a gallon of vinegar.
edit on 13-5-2012 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)