Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaminyu
Yeah. I think Ron Paul is a better candidate. He's about the only one who's really anti-war, and even more importantly, he's anti-interventionist. He's a constitutionist libertarian individualist, who doesn't take money from AIPAC, is against the Federal Reserve and the CIA, as well all those unconstitutional acts that got passed recently. Obama and Clinton don't even compare, and it's just going to be the same story with them. They're both as committed to Israel and more wars as Bush is, and probably more of those anti-freedom-and-liberty acts as well.
|
and your living idealistic too. look we have to look at people who can actually win and who can beat the repugs. have you been listening to what they have been saying? especially this romney character. thier anti-islam bashing is downright frightening. not to mention how these repugs ruin the economy left and right, destroy the middle class. we have to make sure that they repugs dont win the election. its basically the lesser of two evils. at least with a democrat in the white house, middle class tax cuts to spur the economy, no more wars, an end to the iraq war, an end to the patriot act and maybe just maybe we might get a little bit more balance in foreign policy as well. but at least Muslim's in america can start to feel safe again, once we can do that, then we can lobby more on foreign affairs.