Obama=Marxism
House+Senate(currently
)=lib
McCain=Marxism loses
my vote=McCain
McCain+Lieberman, Ridge, etc.=?(my vote=McCain)?
They call themselves liberals (Democrats of the house & senate). That doesn't mean that they actually adhere to anything that might resemble "liberal ideals", though. Why did none of them read the PA? Oh! That's right, they want to look "Tough On Terror".
Better to get that puppy voted in, then we'll worry about sorting it out later. Besides, here in the United States of Amnesia we only remember whom had an affair with whom, and little else.
What's MADDENING is the sheer numbers of people who support Obama believing that he will end this war. He knows exactly on which side his bread is buttered, and a man who plans to expand the military is not the man who will get us out of the business of policing other sovereign nations. Of course, I'm sure you know I will NOT vote for McCain.
Yes, but if the president moves for something, stuff happens. Like when George Bush wanted an amendment for gay marriage to be banned. (I was in eighth grade, but I still remember how mad I was.) We only JUST managed to keep that from happening. I don't want to risk another president pushing stuff like that again.
Fair enough, you have a special vested interest in such a topic. Believe it or not, while my own interest isn't quite so "vested", it is yet another that I am PASSIONATE about.
(snipped) but I don't think his party alignment is what will keep him from winning. It'll be more like wanting to abolish the federal reserve, and the DEA. I support his views on these things now, after doing some research. But when I first read this, my initial thought was "Don't we need those things?"
You left out the Department of Education (after "whose" inception our literacy rates have nosedived), and the IRS, because apparently the ability to levy tariffs just isn't enough for the feds (i.e. Congress).
Joe Shmoe isn't inclined to do research. I think that a lot of people would read that and immediately skip him as a candidate because of confusion.
You've got that absolutely right.
The whole bi-partisan thing is a sham, George Washington felt similarly.
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"[/FONT]I was no party man myself, and the first wish of my heart was, if parties did exist, to reconcile them.[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"
[/FONT]But there are quite a few people who don't see that. And wouldn't bother to really search their hearts for their true positions on things, while doing fact checks for each of the candidates, to really choose who they want.
Easier to pick a side, and then listen to campaign ads for who sounds best.
Again, agreed, I think you're right. Tis a conundrum, is it not? Therefore, I am left with the prospect of simply being able to live with myself, and I cannot if I do not vote according to my integrity and conscience. (I can't say I agree with Washington, because I see a need and utility for even further division, politically, and what poses as "bipartisanship" is, in fact, one group helping the other maintain the status quo for each other. Luxury lunch, anyone?)
