Hillary Not 2nd Choice

THIS IS REALLY INTERESTING. TOUGH TO SWALLOW.

THIS IS SO IMPORTANT... and interesting, PLEASE READ:

Who is Barack Obama?
Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in
Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a Black Muslim from
Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita,
Kansas.
Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two
years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His
mother then married Lolo Soetoro, RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia.
When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama
attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a
Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is
a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but
that he also attended Catholic school."
Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that Obama's
introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was
temporary at best.
In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce,
and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.

Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham,
introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school
in Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the
Muslim terrorists who're now waging Jihad against the western world.
Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking Major
public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the
United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background.


Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential
candidacy.


The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside
out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the
President of the United States, one of their own!!!!

ALSO , keep in mind that when he was sworn into office - he DID NOT use
the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran (Their equivalency to our Bible,
but very different beliefs)
Please forward to everyone you know. Would you want this man leading
our country?......NOT ME!!!

The previous posting #1 was brought to you courtesy of one of the Clinaton campaign operatives whose job is to surf the Web and counter anything that does not tout the "inevitability" of Hillary's ascension to the Throne.

Right. I don't know if it was Hillary but LYING about a preseidential candidate is not ethically and politically wrong, it is libel.

not only* ethically and politically unacceptable, i meant.

samantha (if that is your real name),
stop copying and pasting that slander. it's been discounted by reputable news organizations.

Hillary looks soft and lovely here on this ad and does a damn impressive job in seducing me into thinking that she cares about me for 2 minutes. But now the spell has worn off. Where is she going to get the money to fix all my problems and pay all my medical bills? I'm back to reality now, and I realize this government can't help me. It's going broke,broke,broke. The entitlements can't last. I will have to help myself. I'd love to have a woman as president, and I'll vote for one when I find one who's willing to acknowledge our economic problems and offer realistic solutions. Unfortunately this is the wrong woman for the job.

The filthy lies told about Obama by the Clinton camp or their hidden allies are too sick to need a reply.Shame on you Samantha!!

You better wake up or you will be screwed as the people over there are. They don't know any better and are as stupid as you. Do you want to live in peace and prosperity or do you want to live as a ignorant follower of a Muslim? Your choice stupid.....

regarding Samantha's ignorant comments on Obama, Id like to add that the United States can only be destroyed from the inside, which is what makes the Bush/ Cheney administration so dangerous. They have attacked the constitution, the other two branches of govt., have spied on US citizens, participated in torture, directed the justice department to do its bidding, created staggering debt and then sold it to foriegn interests, destroyed the US currency, further damaged health care system, privatized things that should never be privatized like FEMA operations, military and national security, etc

Yes we need to be mindful of destruction from within, which is why impeachment is critical and written into the constitution so many times. Bush and Cheney belong in jail, not the white house.

Sam

First of all Reagan, Bush Sr, and Bush Jr didn't us the Bible, Clinton did. Second of all, are you saying that someone can't find God. And when the do they have NO RIGHT TO PRACTICE THEIR FAITH OR EVEN LAY CLAIM.

I would say you are working for Mitt, on Youtube his ads attacting Obama said the same thing. MITT THE PERSON THAT BELIEVES THAT THE DEVIL AND GOD ARE BROTHERS, BELIEVES THAT IF YOU ARE WHITE AND ONLY WHITE AND MAKE IT TO HEAVEN, AND THEIR HEAVEN IS DIFFERENT STARS. EACH SOLE MAKES A NEW PLANTA. Is that who you are working for.

Obama is more Christian then any so Call right-wing Rep's. Obama believes in the teaching of Jesus and doesn't believe in teaching hatred like the so call Christian on the right.

Now the Right Wing Reps have be outted for the stories about Obama saying it was Clinton. But it's nice to have the internet where you can find the truth.

THE RIGHT WING REP'S HAVE PREACH HATRED FOR ANY DEM FOR OVER THIRTY FIVES YEARS (RUSH, FOX NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, TOM DELAY, ECT..ECT...)

Now for 16 years the hatred and the lies about Mrs. Clinton told by Reps groups haven't change the mines of most Americans. GET A CLUE you will not win based on the Lies. THE INTERNET IS HERE. THE SWIFT BOAT CRAP WILL NOT WORK AGAIN.

What ever happened to the seperation of CHURCH & STATE? I DON"T CARE what their personal preference of religion is, but more for their ability to set that aside as they govern this acreage know as the US. I am aware that their personal feelings about certain issues will influence their decisions, but that remains true of ANYone that would attempt this office, no matter their religion or lack of it. Instead of focusing on just ONE issue, you all need to start looking at the whole picture.

The issue is certainly not the message itself. If Republican voters truly understood Ron Paul's views, they would understand that he is the truest conservative in the race, is the most honest, would protect their religious freedoms more than any other candidate, lower their taxes, and actually has a plan to truly win the War on Terror while strengthening national security. All of his supporters know this, and it is why they are so vociferous in terms of espousing their opinions. So why isn't the message reaching the Republican Party Loyalists? We could blame the "Mainstream Media" or the "Mindless toeing of the Party line" but instead, let's look at it from their point of view.
Let's start with his supporters (of which I am one if you couldn't tell). If you read this from Dale Carnegie's famous book called How to Win Friends and Influence People, you will quickly notice afew of things we are doing poorlywhen reaching out to this group of future Ron Paul supporters. The two biggest are--Never Criticize, Condemn or Complain, and the second is-- Show Respect for the other people's Opinions--Never tell someone they are wrong. There are others as well, and if you read the link, you'll be quick to notice them. Remember that the Republican Base is not our enemy. If Dr. Paul has a chance of winning the GOP nomination, we need to INFLUENCE them.
Think about how you feel when you someone calls you a "Paultard." Don't you immediately close off and want to attack? Has anyone who ever used this term had any influence in the way you think other than strengthen your resolve to defend what you already believe? When Dr. Paul addresses the issue of "how would we feel if China were building bases in Texas" to explain his non-interventionist foreign policy, we applaud. What's the difference between this example and what we do when we attack our fellow Republicans (even if it makes you cringe to think of yourself as a Republican, you are one now if you plan to vote for Dr. Paul--and if he wins and shows people whata Republican actually stands for, you'll probably stay one for life)? How do you feel when they attack you?
Whenwe call someonea "Neo-Con",stupid, or any other derogatory term,we isolate them immediately. These people love America, too. They aren't trying to destroy our country. Imagine a little kid trying to help its mom do dishes. It really wants to help, but keeps breaking dishes. What's more imporant a broken dish, or yelling at the kid, breaking its spirtit, and making it never want to help again. No matter how many dishes our current politicians have broken, they really were trying to help. There isn't a single law they passed that didn't have good intentions--regardless of whether or not it they had the Constitutional authority to actually pass the bill.
Try to understand where they are coming from. People absolutely hate to be wrong or feel stupid. While you may not agree with them, try to empathize first. From a decade and a half of very successful professional sales experience and dealing with tens of thousands of people, I can tell you without a doubt that it is better to start out by saying "I understand your concern" or "help me understand how you feel" (as in, "I understand your concern, help you understand how you feel that bringing the troops home to be with their families means Dr. Paul doesn't support them" or "I understand your concern about whether or not Ron Paul is a Real Republican, but help me understand how someone who has been a Republican for 30 years, and a libertarian for one yeartwo decades ago isn't really a Republican" or "help me understand how you feel that bringing our troops home from all over the world and back to the United States would make us less safe or bringing our National Guard home would hurt our National defense" or "I understand your concern that we need to win the war, but help me understand how we will know when we have actually won? Didn't President Bush declare 'Mission Accomplished' a few years ago? Please help me understand" than it is to start out saying "You are an idiot and your apathy and mindless following are destroying our country."
Nobody wins an argument. While you may get to feel smart when a ton of other Ron Paul supporters come to support you on the message boards and bash some "neo-con idiot", in the end this is just one less vote for Dr. Paul because we turned them off. For an example of statesmanship, just look at what Ron Paul himself had to say when asked about Mitt Romney's religion and his own personal faith. Just as Dr. Paul asks people about how they would feel if China was in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico setting up bases, you have to ask yourself how you feel when people attack you as a Ron Paul supporter to understand how our future GOP friends we will influence attack us.
Remember that most people in America still don't know who Ron Paul is. Heck, for that matter, they don't even know who Barack Obama is. By the time next November rolls around, only 50-60% of eligible voters will even bother to show up and vote at the General Election, much less primaries. The Republican Constituency that will vote doesn't understand Dr. Paul's policies; and if we turn them off to him, they will never bother to find out about him.
As I was watching the GOP debate on PBS the other day, I noticed that when Dr. Paul was talking about the war, his support graph reached its lowest point. Why would this be? Well, most of the politicians the mainstream GOP'ers are used to hearing rail about the war are Democrats (who actually weren't against the war in the beginning, but are now that it is politically convenient to be). They have never watched this YouTube video of an interview with Ron Paul BEFORE the Iraq War. If you asked most Republicans Party Loyalists (let's call them RPL's--Ron Paul Latecomers--for short) if they would have supported the war in 2002 if there had been absolute certainty that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction and that Saddam Hussein posed no threat to our national security, many would say no. You could then point them to this video to show that Ron Paul's opposition to the war isn't based in political convenience but in research and commitment to the constitution while many of the Republicans based their decision in fear of going against the President. The people who won't support Ron Paul because of the war believe that not supporting the continuation of the war means that we would be less safe, un-patriotic, and means they don't support the troops. If they weren't turned off by our rhetoric, they may be willing to seek information and understand that the opposite is true (like I did, and likely many of you did).
Another thing to realize is that most people don't believe that the sky is falling. As myRPL friend texted me after reading one of my articles the other day, "I'm just hoping the barbarians don't climb over our city walls and ruin our empire just yet." They don't have a problem with the Patriot Act because (well, it is called the Patriot Act and it makes sense that you would support it if you are a Patriot) and if it helps catch terrorists, then it must be a good thing. They personally don't have anything to worry about because if they talk about things like picking Bobby up from soccer practice the government isn't going to come raid their homes. They don't have a problem with the War on Drugs, because locking up drug pushers is a good thing. They don't have a problem with fighting terrorists abroad so that we don't have to fight them over here. They don't understand the issue with the dollar eroding. They've heard politicians talk about lowering taxes forever and are immune to that. Just as a mom may recognize a slight aberration in her baby's eating pattern and due to that recognition take it to the Dr. and prevent a major problem due to early detection, we recognize the issues that the average nonplussed voter isn't bothered with today portends greater problems to come. Most of the voters we are discussing are sitting around saying at best "Yeah, the baby's not eating tonight; it's probably just not hungry." If these people realized that the baby was actually their baby, they may at least go listen to the "Dr.'s" advice. This is the importance of appealing to each of these future Paul-Bots at an individual level.
It's important to remember this when talking to ourRPL friends that extreme fervor has been associated for so long with liberal democrats (which Dr. Paul is the antithesis of), that when we sound like one (and if you are a liberal democrat who supports Ron Paul, thanks, but can we tone it down just a little for the polite, genteel, church-going crowd for just a little while, please), it makes it even harder for these people to associate with us.
Instead, let's use our knowledge of issues to present them in a way that appeals to each RPLas an individual (after all, isn't this what the campaign is really all about and why all of us are so fired up? We believe that we, as individuals really matter). Instead of talking to these RPL's about how the war in Iraq is wrong because we were lied to (by the people the peoplethe RPL'sardently support in part because he has been attacked so much--not unlike why we support Dr. Paul more fervently when he is attacked) and because soldiers are dying (they would tell you that, while it is tragic,it is part of their job description and that they died doing what they wanted to do--serving their country with honor), ask them what they would buy if they had $13,000 extra for Christmas (which is how much the estimated $1.2 TRILLION the war has cost divided by the number of tax returns filed where the family actually paid taxes--and keep in mind this is for tax returnsnot individual tax payers, while the amount each individual would owe varies based on income, it still provides a good metric). Ask them if they had $13,000 what kind of home security system they could buy to protect them from terrorists. Ask them if they'd consider sending any of that extra money to the families of the troops who have died for them since the troops themselves wouldn't be able to personally support their families anymore. This brings the issue home a little more. Let them know that you don't believe that war is wrong in principle, and that Dr. Paul would support a war if it were justified. Tell them he proposed a motion that would have allowed for a formally declared war on Iraq that would have solved all of these funding for support of the troops and really allowed us to win, but nobody in Congress wanted an actual up and down (Constitutional) vote on the war resolution.
Instead of talking to our future friends that we are influencing about how drugs should be legalized, ask them if they would write a check for $600 (the amount so far this year) that would go to provide free housing and food for drug dealers and ensure that our law enforcement officials would be faced with life-threatening situations on a nearly nightly basis? Ask these RPL'sif they could give that $600 to their church instead how much that would do to help keep people of drugs and help people who were alread addicts by increasing missionary outreach programs. Ask them if they or their kids would use drugs even if they were legal. And if they say they are worried about the "other" people, ask them at what point they decided that the Federal Government should replace churches in instructing peoplehow to live their lives; and again if that money went to churches instead of the federal government, wouldn't it be better used? Or better yet, don't talk about the War on Drugs at all. It's not worth discussing with the audience we are discussing here unless they bring it up.
Instead of talking to ourRPL friendsabout school vouchers, ask them if the $773 they spent last year on other people's kids to go to college, promote bilingual education, nationally test kids, and pay for people to sit in Washington and decide whether or not their school should give out free condoms and teach evolution would have helped them buy school supplies or pay for a private school.
Ask our RPL friends who will help us win Super Tuesday (if not Iowa and NH due to time constraints) how they feel about banning school prayer and not being able to display the Ten Commandments in courthouses, then show them this liberal article bashing Dr. Paul for supporting those things. Ask how they feel about abortion, and show them this. Issues like this may not matter to thea lot ofDr. Paul's supporters, nearly as much as let's say the destruction of our dollar, national sovereignty or the following the Constitution and restoring our liberties, but they are paramount amongst the people we used to call "neo-cons." Isn't RPL a much better dual meaning euphemism?
Remember that one of the Six Ways to Make People Like You as stated in Dale Carnegie's book is to "Talk in terms of the other man's interest." I think all of us already on the Ron Paul bandwagon have agreed that there are some issues on which we don't agree with him. But I also think that we all agree with him on the biggest ones that really matter and firmly believe that he would uphold his Oath of Officeif he were elected, and that even if we didn't support something he proposed or vetoed, we'd know it was for good reason based on our Contract WithOur Government (popularly known as the Constitution) and not to satisfy aspecial interest group.Let's not let the littleissues (to us) get in the way of nominating the right man for the job.
We are about to ride a big push in publicity caused byDecember 16th's Tea Party. This publicity will cause a lot of people to "Google" Ron Paul. I strongly urge all of my fellow Ron Paul supporters to do what you can to really help promote the cause of liberty instead of running around and trying to makeRPL'sfeel like idiots for believing what they have believed for a long, long time (for some of them their entire lives). Remember that it's been awhile since politicians actually did their job--everyone knows this; but most people don't think that there's anyone who is truly different.
Our job should be to help our GOP brethren remember what the true job of politicians is (upholding the Constitution in order to secure our liberty) and then get them to help us nominate the one man who has a 20-year track record proving he will do it without fail. Let's use this opportunity to truly Win Friends and Influence People.

I can't watch a major "news" network without hearing something about whether or not Ron Paul is a racist. Interestingly enough, I can't watch the same networks without constantly hearing about whether "black" voters should support Obama or if "women" voters should support Hillary.
Since these major networks seem to want to group people into categories and pretend that each individual has no choice of his/her own, it really made me stop to think. You see, I was under the assumption that I was supposed to research a candidate's issues and then cast my support behind the candidate I felt best addressed the issues I held as most important. It seems I was wrong.
I really hate that I wasted hundreds of hours over the last few months trying to decide who I supported when I was doing it wrong all along. I am such an idiot. Thank goodness I turned on the debates on Fox the other night and happened to catch some CNN post-debate comments so I could learn how I am supposed to vote. Since I am a White, Protestant-Christian, Male I now understand that I should also support someone also fits these categories. Which makes perfectly good sense if you are a major news network since that same thought process leads to the logical conclusion that every Muslim in the world obviously supports Terrorists.
Remember--it's Islamofascists and Muslim Extremists that did us harm on 9/11, not just 19 really angry guys supported by a couple of thousand more (tops) pretty angry ones. Angry at what? Who cares? Kill 'em all--let Allah Sort 'em out. Jihad this, bin Laden. America--F--Yeah. Yeeehawww. You get the point. This has to be said. Why don't we want to fight them over here? There are 300 million of us, who at least for the time being have a right to bear arms. Even if there are a million of them, at 300-1, I like their odds even less than Fox News likes Ron Paul's. I digress. No I don't. When did this country become so damned afraid of a band of angry nomads? Somebody needs to stand up and say, HEY TERRORISTS!!!!! YOU DON'T SCARE US ANYMORE!!!! AND LAUGH AT THEM. WE need youtube videos going out to al Jazeera with people rolling on the floors laughing and pointing at bin Laden--not at muslims, but at the "terrorists." Here's something funny I've talked with my friends about. Watch a bin Laden video and turn the volume down. You do the voice, but do it with a real deep-redneck accent (I'm from the South so I can say that). You won't die from "Terrorist" attacks, but you may die laughing. These dudes didn't "terrorize" the badass Americans on Flight 93 (save it conspiracy people, I've been planning an article for you). That day they were just hijackers speaking some strange language that those brave guys on United 93 thumped. But now they are scary "Terrorists." What a joke. They had their 15 minutes, let's move on. And if one kills me tonight, I don't take a word of this back. Your money, your friend/relative who died for no reason, your Constitutional Rights, heck even your TSA confiscated tube of toothpaste is more important to me than being safe from some camel herders. We need some cartoons about these guys. They are a joke compared to us. I don't care where bin Laden is. The last time one man could have destroyed our country, he had an office in the Kremlin with a button he could push to do it. Stop being so pusillanimous (great word by the way) America. Okay that was a rant, now back to the article.
So by this logic, I guess that rules out Hillary; and what a shame; I really wanted the leader of the free world to be someone who had to cry and realize that it would be a good idea to run her own campaign and make her own decisions instead of having people tell her what to say and do. Sorry, Obama; no soup for you. And so much for Romney, but man is he good lookin', and although I'm not sure exactly what he reads, it certainly isn't Ahmadinejad's press releases. And Rudy is about as Christian as I am a respected journalist so that rules him out. I had no idea it was so easy to rule out candidates. Thanks major "news" networks for making this so much easier for me.
But you see I don't just want a candidate who is my color and religion; I want a candidate who hates the same things I do. Since I'm not "terrorized" by terrorists since my brand of Christianity taught me to fear no evil, and my Savior taught me to turn the other cheek instead of sending some crazy guys in off-course speed boats to the Gates of Hell (thanks for that one, Huck), because I actually trust my God to protect me and have faith that He will even when the storms come more than I trust the god (read: Federal Government) of most Sunday Christians, I can't support Edwards, Huckabee, McCain, or Thompson either.
I guess that leaves me with that ole kook Ron Paul. Good thing he only hates Blacks and Jews since I am neither and that's how I'm supposed to vote according to the media.
But wait, does he really hate them? This is important. As a Christian I know I heard something in church three times a week about how I was supposed to hate people. And if they hated me first, that really made it okay. Or am I getting the Bible confused with a transcript from every White House press release for the last 7 years? Who knows? But I know I am supposed to hate someone so we need to make sure Ron Paul really hates these guys.
Let's see, he hates Jews because he wants to let Israel make its own policy decisions without our interfering. Oh, and he also wants to stop sending Israel's enemies three times more American taxpayer dollars than he wants to stop sending Israel. And he supported the Israeli's decision to take out that nuclear facility in Iraq back in the 1980's when everyone else condemned them because he believed that they had every right to do what they felt was in their best interest as a sovereign nation. So I might be missing something here but I just don't see where he hates Jews. So my support may be getting a little shaky. Oh well, at least he hates black people. Right?
Let's see. Every other candidate bemoans the loss of the black family unit and readily cites it as an explanation for nearly every issue confronting the black community. But it's hard to keep a family together when 1 in 4 Black Men between 20-29 are in prison because of today's version of the Jim Crow Laws, popularly known as the War on Drugs. And Ron Paul has said he would pardon all non-violent drug offenders if elected. So he obviously doesn't hate black people. Maybe I should find a candidate who does. We can't have all of those dangerous criminals back home with their families getting treatment or learning how to actually do something productive since they wouldn't be able to sell drugs anymore if drugs were legalized. We need someone in office who will spend billions of taxpayer dollars to help people make better personal decisions. We need a leader who will deprive those dastardly blacks of their freedom and keep them from pushing drugs on the innocents. Just last night a crazed black man came up and tried to shove a crack pipe in my mouth without my consent so he could get me hooked and make more money. I need a candidate who will keep me safe from these dangerous people by locking them away forever. I also need someone who will make sure the other three-quarters of non-drug dealing black men stay in their place by keeping them guilty by pigmental association with all of these "criminals" instead of seeing them as individuals and recognizing their vast contributions to our society. We can't have this. It's not about the content of their character; it's about the color of their skin. Ron Paul is obviously not the man to get this done. So if he doesn't hate black people either, what am I supposed to do? I'm out of candidates.
Hmmm. What if I just picked a candidate based on who he was as a person, his character shown through his family life, his voting record showing a steadfast commitment to upholding his Oath of Office, and his trust in people as individuals (that runs so deeply that it sometimes allows his good name to be taken advantage of because of things they write in decades old newsletters with that same good name attached to it that he didn't inspect because he trusted them)? What if I didn't have to have a mutual hate partner in common with my candidate? What if I didn't need someone to be funny to deliver his message like Frank Luntz’ (explicit video) focus group said they did when explaining why Fred won after the S.C. debate? What if I voted on issues? What if I think 9/11 was a really bad thing, that going after Bin Laden and boys in Afghanistan was a good idea, but forgetting him to attack a country that posed no imminent threat to America and had exactly zero terrorists from there on those planes, spending over a trillion dollars to do it, without declaring war, and killing thousands of truly brave Americans (soldiers are Americans too) in the process might not have been a great idea and that saying so doesn't make you unpatriotic? Or what if I believe that looking for motives as to why it happened so that we can eliminate those if possible doesn't mean I'm blaming America any more than looking for a motive in a murder case means I'm blaming the victim who was murdered; maybe I'm just trying to understand a serial killer so I can stop him before he does it again? What if, despite graduating from UNC-Chapel Hill, I don't believe that Duke awards Medical Degrees to quacks or kooks? What if I actually did a lot of research and wanted a candidate who offered answers based on eliminating problems instead of reacting to and treating symptoms?
Well, he might not be perfect according to the media since he is my same Race, Religion, and Sex but he doesn't hate Blacks and Jews but he'd still be alright with me. I support Dr. Ron Paul because I can read polysyllabic words and because I believe a lifetime of actions far outweighs an editorial oversight from a decade ago caused by his trusting people who took advantage of his good name. I don't hate Blacks and Jews because Ron Paul does. I don't believe in anything simply because he does. But I am inspired to learn about issues that don't make sense to me when he brings them up. And even though I don't always agree with him, I usually do once I've read an article or two on the issues he's spent a lifetime studying.
Ron Paul may not be perfect since it turns out he doesn't really hate Blacks and Jews. Neither do I. But if you listen to the media which assumes you can't read; you would believe he does, and I would believe that I should.
America, we are better than this. Aren't we? It saddens me that I would even have to add that last question

VOTE RON PAUL IN ' 08 www.ronpaul2008.com ;

P.S. Your high gas prices support terrorists, too--you evil SUV driver. think about it.

well i am a Ron Paul fan because his voting record actually matches what he says....that is unheard of in politics. i am usually not interested in politics because until now all we get is the same old business as usual type crap. and i do not buy into the democrat or republican party......they are the same, no matter whose been in charge nothing really gets done unless it benefits special interest groups that own most politicans. i have looked at all of what the media calls the "frontrunners" and none would change any of the horrible stuff the government has done in the past 30 or 40years. as for obama i would like to know what you think he would actually do if he won? he talks about change but doesnt really say what he would change.....
as for Dr.Ron Paul he is in his 10th term in the U.S. House. he was a obgyn and has delivered over 4000 babies. he served as a flight surgeon in the air national guard. as for some of his voting record Ron Paul has never voted to raise taxes,never voted for an unbalanced budget,never taken a government-paid junket, never voted to increase the power of the executive branch, voted against regulating the internet, he has not participated in the lucrative congressional pension program. Dr.Ron Paul wants to end the IRS, stop the central bankers inflation tax, protect our privacy from government, stop the national ID card, protect or constitutional rights and end the "patriot act" which literally destroyed the constitution, secure our boarders, and bring our troops home.....which no other person running will do....the democrats say they want to but they do nothing to actually bring our troops home.
i know thats alot of information but i would really like for you to think about and compare obama's voting record....when he actually showed up to vote to Dr.Ron Pauls record. but i do like to let as many people know how much is actually on the line for this election, and we really have a choice this time. there is also alot of information on Dr.Pauls website www.ronpaul2008.com and please tell everyone you know to at least look into Ron Paul and compare him to all the other "frontrunners" who dont really talk about the real issues that our country is facing they just give sound bites and talking points.