Ron Paul "McCain and Obama the Same"

[dc dalton]

Great new interview with Dr. Paul ... I still agree 1000% with this man and wish to HELL he was on the ballot in November!

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Ron_Pa...John_0828.html

[andrewjs18]

Originally Posted by dc dalton

Great new interview with Dr. Paul ... I still agree 1000% with this man and wish to HELL he was on the ballot in November!

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Ron_Pa...John_0828.html

don't we all? =P

[ar15jules]

No....we ALL do not.
Jules

[jkp1187]

And Paul is simply wrong here.

[manyplews]

Well,if you want to throw away your vote,you can always vote for Bob Barr !
Remember how voting for Ross Perot got us Bill and Hillary and the assault weapons ban,the high capacity magazine ban,NAFTA,etc.
Sarah Palin sure isn't anti-2nd Amendment like Biden and Obama-nation are.

[ChamberedRound]

I still agree with Ron Paul's ideology and proposed policies and still wish he had been given a real shot in this race. With that said, I think his current "Restore the Republic" initiative is an even better strategy. All politics is local, and by starting with change at the local and state levels, eventually it will bubble up and get momentum nationally. It might take awhile, but I think it will happen, and in addition it doesn't tie the whole plan to a single individual.

[adymond]

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

I still agree with Ron Paul's ideology and proposed policies and still wish he had been given a real shot in this race. With that said, I think his current "Restore the Republic" initiative is an even better strategy. All politics is local, and by starting with change at the local and state levels, eventually it will bubble up and get momentum nationally. It might take awhile, but I think it will happen, and in addition it doesn't tie the whole plan to a single individual.

One thing Obama got right is that it all starts with US. WE THE PEOPLE need to get involved locally and start taht ground swell. I think Paul goes a bit further than I do. Barr is closer to my ideals, but I don't think I can handle the thought of voting for anyone that will not have a genuine chance at defeating Obama. I'll start locally to change things nationally while helping to elect someone who will do the least amount of damage nationally.

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

I still agree with Ron Paul's ideology and proposed policies and still wish he had been given a real shot in this race. With that said, I think his current "Restore the Republic" initiative is an even better strategy. All politics is local, and by starting with change at the local and state levels, eventually it will bubble up and get momentum nationally. It might take awhile, but I think it will happen, and in addition it doesn't tie the whole plan to a single individual.

A hearty +1 to you sir.

[pex]

Originally Posted by manyplews

Well,if you want to throw away your vote,you can always vote for Bob Barr !
Remember how voting for Ross Perot got us Bill and Hillary and the assault weapons ban,the high capacity magazine ban,NAFTA,etc.
Sarah Palin sure isn't anti-2nd Amendment like Biden and Obama-nation are.

It is because so many feel this way that we were unable to send a message of dissatisfaction to the yin-yang of tyranny that is the two-party system.

Voting two-party because we think there's no other option will always ensure there is no other option.

Aside from that, a similar total voter turnout in two elections that sees a huge decrease in two-party votes in the second election will send a huge message (to both two-party and the people), even if the object of those votes is not elected.

Waiting for someone to do the right thing before you're willing to do the right thing means if no one is willing to be first, we're all going to end up last.

[adymond]

Originally Posted by pex

It is because so many feel this way that we were unable to send a message of dissatisfaction to the yin-yang of tyranny that is the two-party system.

Voting two-party because we think there's no other option will always ensure there is no other option.

Aside from that, a similar total voter turnout in two elections that sees a huge decrease in two-party votes in the second election will send a huge message (to both two-party and the people), even if the object of those votes is not elected.

Waiting for someone to do the right thing before you're willing to do the right thing means if no one is willing to be first, we're all going to end up last.

I think it needs to start with the local elections first.