Danny,
To quote ole Bill, "I feel your pain!"
No, seriously I understand exactly what you are saying. There seems and in many ways no other clear option on the table. Or is there?
We have a document called the Constitution and it spells out the process by which gov't is suppose to run. I don't believe it is flawless or perfect but it was written with limited powers so that when flaws did occur that maybe local and state govt's could compensate themselves to local conditions and move forward.
Even the current economic crisis has an answer in the constitution in Art. 1 Sec. 8 and Art. 1 Sec 10 but instead we try to fix a broken system. I know this is vastly easier said than done but step way back and look at the complete picture. Don't except the premise that your only choice is Obama or McCain.
There's much that could be said concerning the question you asked and I mean a lot but Tie worked so hard to research the word brevity so I want to reward his efforts in the hopes doing so will encourage more. It's good management to reward good behavior in the hopes you'll get more of it, RIGHT?
The 2 major parties know they have the system looked up in that people believe they have only 2 choices. Throw a monkey wrench into that thinking. If 30% of the voting public shifted from democrat and republican to any of the 3rd party candidates, neither major party ultimate winner would have a clear voter mandate because it doesn't take much to realize who ever wins will at the very best as it stands now will do by meer % points in relation to popular vote. This has been the trend in the last several elections and I don't see that changing. But what if the winner only won by say 39% of the total popular vote? I mean when Clinton won with a 43% total popular vote, that scared a lot of people and Perot only took 18%. What if among the various 3rd parties and independents that 18% totaled more towards 30%. In elective circles in Washington, that would be the equal of the Boston Tea Party of maybe even BunkerHill.
Washington has been playing a game with us for years. They've done their own thing but have been able to get away with it by convincing us that "we approved their message." However, the economic bailout finally showed their hand when in massive numbers the American public got it right in "just saying NO!" but Washington said "YES!" anyway. Or maybe Tie's voice was just louder than ours but the fact is they ignored the bi-partisan public who got it right. Look where we are today as this whole thing continues to implode on itself. Paulson now saying more bank nationalization of banks maybe needed.
Who would have thought that it would be republicans who'd set the precedent that Maxine Waters can now use to nationalize the oil industry and all she has to do is get the Middle East to create the crisis and it's all but done.
Do you believe in nationalization? Do you believe that the gov't should take McCain's suggestion the other day and buy up mortgages and then restructure them at a loss to keep the homeowner in them? I'll give you from your perspective thast McCain is a lesser evil than Obama if you want that but even though it's hyperbole, the comparison of Trotsky to Mussolini in a weird kinda way is what we got but this is America and there are alternatives and it doesn't require you to win the day to win the war so to speak.
Danny, it took us a longtime to get where we are it will take a long time to get us turned around. Even Ron Paul openly admitted in June of this year at the Future of Freedom Foundation Conference that before you did anything with Social Security for example, you'd have to fully fund it first. The video of the conference in on YouTube. Now it's not what I want to hear but I also understand the reality of it and I agree that Ron is correct in that accessment and he had a plan to fully fund it and he spells it out in the video as well.
You know voting for the lesser of 2 evils is still going to get you evil so why not try something different in the hope that maybe you might could actually make a difference in the long run. McCain and Obama as much as others would like to try and convince us otherwise are not that much different in ultimate public policy. If you are a republican conservative tpye person consider Bob Barr, the libertarian or Chuck Baldwin of the Constitutional party. If a democrat/liberal is more your flavor look at Ralph Nader or even (sorry but I'm laughing as I type this) Cynthia McKinney. I laugh because imagine this scenario. McKinney President, Pelosi Speaker and Clinton Senate leader. The cat fights would be glorious. LMAO!
I won't kid ya and say that this will work, it is a risk but I can also point out that what we've done in the past hasn't worked either and there was also risk in that course of action. Whatever you decide, I wish you the best.
Take care!
Sorry Tie but we'll call this one semi-brevity!
It's just me again!
