To have a genuine chance to "turn this thing around", we'd need to elect neither a RepubliClown nor a DemoCrap. Well, maybe Ron Paul... but we know he has the proverbial "snowball's chance.." Neither of the major parties is about "real change"... except who gets to swipe the credit card and charge it to the American taxpayer.
Is it just me or did Mike Huckabee take this part of his platform directly from Ron Paul? I'd believe his whole tax stance a lot more if he'd thought of it himself.
I hope you don't use that as an excuse not to vote for Huckabee. There is no other viable candidate out there willing to carry the message. Ron Paul definitely doesn't have a snowball's chance... He wants to close up all the strategically located bases around the world and bring everybody home. Who, in there right mind, would vote for that kind of idealism?
At SOME point... likely when it really IS too late... there will be something else. In the meantime, protest vote? There is a classic South Park episode where one of the kids refuses to vote... can't see the point of voting when the only choice is between Giant Douche, and Turd Sandwich. But he eventually learns the lesson, "it ALWAYS boils down to a choice between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich... as they are the only ones who suck up enough to get that far along in an election..." Seems the '08, election will be like in South Park...
there's no way i'd consider voting for mike huckabee. his bandwagon approach to Ron Paul policies is far down the list. the guy wants to ammend the constitution to 'reflect god's standards' which seems extremist and arrogant to me. <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/onHkywYc_1M&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/onHkywYc_1M&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> i don't think RP is talking about a 100% global force withdrawal... it seems like the point he argues is for substantial reduction, reversing the trend of overextension. might be wrong about that, but i doubt he means a full global withdrawal. i've always taken the argument as rhetorical.
sure, doesn't make much difference if he means it or just says it to exploit certain voters. it's exactly the type of shit i hope to avoid in the next pres - tho i do understand that religious extremists are a growing constituency in the country... so i can see why ppl come out defending it
Changing the tax code dramatically takes more than electing a President who shares your views. We also have to elect a Congress who will change it. It takes a majority of the Senate and a majority of the House to pass a bill for the President to sign. I would like to pass FairTax and having a President who supports FairTax is a step in the right direction. The REAL WORK is electing a Congress to actually pass a bill for FairTax.