|
[QUOTE=medicineman;359699]Cleckstro, what you say may be true, excepting your mental image of me. I am fully aware of the manipulation of the MSM and have posted several times that I liked some of Pauls agenda. I am also aware of the tremendous debt and world hatred this regime has forced upon us. I literally hate the current government and would not lose one minutes sleep if Washington DC were to go up in a huge explosion while the 535 and the white house staff were all present. There aren't 10 honest people in that Sodom and Gomora. The thing is, Cleckstro, I am a realist and Ron Paul has no chance of making it to the white house, or changing the status-quo. Youth is eternally hopeful, so you must be young. I give hope a shot, but it has worn thin in my vision of American politics. Do not put me in lockstep with either the current status or the MSM. I know the score and am only trying to lesson the pain when your man (Paul) is not the decider. Check your history books. people that want to elicit too much change soon join the departed.[/QUOTE
Med,
I'm not pegging you as a neo-con responsible for this fiasco in the slightest. I am simply saying that your "Machiavellian" voting method is flawed, and will result in nominees, and therefore a President, that will not address the currency crisis, the exorbitant debt, the return of civil liberties through repealing NSA wiretapping and the Patriot Act, etc.
The Democrats will nobly offer an expansion of social services with tax increases (but will stay mum on Iraq because they fear being called pussies, not to mention the financial crisis) and and the Republicans will offer an expansion of the national security police state, "double Guantanamo" and will deficit spend the nation to bankruptcy. Things will stay the same with a Democrat and will get worse with any Republican other than Ron Paul, period. It is an interesting paradox for one who actually votes: you would lose just as much sleep were DC to explode as if it would stay the same. I think they call that apathy.
You have one vote for change, Med. Use it wisely.
I address these things not out of hope, but of desperation.
__________________
"From the psychopharmalogical standpoint we now understand these [religious/mystical] states to be changes in brain chemistry. From the sociological perspective we see that they tended to be connected in some way with religion."
--Huston Smith, "Do Drugs Have Religious Import?"
Check out my first grow ever: White Widow and Santa Maria! Input obviously accepted...
http://www.rollitup.org/grow-journal...nta-maria.html
|