BoshStrikesBack posted...
I know you've got me on ignore, but for the average american nothing has actually changed in the last few years. They still aren't willing to hear the truth no matter what they have to lose. We're on a path to failure? Who wants to hear that? Ignore the messenger and elect someone who will **** us harder because it feels good if you don't think about it too much. Screw trying to fix ****.
Right, because a racist, isolationist, economically-fringe radical who doesn't believe in separation of church and state is exactly what we need to turn things around.
Racist is a stretch. Some of his supporters sadly are, no doubt*, but he's never said anything racist and you'd be hard pressed to find him doing something racist. You'd have to stretch the truth and say that some unfunded spending program he voted against was a racist act. Why? Because he believes all people should be treated equally no matter what they look like, and government should only spend what it has. He doesn't believe minorities deserve a hand up... but he wouldn't give a hand up to whites either. He believes that **** just isn't what government is for.
Isolationist? Are you joking? Take a poli-sci class and you'll learn he is anything but. He wants international trade and says so regularly (which is the actual opposite of isolationism). He wants diplomatic relations, no question. What he doesn't like is going to war with people that have never (really) threatened us (or at least aren't a real threat). We didn't need to pay for the destruction of, and subsequent rebuilding of, Iraq because they were absolutely no threat.
Economically fringe is a joke response in this economic situation. When everything that is supposed to work fails, it's a good idea to check the alternatives. Now, he goes further than I ever would, no doubt, but he goes in the right direction. If he were pres congress would keep him in check. He couldn't cut to the bone, but he could cut the fat. One of the institutions he rails against the most is the department of education, and for good reason. Bush doubled their budget and halved their result. That **** needs to be fixed, and the easy fix is telling the federal gov to mind their own business.
And believing in your own idea of separation of C+S shouldn't be a knock. I believe religion has no place in politics, but that's not how the constitution was written. What they wrote was that politics had no place in religion. If I could convert him to atheism I wouldn't hesitate for a second because he'd be a better candidate... for me... but to ignore the actual writing of the founding fathers as you have on this matter is foolish. You can't separate the public from their religion, all you can do is insure that religion doesn't oppress people who don't follow it and insure that government doesn't oppress religion (the real reason behind division of church and state).
*You can't find a candidate that isn't supported by someone that hates some other ethnic group in today's political climate. It's not the candidate's fault
--
"Principally I hate and detest the animal called man, although I heartily love John, Peter, Thomas and so forth" - Jonathan Swift
BT with the victory!