Quote:
Originally Posted by count zero  "Ron Paul is the only candidate who is not bought and paid for by those looking to steal from you for eternity."
I disagree with this. Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are not owned by those people either. And, unlike Ron Paul, they are pro-choice. I also doubt very much that, if confronted with some particularly vindictive act of the feds that clearly oversteps the bounds of rational governance (like arresting Canadian pot seed sellers or British sportsbook managers), Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel would say "Well, too bad for them, I believe in the rule of law."
Guy is just another Republican conservative. Easy to talk up your ideals when there's no chance you'll ever be called upon to put them into practice. |
Um, i think your a little confused as to these candidates ideology. Paul wants to ELIMINATE overzealous feds by eliminating many of their departments, while Kucinich wants to EMPOWER the federal government and give them even more power than they already have. Thats why i'm a tad confused about your vindictive act of feds scenario. Heck, i can remember Paul wanting to legalize drugs and pot 20 years ago when he ran for president 20 years ago on the Libertarian ticket. You can still find clips at you tube of the old Morton Downey Jr. show with him debating the likes of Lisa Sliwa and Downey as they attacked him for his drug legalization policy.
Never forget, that it was your hero FDR, that granted J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI almost complete autonomy and greatly expanded powers. I find it a little odd that one would credit someone (kucinich) as being a candidate to be "level headed" in regards to overzealous feds, when it's common sense that when you increase the size and numbers of these agencies, it's naturally going to become more intrusive and powerful. And Kucinich would increase the size of government enormously, as all socialists love to do.