I'm registered as an independent but won't waste time voting. You get to choose your master... not whether you're free.
Well I agree with you one the 10/20 year appointments, but I'm not willing to risk FOUR 80 year old Justices hanging in for another four years. The stakes are just too high in light of the dissenting opinions written on Heller and other cases. They've put their agenda front and center for all the world to see and should really be ousted for violating their oath. But I digress...It's not a moot point.
Those justices might be able to hang on for 4 years and not 8 years.
What should really happen is a constitutional amendment to limit justices to a single 10 or 20yr term anyway.
I told myself that I would never vote against somebody, but would only vote FOR somebody.
I have heard a few disturbing things about him regarding foreign policies, ...
And you don't think Robama will nominate the same as Obamney?Well I agree with you one the 10/20 year appointments, but I'm not willing to risk FOUR 80 year old Justices hanging in for another four years. The stakes are just too high in light of the dissenting opinions written on Heller and other cases. They've put their agenda front and center for all the world to see and should really be ousted for violating their oath. But I digress...
It's all pointless. I'm too busy doing important stuff like punching myself in the sack to worry about it anymore.
With Romney it's just a risk. With Obama it's a given.And you don't think Robama will nominate the same as Obamney?
You might want to research Romney's judicial appointments when he was governor of Mass.
Because the leadership doesn't support Ron Paul? I hardly think that's an indictment on ability to change. I'd say that change is always feared and that every organization over 10 people has the same issue. Refusing to support the party or the cantidate offerred will only lead to downfall if in fact enought people feel strong enough and the same way. But then again... if that were the case, then the party would in fact by definition have changed.
I'd say that the vast majority of Paul supporters are behind him solely for his individual freedoms policy.
We'll see I guess, but I don't view it like that. Again... just because the GOP leadership doesn't support Paul, it doesn't mean they are cocky, blaming or <insert choice of Paul supporters rhetoric here>
Add in the premiere of MTV's Caged, I'd definitely say the world's set to end in 2012.
I'd say that the vast majority of Paul supporters are behind him solely for his individual freedoms policy.
I'd say that the vast majority of Paul supporters are behind him solely for his individual freedoms policy.
Enter your email address to join: