Originally Posted by MariconesUnited
I suppose I was being too polite with my initial post. I don't think it's a good idea at all to look at why a certain politician votes a certain way. It's more important to look at the likely consequences of such votes. To me, Paul encapsulates the expression ''The road to Hell is based on good intentions'' just perfectly.
Of course it is important to look at the possible consequences of a vote. What I am saying is don't be so quick to believe a vote is bad from the surface. If you look closer you may see the actual end is different than what expected. Ofcourse if you don't welcome change I could understand why you dismiss Paul. He is a very big change. Do you really think anything good will come of Any of the other candidates? They are all the same. Ron Paul stands out as the only one that stands up to the status quo.
So you don't believe in individual freedoms over collectivism? You don't believe the FED is a harmful organization? You don't believe endless war to be bad? You like the fact people can't choose what to put in their own bodies? You believe the TSA has the right to fondle grandma at the airport? You believe taxation isn't theft?
All the other candidates give you exactly what we have. Which is a country that is slowly dying, and dying faster by the minute. How could you actually choose to support the same ole' policies that have destroyed us?
Please inform me of certain stances Paul has took that you believe lead to negative consequence.