it is vital to vote a third party candidate in because they stand for the most important issue: the constitution. Obama and Mccain are both run by the same corporate elite. it doesn't matter who gets in, wars will increase with obama as well...defend your rights now before the republicans and democrats take them all away--they are already succeeding
As much as I respect your videos which for most part speak the truth,to vote for any third party is a throw away vote.I'm not in love with Obama.but we as a nation can't take another 4 years of any repugnant in the White House.Just think how much different the country could have been had Nader not cost Gore Florida.Look at which party will spend money to get him on the ballot this time.
To vote for a third party is to give up support for the business/ concentrated power/ establishment party, and to push the issues farther toward what the people really need, and in most cases, already want.
Ralph Nader said Obama talks to much like a "white" guy and should talk more like a black guy. Hey Jackass, Obama is a Harvard graduate and is running for the President of the United State. Do you want him to talk "Jive".....and are you saying African-americans have a way of communicating that's different from whites? Talking from your butthole again aren't you Ralph...your life is at its twilight years and your desperate to make one more splash before you kick the bucket.
Come on buddy. Didn't you hear what he really said, or did you just hear the 10-second FAUX News clip of it?
He wasn't criticizing the way he spoke, he was criticizing the fact that he doesnt support actions or issues that support and help minorities and the underclass (blacks and latinos, people in the ghettos and projects, etc) or which run contrary to the white, corporate power structure that runs our country and that he is relying on the get him into power.
Nader is a left wing nut! They support terrorists, want to make the US very immoral, etc. We don't need less God in society, but more! We need to ban abortion, homosexuality, and other sins!!! God abhors evil, and destroys evil nations.
Nader is a nut? Do you have any actual proof of this, or are you just pulling it out of your ass?
Ralph Nader has a record of standing up for the little guy and fighting for our rights. Ralph has helped pass a lot of legislation that helps keep people safe, whether it is at their work, home, or in their car. Would a terrorist supporter fight to keep us safe? Are you sure it is you who is the nut?
Nader din't lose the election for Gore, Gore lost the election for Nader. Gore should have run a stronger campaign. Most Americans though wanted a president that they could have a beer with, or go to a ball game with. Now we pay the price
Wow. There are a lot of religious nuts out there. The church is just as corrupt (maybe more) as the politicians. If it is really about God, then why are there so many preachers out there with a political agenda? Hagee, Wright, Sharpton... they all have a stake in it. If they really preach the "gospel" they should stick to that and stop spreading moronic opinions about something they are not experts in.
I completely agree with the implications of what you're saying, but did we not learn that either 1) Our voting system is completley rigged or 2) No one even in California, land of pissed democrats, even voted for him.
I pick 1). due to everyone I knew, including myself, voted for him, yet he barely made 5% in CALIFORNIA???? HELLOOOOOO!
Either way, the result is the same and he and Gravel are only going to give the impending McCain war party win minimal plausibilty.
Democrats and republicans are working for the ruling class. We the people don't matter to them. Until we stand up and demand change nothing will change.
Join Nader/Gonzalez in the streets and vote for them in November!
Enjoy your self-righteous idealism. Those of us in the trenches will just buckle up for 4 more years of Neo-cons in the White House. And yes, I may sound pompous but I'm tired of burying babies.
It's too bad the Democrats you support voted for this war...it must make you angry for supporting them. But...you just keep on supporting them...hoping they will change??
Obama did not vote for it becasue he coulnd't...not being in the senate then but he HAS voted to FUND the war...do you lkie that?? He HAS stated he wants to SPEND more on defense than the Bush administration..do you like that??? Why do you think he believes we need to "bump up" defense spending? Why is he against single payer health insurance and gay marriage? Why does he get the lions share of Wall Street money?...Get out of your box and think man!
boomac62, good point. Obama voted for funding this illegal war. Obama never says the war is illegal. And he felt it necessary to tell newpaper editors that he isn't against all wars. I didn't hear him say anything about legality.
People need to see that an Obama presidency will mean yet another war.
Its people like you that helped put Bush in the White House and are going to put McCain in next. So watch lots of Iraq videos because that's you handiwork too.
No..That's not. People like me support Nader...who would not vote to fund YOUR war (Your party voted for the war and your candidate voted to fund it)..Your Democrats have blood on their hands.
Ohara, you are so far off base - I live and work in Third World humanitarian projects - I see the people who actually pay the price for your pie in the sky foolishness and I know the reality of life or death for them. But you don't have to hold dying babies, so keep voting stupid and I'll keep saving as many lives as possible after spoiled, arrogant, foolish americans like you throw the next election and put another Bush in the White House for 4 more years. You kill ppl with your ignorance.
exMuslim, while I take your pompous, self-righteous points to heart (really, I do, I spent a few months working with an NGO for Children in Ghana), I am with Ohara.
While Dems and Repubs MAY not advocate the same things (much of what they advocate actually IS the same), they both effectively lead to more or less the same results. Take one of the thousands of examples; the fact that the democrats have consistently supported the Iraq war. Guess who profited most off of the war...
Well,i'm not sure that happens. As a Nader supporter myself I would never vote for a corperate Democrat anyway, so the only person Nader takes my vote from is perhaps Cynthia mcKinney, the Green Party candidate. We need to vote our conscience and nothing else and let the results be the results.
I understand that some people believe we should "vote out conscience and nothing else" which is good in theory but in reality all it does is allows the worst person possible to end up running the nation. Because of people "voting their conscience" hundreds of thousands of people died in war these past 4 years. All voting your conscience does is bolster your own feelings of self righteousness and allow the other side to stay in power.
I don't understand your logic. Do you know that the Democrats voted for the war? The Democrats voted for the Patriot Act...did you know that? Obama says we need to "bump up" military spending...do you agree, do you believe Bush/Cheney are not spending enough? Both Hillary and Obama say lets spend more. I will always vote my conscience..Always. A vote is sacred. DO not sell it.
Go ahead, but your idealism will probably put McCain in the White House.Just remember that when you're complaining about the death toll... if people like you would have voted realistically we probably wouldn't have ever gone to Iraq. Spoiled Americans with pie in the sky dreams are not helping this nation become more humane. They are only splitting the liberal vote and giving the White House to the neo-cons. Yes a vote is sacred and a vote for an independent is a vote for the Republicans.
I don't know if we would have gone into Iraq or not...but I do know the Democrats supporterd the war and still vote to fund it. I'm not concerned about a Republican winning becasue as the facts show both the GOP and the Dems are very much the same...they are wall street controlled and both supported the war,both supported the patriot act , neither supports single payer health care. I voted for Nader in 2000 and it was not a wasted vote, I voted for kerry in 2004 & I believe that vote was wasted
The Dems are NOT the same as the Neo-cons. They may not be extreme far left liberals but they are a lot better than what we've had in there for 8 years! I don't know why the people who are the most educated can't figure out 2nd grade math and know that there is NO chance of a far right independent winning and that voting for them just splits the vote and puts Neo-cons squarely in the White House. Apparently some ppl are more concerned with their ideals even in life or death situations.
I'm really not that nervous about McCain being in office (when compared with Obama). In reality I'm scared of both of them, as they will both attack Iran, they will both support Israel's occupation of and tyranny over Palestine, they will accept multiple permanent military bases in Iraq, and they will go to any length to prop up a bitch government there that doesn't represent the Iraqi people.
Obama's claims are somtimes noble enough, but they really are false and empty.
Corporate owned media tell exMuslim07 to chose bt. "Corp. owned Candidate 01" or "Corp. owned Candidate 02" and exMuslim07 accepts it as "reality."
A vote for Dems/Rep is a vote for war.
"people like you" are like birds who lived in a cage too long... Ralph Nader opens the door for you but you won't fly. You're so scared of the World, you'd rather stay inside and tell yourself it's "realistic."
We shouldnt be voting on WHO is in charge, we should be voting on the issues and then the elected leader fulfill our wishes. WE are in charge, why look for someone who may agree with you, almost impossible and the govt KNOWS this!! instead of them DOING THEIR JOB?
they all eat together, have events together...shit they probably draw names out of a hat~dont you watch those people SLEEP during congress on CNN????
if he upholds international treaties, that means we'd still be owned by Rome from 1422 (i believe thats the correct year) now, why would we want ANY leader that would uphold that? all roads lead to Rome. Good Luck! blessings to all!
First Kucinich, then Gravel, and now (surprise surprise) Ralph Nader.
What happened to Gravel? You appear to be a little fickle and undecided there rp. Did you switch over to Nader because Gravel changed his allegiance from the Democratic to the Libertarian Party?
I know the good guy who's channel this is, and though I don't speak for him, I can flat out say the answer is NO.
He still likes Gravel. But now that Ralph Nader is in the race, it changes things. NO ONE has done more to advance the 3rd party movement or FIGHT the ruling powers that be in the last 20 years than Ralph Nader. As a Ron Paul supporter, I can tell you what I know and the guy who runs this channel already knows: Ralph Nader is the BEST thing going over on the left.
Yeah, I should know. I voted for Nader in 2000. But times have significantly changed since then, and, at least in my view, Ron Paul is still the logical choice given the situation we now find ourselves in. I believe Nader was definitely the right choice in 2000, given Bush/Cheney and Gore/Lieberman -- all four of which have been showing their true colors since that time.
Yes I know how you feel. I voted for Nader in 2000 and still feel he was the best candidate then. But yes, you are right. Times have changed. The national debt has tripled. Inflation is running sky high. We are in a government (as well as personal) debt CRISIS that is causing the currency to devaluate and risks collapsing the economy. Now is the time for someone TIGHT with money NOT loose with it.
Ron Paul is the ONLY one showing how we can cut the debt without hurting anyone.
Seriously. Do you acually expect us to vote for Nader and end up giving McCain a vote? I LOVE Rep Press, but seriously. Can we get behind Obama even if he has ties to the assholes who run everything from behind the scenes? Please?
Is anyone going to work for anything good? It is the ides of May, the election is in November, can we at least work and see what impact we can have on the polls? Here is a hypothetical, lets say people get active and things change and for example we find a roughly four way split in polls divided between Bob Barr, McCain, Obama, and Nader. Are you telling me that even in that case you are not going to vote for Nader? People want change, McCain and Obama are NOT change. How about telling others
I find the statement that Obama isn't going to change anything to be just...odd. He is at odds with the current president on almost every issue. What change do you want to see that you don't think will happen with him?
But if they get an increased share of the vote then
1. it will demonstrate that a portion of the American people support their kinds of policies and policital approch, putting an alternative into the policial conciousness
and
2. a rising percentage of the vote will convince others that it is worth voting for them (or similar candidates) in the future.
It would have some effect in the short term, and if we want an end to the current state of affairs then momentum must be built up over time.
R3B3L7, you ignore the fact that Obama violates his oath right now by making threats against foreign countries. From what the mad says and fails to say - HE WILL NOT ADMIT THE IRAQ WAR WAS ILLEGAL - you should see that he is very likely to get us into yet another war.
I agree. Although I would vote Obama any day over Hillary or McCain, you are correct. He pretends to be "opposed to the war" and is "critical" of Bush's foreign policy, but when pushed in a corner he's not offering any real alternative or taking any dares to condemn it as ILLEGAL and then threatens like McCain. He speaks in half measures that sound like little carefully market researched sound bites designed to tell people what they want to hear, NOT what they NEED to hear.
Anyone that did not make those comments would never have had a chance. Perhaps he's following the Kennedy approach and playing the smart politician until he get's in.
Let's hope and pray that he'll have something to prove about people of color, this despite or maybe as a result of being a CFR member himself.
I don't think he'll attack Iran. There would be too much opposition, especially after the Iraq war. Even he wouldn't be that stupid. It's mainly sabre-rattling, in an attempt to look toughr than the Democrats without favouring perminant occupation of Iraq (any more). He might cause a bit of antagonism, but mark my words there will be war (international and civil) the way we're going regardless of who wins in 2008 unless we can make a decisive change of direction.
Yes, they could run in 2012, but they can also run in 2008. Any 3rd party presidential candidate can decide to run in any presidential election; they just need to get their party's nomination, or they can run as an independent. The notion that they shouldn't run in 2008 is without merit. Vote your dreams; not your fears. 3rd party's have received my vote for years. Ralph Nader's father, when asked if he would like a third political party is said to have replied, "I'd be happy with a 2nd. :)
Nader is the best of any possible alternative to McCain Obama and Hillary. this is because a successful anti-corporate stance is the precise one that we need more than any other one thing. A vigorous adversarial stance toward the MI complex and the corporate sector in general will help fix globalization, oligopoly inside the country, and illegal immigration. Nader has the credentials - we know where he stands on that.
you should vote for people, not parties. this guy nader could make a difference. My question is this.
I have heard rumors that Nader wants everyone to rent. Rent to who?
Is it that he wants everyone to rent or that he doesn't own property because of property tax. Where does Nader stand on taxation of everday people? why does irs jail wesely snipes for not giving his money to them?
the democrats will do the same thing as last year vote for any one but a republican and since the republicans are almost extinct any one (even ralph Nader) who is a democrat will win
I voted for Nader in 2000, to try to get federal funding for the Green Party since I couldn't tell if another Bush or another Clinton man was worse, not because I thought Nader could possibly win.
Nader couldn't possibly win in 2004, and he knew that, yet he took Republican money and ran. That's disgusting. Also, I find his stock history disgusting. I think Nader is as shady as he looks.
Unfortunately, two of the people I once admired most now have their legacies reduced to a footnote on the loser's side of the balance sheet.
Hillary and Nader both have such inflated egos, they are plenty content to watch the world go down the tubes planted by the Repubes all because the PEOPLE of the US didn't want them. Well too damned bad.
What are you talking about? You make no sense. I am so tired of the ignorance ion this country. Do you even have a clue about Ralph nader's history? Do you know ANYTHING about the Clintons? How you can remotely put these two in the same category is totally beyond me..
Sand, Seems a very straight forward comment, I'm not sure how you're so mystified by it. Let me make it so your Republican mind can understand. They BOTH put what they thought would be their legacies in front of the greater good. Nader has already been partially responsible for the installation of BUSH and all that's occurred since then. Hillary is perilously close to doing the same thing.
heh sorry didn't notice this was part of a thread, thought you were talking about the video... damn youtube comment system.
Although I would have to agree that Nader does have a bit of an ego thing going, wish he would either run for/with the Greens or step aside. I was hoping for a McKinney/Nader ticket :(
I think everybody who is not happy with our options... I'm talking all the independants, libertarians, Ron Paul supporters, disenfranchised republicans AND democrats... need to get behind ONE candidate and break this "Republicrat" system we have in the U.S. I'm not saying Nader is our man, but maybe Bob Barr, or someone else. I think we need to choose as a community, because frankly, I'm tired have having to choose the lesser of 3 evils. This sucks.
The fact of the matter is that we are stuck in a two party system and we need to vote our conscience not the lesser of two evils! republican or democrat they no longer speak for the people. nader is a brillint man who is the only consumer advocate and voice of the people other than ron paul. they have no hidden agenda.we need to wake up and vote TELL EVERYONE!!!!!
Who cares whos wins it will not matter because the president does NOT have control over this country the ILLUMINATI does that's how BUSH won twice. the reason why Lincoln and Kennedy got killed was because they wanted to destroy the federal reserve and the secret government is NOT going to allow this so they just killed them ,they have been controlling this country since it was established.George Washington was a 33degree freemason and the freemasons are connected to the ILLUMINATI AND so on>>>
Wish you all the luck in the world Nader, I'm glad to see that real patriots like you are still running in this race giving the American people a real choice in this communist republicrat election. My vote is still with Gravel but if you win I hope you consider the NI4D as it seems as the only logical solution to fix our broken government.
I have deep respect for you as your one of the few americans that actually give a shit about whats going on in washington.
If more americans cared our country would be better, all i'm saying is its time to start focusing on picking a candidate with a realistic shot of winning.
True, to some extent. . . .but the president's REAL strongest power is his control of our armed forces and the direction our foreign policy goes. This determines virtually EVERYTHING! As you can see with Bush, it leads to a crashing dollar, inflated oil prices, which lead to increased cost of everything in our lives. It also leads to a weaker military since we're so spread out and more vulnerable to attack then ever. The president has a lot more power then you give him credit for.
McCain and Cbama are Senators, they have been give a chance and they have failed to serve the American people. they have violated their oaths to uphold the US Constitution. People are VERY hungry for a change today and third parties have won in before, so never say never. If more people get the facts, he will win.
let me say it slowly. NADER IS NOT GOING TO WIN!!! HE CANNOT let it go man.
I'vve been watching your videos, and you seem to have this "anybody but obama clinton and mc Cain" attitude with no real justification. Appart from your own personal bias, first it was vote for gravel, then vote for kuccinch, then vote for Nader. dude read the polices of the front runners, and pick the one that best represents the things you wanna see accomplished.
i know you guys are going to hate I said that. I was a hardcore nadar fan back in the day.. Good luck! Personally I would love if Ron Paul would go Indy...
There's already a candidate that meets your criteria! His book sit's at #1 on the NY times bestseller list! His name is Ron Paul! how can you ignore him? not very representative of you. I'm un subscribing.
I plan to make a video asking YouTube to try to be at least as good as CSPAN. You are right, on the YouChoose page they should have listed Independents and Third parties and not bias the whole thing to the tow powerful political parties who put forward unacceptable candidates.
I lost a bit of respect for Gravel over that. Maybe it was a publicity stunt or whatever- but it doesnt make him seem like a serious candidate. I would still rather vote for him or Nader that these other war criminals.
Ron Paul tried to impeach Clinton for going to war in Kosovo and not declaring, and abuse of power. Yet, Ron Paul accuses Bush of these very same things but says Bush hasn't committed an impeachable offense. So what about Ron Paul you ask? "We must protect our oil. It is called ``our oil.'' At the same time, there is a strong constituency for never offending Israel" -Ron Paul
He was talking about how we cant just tell the "Arabs" to get lost. That they have a lot of oil, that we need. In that we call it "our oil" for a reason.
Nader doesn't have the balls that gravel has. Gravel will get in people's faces and be heard. Nader is far too apathetic. Independants won't win with Nader. They just won't.
I'm with ya on that. What the hell? I mean, wasn't it Mike who gave Ralph kudos in the book BIG time? I think what Ralph is seeking is a "look" he can sell. I don't blame him with the crazy eye look the sheeple can't get past. Gonzalez lives a very "artful" life & seems very articulate. Mike tells ya right where the bear shit in the woods... This all seems like the usual dog & pony show to me. Mike's too good for Nader. Just expressing my opinion. Maybe I sound too definite. Nice to see ya.
RP I'm curious, If Nader and Gravel don't team up (which I believe they should) and they both remain in the race until the end, which one do you think you would end up supporting?
hollyhoodjoe123, you think illegal wars of aggression are a trivial matter? The question is hard for dishonest politicians. It is not a dishonest question for a dishonest politician so I don't see what Fox has to do with it. The fact you think it is easy for Nader shows how good he really is.
I mean that you know his stances on those issues will be. It's like asking John McCain "will you raise taxes like Barack Obama?", or asking Barack Obama "are you pro-life, like McCain?"
I don't believe that Obama is for the military-industrial complex like you believe he is.
hollyhoodjoe123, well Obama is very much for the military-industrial complex. "Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines." WHAT THE HELL FOR? Another war? He never says the war was illegal. THAT should be a danger sign to all.
hollyhoodjoe13, its easy to determine who their people are, any person that isn't crucified or ignored by the media MUST be corporate owned and have their interest at heart, not the interest of the people.
holly, while the question doesn't go into details of foreign policy to satisfy whatever "in depth" or "hard hitting" questions you may have, asking a candidate to truthfully acknowledge the rules of law as stated by your constitution as well as those agreed to by the international community is actually a very important question. You haven't had a president who upheld the constitution of your country in a hundred years. George Washington would be leading the revolt right now if he were here.
if you cant go red or blue on things theres always NADER.
tch, hes a joker/wildcard in all the presidential races
POWER TO THE PENGUINS!
HAPPY FEET for PREZ 08!
songunkilla 3 years ago
it is vital to vote a third party candidate in because they stand for the most important issue: the constitution. Obama and Mccain are both run by the same corporate elite. it doesn't matter who gets in, wars will increase with obama as well...defend your rights now before the republicans and democrats take them all away--they are already succeeding
13asid 3 years ago
Ron Paul!!!!
Or who ever he supports for prez!!
Bob Barr??? Chuck????
OneVisionProductions 3 years ago
No effing way.
NADER '08
aewester 3 years ago
what's wrong with ron paul?
hafk1n 3 years ago
Is Ron Paul even runing now??
nportillo73 3 years ago
As much as I respect your videos which for most part speak the truth,to vote for any third party is a throw away vote.I'm not in love with Obama.but we as a nation can't take another 4 years of any repugnant in the White House.Just think how much different the country could have been had Nader not cost Gore Florida.Look at which party will spend money to get him on the ballot this time.
blair227 3 years ago
To vote for a third party is to give up support for the business/ concentrated power/ establishment party, and to push the issues farther toward what the people really need, and in most cases, already want.
aewester 3 years ago
Ralph Nader said Obama talks to much like a "white" guy and should talk more like a black guy. Hey Jackass, Obama is a Harvard graduate and is running for the President of the United State. Do you want him to talk "Jive".....and are you saying African-americans have a way of communicating that's different from whites? Talking from your butthole again aren't you Ralph...your life is at its twilight years and your desperate to make one more splash before you kick the bucket.
NigelTempleton 3 years ago
This is not the issue here
Beadbud5000 3 years ago
Come on buddy. Didn't you hear what he really said, or did you just hear the 10-second FAUX News clip of it?
He wasn't criticizing the way he spoke, he was criticizing the fact that he doesnt support actions or issues that support and help minorities and the underclass (blacks and latinos, people in the ghettos and projects, etc) or which run contrary to the white, corporate power structure that runs our country and that he is relying on the get him into power.
aewester 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Nader was and is a Neocon tool! A spolier for the 2000 election. The only thing missing was the 40 pieces of gold!
sstyx8 3 years ago
Anyone know what was his response?
MustacheVerra 3 years ago
Nader is a left wing nut! They support terrorists, want to make the US very immoral, etc. We don't need less God in society, but more! We need to ban abortion, homosexuality, and other sins!!! God abhors evil, and destroys evil nations.
RedWhiteBlue4Life 3 years ago
Nader is a nut? Do you have any actual proof of this, or are you just pulling it out of your ass?
Ralph Nader has a record of standing up for the little guy and fighting for our rights. Ralph has helped pass a lot of legislation that helps keep people safe, whether it is at their work, home, or in their car. Would a terrorist supporter fight to keep us safe? Are you sure it is you who is the nut?
Unbrandedgravy 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
thanks to fool nader, gore lost his election.
nader is dreaming idealist as compared to a present situation pragmatist.
getlostfuckyourself 3 years ago
Nader din't lose the election for Gore, Gore lost the election for Nader. Gore should have run a stronger campaign. Most Americans though wanted a president that they could have a beer with, or go to a ball game with. Now we pay the price
Waushara 3 years ago 4
Wow. There are a lot of religious nuts out there. The church is just as corrupt (maybe more) as the politicians. If it is really about God, then why are there so many preachers out there with a political agenda? Hagee, Wright, Sharpton... they all have a stake in it. If they really preach the "gospel" they should stick to that and stop spreading moronic opinions about something they are not experts in.
Don't vote republican or democrat in '08.
Nateriffic1 3 years ago 7
"Don't vote republican or democrat in '08."
we can change things for real if we do that.
representativepress 3 years ago
I completely agree with the implications of what you're saying, but did we not learn that either 1) Our voting system is completley rigged or 2) No one even in California, land of pissed democrats, even voted for him.
I pick 1). due to everyone I knew, including myself, voted for him, yet he barely made 5% in CALIFORNIA???? HELLOOOOOO!
Either way, the result is the same and he and Gravel are only going to give the impending McCain war party win minimal plausibilty.
dstevens101 3 years ago 2
Agreed. It was send a messsage to Washington at the very least. These two parties are but one.
Beadbud5000 3 years ago 2
Democrats and republicans are working for the ruling class. We the people don't matter to them. Until we stand up and demand change nothing will change.
Join Nader/Gonzalez in the streets and vote for them in November!
nowellian 3 years ago
judenrat!
evel1969 3 years ago
I am thinking about supporting Nader because between McCain and Obama, there's no good candidates.
jmkpns 3 years ago 8
Enjoy your self-righteous idealism. Those of us in the trenches will just buckle up for 4 more years of Neo-cons in the White House. And yes, I may sound pompous but I'm tired of burying babies.
exMuslim07 3 years ago
It's too bad the Democrats you support voted for this war...it must make you angry for supporting them. But...you just keep on supporting them...hoping they will change??
boomac62 3 years ago
Obama did NOT vote for this war. But you just keep on living your little self-righteous pipe dream while millions of people die, okay?
exMuslim07 3 years ago
Obama did not vote for it becasue he coulnd't...not being in the senate then but he HAS voted to FUND the war...do you lkie that?? He HAS stated he wants to SPEND more on defense than the Bush administration..do you like that??? Why do you think he believes we need to "bump up" defense spending? Why is he against single payer health insurance and gay marriage? Why does he get the lions share of Wall Street money?...Get out of your box and think man!
boomac62 3 years ago
Didn't Obama talk about invading Pakistan?
jmkpns 3 years ago
Yes, Obama is very big into sabor ratling....same old story.
boomac62 3 years ago 2
boomac62, good point. Obama voted for funding this illegal war. Obama never says the war is illegal. And he felt it necessary to tell newpaper editors that he isn't against all wars. I didn't hear him say anything about legality.
People need to see that an Obama presidency will mean yet another war.
representativepress 3 years ago
Its people like you that helped put Bush in the White House and are going to put McCain in next. So watch lots of Iraq videos because that's you handiwork too.
exMuslim07 3 years ago
No..That's not. People like me support Nader...who would not vote to fund YOUR war (Your party voted for the war and your candidate voted to fund it)..Your Democrats have blood on their hands.
Peace and blessings to you
boomac62 3 years ago
google this:
"151 congressmen profit financially off the Iraq war"
Check out the list of congressmen at the bottom of the article...
aewester 3 years ago
Ohara, you are so far off base - I live and work in Third World humanitarian projects - I see the people who actually pay the price for your pie in the sky foolishness and I know the reality of life or death for them. But you don't have to hold dying babies, so keep voting stupid and I'll keep saving as many lives as possible after spoiled, arrogant, foolish americans like you throw the next election and put another Bush in the White House for 4 more years. You kill ppl with your ignorance.
exMuslim07 3 years ago
exMuslim, while I take your pompous, self-righteous points to heart (really, I do, I spent a few months working with an NGO for Children in Ghana), I am with Ohara.
While Dems and Repubs MAY not advocate the same things (much of what they advocate actually IS the same), they both effectively lead to more or less the same results. Take one of the thousands of examples; the fact that the democrats have consistently supported the Iraq war. Guess who profited most off of the war...
John Kerry.
aewester 3 years ago
Nader is going to do what the independents always do - split the liberal vote and put another republican in the white house.
exMuslim07 3 years ago
Well,i'm not sure that happens. As a Nader supporter myself I would never vote for a corperate Democrat anyway, so the only person Nader takes my vote from is perhaps Cynthia mcKinney, the Green Party candidate. We need to vote our conscience and nothing else and let the results be the results.
boomac62 3 years ago
I understand that some people believe we should "vote out conscience and nothing else" which is good in theory but in reality all it does is allows the worst person possible to end up running the nation. Because of people "voting their conscience" hundreds of thousands of people died in war these past 4 years. All voting your conscience does is bolster your own feelings of self righteousness and allow the other side to stay in power.
exMuslim07 3 years ago
I don't understand your logic. Do you know that the Democrats voted for the war? The Democrats voted for the Patriot Act...did you know that? Obama says we need to "bump up" military spending...do you agree, do you believe Bush/Cheney are not spending enough? Both Hillary and Obama say lets spend more. I will always vote my conscience..Always. A vote is sacred. DO not sell it.
boomac62 3 years ago
Go ahead, but your idealism will probably put McCain in the White House.Just remember that when you're complaining about the death toll... if people like you would have voted realistically we probably wouldn't have ever gone to Iraq. Spoiled Americans with pie in the sky dreams are not helping this nation become more humane. They are only splitting the liberal vote and giving the White House to the neo-cons. Yes a vote is sacred and a vote for an independent is a vote for the Republicans.
exMuslim07 3 years ago
I don't know if we would have gone into Iraq or not...but I do know the Democrats supporterd the war and still vote to fund it. I'm not concerned about a Republican winning becasue as the facts show both the GOP and the Dems are very much the same...they are wall street controlled and both supported the war,both supported the patriot act , neither supports single payer health care. I voted for Nader in 2000 and it was not a wasted vote, I voted for kerry in 2004 & I believe that vote was wasted
boomac62 3 years ago
The Dems are NOT the same as the Neo-cons. They may not be extreme far left liberals but they are a lot better than what we've had in there for 8 years! I don't know why the people who are the most educated can't figure out 2nd grade math and know that there is NO chance of a far right independent winning and that voting for them just splits the vote and puts Neo-cons squarely in the White House. Apparently some ppl are more concerned with their ideals even in life or death situations.
exMuslim07 3 years ago
I'm really not that nervous about McCain being in office (when compared with Obama). In reality I'm scared of both of them, as they will both attack Iran, they will both support Israel's occupation of and tyranny over Palestine, they will accept multiple permanent military bases in Iraq, and they will go to any length to prop up a bitch government there that doesn't represent the Iraqi people.
Obama's claims are somtimes noble enough, but they really are false and empty.
aewester 3 years ago
Corporate owned media tell exMuslim07 to chose bt. "Corp. owned Candidate 01" or "Corp. owned Candidate 02" and exMuslim07 accepts it as "reality."
A vote for Dems/Rep is a vote for war.
"people like you" are like birds who lived in a cage too long... Ralph Nader opens the door for you but you won't fly. You're so scared of the World, you'd rather stay inside and tell yourself it's "realistic."
Don't ask me to stay inside with you.
oharawinter 3 years ago
thank you
supportnader 3 years ago
We shouldnt be voting on WHO is in charge, we should be voting on the issues and then the elected leader fulfill our wishes. WE are in charge, why look for someone who may agree with you, almost impossible and the govt KNOWS this!! instead of them DOING THEIR JOB?
they all eat together, have events together...shit they probably draw names out of a hat~dont you watch those people SLEEP during congress on CNN????
many returns of the day, to all.
phloridababe 3 years ago
Sounds a bit like an ad for the NI4D.
petergoesonair 3 years ago
not to sound ignorant, but what is that? thank you & many blessings~
phloridababe 3 years ago
if he upholds international treaties, that means we'd still be owned by Rome from 1422 (i believe thats the correct year) now, why would we want ANY leader that would uphold that? all roads lead to Rome. Good Luck! blessings to all!
phloridababe 3 years ago
First Kucinich, then Gravel, and now (surprise surprise) Ralph Nader.
What happened to Gravel? You appear to be a little fickle and undecided there rp. Did you switch over to Nader because Gravel changed his allegiance from the Democratic to the Libertarian Party?
KobyBrandt 3 years ago
KobyBrandt:
I know the good guy who's channel this is, and though I don't speak for him, I can flat out say the answer is NO.
He still likes Gravel. But now that Ralph Nader is in the race, it changes things. NO ONE has done more to advance the 3rd party movement or FIGHT the ruling powers that be in the last 20 years than Ralph Nader. As a Ron Paul supporter, I can tell you what I know and the guy who runs this channel already knows: Ralph Nader is the BEST thing going over on the left.
RonPaulRevolution4u 3 years ago
Yeah, I should know. I voted for Nader in 2000. But times have significantly changed since then, and, at least in my view, Ron Paul is still the logical choice given the situation we now find ourselves in. I believe Nader was definitely the right choice in 2000, given Bush/Cheney and Gore/Lieberman -- all four of which have been showing their true colors since that time.
KobyBrandt 3 years ago
To KobyBrandt:
Yes I know how you feel. I voted for Nader in 2000 and still feel he was the best candidate then. But yes, you are right. Times have changed. The national debt has tripled. Inflation is running sky high. We are in a government (as well as personal) debt CRISIS that is causing the currency to devaluate and risks collapsing the economy. Now is the time for someone TIGHT with money NOT loose with it.
Ron Paul is the ONLY one showing how we can cut the debt without hurting anyone.
RonPaulRevolution4u 3 years ago
Seriously. Do you acually expect us to vote for Nader and end up giving McCain a vote? I LOVE Rep Press, but seriously. Can we get behind Obama even if he has ties to the assholes who run everything from behind the scenes? Please?
mvwehner 3 years ago
Is anyone going to work for anything good? It is the ides of May, the election is in November, can we at least work and see what impact we can have on the polls? Here is a hypothetical, lets say people get active and things change and for example we find a roughly four way split in polls divided between Bob Barr, McCain, Obama, and Nader. Are you telling me that even in that case you are not going to vote for Nader? People want change, McCain and Obama are NOT change. How about telling others
representativepress 3 years ago
I find the statement that Obama isn't going to change anything to be just...odd. He is at odds with the current president on almost every issue. What change do you want to see that you don't think will happen with him?
mvwehner 3 years ago
Gravel and Ralph will never win... or at least not this year...
Stop living in DENIAL...
R3B3L7 3 years ago
But if they get an increased share of the vote then
1. it will demonstrate that a portion of the American people support their kinds of policies and policital approch, putting an alternative into the policial conciousness
and
2. a rising percentage of the vote will convince others that it is worth voting for them (or similar candidates) in the future.
It would have some effect in the short term, and if we want an end to the current state of affairs then momentum must be built up over time.
n14e5o15 3 years ago
You are only helping John McWorldWar3... We don't need another Psychopath like G. Bush in the white house...
R3B3L7 3 years ago
R3B3L7, you ignore the fact that Obama violates his oath right now by making threats against foreign countries. From what the mad says and fails to say - HE WILL NOT ADMIT THE IRAQ WAR WAS ILLEGAL - you should see that he is very likely to get us into yet another war.
representativepress 3 years ago
That's just speculation... Again if you want to make a point at least provide proof...
R3B3L7 3 years ago
representativepress:
I agree. Although I would vote Obama any day over Hillary or McCain, you are correct. He pretends to be "opposed to the war" and is "critical" of Bush's foreign policy, but when pushed in a corner he's not offering any real alternative or taking any dares to condemn it as ILLEGAL and then threatens like McCain. He speaks in half measures that sound like little carefully market researched sound bites designed to tell people what they want to hear, NOT what they NEED to hear.
RonPaulRevolution4u 3 years ago
Anyone that did not make those comments would never have had a chance. Perhaps he's following the Kennedy approach and playing the smart politician until he get's in.
Let's hope and pray that he'll have something to prove about people of color, this despite or maybe as a result of being a CFR member himself.
dstevens101 3 years ago
I don't think he'll attack Iran. There would be too much opposition, especially after the Iraq war. Even he wouldn't be that stupid. It's mainly sabre-rattling, in an attempt to look toughr than the Democrats without favouring perminant occupation of Iraq (any more). He might cause a bit of antagonism, but mark my words there will be war (international and civil) the way we're going regardless of who wins in 2008 unless we can make a decisive change of direction.
n14e5o15 3 years ago
Ralph and Mike could run in 2012, but right now the stakes are high...
I hope that no one votes for him or Gravel this year...
R3B3L7 3 years ago
Yes, they could run in 2012, but they can also run in 2008. Any 3rd party presidential candidate can decide to run in any presidential election; they just need to get their party's nomination, or they can run as an independent. The notion that they shouldn't run in 2008 is without merit. Vote your dreams; not your fears. 3rd party's have received my vote for years. Ralph Nader's father, when asked if he would like a third political party is said to have replied, "I'd be happy with a 2nd. :)
shudderbug 3 years ago
Nader is the best of any possible alternative to McCain Obama and Hillary. this is because a successful anti-corporate stance is the precise one that we need more than any other one thing. A vigorous adversarial stance toward the MI complex and the corporate sector in general will help fix globalization, oligopoly inside the country, and illegal immigration. Nader has the credentials - we know where he stands on that.
nicholas9999 3 years ago 2
Mike Gravel is still better ;)
DeathRattle101 3 years ago
NEOCONZIONISTTHREAT[dot]BLOGSPOT[dot]COM
NOMOREWARFORISRAEL[dot]BLOGSPOT[dot]COM
NOMOREWARFORISRAEL 3 years ago
why does google front stupid helmet cam videos in cali that get 500K hits and not Nader?
accountisavailable 3 years ago
you should vote for people, not parties. this guy nader could make a difference. My question is this.
I have heard rumors that Nader wants everyone to rent. Rent to who?
Is it that he wants everyone to rent or that he doesn't own property because of property tax. Where does Nader stand on taxation of everday people? why does irs jail wesely snipes for not giving his money to them?
accountisavailable 3 years ago
He was a spoiler last time and from the looks of things, prolly will be again...
UFMD1 3 years ago
he's got my vote! (i don't wanna throw it away on one of the two corporate owned parties.)
brainsplatty 3 years ago
Nader got credit for what 5% in CALIFORNIA?
All his race will do is give McCain a plausible
win.
My question for Nader is have you lost your mind? The math on these 'elections' are readily apparent in almost every state.
How could you possibly win?
What is the point?
dstevens101 3 years ago
the democrats will do the same thing as last year vote for any one but a republican and since the republicans are almost extinct any one (even ralph Nader) who is a democrat will win
ali921812 3 years ago
I voted for Nader in 2000, to try to get federal funding for the Green Party since I couldn't tell if another Bush or another Clinton man was worse, not because I thought Nader could possibly win.
Nader couldn't possibly win in 2004, and he knew that, yet he took Republican money and ran. That's disgusting. Also, I find his stock history disgusting. I think Nader is as shady as he looks.
TheGiantRobot 3 years ago
Unfortunately, two of the people I once admired most now have their legacies reduced to a footnote on the loser's side of the balance sheet.
Hillary and Nader both have such inflated egos, they are plenty content to watch the world go down the tubes planted by the Repubes all because the PEOPLE of the US didn't want them. Well too damned bad.
shaire99 3 years ago
What are you talking about? You make no sense. I am so tired of the ignorance ion this country. Do you even have a clue about Ralph nader's history? Do you know ANYTHING about the Clintons? How you can remotely put these two in the same category is totally beyond me..
sandyg1955 3 years ago
I think you missed the point just a little...
jp3d2k 3 years ago
jp3d2k , i am referring to the line "Hillary and Nader both have such inflated egos"
What did I miss?
sandyg1955 3 years ago
Sand, Seems a very straight forward comment, I'm not sure how you're so mystified by it. Let me make it so your Republican mind can understand. They BOTH put what they thought would be their legacies in front of the greater good. Nader has already been partially responsible for the installation of BUSH and all that's occurred since then. Hillary is perilously close to doing the same thing.
Gee, not sure if I can make it simpler for ya!
shaire99 3 years ago
heh sorry didn't notice this was part of a thread, thought you were talking about the video... damn youtube comment system.
Although I would have to agree that Nader does have a bit of an ego thing going, wish he would either run for/with the Greens or step aside. I was hoping for a McKinney/Nader ticket :(
jp3d2k 3 years ago
if u dont soport macain y is his add at the top of your page?
jasonhydro 3 years ago
jasonhydro, his ad is there because Google and YouTube put it there. I don't control the selection of ads.
representativepress 3 years ago
o my bad
jasonhydro 3 years ago
voted for Nader in 04. might do so again this year.
omerta926 3 years ago
I think everybody who is not happy with our options... I'm talking all the independants, libertarians, Ron Paul supporters, disenfranchised republicans AND democrats... need to get behind ONE candidate and break this "Republicrat" system we have in the U.S. I'm not saying Nader is our man, but maybe Bob Barr, or someone else. I think we need to choose as a community, because frankly, I'm tired have having to choose the lesser of 3 evils. This sucks.
cmanw 3 years ago
The fact of the matter is that we are stuck in a two party system and we need to vote our conscience not the lesser of two evils! republican or democrat they no longer speak for the people. nader is a brillint man who is the only consumer advocate and voice of the people other than ron paul. they have no hidden agenda.we need to wake up and vote TELL EVERYONE!!!!!
TheBudderDog 3 years ago
Who cares whos wins it will not matter because the president does NOT have control over this country the ILLUMINATI does that's how BUSH won twice. the reason why Lincoln and Kennedy got killed was because they wanted to destroy the federal reserve and the secret government is NOT going to allow this so they just killed them ,they have been controlling this country since it was established.George Washington was a 33degree freemason and the freemasons are connected to the ILLUMINATI AND so on>>>
xg8512 3 years ago
Wish you all the luck in the world Nader, I'm glad to see that real patriots like you are still running in this race giving the American people a real choice in this communist republicrat election. My vote is still with Gravel but if you win I hope you consider the NI4D as it seems as the only logical solution to fix our broken government.
kyeot 3 years ago
I have deep respect for you as your one of the few americans that actually give a shit about whats going on in washington.
If more americans cared our country would be better, all i'm saying is its time to start focusing on picking a candidate with a realistic shot of winning.
3star2nr 3 years ago
Realistically speaking their is LITTLE the president can actually do once in office. Congress runs the country not the president.
The presidents strongest power is the power to veto congress.
3star2nr 3 years ago
True, to some extent. . . .but the president's REAL strongest power is his control of our armed forces and the direction our foreign policy goes. This determines virtually EVERYTHING! As you can see with Bush, it leads to a crashing dollar, inflated oil prices, which lead to increased cost of everything in our lives. It also leads to a weaker military since we're so spread out and more vulnerable to attack then ever. The president has a lot more power then you give him credit for.
cmanw 3 years ago
I will vote for nader, the only candidate that oppose israel aggression.
Chromegrillz 3 years ago
dude would you give up already... its kinda lame
give mcain and obama a chance man, ur being very biased for no good reason. Nader isnt gonna win so why are u acting like a douche?
3star2nr 3 years ago
McCain and Cbama are Senators, they have been give a chance and they have failed to serve the American people. they have violated their oaths to uphold the US Constitution. People are VERY hungry for a change today and third parties have won in before, so never say never. If more people get the facts, he will win.
representativepress 3 years ago
let me say it slowly. NADER IS NOT GOING TO WIN!!! HE CANNOT let it go man.
I'vve been watching your videos, and you seem to have this "anybody but obama clinton and mc Cain" attitude with no real justification. Appart from your own personal bias, first it was vote for gravel, then vote for kuccinch, then vote for Nader. dude read the polices of the front runners, and pick the one that best represents the things you wanna see accomplished.
3star2nr 3 years ago
@3star2nr:
You and like you, are what is wrong with this country.
Aliof 3 years ago 2
Nader is far better than Obama
davood1357 3 years ago 5
Obama is just making token nods to Progressives. He's pandering just enough so that he can fool some of them into voting for him. Nader is legit.
poop121 3 years ago
At least he can't sway the dems winning this time. Really I blame Nader for the Bush takeover...
Psilo007 3 years ago
i know you guys are going to hate I said that. I was a hardcore nadar fan back in the day.. Good luck! Personally I would love if Ron Paul would go Indy...
Psilo007 3 years ago
Gravel is too good for Nader. It'll never happen.
BonzoGal1980 3 years ago
No need to add any more to the race we already have the best choice, Ron Paul 08!
ladalang 3 years ago
KUCINICH was almost AMERICANS BEST PRESIDENT EVER !
nohealthcare62 3 years ago 2
its a long shot... but i rather lose with dignity than win with remorse.
cousinNACHO 3 years ago 2
There's already a candidate that meets your criteria! His book sit's at #1 on the NY times bestseller list! His name is Ron Paul! how can you ignore him? not very representative of you. I'm un subscribing.
red05hemi 3 years ago
I'm still voting for Mike Gravel. lol
Penlord 3 years ago
only Ron Paul will get my vote.
no nader 08
johndessoye 3 years ago 3
Isn't a vote for Nader a waste of your vote?
Visfen 3 years ago
Not as much of a wasted vote as one for Clinton or Obama. If you want change away from the neocon policies- the Democrats are not the party for you.
Threatening Iran, keeping troops in Iraq, no socialised healthcare...they are Right wing.
leiwy 3 years ago 3
Yup, but rather Obama (cause let's be clear, Hillary has lost) than mini-Bush McCain.
There needs to be campaign and democratic reform from the inside, wasting votes on Nader will do nothing to change that.
Visfen 3 years ago
SPREAD THE WORD:
/watch?v=hqjaGSekkmU
RevoIutionNow 3 years ago
Hey RP, why do you suppose YouTube doesn't have other presidential candidates on their YouChoose08 site along with the Democrats and Republicans?
agitcam 3 years ago
I plan to make a video asking YouTube to try to be at least as good as CSPAN. You are right, on the YouChoose page they should have listed Independents and Third parties and not bias the whole thing to the tow powerful political parties who put forward unacceptable candidates.
representativepress 3 years ago
If Nader does a hiphop video with the Obama Girl, I'll think about it...
3henchmen 3 years ago
I lost a bit of respect for Gravel over that. Maybe it was a publicity stunt or whatever- but it doesnt make him seem like a serious candidate. I would still rather vote for him or Nader that these other war criminals.
leiwy 3 years ago 2
Mike Gravel 08!
The man is amazing and fights for ALL of us!
I am voting Gravel!
HughieGphiladelphia 3 years ago 5
no one would have done squat if elected, and they won't when elected. except keep doing the work for their masters. only ron paul wanted to help.
ogskeetdizzle 3 years ago
Nader is a pretentious S.O.B. who needs a cold garden hose turned on his ego. He isn't going to do SQUAT if elected.
If you want real change, then back Mike Gravel.
He's the only candidate with the balls to stand up for the American people.
BonzoGal1980 3 years ago 3
Nader has done so much without even being elected. (As has Gravel). I'm just not sure why they wont unite together.
leiwy 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(¯`v´¯)
`*.¸.*´
¸.•´¸.•*¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.•´ .•´ ¸¸.•¨¯`•
(`*•.¸( `*•.¸ ¸.•*´ )¸.•*´ )
«´`•.* WE LOVE *.•´`»
(¸.•*´( ¸.•*´ `*•.¸ )`*•.¸ )
..♥♥ Mike Gravel ♥♥..
Ni4D[.]US
uterfan 3 years ago 2
What about Ron Paul?????
june201955 3 years ago
Wooo Hooo!!! Give me Ron Paul or give me death!
LumpyRevolution 3 years ago
Ron Paul tried to impeach Clinton for going to war in Kosovo and not declaring, and abuse of power. Yet, Ron Paul accuses Bush of these very same things but says Bush hasn't committed an impeachable offense. So what about Ron Paul you ask? "We must protect our oil. It is called ``our oil.'' At the same time, there is a strong constituency for never offending Israel" -Ron Paul
ronpaullibrary. org/document. php?id=737
DecentralizedTommy 3 years ago
^^He was referring to the oil in the middle east btw
DecentralizedTommy 3 years ago
whats the context of that quote exactly?
I am interested in why Paul doesnt think Bush has performed impeachable offenses. I support him, but this has always perplexed me.
RationalLiberty 3 years ago
He was talking about how we cant just tell the "Arabs" to get lost. That they have a lot of oil, that we need. In that we call it "our oil" for a reason.
DecentralizedTommy 3 years ago
Nader doesn't have the balls that gravel has. Gravel will get in people's faces and be heard. Nader is far too apathetic. Independants won't win with Nader. They just won't.
johncantees 3 years ago 6
I think they are both heros, but Nader doesnt seem to get even the minimal airtime that Gravel gets. I dont know why.
leiwy 3 years ago 3
why'd you shun Gravel? thatd be my question.
oldhacks 3 years ago 3
I'm with ya on that. What the hell? I mean, wasn't it Mike who gave Ralph kudos in the book BIG time? I think what Ralph is seeking is a "look" he can sell. I don't blame him with the crazy eye look the sheeple can't get past. Gonzalez lives a very "artful" life & seems very articulate. Mike tells ya right where the bear shit in the woods... This all seems like the usual dog & pony show to me. Mike's too good for Nader. Just expressing my opinion. Maybe I sound too definite. Nice to see ya.
LumpyRevolution 3 years ago 3
RP I'm curious, If Nader and Gravel don't team up (which I believe they should) and they both remain in the race until the end, which one do you think you would end up supporting?
evildaikenkai 3 years ago
Nader
representativepress 3 years ago
I believe Nader would be the only choice if Gravel didn't run.
judoka1 3 years ago
Wow! Hard-hitting question, representativepress.
You sound like those Fox News reporters sucking up to George W. Bush.
hollyhoodjoe123 3 years ago
hollyhoodjoe123, you think illegal wars of aggression are a trivial matter? The question is hard for dishonest politicians. It is not a dishonest question for a dishonest politician so I don't see what Fox has to do with it. The fact you think it is easy for Nader shows how good he really is.
representativepress 3 years ago
I mean that you know his stances on those issues will be. It's like asking John McCain "will you raise taxes like Barack Obama?", or asking Barack Obama "are you pro-life, like McCain?"
I don't believe that Obama is for the military-industrial complex like you believe he is.
hollyhoodjoe123 3 years ago
hollyhoodjoe123, well Obama is very much for the military-industrial complex. "Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines." WHAT THE HELL FOR? Another war? He never says the war was illegal. THAT should be a danger sign to all.
representativepress 3 years ago
Obama's actually related to Dick Cheney.
evildaikenkai 3 years ago
hollyhoodjoe13, its easy to determine who their people are, any person that isn't crucified or ignored by the media MUST be corporate owned and have their interest at heart, not the interest of the people.
4AntiWar 3 years ago 2
holly, while the question doesn't go into details of foreign policy to satisfy whatever "in depth" or "hard hitting" questions you may have, asking a candidate to truthfully acknowledge the rules of law as stated by your constitution as well as those agreed to by the international community is actually a very important question. You haven't had a president who upheld the constitution of your country in a hundred years. George Washington would be leading the revolt right now if he were here.
jeffjohnrog 3 years ago
George Washington wasn't the patriot our history books portray him as. I'll take Thomas Paine.
evildaikenkai 3 years ago
Or Thomas Jefferson.
Fullmetalpizza 3 years ago
gravel is running green party i believe.
sbmillionair 3 years ago
Libertarian.
evildaikenkai 3 years ago