In response to:

What If November Changes Nothing?

Buzz42 Wrote: Sep 13, 2012 9:12 PM
Ron Paul doesn't pass the "what if" test on foreign policy. His evasion of the threat to America's security posed by a country like Iran having an atomic bomb disqualified him to be Commander in Chief. It is part of the presidential oath to defend America from foreign enemies and that doesn't mean waiting until they've landed on our shore. This is why , in spite of his laudable and correct position on most domestic issues, he was never a real contender for the nomination. The events happening in Egypt and Libya today are what logically follow from the foreign policy Ron Paul espoused and Obama is practicing
What if the principal parties' candidates for president really agree more than they disagree?

What if they both support the authority of the federal government to spy on Americans without search warrants? What if they both support confining foreigners, uncharged and untried, in Guantanamo Bay? What if they both believe the president can arrest without charge and confine without trial any American he hates or fears?

What if they both believe in secret courts -- kept away from the public and the press -- that can take away the rights of Americans? What if they both think...