that's almost exactly what ron paul said. the problem with voting for a third party is that it's just a wasted vote. i mean you know who ever the third party candidate is isn't going to get enough votes to win.

I know, but I wouldn't want to vote for someone that I don't want to win, so a wasted vote is better than no vote at all.

i'm not saying i don't agree because i do. other than not voting altogether i usually vote for the lesser of two evils and it's usually but not always the republicas that get ny vote.

I should just run for president

she needs to drift into a plastic surgeons office and get her **** fixed, and John McPastey face needs ****ing adult diapers.

Don't think he can help having cancer...

I think ralph nader put his name in the hat this time as well.

a major problem in the politics is the media coverage. ron paul named a few candidate from other parties that he feels would be a good choice. nader was one of them but like i said the media refuses to give anyone who is not to their liking any or equal coverage.

obama is a charismatic, young, well spoken individual and that's the kind of person the media likes. someone to pose and smile for them. mccain is old and a republican so he's automatically blamed for the current state of universe. not to mention he fought in vietman so that make him evil as well.

those who do not support candidates of their own party or are member of a third party are seen as incompetent and unable to fully understand what it is they are trying to do because if they did they'd be a member of and support the democratic or republican party.

now before someone gets the wrong impression and causes this discussion to go astray you should know that these are not my feeling but rather the way i see things portrayed by the media. religion and politics tend to be a touchy matter but we've managed to keep it civil so far so let's not ruin it.

I agree with you on the media part, they've gone and made obama their "savior" for this country, ignoring their purpose as an unbiased reporting entity. But it's been like that for so long.

Now the one thing that really pissed me off was when bush began mixing religion with politics. Correct me if Im wrong, but studying political science, there was a saying of "Separation of Church and State..." yet no one bothered to point that out and enforce that policy (which has been set in stone for our country since we established this government, or around that time) So now everyone is trying to claim their religion publicly in hopes to gain a few more votes. This country, politically, is going down in a sh*t hole and no one cares thanks to the "entitlement" mentality liberals have engrained in their heads.

Sorry, I had to vent that one, its just that no one holds themselves accountable anymore. If I screw up, thats my bad. I learn to get up and start all over again. If I bought a house with an ARM loan with not a whole lot of knowledge about buying a home and end up in forclosure? Yeah, my bad.

i see what you are saying but must tell you that like the vast majority of the people that i know and make the same claims is that it is a misunderstanding of what the amendment was intended for. the separation of church and state meant that the president, king emperor, entity, ect. couldn't promote or force upon the people any one religion and make himself the head of that establishment as well.

in history i was taught that the kings of england and other nations with a hierarchical ruling structure felt it was their divine right to govern over that nation and therefore it was fit that they should lead the church too. the roman catholic church was for the most part in control of such nations until the was a problem between a pope and king henry the viii of england. the events following this are an example of why the separation of church and state are necessary.

as a Bible believing Christan myself i understand why bush said some of the things he did concerning his believes. however at times i just wished he would have kept his mouth shut also.

also the events i've just mentioned could be off a bit because this is just off the top of my head so i encourage everyone reading this to check and inform me of any thing misleading on my part.

Obama 2008''

But see, the thing is, no one in recent history that I can remember, has ever used religion to sway votes.

Since bush pulled it off, you started to see others using the same tactics, "My family and I are devoted Christians..." ok... so how is that going to prove to people that you are the better candidate? How is practicing one type of religion going to make you a better politician? It doesnt.

So then mid way through bush's re-election year, both sides tried their best to claim their Christianity. Then the media starts to call out saying, I dont think so... and they stop.

Now fast forward to this election season, both sides are trying hard, pushing limits of showing their Christianity at the same time not trying to.

Lets not focus on religion and focus on the content of our countries major issues. And how come we have yet to have a debate between these two candidates yet? We're only two months away from elections!

I also didnt know about the history (origin) behind separation of church and state, I learned about it in class where you could not use a certain religion to boost votes since religion should not be mixed in with government due to conflict of interest?

obama put it best in an interview i heard this morning when he said, "that's the game we play."

Which is why I look at the records and see where each person stands. I gave up listening to both candidates running for any seat. Its the same crap every time.

i could give a gotdamn about this bs..

and anyone who has been in the miliary will tell you the same for the most part...

we go with who ever pays us the most...