<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why No Push For Duncan Hunter?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/</link>
	<description>Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:25:23 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65756</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:29:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65756</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m with a Thompson/Hunter ticket! Redeploy our troops from Korea, Japan and Europe to the theaters in the War on Islamic Jihad.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m with a Thompson/Hunter ticket! Redeploy our troops from Korea, Japan and Europe to the theaters in the War on Islamic Jihad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kerwin</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65755</link>
		<dc:creator>kerwin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 06:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65755</guid>
		<description>â€œA tariff war is what led to the Great Depressionâ€ Dale

You have to stop listening to propaganda.  The Great Depression was probably caused by the unstable U.S. dollar and banking system and the normal flow of economics.   There are always high points and low points in economics because God chooses not to maintain a steady flow of resources or the general desire to purchase goods and services on the part of the people.  A tariff war leads to inflation as the cost of goods increases and not to a depression.  For reasons I do not know the peopleâ€™s desire to purchase goods decreased thus collapsing the market and after that a number of other dominoes fell.  The housing market is having the same problem now.  Other markets constantly suffer likewise and some people make and lose money off that flow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>â€œA tariff war is what led to the Great Depressionâ€ Dale</p>
<p>You have to stop listening to propaganda.  The Great Depression was probably caused by the unstable U.S. dollar and banking system and the normal flow of economics.   There are always high points and low points in economics because God chooses not to maintain a steady flow of resources or the general desire to purchase goods and services on the part of the people.  A tariff war leads to inflation as the cost of goods increases and not to a depression.  For reasons I do not know the peopleâ€™s desire to purchase goods decreased thus collapsing the market and after that a number of other dominoes fell.  The housing market is having the same problem now.  Other markets constantly suffer likewise and some people make and lose money off that flow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Redhead Infidel</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65754</link>
		<dc:creator>Redhead Infidel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 04:53:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65754</guid>
		<description>Duncan Hunter is the only conservative choice.  No one else even qualifies as a conservative, except Tancredo.  (Personally, I&#039;d love to see him as Hunter&#039;s Chief of Homeland Security.)

Look...let&#039;s get down to brass tacks, here.

Y&#039;all must see the resemblance between the losing Democratic strategy in â€˜04 (&lt;b&gt;Anyone but Bush!!!&lt;/b&gt;) and what you all are saying we conservatives MUST settle for today (&lt;b&gt;Anyone but Hillary!!!&lt;/b&gt;)? Itâ€™s a losing proposition, people.

Merely voting AGAINST someone is not enough to win. Remember, Democrats donâ€™t vote on principles, but &lt;b&gt;conservatives DO&lt;/b&gt;. That means that the Repub nominee has to uphold and support the principles fundamental to the Republican core. Just fielding a candidate because he barely has an (R) after his name and then saying, â€œHey, anybody is better than Hillary!â€ will not work on conservatives the way it did on the brain-dead Left.

None of the RINOs will win in â€˜08 - especially not Giuliani, because he divides the party.

A divided Republican party will lose and the elites are more concerned right now with selling out their few remaining conservatives than uniting the party. Without Christians, 2nd Amendment groups, anti-illegal immigration groups, and social conservatives - none of whom will support Giuliani &lt;i&gt;en masse&lt;/i&gt; - Repubs will lose. Nominating Giuliani guarantees it.

Iâ€™m so tired of being told that Giuliani is the only candidate that can win against Hillary. Heâ€™s being shoved down our throats. And he most certainly cannot win.

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths and depths people will go to to airbrush Giuliani. If you go back and compile the pundits&#039; excuses and explanations for Giulianiâ€™s deficiencies as a candidate, itâ€™s tiresome because there are so many.

Why even bother with him? He cannot win. I canâ€™t believe heâ€™s even gotten this much traction - except for the &lt;b&gt;slavish&lt;/b&gt; media coverage heâ€™s been gifted with. Think about it. Why has the MSM already anointed Giuliani already as the Repub nominee??? Anything the media wants is bound to be &lt;i&gt;bad for the country&lt;/i&gt;. &lt;b&gt;The media likes Giuliani because he is most like them.&lt;/b&gt; Itâ€™s just icing on the cake that his nomination guarantees Clintonâ€™s win.

Consider recent history. Enough conservatives stayed home in â€˜06 to turn both he House and the Senate over to the Democrats, so itâ€™s quite LIKELY to happen again. The Repubs have alienated the conservatives for far too long and canâ€™t count on their votes anymore. Now theyâ€™ll have to EARN them, and thatâ€™s not something they are willing to do. Giuliani will fail to inspire enough staunch conservatives to vote, and others will vote their conscience anyway - which wonâ€™t be for Giuliani, I can tell you.

I recently had an a hard-core water-carryin&#039; Repug smarmily tell me I have to vote for the Republican nominee no matter what - or it will be MY fault that Hillary gets elected President.   After all, he said smugly:

    &lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;pragmatism is thy friend.&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Really? Because it rather reeks of compromise. &lt;b&gt;Iâ€™d say PRINCIPLES are thy friend.&lt;/b&gt; Thatâ€™s something the Repubs have forgotten. They paid for it in â€˜06, and â€˜08 will be a repeat, unless they return to the principles that brought the party together under Reagan.  &lt;i&gt;Believe it.&lt;/i&gt;



~Heidi</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Duncan Hunter is the only conservative choice.  No one else even qualifies as a conservative, except Tancredo.  (Personally, I&#8217;d love to see him as Hunter&#8217;s Chief of Homeland Security.)</p>
<p>Look&#8230;let&#8217;s get down to brass tacks, here.</p>
<p>Y&#8217;all must see the resemblance between the losing Democratic strategy in â€˜04 (<b>Anyone but Bush!!!</b>) and what you all are saying we conservatives MUST settle for today (<b>Anyone but Hillary!!!</b>)? Itâ€™s a losing proposition, people.</p>
<p>Merely voting AGAINST someone is not enough to win. Remember, Democrats donâ€™t vote on principles, but <b>conservatives DO</b>. That means that the Repub nominee has to uphold and support the principles fundamental to the Republican core. Just fielding a candidate because he barely has an (R) after his name and then saying, â€œHey, anybody is better than Hillary!â€ will not work on conservatives the way it did on the brain-dead Left.</p>
<p>None of the RINOs will win in â€˜08 &#8211; especially not Giuliani, because he divides the party.</p>
<p>A divided Republican party will lose and the elites are more concerned right now with selling out their few remaining conservatives than uniting the party. Without Christians, 2nd Amendment groups, anti-illegal immigration groups, and social conservatives &#8211; none of whom will support Giuliani <i>en masse</i> &#8211; Repubs will lose. Nominating Giuliani guarantees it.</p>
<p>Iâ€™m so tired of being told that Giuliani is the only candidate that can win against Hillary. Heâ€™s being shoved down our throats. And he most certainly cannot win.</p>
<p>It never ceases to amaze me the lengths and depths people will go to to airbrush Giuliani. If you go back and compile the pundits&#8217; excuses and explanations for Giulianiâ€™s deficiencies as a candidate, itâ€™s tiresome because there are so many.</p>
<p>Why even bother with him? He cannot win. I canâ€™t believe heâ€™s even gotten this much traction &#8211; except for the <b>slavish</b> media coverage heâ€™s been gifted with. Think about it. Why has the MSM already anointed Giuliani already as the Repub nominee??? Anything the media wants is bound to be <i>bad for the country</i>. <b>The media likes Giuliani because he is most like them.</b> Itâ€™s just icing on the cake that his nomination guarantees Clintonâ€™s win.</p>
<p>Consider recent history. Enough conservatives stayed home in â€˜06 to turn both he House and the Senate over to the Democrats, so itâ€™s quite LIKELY to happen again. The Repubs have alienated the conservatives for far too long and canâ€™t count on their votes anymore. Now theyâ€™ll have to EARN them, and thatâ€™s not something they are willing to do. Giuliani will fail to inspire enough staunch conservatives to vote, and others will vote their conscience anyway &#8211; which wonâ€™t be for Giuliani, I can tell you.</p>
<p>I recently had an a hard-core water-carryin&#8217; Repug smarmily tell me I have to vote for the Republican nominee no matter what &#8211; or it will be MY fault that Hillary gets elected President.   After all, he said smugly:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;pragmatism is thy friend.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Really? Because it rather reeks of compromise. <b>Iâ€™d say PRINCIPLES are thy friend.</b> Thatâ€™s something the Repubs have forgotten. They paid for it in â€˜06, and â€˜08 will be a repeat, unless they return to the principles that brought the party together under Reagan.  <i>Believe it.</i></p>
<p>~Heidi</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike B</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65753</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:37:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65753</guid>
		<description>tickedofftoo,

I agree the Democrats cant do anything about anything. But considering the Army has 500,000 troops and the USMC has 180,000 about 2/7ths of our forces are tied up there. Considering Iran has 65 million people and rough terrain. Pulling everyone back from Germany etc isn&#039;t really a solution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>tickedofftoo,</p>
<p>I agree the Democrats cant do anything about anything. But considering the Army has 500,000 troops and the USMC has 180,000 about 2/7ths of our forces are tied up there. Considering Iran has 65 million people and rough terrain. Pulling everyone back from Germany etc isn&#8217;t really a solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rosemary</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65752</link>
		<dc:creator>Rosemary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:32:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65752</guid>
		<description>That would be Hunter/Thompson if anything! I have backed Hunter since the beginning, and it is absoluting frustrating that no one is following him around like they are doing with their tongues hanging out of their mouths with billary.

Don&#039;t you get it? THEY DO NOT WANT A CONSERVATIVE ON ANY TICKET! They are only going to show us what THEY want us to see. They have manipulated many elections before, and I&#039;m sick and tired of conservative pundits telling us that this is the way or that is the way things are done because this is the way it was always done that way before. SO WHAT?

Go to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gohunter08.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Go Hunter &#039;08&lt;/a&gt;, and make up your own mind. We are NOT sheeple. We get to nominate who WE CHOOSE. Talk about choice! lol.

Remember, his son who is coming home from Afghanistan (on his 3rd tour) is running for his father&#039;s seat in Congress: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.duncanhunter.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Duncan Hunter&lt;/a&gt; (I think).
Thank you. ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That would be Hunter/Thompson if anything! I have backed Hunter since the beginning, and it is absoluting frustrating that no one is following him around like they are doing with their tongues hanging out of their mouths with billary.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t you get it? THEY DO NOT WANT A CONSERVATIVE ON ANY TICKET! They are only going to show us what THEY want us to see. They have manipulated many elections before, and I&#8217;m sick and tired of conservative pundits telling us that this is the way or that is the way things are done because this is the way it was always done that way before. SO WHAT?</p>
<p>Go to <a href="http://www.gohunter08.com/" rel="nofollow">Go Hunter &#8216;08</a>, and make up your own mind. We are NOT sheeple. We get to nominate who WE CHOOSE. Talk about choice! lol.</p>
<p>Remember, his son who is coming home from Afghanistan (on his 3rd tour) is running for his father&#8217;s seat in Congress: <a href="http://www.duncanhunter.com/" rel="nofollow">Duncan Hunter</a> (I think).<br />
Thank you. <img src='http://www.stoptheaclu.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tickedofftoo</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65751</link>
		<dc:creator>tickedofftoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:44:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65751</guid>
		<description>Mike B,
You said; &quot;but congress right now is against the war&quot;
If that were true one of their 58 bills this year to get us out of Iraq would have passed by now.

You also said; &quot;What happens if Iran attacked Israel? We donâ€™t have the ground troops, their all deployed.&quot;
Mike!  First, &quot;all&quot; our troops are not deployed.
Second, Look at a map.  Those that are deployed are strategically stationed between Iran and Israel and surrounding Iran!

If you want to bring the troops home, let&#039;s start with bringing them home from Germany, N. Korea, Japan and KOSOVO.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike B,<br />
You said; &#8220;but congress right now is against the war&#8221;<br />
If that were true one of their 58 bills this year to get us out of Iraq would have passed by now.</p>
<p>You also said; &#8220;What happens if Iran attacked Israel? We donâ€™t have the ground troops, their all deployed.&#8221;<br />
Mike!  First, &#8220;all&#8221; our troops are not deployed.<br />
Second, Look at a map.  Those that are deployed are strategically stationed between Iran and Israel and surrounding Iran!</p>
<p>If you want to bring the troops home, let&#8217;s start with bringing them home from Germany, N. Korea, Japan and KOSOVO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Art</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65750</link>
		<dc:creator>Art</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:20:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65750</guid>
		<description>Ron Paul is flat out loco!

Isolationism may have been an option about 200+ years ago when our enemies were roaming the waters in wooden ships.

Now we have Terrorist Nations trying to aquire nukes, and Paul wants the US to just sit on the up in the nose-bleed section, and idly watch the mass-destruction.

Earth to Mr. Paul, the world has become too small, and there is no nose-bleed section.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ron Paul is flat out loco!</p>
<p>Isolationism may have been an option about 200+ years ago when our enemies were roaming the waters in wooden ships.</p>
<p>Now we have Terrorist Nations trying to aquire nukes, and Paul wants the US to just sit on the up in the nose-bleed section, and idly watch the mass-destruction.</p>
<p>Earth to Mr. Paul, the world has become too small, and there is no nose-bleed section.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike B</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65749</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:12:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65749</guid>
		<description>Agreed, but congress right now is against the war. My point is that a democratic congress limits what Ron Paul AND Duncan Hunter can do. Im watching whats happening, Personally I believe things by next election will be settled enough to pull the troops out, I do not want our guys there for the next 20 years. But the Troops are doing a great job. I think Bush and Hillery and Rudy are for staying in Iraq long after we need to. I think thats a disservice to our troops.

I don&#039;t think Duncan Hunter wants them there for 20 years either. What happens if Iran attacked Israel? We don&#039;t have the ground troops, their all deployed. Thats why that idiot Rudy talks about the nuclear option, were out of troops.

So one of 2 things to restore our reserve manpower to be able to deal with a threat. Get out of Iraq when the Iraqi Army can handle it. (which might be quite soon) Or we start the draft. The troops need our support, but once the job is done I don&#039;t want a president like Rudy or Hillery keeping them there forever.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed, but congress right now is against the war. My point is that a democratic congress limits what Ron Paul AND Duncan Hunter can do. Im watching whats happening, Personally I believe things by next election will be settled enough to pull the troops out, I do not want our guys there for the next 20 years. But the Troops are doing a great job. I think Bush and Hillery and Rudy are for staying in Iraq long after we need to. I think thats a disservice to our troops.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think Duncan Hunter wants them there for 20 years either. What happens if Iran attacked Israel? We don&#8217;t have the ground troops, their all deployed. Thats why that idiot Rudy talks about the nuclear option, were out of troops.</p>
<p>So one of 2 things to restore our reserve manpower to be able to deal with a threat. Get out of Iraq when the Iraqi Army can handle it. (which might be quite soon) Or we start the draft. The troops need our support, but once the job is done I don&#8217;t want a president like Rudy or Hillery keeping them there forever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Redhead Infidel</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65748</link>
		<dc:creator>Redhead Infidel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:39:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65748</guid>
		<description>Mike B, Duncan Hunter is pro-VICTORY, not pro-war.  He&#039;s been to war, remember?  He wants nothing more than to end this war - on OUR terms and with decisive victory.  He&#039;s  personally vested in this war like no other candidate is - his first-born son (a Marine Corp captain) is on his THIRD tour of duty in this war.  Yet, having made the sacrifices all our military families have had to make, Hunter still believes there is simply no substitute for victory.

The most dangerous problem with Ron Paul - among many others - is that he does NOT understand the problems in the Middle East. He&#039;s dangerously naive and we can&#039;t trust a Commander-in-Chief who doesn&#039;t understand the enemy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike B, Duncan Hunter is pro-VICTORY, not pro-war.  He&#8217;s been to war, remember?  He wants nothing more than to end this war &#8211; on OUR terms and with decisive victory.  He&#8217;s  personally vested in this war like no other candidate is &#8211; his first-born son (a Marine Corp captain) is on his THIRD tour of duty in this war.  Yet, having made the sacrifices all our military families have had to make, Hunter still believes there is simply no substitute for victory.</p>
<p>The most dangerous problem with Ron Paul &#8211; among many others &#8211; is that he does NOT understand the problems in the Middle East. He&#8217;s dangerously naive and we can&#8217;t trust a Commander-in-Chief who doesn&#8217;t understand the enemy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike B</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/comment-page-1/#comment-65747</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:13:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/11/19/why-no-push-for-duncan-hunter/#comment-65747</guid>
		<description>Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul are very similar(immigration, the fence, trade, abortion, 2nd Amendment). Its really just the war issue that divides them. I honestly believe that both are honest and would do what they thought was best for the country. So in alphabetical order the men I would vote for if they are nominated. (and I&#039;m not done deciding for the primary, a lot could change.)

Vote for
Duncan Hunter (solid conservative, honest, Pro war, but Democratic Congress.)
John Mccain (only one of the lesser evils id vote for.)
Mike Huckabee (new kind of Republican, Ill give him a shot)
Ron Paul. (Hes honest, hes smart, and the first thing he will do is limit the power of the executive branch, and in no way will congress go along with his small government ideas. Talk about veto city, the thought of Nancy Pelosi getting shot down on every democrat government expansion is quite nice.)

No chance in hell
Alan Keyes (no shot)
Tom Tancredo (he isn&#039;t trying to win)

Probably sit home.
Fred Thompson (I just don&#039;t know if I can trust him yet)
Mitt Romney (I know I cant trust him)

Vote 3rd Party
Rudy Julie-Annie (I forget who first called him that but its great)

Yes Id vote 3rd party if Rudy was our nominee He and Hillery are twins Pro war Pro Globalization/NAFTA Pro Abortion, both are rumored bisexuals (not as an election issue but their similar in everything, since none of the other 20ish candidates are rumored to be that way)and both are jerks. If I cant see one difference between the 2 I&#039;m going to cast my vote for someone who I think is at least honest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul are very similar(immigration, the fence, trade, abortion, 2nd Amendment). Its really just the war issue that divides them. I honestly believe that both are honest and would do what they thought was best for the country. So in alphabetical order the men I would vote for if they are nominated. (and I&#8217;m not done deciding for the primary, a lot could change.)</p>
<p>Vote for<br />
Duncan Hunter (solid conservative, honest, Pro war, but Democratic Congress.)<br />
John Mccain (only one of the lesser evils id vote for.)<br />
Mike Huckabee (new kind of Republican, Ill give him a shot)<br />
Ron Paul. (Hes honest, hes smart, and the first thing he will do is limit the power of the executive branch, and in no way will congress go along with his small government ideas. Talk about veto city, the thought of Nancy Pelosi getting shot down on every democrat government expansion is quite nice.)</p>
<p>No chance in hell<br />
Alan Keyes (no shot)<br />
Tom Tancredo (he isn&#8217;t trying to win)</p>
<p>Probably sit home.<br />
Fred Thompson (I just don&#8217;t know if I can trust him yet)<br />
Mitt Romney (I know I cant trust him)</p>
<p>Vote 3rd Party<br />
Rudy Julie-Annie (I forget who first called him that but its great)</p>
<p>Yes Id vote 3rd party if Rudy was our nominee He and Hillery are twins Pro war Pro Globalization/NAFTA Pro Abortion, both are rumored bisexuals (not as an election issue but their similar in everything, since none of the other 20ish candidates are rumored to be that way)and both are jerks. If I cant see one difference between the 2 I&#8217;m going to cast my vote for someone who I think is at least honest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
