http://ktracy.com/?p=1412

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/18/politics/main3272597.shtml

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=411693

http://econ4obama.blogspot.com/2008/04/mccains-tax-plan.html

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gG5GFB

Also, seniors earning under 50k/yr. will pay NO income tax.

I see Obama as the less of three evils..
But MCCain will Definitely win.
Only read this if you have a few hours (or days) to do your own research, otherwise you will surely dismiss this. If you can spend the time to research this it would be appreciated, as it’s important.

First of all I have to explain a few things. Politics in America is a farce, elections do not respect real vote of Americans since a few years now (research in youtube diebold, “hacking the elections” etc). So this must be taken into account.
Second the media are completely controlled in their general lines (not only fox news), the people who control them are the Rockefellers, Morgan, Warburgs etc (research cnr, trilateral commission, Bilderberg Group etc). They also control the general lines of a few secret societies amongst them the “skull and bones” in which all Bush’s family is and Kerry and most CIA are hand picked from these societies. (research in wikipedia Bush in “skull and bones”, IG Farben and Carlyle Group ).
The bankers that took power by establishing the FED and lending money to the government need the government to run big deficits as this gets them more money, this deficit is counter balanced only by the fact that after WWII America imposed that petrol is traded in dollars (research Petrodollar, cfr, fed). Some research estimates the real value of the dollar to be now 2 cents (I don’t believe this but I believe is around 20cents).
Iraq started trading petrol in euros (research oil for food program), and also Venezuela and Iran wanted to do this soon. This would mean crushing American dollar to its real value and the total collapse of America.
America had to persuade Americans and the world opinion that a war against Iraq and iran is needed, also needed more control and power over citizens (patriot act).
War is also good for CFR as the bankers will get the interest of all the money needed for the war.
To change the world’s opinion on this war they bombed the twin towers and pentagon (watch documentary “9/11 Ripple Effect” should show enough evidence, if that is not enough look a few more and follow some of the truth movement).
Don’t dismiss all of this please RESEARCH yourself.
So after this introduction i can tell you what will happen in the future:
1. Media in this moment is pushing for Obama to win against Hilary, and at the same time slowly dismissing both of them and praise McCain.(research the technique of FOX news of saying “some people says” to give judgments and not facts).
2. So they can have an easier battle against Obama to make McCain win.
3. With such control of the media McCain will most likely reach the needed support (he doesn’t need to fairly win the election but it’s always good to not hack the election by more than 5-10%, so he would need some real support). However, if the polls (the real polls not the ones they show you) show that McCain is losing they will do other attacks (not as big as 9/11 yet). People will be scared for home security and will vote for McCain.
4. VeriChip RFID will start to be installed voluntarily on babies if their parents decide is good for them.
5. Dollar will be replaced by AMERO the new currency, America will join Mexico and Canada (why do you think they allow all these illegal immigrants and build a motorway… research amero). (this move will be good for America but a disaster for Mexico and Canada when the dollar will crush to its real value)
6. Another attack, this time of the size of 9/11 will happen, this will scare Americans again and more. Iranians will be the alleged cause (by the way see interview with Benazir Buttho 1 month before she was killed to learn Osama Bin Laden died in 2001. Interesting to see both Al Jazeera and BBC version).
7. With this they will finally make the installation of verichip in every citizen compulsory. A weapon of mass destruction will be used against Iran (I don’t think it will be nuclear bomb but at the same time will not be full war because America seems not to have enough money.. unless they are insane enough to still print some more!?). (research “Iranian oil bourse” to see the reason).
8. The last liberties of America will be abolished, people will forget what freedom is and complete control will be achieved in America (which now includes Canada and Mexico).
9. CNR founder members will continue until they have their idea of “one world government” completely realized, they will succeed and they will silently rule the world by behind the scenes. (new world order)
Thanks for your time, now start insulting the “loony” theories… or start doing some real research, pass the phase of being scared of such a reality, and give some constructive comment.
I suggest you to move to another country if you live in America now.
V

Since the end of slavery and women’s suffrage were brought about via Constitutional amendment, they were and are Constitutional. That’s what amending the Constitution is for. Garner sufficient support to amend the Constitution, and whatever you’ve garnered support for becomes Constitutional.

That is very much in tune with “following some sort of true-Constitution model with any logical consistency.” Indeed, it is the very expression of following the true Constitution model with logical consistency.

The Constitution is still the law of land; our elected officials take an oath to uphold and defend it. Those words in that document, and in all its amendments, have meaning: they are the law.

Or are suggesting that the Constitution is outmoded, outdated and a meaningless relic that ought be as ignored as it is presently? If that’s the case, then why do we keep up appearances and have politicians swear/affirm an oath to uphold and defend it? Why continue to have a Constitution if we’re not going to follow it?

This isn’t so much a question about libertarianism as it is a question of whether we should follow the laws we write. We ought to have a government ruled by laws, not men.

Correct, but you are presenting another straw man. The Constitution was amended, according to a process spelled out within the Constitution. Nobody has said you shouldn’t be able to amend the Constitution. Don’t put words in other peoples mouths.

I read your essay, libertarianism follows a continuum between extremes just like any other school of thought.

You keep missing the point – ending slavery and women’s votes were expansions of Federal power into the realms of the States. Big ones. You can’t say “Oh that expansion of Federal power, that’s good, I like that, but this one, that’s not”, AND claim to be following some sort of true-Constitution model with any logical consistency. That’s what I mean by special pleading. More so when these were very much the arguments used by forces for slavery and later against civil rights.

Seen in this light, Ron Paul’s association with explicit racism is not an aberration.

It’s a waste of time, but sometimes I try to remind people that:

Libertarianism Makes You Stupid

You are probably right when you say, “it’s power that matters. McCain looks like he’s going to win the Republican nomination. ” That summarizes, very neatly, the problem with the federal government today. That’s why you should support Ron Paul. If you reduce the size of the federal government and the size of the pie it controls then you also diminish the impact that “power” has over ordinary citizens and the states.

Anyway, my point is that events like the McCain endorsement show that while the audience might be fed a lot of ideology to motivate them, when it comes down to the deal-making, it’s power that matters. McCain looks like he’s going to win the Republican nomination. Ron Paul is going to go back to ranting about the Federal Reserve. It’s very clear who has more to offer in politics.

I am curious, however, to know what you meant by “power v. ideology” in politics. Could you elaborate on this concept?