McCain vs. Obama.

McCain for me,thats who i hope wins....I am normally a democrat,however i am really not ready for a muslim president..Have you read his book.?..It also has a lot of racial slurs and notes in his book like he is not to crazy about white people,but thats not what bothers me...I am afraid he will bring his religion into it...I may be wrong...

Hello Bstinson1989, Let me preface by stating that, at this time, I doubt that either man has the capacity to be a great president! Right now, we find ourselves at a pivotal moment in history. Never before have fascists, both theocratic and socialist been as bold as they are today. The primary threat from within comes from Socialists, whose basic underlying ideology is Marxism. As such, every U.S. citizen has to make a monumental decision: Should we continue to honor the priniciples that this nation was founded upon? Or, should we scrap it for a communist or theocratic adaptation? The decision is really as simple as that. We all understand why theocratic fascism is a threat. Though, some may wonder why Socialism/Marxism is a threat? The reason is that Marxism is based on the principle of absolute equality. Yet, equality cannot exist in a heirarchical reality. And, make no mistake, government, by its very definition, must function within a heirarchical reality. As long as the Human species is shackled by greed, envy, and competition, there will always be the very real threat of repression and oppression from an empowered illusion. So, unless and until mankind experiences a paradigm shift in consciousness, we are incapable of governing, or being governed under the premise of absolute equality. I would ask all to ponder this for a moment. Isn't individuality cherished in our culture? And, are there any two people who are exactly alike? So, if individuality is cherished, and no two people are exactly the same, then how can equality be forced upon us? Quite simply, it can't! Which means that Socialist/Marxism cannot be a succesful form of government. It never worked in a purist environment, like the USSR, Cuba, China, Venezuela, or the first Plymouth colony. And, it has not worked in a blended environment either. The fact that the many Socialist nations of Europe were forced to create a union to remain economically solvent perfectly demonstrates this point. In their wisdom, the Founding Fathers devised the most viable compromise, which is personal freedom tempered with equality UNDER THE LAW. Not absolute equality; because they were astute enough to realize that as long as we are free to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness based on our own deeply personal definitions, then absolute equality remains an illusion! Yet, the temperance of legal equality allows the pursuit to unfold without anarchy or oppression. It's a great challenge to maintain the balance. Though, I believe that surrendering our willingness to pursue the balance would be absolutely disastrous. Having offered the above, I'll follow up with a more direct answer to your question: Until the American voter is willing to reclaim our government from corrupt, self-serving legislators, neither Sen. McCain nor Sen. Obama will have the opportunity to lead as a great president would. Two points (and only two) put my vote behind Sen. McCain -- at this juncture anyway -- given that both have plenty of time, and an equal opportunity to further shoot themselves in the foot. Those two points are: 1. The nomination of Supreme Court judges -- I will not surrender our nation's history and values to the manifestion of Nikita Kruschev, who scoffed that the USA would fall from within. As such, my goal is to see the high court returned to judges who are satisfied with interpreting existing law, as opposed to making it up as they go along, while further diluting our Constitution. -And- 2. We must not allow ourselves to be perceived as having been beaten by terrorists -- ever again! That means that we must 'win' in Iraq. To do otherwise would embolden al queda, hezbollah, hamas, etc... just as they were emboldened after the ambush in Mogadishu, Somalia. Let's remember Bin Ladin's "paper tiger" rhetoric. If we allow Islamic fascism to feel its oats, then we're looking at a prolonged struggle to avert the coercive spread of Sharia Law. Look at what's happened to Africa and the Pacific Rim because of violent, forced conversions to or attempted infusions of Sharia Law! I don't know about anyone else, but I am absolutely unwilling to live under to fascist canopy of Sharia Law!!! And, if anyone believes that I'm simply being provacative, then they really need to look into the changes that are occurring in the banking industry. Islamic states, who WE have provided the single, largest transfer of wealth to by way of oil purchases, are buying up majority stakes in traditional banking and lending organizations. They are fast-tracking the global infusion of Sharia compliant banking options, where the borrower does not ever own their tangibles -- they simply lease them for a pre-determined time frame. That means that tangibles, the only real wealth (as opposed to fiat currencies) remains under the control of the growing segment of Sharia bankers. Please confirm by researching who the largest share holders of the USA's largest banking/lending organization is. Remember the Citigroup bail-out last fall? I believe it was in November, so it should be easy to look up. Though, I would urge all to search for the expansion of Sharia lending options and institutions around the globe. It's really quite eye-openning! Add to Sharia's expansion the shocking spread of dogmatic Islam since the 1970s. When a movement, especially one that touts intollerance as being 'Divinely ordered', is that large-scaled, it must NOT be ignored! Now, back to the two candidates: Sen. Obama has called himself "boneheaded" for getting involved with shady deals with Tony Rezko. He has declared that he would meet with thug dictators "without pre-condition", he admitted that he made a big mistake by allowing his minor daughters to be exposed and directly involved with the national media, he has back-peddled in declaring that over a twenty year period of time he failed to see the radical 'metamorphosis' of his pastor and mentor, to say nothing of the document found linking Sen. Obama to South American guerillas, etc, etc, etc... Essentially, he has offered us a very unflattering glimpse into his naivety; his willingness to blindly trust, and remain oblivious to the danger around the bend. These are not the qualities of a great leader! In fact, given the looming threats directed toward the USA, those qualities are unequivocably DANGEROUS! As for Sen. McCain: He similarly trusted that the media and his fellow legislators would continue to embrace and welcome his "maverick" style. That was boneheaded, if you ask me. Though, Sen. McCain does seem to understand the threat that we face from a convergence of external enemies who seek to abolish our current way of life. So, on the merit of nominating constrictionist judges, and not allowing the re-emboldenment of Islamic, fascist, terrorists -- I plan to skeptically support Sen. McCain. Though, I reserve the option to change my mind until the morning of Nov. 3rd. Just in case I determine that it would be wiser to vote for a third party candidate.

I feel like Obama would be the better president because one, I am against the entire republican party after having these two terms with Bush. I know that may be a little biased, but that is the way I feel. I also think that Obama is more in touch with middle and low class issues, and there is a lower chance that we will go through the tax breaks for people and businesses that don't need it. I feel that America is due for a paradigm shift, and Obama can be the catalyst for that change.

The real question about Obama is what scares you most: The support of child killing? The total lack of patriotism? The ties to communism? There are a lot of rediculous rumors about Obama, but there are also really legitimate, scary questions.