Defending My Choice to Switch From Paul to Obama

Methinks you just want to be part of a winning team (not tonight, of course)? I can understand how you feel. It’s just that you seem to be capable of going beyond feelings–you seem to realize that philosophically, Ron Paul is correct. Right? I assume you know that Obama voted for the reauthorization of the “Patriot Act?” That stops me right there–other than I disagree with his philosophy of government. I hope you will continue to educate yourself and those around you about Ron Paul’s ideas–principles of liberty/freedom. Who knows, maybe someone like RP will have a chance in 4/8 years? We must keep the faith and continue to educate people.

Peace – drop by and hear my music. Aaron

I could understand voting for Obama in order to stop McCain and the Neocons from continuing to control the Republican Party.

However, I might advise not to do so for the following reason:

The liberal Supreme Court justices (Breyer, Souter, Stevens, Ginsburg) are all getting very old and all openly say that the Constitution was written in “primitive times” and that the “Commerce Clause” allows Congress to make literally any laws it wants to, bounded by their own “reason”…where it is assumed that, if a law was passed with a majority, then it was “reasonable”.

In US vs Morrison, these justices dissented from the majority that said a woman could not sue a man for rape in a federal courtroom. The liberal justices said “Violence against women causes economic disruption that constitutes a national epidemic…therefore Congress can make any law regulating violence against women under the Commerce Clause”.

That is just one example of States Rights being taken away but it is a huge example. Since then, the IMBRA law takes away the rights of Americans and foreigners to talk with each other online or via agencies before the American provides a detailed background check for the foreigner to sign.

Obama would replace 4 old radical liberals who will find any excuse for government intervention in police and personal matters with 4 young radical liberals who will find any excuse for government intervention in police and personal matters.

You can be sure that, if Obama is President, the media and Republicans will talk about his SC nominees only in terms of their stance on abortion and nothing else at all.

I agree completely with Mr. Peterson. It is inconceivable to me that someone could support Paul, a true libertarian, and then switch to Obama. This indicates someone not grounded in principle because Obama would govern from the from the far left, which would be anathema to anyone professing to support Paul from a policy perspective. Peterson used Supreme Court justices as just one example. Many more such examples could be cited. Beyond that, every time Obama speaks the rhetoric sounds good but, then I ask myself what did he say. His speeches say nothing of substance. It is a person who sounds good but says nothing that is very troubling. What is he going to do? Usually it means that the Consitution, which set up a government of limited powers extolling the principle of individual freedom and responsibility, is replaced by a system of coercive socialist practices making the individual subserviant to the state. Paul would enhance individual freedom while Obama advocates government intervention in every aspect of a persons life. Consequently, a loss of individual freedom.

I wanna be part of the winning team, but to tell the truth Obama was always my fallback — I was fairly certain that Paul wouldn’t get the nomination.