I know Ron Paul is the correct candidate too, but I know it and my choice is informed thus my certainty about such a choice. People should work to be informed and not take your word for it by the status quo argument because first you have to know what that is, meaning you have to do your research.

If we’re not happy with our government, our duty, as Americans, is to change it. Obviously, we are unable to accomplish that using the current process, but ONLY because the people who choose to run for office do so not out of a sense of duty to their country, but for power.

Until good men and women, of good moral character and a sense of duty stand up and find a way to convince the masses that they are the right choice, nothing will change. This needs to happen at all levels, not just Federal.

As for Ron Paul, I like a lot of what he says, but he’s got two problems. First, he’s too “radical” for even Republicans, much less Independents and disaffected Democrats. Second, even if he did get elected, Congress would accomplish nothing while he was in office, because they would never present him with a bill that he would consider worthy of becoming law, so he would veto everything. If they happen to have the votes needed to override a veto, then having him in office will have almost no impact. If he stands by his principles, then he won’t negotiate with Congress, because he won’t have anything to give them.

This country is a mess. I think “None of the Above” should be on every ballot at every level. If “None of the Above” wins the election, new candidates must be presented and we vote again in 90 days. We keep this up until we actually have someone worthy in office.

200 million well-meaning sheep voting for a tyrant are tyrants. I’d rather vote for nothing than be a tyrant.