Contumacious
Radical Freedom
"The people" aren't the commander in chief. One person controlls our military, and one person only. "The people" don't have access to national security information. "The people" - half of them are stoned out of their minds like idiot Conservaderp here. "The people" - the same half that are stoned, are passivist pussies who would rather pray muslim all day than fight for their freedom. And those same "people" will be the first holding an Occupy Wall Street protest (complete with rapes and murders of their own kind) because we got hit with a nuclear bomb and they think the government didn't protect us.
You Ron Paul supporters are damn near as disturbing as the Communist liberals. The entire thought process that people vote on whether or not we take military action (despite having exactly ZERO national security information) is so absurd and asinine, it makes me believe you people need phsychiatric evaluations. Ron Paul is a fucking kook and so are all of his followers. Hell, his own son support Mitt Romney!
I think you should reconsider your position. The People are who count the most. The Commander in Chief and all Politicians work for them. That's why we're not a Dictatorship/Monarchy. What you advocate, is everything our Founding Fathers didn't want. The Commander in Chief should not have unlimited power. I think you should look into Ron Paul a bit more. You may be surprised. Check out Peace . Gold . Liberty | Ron Paul 2012 | Daily Paul
I agree with you - they do work for us. But they don't take votes, polls, or opinions with national security, nor should they. The people are not informed on the classified information.
As far as Ron Paul, he's phenomenal when it comes to economics, but a complete olk kook when it comes to foreign policy and national security.
Gee, were the Libertarians in power when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, when AQ attacked the WTC?
.