Johnson,Obama, Paul, Romney *Specifics Only*

I like Ron Paul's Constitutional talk, this talk of peace and to stop sending our troops to die in vain. I like that his voting record is consistent with everything he says. I like that he is humble, and does not get contributions from the millionaire banks and corps. He is telling us to prepare for the worst, if we continue to allow the government to run amuck. Not to mention his plans to reduce the deficit and how much he would cut from the deficit within the first year as President. If Ron Paul gets elected, we will not be forever in debt to China, where we will always have a concern looming that they will claim eminent domain on our homeland. Ron Paul has the most donations and support of the military. Neither of the candidates combined match his donations. (Mitt Romney and Barack Obama). Ron Paul also gets his contributions from people like you and I. If Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are asking you, its because they already spent the millions they had donated by banks! Ron Paul is telling you that they are robbing you of your freedom as they commit these crimes against you.

Gary Johnson I have listened to him a few times, and he is the only candidate that closely aligns with what is important to me, he wants an audit on the FED, he believes in smaller Government, He is the best candidate to argue that modern politicians both democrats and republicans have strayed away from their roots, in that Johnson was a Republican all his life, and because of the straying of the Republican Party, he broke away from them and decided to be an Independent candidate. He believes in small Government, and he has previous experience, I am not too sure what the people of Mexico say about him, but he has a decent idea or two as well. Him and Ron Paul are different because of most likely religious purposes. I actually because of my religious beliefs more align with Gary Johnson, I know he will be in Tampa supposedly to attend the Paul Fest prior to the convention. So it would be a chance to find out more about our alternative, who I do know is going to be on the ballot in all 50 states, because he is 3rd party. I also know he did not have much when it came to campaigning, but the nomination is what will tell the rest of the story.

Barack Obama in 08 said his administration would be open and transparent, His ideas of open and transparent have not only frightened me, because he arbitrarily demands the power to be able to execute humans American citizens at that, but for a mere accusation or thought that you might be a terrorist in the future. Has signed N.D.A.A. on Dec 31, 2011 which was completely opposite of transparent and open. Not to mention the N.D.A.A. was much like the Enabling Act, and the Patriot Act, but at least the Patriot Act required the signature from a judge to warrant a wiretap on someone. The current President can order the execution of a person for his random thoughts that anyone could commit a crime in the future. We've got a large number of Military men killing themselves. Some are risking their lives, and their own court martial by sending warnings back home that there really is a resistance in the military to POTUS orders. Now the SCOTUS has upheld the most controversial law of our time, as a tax. The biggest one in History, and I don't even want to get started on what is buried inside of this so called Health Care Act. Thinks that the way to help the economy is to go to Ben Bernanke the mint, and print more money, which got us into this mess of spending in the first place.

Remember the Health Care Act mentioned above, well I'm sure you can guess who the next candidate is, Mitt Romney. This is the person current POTUS conceived this awesome idea of National Health Care. Mitt Romney gave President Obama the bright idea of Obamacare, from an earlier written health care bill. Mitt Romney when asked would he have signed the same N.D.A.A. which was like the Enabling Act of Hitler, and the Patriot Act of Bush. But was also, The current President can order the execution of a person for his random thoughts that anyone could commit a crime in the future. He has said the indefinite detention clause that is in the N.D.A.A. provisions, is a good idea. Mitt Romney has a lot of skeletons in his closet, as well as the current President, and he too gets massive contributions from big banking systems and large corporations. Is this someone we want that has unlimited influence from other interests? He has changed his position more than once or twice, and sometimes he sounds just like the current POTUS.

Okay, so did you read any of these Executive Orders. Read National Defense Resources Preparedness Act signed March 16 2012. It gives the Federal Government absolute ownership, and the right to confiscate any of your properties for any such reason deemed as appropriate to prepare for future wars, when our soldiers had just returned from a separate one. He signed the Executive Order for Yemen, but it this specific Executive Order, he declared that even American citizens that interfers in political processes can be detained and arrested. Oh, lets not forget that the current POTUS also demanded the passing of H.R. 347 which takes away our Freedom of Speech at any political function, which is by the way our First Amendment Right. Then he promises to veto to censorship of the internet bill, but it passes and now its being voted on again, although there are already companies being told to pull their websites, for being politically incorrect and outspoken about President Obama. Teachers are yelling at the students for questioning his lies and what not, he is now attempting to take away your right to bear arms, and here comes the military and it matters not which one, know that The Obama knows what is going to happen.

Maybe you should ask what they are spending all this money on, this innovative technology is going to be used to destroy humanity just so you know. Think about some of the things that are about to take place. Like wars, and whats really about to happen, since these issues are not important to you anymore.

Ron Paul will also end the IRS, the DEA, the ONDCP and other illegal federal agencies. The Constitution gives the fed gov no police powers except in three particular crimes, treason, piracy and counterfeiting:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/hand...
Excerpt:
The Constitution specifically authorizes federal enforcement of only three types of laws, all of which involve uniquely federal concerns. The first is based on the congressional power "To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States.'' The counterfeiting enforcement power immediately follows the delegation of power to Congress to "coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin.''

The second congressional criminal power is "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations.'' The third is, "Congress shall have Power to declare Punishment of Treason.'' Although counterfeiting, treason, and piracy clearly involve areas of federal, not state, concern, it is notable that, even in those cases, the authors of the Constitution felt a need specifically to authorize congressional law enforcement.

While the body of the Constitution grants only narrow criminal powers to the federal government, the Bill of Rights, in the Tenth Amendment, specifically reserves to the states all powers not granted to the federal government.

Even the Federalist Papers, which were, after all, a defense of increased federal power, made it clear that criminal law enforcement would not come within the federal sphere under the new Constitution. James Madison wrote that federal powers "will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. . . . The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and property of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the state.''

Likewise, Alexander Hamilton, the most determined nationalist of his era, explained that state governments, not the federal government, would have the power of law enforcement and that that power would play a major role in ensuring that the states were not overwhelmed by the federal government: "There is one transcendent advantage belonging to the province of the State governments, which alone suffices to place the matter in a clear and satisfactory light--I mean the ordinary administration of criminal and civil justice.''