osamanobama said:
well is still dont support his view on drugs, pot i can understand, not others. anyway im 100% against any form of killing an unborn child, regardless of the term, you are murdering a child no matter what age, so stopping partial birth abortion is hardly anything to be proud of. i cant see how anybody with any shred of inteligence can be for massacring a child as its being born. (for that matter murdering a child at any age). but Newt should still be a pretty good candidate (far from perfect) but still good, it seems he has turned away from most of his liberal tendencies, and is a strong fiscal conservative. much better candidate than Romney. but im sure you would agree that these men would be near perfect presidents: Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, colonel allen west, or Scott Walker |
Given that the congressmen and senators you've listed haven't actually done anything to reduce the size and scope of government, I am rather skeptical of your list. Mr. Walker has been pretty interesting thus far, but we'll see how that goes.
I want a president that will fight with congress until the government shrinks. That is likely not West or Christie by any means. Ryan and Rubio would be questionable if they have the conviction to do so.
So with that said, I would still take Ron Paul or Gary Johnson. However, Ron Paul's son, Rand, is showing a lot of promise. I hope he can be promoted and run in 2016 if there are no better candidates by then.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.







