You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The friendship of George W. Bush and Michelle Obama (CNN)
That is really my point, both parties are acting the same. One party appears to be a little more for domestic activism and the other for international activism, but basically both want to expand government. Most of the differences are trivial or contrived.
I think what the apologists for one party or the other forget is that the current candidate for President has never met a war SHE did not love. She voted for the Iraq War, she helped the Obama administration arm the Syrian insurgents that turned out to be ISIS, she destabilized Libya and she supported her husband's actions in the Balkans. The other knucklehead is not much better, though he does seem to understand that Iraq was a huge mistake.
Me, I "think locally, act locally" and understand that when one member of Congress represents 750,000 people they are no longer public servants but oligarchs. I refuse to participate. To paraphrase Lysander Spooner, a man is no less a slave because he chooses a master in a term of years.