posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 10:21 AM
There is something to this argument I don't quite get. I am not taking a stand on either side here, but felt this needed to be stated. Why on a
website where many (including some who are defending Barack) don't trust what the MSM and official government stories, is it now seen as acceptable
to take the government and media at their word? I'll be honest, I don't care for Obama and don't have the slightest clue about where he was born,
whether it be Hawaii, Kenya, or Mars for that matter. I am just curious though as some of the same people who say these sources should be trusted on
Obama, are the same ones who accuse the same sources of burying 9/11. Lest we forget, whether he is potrayed as opposition to the Bush regime or not,
he is still part of this corrupt system we find our selves in. This isn't change, its just the opposite side of the same coin. For the record I am
anti-Mccain as well, and no I'm not voting for Paul either. I believe the only way to bring about real CHANGE would be to tear down and start fresh
as the constitution indicates we should when government has over run the people. I digress, why should I trust sources that blatantly lie, and oppress
the truth when convienient?