Candidates don't offer differences

Like all elected officials, John McCain and Barack Obama began their terms by taking an oath to "support and defend" the U.S. Constitution. Like most politicians, they repeatedly have violated that oath by introducing and/or supporting legislation that is destructive of that same document.

For instance, both men have supported some degree of: gun control, foreign aid, unlawful taxation, excessive federal powers, violent deaths of innocent unborn Americans, federal intervention in private sector business via bailouts, etc., etc., ad infinitum. Neither individual is a man of his word, and both have made a mockery of their oaths of office. Consequently, neither candidate is worthy of a single American vote or capable of being a solution to our present problems. Both men, by their actions, are in actuality enemies of this great republic.

There is not a nickel's worth of difference between them on the issues that truly count. When will we Americans wake up and see that a vote for "the lesser of two evils" is still a vote for evil and evil never produces good results? I realize there often is no good candidate to vote for, but this isn't one of those occasions. Chuck Baldwin is the presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He takes his oath seriously and believes the Constitution is still worth honoring and protecting.

Some people say, "I don't want to waste my vote on someone that won't win" to which I answer, "Any vote for evil, either lesser or greater, is a wasted vote, and if America gets flushed down the toilet, do you really want to have helped pull the handle?" Incidentally, the electoral vote elects the president. The popular vote is to reveal the sentiment of the people.