I Want Different Candidates

I want different Candidates. I presently equate on a purely economic level President Bush to President Herbert Hoover. Very likely we are entering another Great Depression. I hope to God I'm wrong! None of these candidates for president are made of the proper stuff to deal with the seriousness of our present predicament! I don't want an average candidate when I sense we may lose not only our democracy but western civilization itself if we don't get some really astute leaders in place!

McCain is a hawk and won't deal with our economic problems and may get us all killed. I know he is a good man but these are my concerns.

Hillary will turn the US into the next
Germany, England, France, Norway or Sweden. In other words our taxes will be 60% to 70%
and no one will starve or be homeless cradle to the grave. This is okay if that is what you want for America. Just be sure that is what you want!

Obama is an idealogue like Kennedy. He's a rock star like Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton etc.
However, Obama hasn't had the experience of being a Governor of any state for 8 or more years. So that is a negative in regard to actual practical experience. Even Kennedy for all his charisma lacked experience when he got into the white house and we all almost got killed after the Bay of Pigs by the Cuban nuclear missile crisis!Some believe he was assasinated for this.

Governors make the best Presidents historically, because they know something about running a country after running a state.

I would speak about Huckabee but he has withdrawn from the race.

As strange as this might sound the two best Presidents of the 20th Century for this type of situation would be FDR and Nixon. I know that Nixon was a flawed man and that FDR socialized America and started the Social Security system. But if you view both these men historically, they were capable of dealing with the kind of situations we are dealing with now.

For example, if Nixon and Kissinger hadn't made friends with Communist China in the early 1970s we likely could have fought a bloody ideological war with them by now because it was pretty scary back then with Mao Tse Tung in place for the US and the Western World. In some ways back then we were much more afraid of China in the future than Russia. The Russians had much more in common with us then and now. China might have just as well been on another planet so different were we all then.

Also, as I have written about in my books, if we had to fight China likely we would win the war only to become exterminated by the survivors. It would look something like this. First Nuclear weapons would be exchanged and all military targets in China would be destroyed. There then would be no real government left in China. However, at least 500,000,000 people would be alive in China and Kamakaze in their anger toward the US. They would get on ships and go to South America and kill every living thing northward until all life was gone from North and South America and then they would all die from Nuclear poisoning that they received in China. This is why Nixon and Kissinger were so important when they opened a real dialog with China that eventually opened trade between the US and China and Europe. From trade between the countries is slowly coming with wealth a move towards democracy and democratic institutions which is a natural progression from successful capitalism as it is found today in China.

So to make a long story short, I don't believe McCain, Clinton, or Obama are the right Presidents for this time on earth. However, if I weigh all the problems I think Hillary's Democratic Socialism (looking like Sweden, Norway, Germany, France and England) might be a way for the United States to survive the severe economic changes coming without a Civil War! Like I said, I'm not happy with these choices.