His point (although a little too blunt for me) was that Obama was this "hope and change" guy that was going to be transparent and all of that nonsense. Even though he's ultimately powerless in matters like this, if he were truly a man of character he would at least speak against it. The problem is the systems we have will not allow men of character to get within sniffing distance of that position.

There are the Cheneys of the world who seem to emit darkness and there are the Obamas of the world who offer an alternative but then do the same thing. Which one is worse?

Thanks for it breaking down.

They are both worse. Also, given the amount of candidates, it's amusing how we become bipolar with notions of good/evil. I prefer objectivity:

Vote for the cleaner voting record; that means some voting record and no PATRIOT Act, FREEDOM Act, etc.

It is the un[self]educated proletariat who gave the plutocrats their power.