Of course not. But we are comparing candidates, if you point out a flaw in one, but all the others have the same flaw, then you have not gotten anywhere. Or, if the others do not have that flaw but are flawed in other ways, again you may not have gotten anywhere depending on how important the "flaws" are to you. If TARP is a biggie and extremely important to you outweighing everything else to consider, then I guess either Paul or Bachmann are the only choices.
“If TARP is a biggie and extremely important to you outweighing everything else to consider”
Actually, adherence and commitment to the Constitution and conservative principles is first on my list, as it ought to be for others. TARP is just one more example indicating that many of the candidates on the stage last night simply are not movement conservatives but are power-first candidates. Obtaining office should not be the objective of the Republican nominee. It should be the restoration of the Constitution.
Taking as the nominee someone who would cast aside principle and the Constitution, even for an end most agree is a good one (whether it be animus for the Rat candidate, e.g., not Gore, not Obama, not whoever, or distaste or love for a particular policy aim, e.g., killing terrorists, ending drug abuse, stopping crime), is what got the country into this mess in the first place.