Archive for the ‘Ron Paul’ Category

Michael Steele Should Feel Aggrieved Today

November 7, 2012

If I had to pinpoint the key moment when Mitt Romney lost the election, it would long pre-date his eventual securing of the GOP nomination.
In January 2011, Michael Steele was essentially fired and replaced with Reince Priebus. As time passed, it became increasingly clear that by taking this decision the RNC was dicing with electoral disaster. Michael Steele had articulated and taken an inclusive approach that paid dividends in the 2010 election. By dumping him and installing Reince Priebus as the new Chair of the Republican National Committee, the GOP had put in place a person that had no interest in adopting the sort of inclusive approach that would hand victory to Mitt Romney on a silver platter.
My evidence? The treatment of Ron Paul and his supporters by the RNC was atrocious.  All the way from the Iowa straw poll to the Convention in Tampa.  The Republican Party also totally failed to address big issues relating to the role of the Federal Reserve, Civil Liberties and the immediate need to drastically cut Federal spending on programs such as Medicare parts C and D.  This lead to the alienation of natural, small “l” libertarian, Republican supporters and, shock horror, the chickens came home to roost.  Obvious or what.  I had the opportunity to vote for Gary Johnson, who was similarly poorly treated by the RNC, and took it – in the swing state of Ohio, too.  Many others just did not vote.  Political blowback.

As Chair of the RNC, Reince Priebus executed appallingly bad judgement; a charge of which he will certainly not be alone.  For that he, and his cronies, should immediately quit.  They were instrumental in delivering an epic fail.  Or maybe they prefer to fail rather than do what we all know needs to be done to restore fiscal sanity.

Randorsement of Romney: Gradualism in Politics

June 8, 2012

Few events surprise me, but one did yesterday – seeing Rand Paul endorse Mitt Romney on FoxNews. The resultant apoplexy from certain segments of the “Liberty Movement” is not surprising, and regrettable. I did think an endorsement would happen, but not until much later. Paul Jr is seeking to advance his limited government agenda. Given the nature of politics and the innate conservatism of the public (to maintain the status quo) this will occur at a snails pace – rather than by a rapid process. This does not suit plenty of people, but gradualism is usually the most sustainable path forward in politics. So I may disagree with this “Randorsement” at this time, especially when his father Ron Paul is still collecting delegates for the Republican convention, but I commend him for his thinking.

Geopolitical Poker, Blowback & Iran

January 8, 2012

Radical political Islam has flourished in large part due to “blowback” from US/Western foreign policy. This isn’t just an observation by Ron Paul, he is also restating what the CIA have told us for years. Blowback was also discussed by the 9/11 Commission.  Our corporate media give the Neocons a free pass when they refuse to even discuss blowback.  The current extremely serious situation with Iran is probably the best example of blowback and can be traced back to the US/UK overthrowing Mosaddegh in 1953 (over oil). Continuing to engage in the same interventionism despite the obvious evidence of failure only further bankrupts the United States, both financially and morally. If we do bomb suspected Iranian nuclear facilities, I predict the Iranian regime itself will be the big winner (as it was when we went into Iraq). Any attack would be a propaganda gift. Repression would accelerate under the guise of protecting the state from a “5th Column”, thereby weakening internal dissent. Iraq would further destabilize. Plus don’t forget the fragility of Bahrain and eastern Saudi Arabia. Geopolitics on this scale is a massive poker game, we are in serious danger of being taken to the cleaners yet again.  But don’t expect to hear blowback discussed anytime soon by any of the so-called experts, or should I say propagandists, that grace our corporate media.

Bolton, Bolton on the Wall, What is the Biggest Obamablunder of them All?

December 10, 2011

When pondering Obamablunders, and many are colossal, there is a tendency to focus on the unrelenting overseas adventurism, failures to adequately investigate allegations of malfeasance on Wall Street – hardly a shock when considering President Obama has been so chummy with the likes of Tim Geithner and Jon Corzine – or his continued erosion of the Bill of Rights, such as his renewal of the provisions of the Orwellian PATRIOT Act.  But there is one little discussed Obamablunder that I don’t think I have ever heard addressed, and has the potential to have dreadful implications.  That is the failure to investigate and, where required to by law (with the exception of Irv Lewis Libby, and that was under President Bush!), prosecute those that were complicit in the Iraq debacle.

By the Obama administration failing to investigate President Bush and Vice President Cheney’s cronies, we now know that they have a route back.   This week Newt Gingrich said that he wants John Bolton as his Secretary of State.  Yes, John Bolton.  Our former UN ambassador that was up to his neck in the neocon warmongering that has in no small way contributed to our national bankruptcy, erosion of civil liberties and dreadful international reputation.  Honestly, if Newt Gingrich becomes the GOP nominee against Obama is he trying to lose?  Pandering to “the base” doesn’t work with independents, swing voters or “Ron Paul Republicans”.  He needs these voters to win the White House, and he won’t get them if he chums up to the very individuals that have taken America to the brink in pursuit of their adventurist agenda.

A supreme irony in all of this is that Mr Bolton and his ilk should be grateful to President Obama and the Democrats.  By failing to investigate the events leading up to the Iraq debacle, the perpetrators avoided having to repeatedly testify on Capitol Hill.  This also meant they could keep traipsing between their “Think Tanks” and certain of the “Fair and Balanced” crowd, spewing their propaganda.  But President Obama in large part simply continued the Bush doctrine, which is why I am not at all surprised that they got off scot-free.

Extending a Hand of Friendship to Iran

November 6, 2011

I just watched Ron Paul on FoxNews Sunday being interviewed by Chris Wallace. In reply to a question about Iran and its nuclear program, he said we shouldn’t rush into war and that we should offer friendship instead.
There is one easily attainable, tangible measure that could be done that could facilitate this – even without opening formal links with the Iranian government. Make it easier for Iranian scientists and engineers to come to the United States, particularly to go to graduate school as well as work as post-doctoral researchers or visiting faculty. Maybe children of key Iranian nuclear scientists, even these individuals themselves, could be tempted to come. In analogy, Germany losing many of its best scientists in the 1930s deprived the Nazis of their ability to develop nuclear weapons. So why not offer Iranian scientists, and their families, a route out?

Herman Cain’s Achilles’ Heel

October 10, 2011

So Herman Cain has now stated, “To protest Wall Street and the bankers is basically saying you’re anti-capitalism.” Not so fast…….. It may be that many Occupy Wall Street people are, but to focus on that is a diversion. Rather, the reason that OWS is gaining traction is because of the blatant cronyism between the Federal Reserve, “too big to fail” Wall Street firms and their Democrat and Republican puppets in both the executive and legislative branches of government. Be it Obama/Geithner/Pelosi or Bush/Paulson/Boehner. Indeed, much of the Tea Party can trace its roots back to the same disgust with Wall Street as we see today with OWS.
The Federal Reserve, Mr. Cain’s former employer, bailed-out their chums in Wall Street, and overseas, to the tune of $16 TRILLION of freshly inflated Bernanke bucks. In only a little over 2 years, too. The bail-out happened under both Bush and Obama, proving that cronyism is indeed bipartisan. By avoiding true capitalist principles, the perpetrators of the financial meltdown not only got off scot-free but were also spared bankruptcy – the free market fate they deserved.
We know the magnitude of the bail-out because of the stellar work of Ron Paul and Alan Grayson in the House and Jim DeMint and Bernie Sanders in the Senate that forced a GAO audit of the Federal Reserve’s role in the bail-out. I know that all four opposed TARP, too. I do know that Mr. Cain supported TARP and he has stated that there is no need to audit the Fed. This begs the question of who is more anti-capitalist, OWS or Herman Cain? One thing is for sure, Herman Cain’s Federal Reserve connection is his Achilles’ heel.

My 7-year-old understands “blowback” – so why can’t Rudy Giuliani or Rick Santorum?

September 27, 2011

In the GOP primary debates, with the exception of Ron Paul, it seems to be anathema to discuss how blowback was a major cause of 9/11. This is as much the case in 2011 with the likes of Rick Santorum as it was with Rudy Giuliani in 2007, with their ignoring of both a key finding of the 9/11 Commission and of CIA analysis. Blowback was a predictable response to US foreign policy decisions largely relating to the Middle East, be it support of autocratic regimes in Arab countries, military bases in Saudi Arabia or disregard for the plight of the Palestinians. One would assume that obliviousness to blowback betrays an ignorance that would be unthinkable for a President tasked with making the biggest decisions of state. I doubt that to be truly the case with a great many blowback deniers, the likes of Giuliani and Santorum are clearly smart guys, rather they are simply continuing their pandering as a matter of rote. Anything to appeal to the base to try and win the primary, no matter how outrageously ignorant they sound. But it doesn’t really work with the swing voter does it?
In talking to my 7-year-old about bullying, I asked him how he would respond. He said he would tell the bully to stop. “But what if he doesn’t stop?” “I’d tell my teacher.” “But what if that doesn’t help?” Long pause. “I’d trick him.” At 7 he knows that if you try to fight a bully fair and square, it ain’t going to happen and you will very likely get pummeled. You may deck him, but you’ll likely get jumped soon thereafter. Growing up in darkest Lanarkshire taught me that, but I was super impressed by my sons answer. “I’d trick him”. He is clearly way smarter than I was at the same age!
Is it really so hard for people to understand that people don’t attack us because “we are free” but because we are bullies? That we are letting ourselves be tricked into responding in ways harmful to our national security and ultimately self-destructive? That we are bankrupting ourselves, mortgaging our children’s future, polarizing our society and, by casting the Bill of Right onto its funeral pyre, destroying what makes America truly exceptional? Sure, I supported our response after the violence and fatalities of 9/11. But after we overthrew the Taliban we engaged in a militaristic adventurism that has fuelled further blowback. We let ourselves be tricked. After all, the primary goal of terrorism is not to kill as many people as possible. Rather, it’s to change the political environment in which the terrorists and their supporters are seeking to function. Be it the Stern Gang, IRA/INLA or Al Qaeda. This is not a difficult concept to understand. Look around the world today, and how America is regarded. With all the billions we expend on so-called national security and defense we routinely walk into traps that a 7-year-old can understand.
No blowback denier for me. I do not want a Commander-in-Chief that is a dupe and unable to grasp even the simplest manifestations of blowback, let alone to ultimately have the authority to one day send my son and daughter off to war. I do not want a President that is a blatant panderer that would blithely expend our strength on militaristic adventurism. I will never vote for such a candidate in 2012. I do want a President that recognizes the magnitude of the mess we are in and stops this madness.