I came across this video from Time magazine: “10 Questions for Ron Paul” that’s worth sharing. Dr. Paul puts his finger on the problem with Obama’s foreign policy: it neutralizes the anti-war left. (I’ll be discussing this on the show this Saturday–9pm on 750am). I would go further than Dr. Paul, though, and say that it was the plan of the power elite all along to give the people an anti-war, anti-Bush candidate who in the end would follow orders when in the White House.
I believe that’s why Hillary, like the anti-war left, had to be neutralized: because she proved in her time with her husband in the White House that the Clintons could not be counted on to fall on their swords for a cause if it meant jeopardizing a second term. Health care and the ongoing wars are two areas I believe Hillary might have felt she had to tread lightly–Bill gave up on the healthcare plan when the Democrats lost big time in his first midterm election, and Hillary might have been expected to do the same. Not so, Obama, who mysteriously came out of nowhere a few years ago to defeat the heir apparent. He fit the bill perfectly: he had no independent power base in D.C. and had never proven to be his own man.
10 questions with rp
Ron Paul’s Delegate Hunt
Since we’re on the topic of Ron Paul, here’s an interesting article about the Congressman’s delegate strategy. Normally I don’t like getting down and dirty, but I admire these guys trying to beat the filthy establishment at its own game. The problem with giving the government all the power is that access to the power make the power-hungry stop at nothing to get it, while the good people effectively forfeit by remaining gentlemen. The Ron Paul team aren’t even breaking the rules, but the establishment is shocked that the principled idealists have any practical skills and are willing to use them. Funny thing is, Ron Paul, afraid of no one, doesn’t even hide his pragmatic tactics–he said all along he was going for the delegates.