Tag: Ron Paul

Kenny Golden, independent candidate in the Virginia 2nd Congressional District who proposes a widened conflict in Afghanistan and war in Pakistan announced via tweet that he is off to court Ron Paul's support today. Golden, who sailed by Pakistan in the navy, justifies the incursion by citing the tragedy of 9/11.

A Virginian Pilot reporter suggests that an endorsement from Paul could generate significant Hampton Roads Tea Party support. But, this fanciful scenario requires the Congressman from Texas to abandon the Republican Party candidate, Scott Rigel, and reverse his position on the adventures in Southwest Asia.

Golden has garnered the endorsement of another Texan, Democrat Kinky Friedman. Support from Virginians is less forthcoming.

I love the reaction of the Republican audience - dead silence, utter confusion - to Ron Paul's assertion that Barack Obama is not, repeat NOT,  a "socialist." After being told for months by their "leaders," including famed political science theorist Sarah Palin (heh), that Obama is a "socialist," (Dictionary.com defition: "in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."), now Ron Paul is telling them that Obama's actually a "corporatist" (Free Dictionary definition: "Theory and practice of organizing the whole of society into corporate entities subordinate to the state."). Got that?

Yes, it's confusing.  I mean, how can Obama simultaneously be attempting to push the United States from "the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism" while working hard to entrench corporate power and influence in our country? In the case of health care reform, of course the private health insurance companies are not eliminated, but in fact they get more customers in exchange for more regulation (on denials of coverage for pre-existing conditions, etc.).  How that is either "socialism" or "corporatism" is hard to see, but Republicans are busy making both arguments. This, despite the fact that the non-partisan Kaiser Health News finds the 2009 Senate bill to be eerily similar to a major 1993 GOP health care proposal, the "Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act of 1993." It seems self contradictory, unless of course you realize that the rationale doesn't matter so much as the conclusion: that, no matter what he does, Barack Obama simply must be wrong, by definition.  If you buy that, all else follows. If not, you get a really, really bad headache trying to make sense of it all.

P.S. The correct answer? If he has secret "socialist" or "corporatist" plans, Barack Obama has hidden them well. In reality, Obama to date has been about as centrist/moderate a president as you can get, on pretty much every issue (foreign policy, domestic policy, etc.).  Of course, that's not nearly as fun as throwing hysterical accusations around, so carry on...