Thursday, November 30, 2023

Arthur Lewin; Ron Paul, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry The Race 4 + Of The President…

August 22, 2011 by  
Filed under News, Opinion, Politics, Weekly Columns

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

( I am hearing all these complaints about the president’s bus, the president’s big, long black bus. They are saying it is too expensive, too luxurious, it was made in Canada, it is too ostentatious, and what else? What else is it that bothers them about the president’s big, long, thick black bus!

Governor Rick Perry of Texas has just thrown his Texas 10 gallon hat into the ring. And in true Texas fashion he then threatened the head of the Federal   Reserve system.  Perry accused the independent, Bush appointed, head of the nation’s financial system of playing fast and loose with the nation’s monetary system in an attempt to get Obama re-elected. He said, “If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I don’t know what y’all would do to him in Iowa, but we — we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas. Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost treacherous — or treasonous in my opinion.”

Pretty ugly” to put it mildly means serious bodily harm. For example, the Governor of Texas in the 1940s, Coke R. Stevenson, refused to do anything when Blacks were being hunted down and put to death by howling mobs. He is reported to have said, “”Well, you know these negroes sometimes do those kinds of things that provoke whites to such action.” 

Yes, Texas Governor Rick Perry is considered a front runner, and he may well may get the Republican nod, but does anyone think he has a chance of winning the presidency? Did I mention he is against abortion, does not believe in evolution or global warming, won’t raise taxes on the rich and is determined to make hefty cuts to all social programs?

Look at Michelle Bachmann. She has the same opinions as the Texas governor on all of the above issues. Meanwhile, she and Perry are both Evangelical Christians. As for Romney, he is against a woman’s right to choose and he is a Mormon. How can a Mormon be elected president when even Evangelical Christians, whom many in this country are wary of, are themselves reluctant to vote for Mormons?

The forgotten man in all of this is Ron Paul. He came in second in the Iowa caucuses, but the talking heads do not even want to mention that. He is the only one who really stands out in the Republican field. Yes, he is a staunch conservative, determined to cut government spending, but he would, unlike everyone else including Obama, take a meat axe to the bloated defense budget. And so he gets the Jesse Jackson treatment. He is branded “unelectable,” hence, not worthy of serious attention in a boldface attempt to generate a self-fulfilling prophecy.

As for President Obama, he has been taken to task by Cornel West and Tavis Smiley, in their recently ended  nationwide tour, for not doing enough to help the Black and the poor. And they are being ripped to shreds by other Black leading figures for having the temerity to say anything about the president. But is that fair? Yes, West is upset that he was not invited to the Inauguration, and Smiley is perturbed that Obama did not attend his annual gathering, but each man, and anyone else, has the right to criticize the president if they feel he is not doing his job.

Yes, we can respect and revere President Obama as the American Head of State, but like any other president, he also wears the title Head of the American Government, and as such, he should be taken to task by those who feel he needs to be criticized.

Many have wondered why the president never takes a hard line, populist stance in dealing with the opposition. They say he is not a good negotiator. Perhaps, but I suspect something else is also at work. 
The one person the establishment definitely does not want to see in the White House is Ron Paul. As for Perry, Bachman, Romney, et. al., they are “Straw Men,” a phony opposition that cannot win. In addition to the fact their political stances are way out of the mainstream, a significant element of the Republican electorate does not like President Obama because he is Black.

The disturbing undercurrents of racism that occasionally flash to the surface in, what has now become, a white, Evangelical Christian party frighten Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Muslims and quite a large segment of the majority population. Obama may, or may not be, a good negotiator, but I suspect he is playing to the establishment interests that backed him in ’08 and that are certain to support him in 2012. He shows every sign of being the sure front runner and is quite reluctant to hedge his bets as he campaigns around the country in that long black bus.

Staff Writer; Arthur Lewin

This talented writer has also self published a book which is entitled; Read Like Your Life Depends On It.



27 Responses to “Arthur Lewin; Ron Paul, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry The Race 4 + Of The President…”
  1. Jonathan says:


    Please tell me more about Jefferson wanting redistribution of wealth! I have a friend whom I debate and that is his personal hero. I would love to gather information from you!

    Thanks for your time today, it has been a pleasure!

  2. Arthur says:

    Not taking sides, just listening. You guys are doing great. But let me note the following. With all the regulation we have now, we are in a situation in which wealth is, in fact, rapidly accruing at the top and our supposed regulatory system has completely broken down. Would a move to libertarianism hasten or retard these processes?

  3. Dell Gines says:

    “The president is not a king.” – Nicholas. I am glad someone else sees that too!

    Jonathan – We are not bankrupt, not close. We still have Triple A rating. Also, I am with you on debt reduction. But that is not the same as libertarianism. Are you missing that point when I say it?

    1st, there is no such thing as “the government”. We are democratic republic. We are “the government”.

    2nd, you are an ideologue. That is cool but I don’t think you understand the implications of an absolute free market. You also sound young, but I don’t want to make assumptions, because you sound dogmatic like I did in my twenties. Both of these lead to narrow simplistic perspectives.

    3rd, I don’t think you understand the implications of an absolute free market. That means there is no regulation. Who controls for pollution and emissions, Who controls for child labor and exploitation, who controls for monopolies, price fixing, and oligopolies.

    Those are business issues.

    Social issues. Who controls for discrimination, redlining, homeless children, prostitution next to schools.

    In addition, wealth becomes perpetually consolidated at the top of the bracket, and the bottom of the bracket essentially becomes third world. Issues like structural unemployment destroy folks because there is no safety net, and essentially we turn into a kingdom with peasants and lords.

    Dude I could go on and on. Libertarianism is a fantasy. It is a feel good illusion.

    One final note, did you know Thomas Jefferson, one of the founders of this nation advocate for absolute redistribution of ALL wealth in this country at set intervals so the situations like I described above didn’t occur in this country?

  4. Nicholas says:

    Indulge me in an observation in support of my 8-23 comment. When the conversation turned to a rational discussion the 8-22 Ron Paul shields disappear.

    Dell’s metaphor could not be more on point and his conclusion leaves nothing else to be said unless we miss the point of his conclusion.

    I want to congratulate Jonathan for busting his butt to get ahead and being the first person in his bloodline to be college educated. I wish I could make a similar claim. I hope he does not think he evolved to this point without government handouts (his words). Before we condemn our president for doing nothing and not caring, we need to objectively look at what he has done and educate ourselves to how our government actually works. If you don’t know you better ask somebody. The president is not a king.

  5. Jonathan says:


    I am fully aware of the copious amounts of handouts that businesses are granted. I disagree with these strongly and so does Ron Paul. I am not sure what you were going for with that last point on handouts. I guess you assumed I am very much pro-business and all for insane tax breaks for the filthy rich. I am not. Ron Paul believes in a free market where business can rise and fall miserably at their own expense. He said the bank bailouts should have never happened. The strong would have absorbed the weak.

    Just because we have flaws in the pointless spending and incentives we give business… doesn’t mean we need to continue paying out massive amounts of incentives for certain selected races… ESPECIALLY WHEN WE ARE 14+ TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT! We are so bankrupt that it isn’t even funny anymore. We must act now… not consider what more the government can hand out.

  6. Dell Gines says:

    Jonathan, I would love to debate this subject with you on a live show. Also what I used was a simply metaphor to illustrate a much more complex issue in regard to the race running example. But let me start with areas where we agree. Secondly I will discuss the concept of outliers, and finally I subsequently will debunk the way I perceive you are utilizing the word handout in the context of minorities.

    1st – I mentioned that I agree with you on government spending control. I am not sure if you saw that. There however is a distinction between government being fiscally responsible, and the ideological position of a libertarian around uber-limited government. Two dramatically different positions altogether. Fiscal responsibility to ensure government solvency is a pragmatic issue that all politicians face. An position on extremely limited government is an ideological approach to the way government should be run. Don’t confuse the two bro. I can be for one and not the other.

    2nd – Blacks have come a long way in this country, and I think you are doing an awesome job in school and are to be commended for it. Your mother is to be commended for encouraging you. But one rule of both logic and statistics is that you can’t look at one, and argue that it is true of all. Simply because Michael Jordan was a phenomal, best of all time basketball player, doesn’t mean that you or I could do it. Black folks are awesome, and have demonstrated a historical resiliancy in the face of oppression second to none. That being said, look at both the statistical and historical inequities and tell me honestly that the playing field is level for the “average” Black versus the “Average” white. We know in this nation wealth is access and power. Blacks on average have 10x less wealth than whites. Do the math.

    3rd – Your concept of handouts is flawed and misguided. I work in the economic development field and EVERYDAY ACROSS VIRTUALLY EVERY CITY businesses, and by proxy then individuals are getting handouts. This comes in the form of tax increment financing, city paid for build out, 99 year, $1 dollar land leases, cheap acquisition of spec buildings, employment tax credits etc. The purpose and theory behind it is that the use of these incentives will lead to a net positive return to the community. How is that any different then creating structured and intelligent ‘incentives and opportunities’ for a group of people that historically was intentionally left out of wealth building opportunties, and currently still suffering for it?

    For example Jon, if I told you I could create a program that for every $1million dollars of tax payer money invested, I could generate $2million dollars in tax payers savings and economic develop revenue? Would you say “Bet let me get that $1million savings/profit”. The logical pragmatic person would, and I am assuming you are both.

    Now what if I told you that that investment was in the development of Black communities that would lead to the reduction of Black poverty and reliance on the ‘system’ and the increase Black economic development, businesses, and entrepreneurship. Would you still say “Do it”. A logical and pragmatic individual, which I am assuming you are would say yes!

    Ron Paul would say no.

  7. Jonathan says:


    “if the Voting Rights Act is not maintained, what guarantee do we have that, in the ten states that it applies to, they will not go back to excluding Blacks, and others from voting once it expires??

    There is absolutely no way our right to vote will ever be revoked. We are living in the year 2011 and have many down-to-Earth people working in the various levels of legislation. Ron Paul does not seek to create a condition for such horrors of the past to surface again. With the growing technology of social networking, people are able to communicate very quickly and something like a proposal to remove the voting of blacks would be quickly flamed out of existence by people of every race.

    “Also, how does Paul’s apparent opposition to a woman’s right to choose abortion square with his libertarian stance?

    Ron Paul is a medical doctor who has delivered over 4,000 babies. He inherently does not believe in abortion. He does, however, realize that his opinion should not be considered. He feels the power to dictate abortion rights should be on a state level (and specifically NOT on a Federal level). So, to answer you second question, Ron Paul thinks his opinion on abortion should be irrelevant.

  8. Arthur says:

    Nicholas and Jonathan, thanks. Finally, a rational discussion about Ron Paul! My only question is if the Voting Rights Act is not maintained, what guarantee do we have that, in the ten states that it applies to, they will not go back to excluding Blacks, and others from voting once it expires? Also, how does Paul’s apparent opposition to a woman’s right to choose abortion square with his libertarian stance? I ask these questions in good faith. If I am wrong in my assumptions please enlighten me.

  9. Jonathan says:


    Who decides when the special perks for minorities ends? Do Jewish people rely on handouts from the German government to get ahead? No, they do not… and that was only 60 years ago. Assuming you are black, I say to you: We do not need handouts! We are evolved the same way other races are evolved. I busted my butt in school because my Mom told me I needed to get ahead and now I am the first person from my bloodline to have a college education.

    My question to you is: When do you think we will finally get ahead? You give the race metaphor which suggests two things:

    1. The races never restart.
    2. The races allow the winner to buy materialistic items that are irrelevant to winning future races.

    Do you feel the need to have government handouts forever? Will you never evolve? We are all humans with the same brains here.

    Also – if the government continues on its current path and collapses completely, THERE WILL BE NO SOCIAL PROGRAMS AT ALL. We must act now and stop asking what all we can get from the government. Obama has done NOTHING of what he promised. He rarely visits impoverished neighborhoods anymore because he never truly cared.

  10. Dell Gines says:

    Nicholas, great points.

    Jonathan, I have no arguments about the need to control spending and reduce the Federal deficit. Absolutely none. It needs to be done in an intelligent and controlled fashion, and that means an appropriate balance of cuts, and an appropriate balances of taxes over an appropriate time.

    But that is not all you get with a libertarian. I am not going to get into a complex economic argument but just a practical metaphor.

    If you and I run at the same speed, and you have a head start in a race you will win everytime.

    If you and I run at the same speed, and you have a head start in a race, and the winner gets 10x the prize money as the loser. Because of your headstart you will have 10x the money even though we run at the same speed.

    If we run ten races in the same format you will still have 10x the amount, but that 10x prize money now gives you a much great purchase, acquisition, and capitalization capacity to do other things that I can’t do to increase your 10x wealth into potentially 100x what I have.

    All of this based upon the head start you were given in a race, even though we run at the same speed.

    It is not about individual equality, it is also about individual equality within the context of a system.

    If the system provides you an advantage even though we both have the same speed, technically we are “equal” as individuals but inherently inequal within the system.

    So if we tie this back to libertarianism, if you move to libertarianism after a system has already allocated winners and losers, you simply reinforce that position of winners and losers because now there is no systemic mechanism to reduce the inherent system inequities that caused the winners and losers in the first place.

  11. Jonathan says:


    Do you feel that handicapped? I don’t. I received NO government assistance for being black during the course of my college career. I am now making a solid 40k per year and well on my way to purchasing my first house. Ron Paul does not have an axe to grind with minorities… he has an axe to grind with the Federal Government because they have gone on far too long without being held accountable for their ridiculous spending.

    Our nation is collapsing. If we do not get someone in office who is honest and does what he says (unlike Obama and the other GOP talking head candidates), we are going to be in SERIOUS trouble within a few short years. Ron Paul may not make people happy if he is elected… and his course of action will sting… but we HAVE to start taking our beating now instead of later… if we don’t, it will be catastrophic and unbearable when it hits (possible complete collapse of the USD). It is better to start feeling the effects now… than to keep kicking the can down the road.

  12. Arthur says:

    Thanks for the info especially about where Ron Paul stands.

  13. Nicholas says:

    Arthur Lewin, How a politician voted on a particular legislation does not tell the whole story as to where they stand on a issure. In the case of the Republican controlled house, when members need to vote against the party the party allows a certain number of opposit votes within the party as long as the party wins it’s position.

    As far as the Civil Rights Act and Republican Presidential Candidate Ron Paul is concerned, more telling is his statements in an interview with MSMBC host Chris Matthews May 13th. when he said he would not have voted for the 1964 civil rights bill. He went on to explain that it was unfair to property owners.

    While the county was suffering from the effects of natural disasters, in that same interview Ron Paul suggested that we should eliminate FEMA. When asked if he was saying that we would be better off without Medicare, Social Security, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. Ron Paul answered with this statement”I think we would be better off if we had freedom and not government control of our lives, our personal lives and policing the world.

  14. Dell Gines says:

    Please don’t drink the Kool Aid on Ron Paul. The war on drugs is sound, as well as a strong evaluation of our military interventionist policies. Other than that libertarianism is a dangerous game in the face of a nation that is built on inequalities.

    For those of you brothers and sisters who are touting him as a solid candidate for Black folks makes me assume you don’t understand the implications of libertarianism.

    Libertarianism at its core believes in a non-interventionist policy not just in regard to wars and drugs but also in every facet of American life. They argue that the free market should be the driver of all economic behavior, and that the government ALA Milton Friedman should only be utilized for shared necessary services (IE defense, police, roads) and nothing else.

    Think about this in the context of where we are at in America. You have a system of inequality based upon years of economic and social racism. This has led to a wealth imbalance of 10 to 1 whites to blacks, and a business ownership rate much starker than that.

    If you move to libertarian policies you have NO REMEDY FOR ECONOMIC INEQUITY which will therefore REINFORCE SOCIAL INEQUITY between Blacks and Whites.

    The reason this is the case is due to the fact that the free market rewards capital…and capital risk to make a return. Those who have capital, economic, human and social would have an exponentially greater advantage under libertarianism than they do now.

    In addition, you libertarianism would kill any targeted programs related to educational equity, kill welfare and leave it to the market and private non-profits and tolerate discrimination and bias in the workforce.

    That is the end result of an uncompromising libertarian philosophy.

  15. Arthur Lewin says:

    Can anyone briefly and succinctly answer either of these questions about Ron Paul? What is his stance on a woman’s right to choose? Did he vote for or against extending the Voting Rights Act? Thank you.

  16. Elizabeth says:

    I would like to correct a misconception that you further in your article. Ron Paul is NOT a conservative. Libertarians are not part of the left/right spectrum. They are on the Authoritarianism/Liberty spectrum. Both modern day liberals and conservatives embrace authoritarianism in order to further their own personal causes. Libertarians, on the other hand, are at the other end of the spectrum, the liberty end. And that is why just about ANY libertarian would be a better president than any of the Republican candidates and Obama. Authoritarianism is just a step away from totalitarianism. And you might think it’s great when it’s YOUR guy in charge, but the minute the OTHER guy is in charge you don’t like it so much. So, how about taking a whole bunch of that power away from those guys. End the War on Drugs, Close Guantanamo Bay, End extraordinary rendition, bring the soldiers home and end these neverending wars. In other words, set people free. If you think that’s crazy, don’t vote for Ron Paul.

  17. Arthur Lewin says:

    Nicholas, you may have a point about Huntsman. He is much more an even kheel, friendly, calm-tempered sort of fellow like Obama. The fact that the media freezes Ron Paul out, the more it causes his followers to believe in him. The overkill that results would seem to be counterproductive. But his followers feel they have no other choice. Either way he is boxed in. The challenge is to try and have a rational discussion about everyone in the race, with everyone in our race, and outside of it too. Tall order. But we can try.

  18. Nicholas says:

    The mere mention of the name Ron Paul, never fails to cue the Ron Paul shields to begin their cover comments designed to infiltrate the minds of any unwary visitors to this website. I have to give Rep. Paul credit for putting together this loyal team of supporters but since he can’t decide if
    if he is a Libretarian or a Republican sez to me he will do what ever it takes to be the President(thats scary). The media is indeed freezing out Rep. Paul, but the “straw man” angle I find to be valid as Perry, Bachman, Rommney and Cain have no chance to beat the president. They are just holding a place for Gov. Ron Huntsman to march in with his Left of Center agenda to appeal to the status quo.

  19. TommyO says:

    What ‘out west says” and the others are saying is the truth – Ron Paul don’t mince his words – he tackles the tough topics like the “war on drugs” – everything that the other candidates won’t touch and speaks straight-up with no pandering! He knows the statistics and the injustice!

    Ron Paul, just like any true classic libertarian; can’t be a racist because acceptance of that philosophy demands you take all people one at a time as individuals – evaluating each separately on the content of their character and NOT in a collective sense by the color of their skin firmly believing that each person is born with the inalienable rights to: their life; their liberty and their pursuit of happiness as members of the human race!

    Every election the establishment tries to smear Ron Paul with old trumped up charges of racism. Just you watch as he grows in popularity – the “man” will try and it again – but it won’t work – never does. In the last 2008 election cycle – it started up again and the presiding President of the NAACP in Austin Texas, Nelson Linder came to his defense saying:

    “Knowing Ron Paul’s intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that….so I think it’s very easy for folks who want to take his position out of context and that’s what I’m hearing.

    Linder continued:

    “Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he’s a very fair guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian platform, – I’ve read Ron Paul’s whole philosophy, I also understand what he’s saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him, – If you scare the folks that have the money, they’re going to attack you and they’re going to take it out of context, …What he’s saying is really threatening the powers that be and that’s what they fear,”

    Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded “No I don’t,” adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

  20. out west says:

    Ron Paul is also the only candidate running who is against the war on drugs. The “war on drugs” is why so many black men are incarcerated. You do hear, mostly from ill-informed liberals, rumors that Ron Paul is a racist. He is not. He is in favor of state’s rights. So are some racists who support him for that reason. However there are other reasons to support states rights that have nothing to do with Southern history: medical marijuana, the right of states to enact environmental regulations that fit with their geographic needs, many others. Basically states rights is allowing states to determine policies that match the local situation. If people in a particular state are racist (or, as Rick Santorum mentioned, likely in reference to Utah) support polygamy, yes there is a risk that state might vote to legalize something most people do not approve of. Then there is the opposite problem: if a state wants to set a legal environment that is more enlightened than the Federal legal environment, that is also a states rights issue.

  21. Veterans for Ron Paul 2012! Spread the word contra-propaganda:

  22. TommyO says:

    The media blackout of Ron Paul while bolstering other candidates illustrates nicely the two great modern schemes operating in American politics facilitated by the mainstream media – those being: the phony “two party paradigm” and the creation of the phony GOP “tea party”. First, the concept of a modern “tea party” came on board with the Ron Paul supporters back in 2007 during the campaign. Actual pounds of tea were to be dropped by a hovering blimp into Boston Harbor on the historic day of the original Boston tea party against British tyranny as a gesture of defiance to the status quo (lost of civil liberties; unending illegal wars; nation building; destruction of our currency; torture and extraordinary rendition; abuse of civil liberties under the bogus Patriot Act etc.). Party affiliation, national origin, race etc. wasn’t important – all were welcomed – only a love of liberty and a willingness to fight for it and hence among those veterans the movement is rarely regarded as “tea party” but instead the “liberty” or “freedom” movement and it is definitely not GOP or PERRY or Bachmann!!

    In 2008 when McCain and his side kick – Palin got their bloodied grinded behinds handed back to them by Obama. This is exactly what the mainstream media had orchestrated for the previous year – and the rank and file GOP voters predictably bought it – they bought media served “stooge of the day” McCain and side kick hook line and sinker! I invite you to research progressive AP reporter Liz Soldoti’s coverage of McCain 2008 and see how she systematically built him up “straight talk express” to become the GOP front runner – the MSM knowing he was hopeless and would get creamed by Obama! Immediately after the election in an attempt to do damage control the RNC/GOP and right leaning media embraced “tea party” to co-opt the movement for the progressive neo-cons – enter the right media ala FOX and the likes of social controlling neo-con personalities such as Rush Limbaugh; Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity. The left media, MSNBC etc. and their social controlling components: Keith Obermann; Chris Mathews and Rachel Maddow in an effort to maintain and reinforce the phony two party paradigm immediately labeled them racists and nut jobs stressing the “tea party” as against newly elected President Obama primarily because he was black!

    Hence: the term “tea party” as currently hyped in the media is a creation of the mainstream media and simply equates to good old American progressive “neo-con”! The concept of “tea party” they propagate is a primary tool currently used to continue the “two party paradigm” . Anyone uninformed enough to buy in is being seriously played and hasn’t taken the effort to analyze the actual facts – just taking the media’s word for it like a good little boy or girl and keeping the “status quo”.

    Allow me to go a little Taoist on you – the “real” tea party you hear about is not the “REAL” tea party!

    There is no actual socio-economic and political ideological difference between – lets say, MSNBC and FOX – only the illusion of one! Both the (so – called) right and left factions of American mainstream media are all globalists – wanting to maintain American empire with all their corporate owners having direct BOD relationships with the giants in the military industrial complex such as: GE; Texaco; Chevron; Boeing; Lockheed Martin; Citigroup; Rockwell Automation; Chase, WorldCom, and JP Morgan; Haliburton, etc. and thereby financially benefit directly from the ongoing nation building and entrenched foreign occupations.

    So the mainstream media as a whole created the current “tea party” as is hyped today, to attempt to contain and control the actual legitimate “liberty movement” (being the actual REAL “tea party” started by Ron Paul supporters in 2007) – it being a threat to the status quo and use the phony “two party paradigm” to help them do it. This is the illusion of two different parties counter balancing one another – please don’t say you can’t remember recently this spring when republican Senator McCain and democrat Senator Kerry went arm in arm bellowing for illegal war with Libya? Do you not find it is strange that Obama never changed Bush/Cheney policies regarding: torture; bailouts; WARS; Patriot Act and lost of civil liberties and abuse of American citizenry. Exactly – both parties want huge intrusive central authority – its just one side prefers to balloon the size of government with aggressive warfare and less social welfare and vice-versa. Americans are spoon fed the “two party paradigm” as a controlling device through the lame-stream media – that’s why globalist neo-cons like Bachmann and Perry are being hyped as “tea party” and that is why they are desperately trying to co-opt many of Ron Paul’s life-long political positions on things, such as: auditing the Federal Reserve.

    For years have you scratched your head wondering – why are our representatives in DC doing this? Are they trying to destroy America? Unfortunately in a sense – they are. For the globalist in both parties it’s not about gaining a secure and prosperous American Republic – upholding liberty maintaining the supreme law of the land – the U.S. Constitution. It is totally about maintaining an economic empire for a select group of oligarchs using the American military. It’s about redistributing American wealth and technology and building “emerging” economies in China. India etc while de-industrializing America! It’s about destroying our education system with federal control so that our young people test dismally against students in the rest of the world in science and math! We could go on and on about the abuses Americans suffer at the hands of a rogue government! However, you and I both know that throughout the process of the dismantling of America, the mainstream media tells you “its okay – remember back in 2008 when they spoon fed us “don’t worry either top tier candidate, Obama or McCain will get us on track”!

    The media is currently working overtime to convince voters that the candidates like Romney; Bachmann and Perry are significantly different than President Obama – this is definitely pure BS! All the 2012 candidates running in both parties EXCEPT RON PAUL are deep in the pocket of international banking and the military industrial complex! This corrupt system needs to keep bailing out criminals and keep this bogus war on terror going and ramped up bombing and saber rattling all awhile keeping the American people placated with the “two party paradigm” allowing for global elites to steal American national wealth and sovereignty! Ron Paul is the only candidate significantly different than Obama and therefore the ONLY ONE capable of beating him on issues that the majority of Americans heavily support (like ending: illegal wars; torture and illegal detention; abolishing the Patriot Act and Federal Reserve; stopping the IRS and getting us out of NATO and NAFTA etc.)

    So, fellow Americans if by now you don’t acknowledge that Obama is a corporate puppet you are in serious denial or part of the subversion! If you want things to continue under the rule of the global “banksters’ and “tanksters” – maintain the status quo and allowing tyranny to grow under the phony “two party paradigm” – vote for the media’s “top tier”: Obama; Romney; Bachmann; Perry etc., but if want things to truly change and have the assurance that you will have the right to be heard and not silenced then begin to restore America liberty now and support Ron Paul! He can’t be bought – and the establishment knows it! Check your states regulations for rules of primary voting and do whatever it takes so that you can cast your primary vote for Ron Paul.

    RON PAUL 2012!!!!

  23. Eve says:

    Obama has kept his promises to his backers, not his supporters.

  24. Eve says:

    While I hate the Republican party as much as I do the Democrats (they are all corrupt!) I would like to submit this story and then ask you to consider becoming a registered Republican, and vote Ron Paul in the primary or caucus in your state. He is the only one who will bring our soldiers home. Our boys and girls are dying needlessly while the wars are bankrupting our country.

    Parker: Blacks’ Obama dilemma

  25. Arthur Lewin says:

    Thank you both. However, I was not endorsing anyone in this piece, only surveying the field and noting how the media is systematically trying to freeze out Ron Paul. In a democracy it is not the media’s place to pre-judge who is, or who is not, a serious candidate. They were wrong to do that to Jesse in ’84 and ’88, and they are wrong to do it to Ron Paul now.

  26. jester2069 says:

    Arthur, once again a well-written article and I guess I’m not surprised that I agree with everything you said. I think gravy86 is right, too; Ron Paul will help Blacks in this country so much *because* he touts for the rights of the individual, not groups.

    I for one would love to hear a Paul/Obama debate.

  27. gravy86 says:

    Great article. Great nod to Ron Paul. Please continue supporting him he is the one hope for Blacks and for America. God Bless.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!