I worked on the Ron Paul Campaign in Washington and Nevada last year and was heart broken watching the bias media coverage of the debates. Especially when Ron out raised all the other candidates put together and wasn't allowed to participate in the second debate. John McCain entrenched supporters cheated across the nation at the state organizer level. After 2000 and being cheated by Bush McCain knew all the dirty tricks and used them on Ron Paul.
McCain never had a chance against Obama with his pro war, more government and supporting the Bush philosophy. Ron Paul on the other hand would have had a much better opportunity to have his message and ideas compete against Obama's "Change" mantra. McCain really wasn't change at all so Obama just had to keep repeating himself and he won easily I mean he really handed it to McCain like very few have ever been beaten before.
Now that Obama will be president and Joe (the senator) vice president. Joe seems to have a supportive view of interventionism and possibly a little less pro war than McCain. As long as he's in wraps under Obama we may see a reduction in over seas commitments. I am hopeful since Obama did in fact vote against the invasion that he supports the Campaign for Liberties goal of using force as a last resort and only for defense.
Obama seems to be getting a socialist rap already although what I perceive is not allowing organizations to exploit workers and pushing more taxes on billionaires and giving the middle class more relief. I don't see it as giving hands outs to the middle class by taking it from the more capable payers. It seems like he may follow the Bill Clinton approach of reducing the deficit and cutting the budget to give tax relief to those pinched the hardest and allowing the Bush tax relief for the most wealthy to be rolled back.
I would hope that the federal government would shrink by 2/3s then it would be much less of a burden on all rich and poor. Ron Paul's vision of a federal government that is given money states want to appropriate vs. going around the states and directly taxing individuals based on federal legislation with a personal income tax that only a hand full of people from each state have any say on. How could it not be corrupt when a total of 10 representatives from Washington State are allocating 1/3 of the income of all the citizens of that state? Money should be allocated and raised at a local level otherwise you get a welfare state where people in California are subsidizing a coal electrical plant in Wyoming instead on a new wind farm in Palm Springs.
With that said I do have hope for the Obama presidency and think he will bring about bold change and make dramatic steps to restore civil liberties and respect individual’s rights like no other president in history. I've read several of his books and don't think he is such a bigot to favor only African American civil liberties and allow the awful infringements George Bush has made with secret prisons, detention without trials, held for years without charges, torture, private trials, wire tapping, declaring American citizens enemy combatants stripping them of their god given liberty and the rights our fathers fought and died for. I belief Obama will be a champion of civil liberties, against interventionism as his record has indicated and hopefully appoint Dr. Paul as one of his chief economic advisors.
I am hopeful that Obama shares some of the Campaign for Liberty values. I am skeptical about his ability to balance a budget based on his support for the bailout.
Categories: Foreign Policy, Finance, Presidential Race, Executive Power, War/Military Tags: Obama presidency
Showing comments 1—1 of 1
Posted 11/09/08
 dxnagel Chandler, AZ | First, Obama DID NOT vote against the invasion because HE WAS NOT in the senate when the invasion began.
Second, Obama holds none of the CFL's values because he wants bigger government, more regulation, and countless other Constitutional violations.
Third, what you call exploiting workers I would call fair business practice. If unions take the control of a business, the business can only see its future in another country where there are no labor laws, no minimum wage, and no endless piles of red tape. Then you are stuck with more unemployed in this country and less locally produced revenue. The list goes on. |
You must be logged in to post comments. [Become a member]
|