Thursday, 22 December 2011


Best You tube comment:

Both the Democratic and Republican establishments are terrified of Ron Paul and what he represents - an end to their World Wrestling Federation style candidate shows.
Oh. Ask yourself whether US education is better now than it was in 1980 when the Dept of Education was started.

As Cenk points out, whether you agree with Paul or not, he's the anti-corruption candidate and that is why the media, and some people in his own party, are trying to sideline him.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, December 22nd, 2011.]


steven andresen said...


You said that Paul is the anti-corruption candidate. Can you provide some evidence of this. I know he's for an audit of the Fed and hes for getting rid of the Fed, prsumably to have the finances of the U.S. work in a different way. But, he hasn't made a big deal out of the fact that there is rampant corruption. He could start to point out some of the ways that we know there's corruption...but he has not.

I told you I thought Paul was the candidate of the Confederacy because he promoted a confederate government which involves little if any central government, but that...I itself does not do anything about corruption in government or in corporate business. In fact, the Confederacy could not do anything about slavery, which tells me that Paul has to be much more explicit about what he would do about corporate and government crime than he has heretofore.

Can you show where he says anything about corruption other than...well, there is some?

Spookypunkos said...


I would agree that Paul does not explicitly address the problems in Washington by referring to them as corruption. However, it is my understanding that he is implicitly addressing the issue via his goal of following the US Constitution and not providing Government support for existing corporations.

I think it is possible that Paul does realise that aggressive attempts to go up against the corrupt workings in Washington would be detrimental to his health. It is likely that his approach is a softly softly one.

Having said that, as President, Paul would find himself in a very difficult position - up against the National Security State apparatus and elite mafia/intelligence underworld. I think he would be somewhat a prisoner of the State in many ways.

Perhaps he will be allowed to make some changes to restore a balance to the system before the elites kick him out ? I wonder, in the Internet age, with many people becoming informed of the corruption problems, how long the system will keep going, enjoying the cooperation of the people ?

Change creeps along slowly and sometimes fast ... in 10 years how well informed will we all be ? I see more and more well informed people appearing and challenging the status quo. New outspoken radio hosts/TV personalities have appeared with their followers.

As for Paul, I think he is part of this change. If he can go someways to fighting the corruption ... that should be a good thing. The situation is highly problematic tho. I'll admit that.

Yes, there is a problem with lack of explicit referral to the corruption by Paul.

Spook !