Browsing the issues pages of all the presidential candidates last year revealed a glaring omission. Sure there were taxes, foreign policy, Iraq war, health care, immigration, and a slew of others, but probably the most important was not listed. “Has a chance to win” is the unmentionable issue yet it is the response many give as to the reason they chose not to vote for Ron Paul. “I’d vote for him, but he doesn’t have a chance,” goes the mantra. It trumps, “He’s crazy”, or “His views are too extreme.” Indeed, if “has a chance” never was, then Ron Paul would be the Republican nominee.
Of course, there is no way to necessarily prove this assertion, but the larger question is why “has a chance” is even an issue in the first place? In most other areas people love the underdog, but in politics the underdog is usually treated unfairly by the establishment (especially in primary contests) and belittled as “unelectable” by the media and therefore the masses.
NOTE: This article originally appeared on The Nolan Chart and is being reprinted here at the request of the author, Jake, The Champion Of The Constitution. Jake has also agreed to become a semi-regular contributing author to Liberty Maven. We look forward to more of his insight into liberty. In this article he demonstrates how the Iraq war may be more like Vietnam than many would care to admit.
Dare to believe that maybe 9/11 did not really “Change Everything” and perhaps we have done this all before. My premise is that there are eerily strange parallels between the Vietnam and Iraq Wars. This article is in 3 parts, a brief outline followed by its elaboration, then a digression on McCain in Vietnam.
“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and our wealth are in jeopardy.” – Dr. Ron Paul.
“Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere.” – Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Communism:Terrorism. A Great Fear is used to Unify and Scare the American Public and Initiate the Wars. In Vietnam, Fighting on Asian Soil Prevents Communism from Reaching America (the Domino Theory). In Iraq, Fighting on Middle Eastern Soil Prevents Terrorism from Reaching America (more 9/11’s).
Gulf of Tonkin: WMD and Iraqi Support of Al-Qaeda. Lying was used to Initiate the Wars and Unify the American Public. In Vietnam, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, revealed as a false flag attack in 2005, made it seem as if North Vietnam was the Aggressor instead of the USA. In Iraq, the Bush Administration’s false claims of “Weapons of Mass Destruction” and Al-Qaeda/Terrorist presence in Iraq were used to justify the Preemptive War by the USA.
Viet Cong : the “Insurgency”. The Single Enemy is another Lie. The American Public is Misled to Believe We are Fighting a Single Entity. In Vietnam, the North Vietnamese Army and Viet Cong were separate entities, but most Americans thought we were just fighting the Viet Cong guerrillas in the jungle. For the starting years of the Iraq war, the Media classified the Iraqi resistance as “Insurgents” or the “Insurgency,” while in reality it is a civil war between multiple Sunni and Shia factions, with dashes of other groups added for good measure.
The Diem Assassination : The Hanging of Saddam Hussein. Political Killings of Our Evil Ex-Ally Spreads Total Chaos.
Secret Bombings of Nation States completely WITHOUT Declaration of War or even Approval by Congress. In Vietnam, Nixon executed the Secret Bombing of neutral Cambodia during Operation Menu in 1969. In Iraq, Bush and Britain’s Secret Bombing of Iraq occurred in mid-2002, well BEFORE Congress gave a rubber stamp to Bush to launch the invasion on October 11th.
“We Must Stay the Course. Leaving Is a Huge Mistake.” Vietnam: Presidents Johnson and Nixon. General William Westmoreland. Iraq: President Bush. General Petraeus/Powell.
Initially, the First Instinct of the US President was Refusal to Attack. (surprised?)
America Commits War Crimes Against Humanity. The My Lai Massacre. Abu Ghraib. Gitmo.
Use of Real “WMD” Against Civilians. Biochemical or Radiation Warfare. Agent Orange. Depleted Uranium.
The Legacy of Colin Powell Will Be to Have Lied in Both Wars.
Lastly, Murder of American Students by the National Guard in America. Kent State. Jackson State. And where next?
Ron Paul is interviewed by Wolf Blitzer on The Situation Room today. Ron goes a bit crazy and endorses John McCain in this clip. Oh wait… no he doesn’t. We all know better than that. He does choose Obama as the lesser of three evils on foreign policy.
We have labeled John McCain has a political opportunist who does not truly represent what the general public thinks of him. Every news item coming out regarding McCain lately only reinforces this view. The latest discusses him dancing himself away from the policies and record of George W. Bush.
This week it was the ill-timed “Mission Accomplished” banner that the White House hung behind Bush five years ago when Bush declared major combat operations over in Iraq.
“I thought it was wrong at the time,” McCain said in Cleveland on Thursday, proceeding to criticize Vice President Dick Cheney’s various comments over the years that the Iraqi insurgency was in its “last throes” with “a few dead-enders” all that was left. (Source: Reuters)
Well that’s certainly easy to say in hindsight after what has become of the Iraq war. Sure he was critical of the Bush administration’s methods, but can anyone find a quote or speech from McCain saying that it was wrong? No one can because it doesn’t exist. In fact, he echoed the President’s words saying “the major conflict is over” as discussed in this Huffington Post article.
Prior to Ron Paul entering the presidential race I was never deemed a conspiracy nut nor a racist. I was never labeled a “moonbat” nor a “something”-tard. I was just a 36 year old libertarian leaning guy who went to work every day with career ambitions and came home to my two children and wife. Things are a little different now.
Because I chose to support Ron Paul for President through donations, time, and effort I’m now considered by some to be all of the things above. I’m regularly called a “Paultard” by a nice gentleman at work (Thanks Wonkette). I constantly read the “moonbat” and “racist” charge on forums and news/blog comments all over the web. I only take mild offense at these comments. Mostly it just makes me sad. Sad at what America has become. Sad that the general populace devours the media like fish on hooked bait oblivious to the danger that lies within.
John McCain’s latest effort to bribe the American people to vote for him is pandering at its finest. As The Atlantic notes in “McCainomics”:
McCain’s speech reads like an attempt to unify a divided party by offering every faction something to make them happy.
This is quite a departure from the “straight talk express”. He itemized a list of populist economic positions for the sole purpose of gaining more votes in an election year. The belief is that no one will consider the feasibility of transforming this vote bribery into actual law. As we mentioned in the past McCain is a chameleon. He is a political opportunist and not much more. He is the GOP’s answer to Bill Clinton. He is representative of the fact that there is little difference between the two major parties.
Contrary to belief, there is another Republican still in the race who is everything John McCain isn’t. And that is a very good thing. Ron Paul is incapable of pandering. Ron Paul won’t propose policy for the purpose of winning votes. He will (and does) propose policy that preserves and protects the Constitution. By doing so he not only keeps his oath of office, but he protects the American people. For some reason this has become the exception rather than the norm in politics today.
American politics is an STD: A special-interest transmitted disease. As newly elected officials enter their white buildings they slowly become what they once despised. The lure is too great. They transform from well-meaning ideologues into puppets and “Talking Heads”. Indeed, a few wake up every now and then and say to themselves, “how did I get here?”. But far too few do.
Throughout Ron Paul’s campaign he has been called many inaccurate and demeaning names: kook, mayor of crazytown, etc.. It is interesting that not many people call him a pacifist. For someone who rejects preemptive war and wishes the troops would come home from overseas, that is surprising. Also interesting is that it is proper not to label him a pacifist, but the truth never stopped them before.
He voted for going after Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan. He has continually spoken as a proponent for the Christian “just war” doctrine. So if an attack is truly imminent or if a retaliatory strike is required he would be for it. It comes down to a matter of focus. He focuses on defense, while our recent policy focus from both Democrats and Republicans has been on offense.
Contrast this with labeling John McCain a warmonger. Ed Schultz, a left leaning radio talk show host, called McCain a “warmonger” at an Obama rally over the weekend. The McCain campaign cried foul and sure enough, the Obama campaign rejected the remark as false. By definition John McCain is a warmonger. No one should be apologizing or crying foul. He advocated the “surge”. He advocates maintaining a presence in Iraq for possibly 100 years. He has also said that “there will be more wars.”
If John McCain is not a warmonger then Ron Paul doesn’t believe in the Constitution.
It’s too bad the Obama campaign doesn’t have the political chops to publicly stand behind a comment everyone knows to be true. I guess that’s why his campaign is all about the audacity of hope, instead of the audacity of truth. For me, I’d rather have truth.
The ideological Ron Paul math can be summed up with the following expression:
Ron Paul(Foreign Policy) + Ron Paul(Economy) = The Solution
Ron Paul’s position on foreign policy is consistent with his position on economics. He preaches non-intervention overseas and the deregulation of markets. His positions are interesting in that they steadfastly refuse to contradict each other. Likewise, He is pro-life and against the death penalty. Many other Republicans contradict their pro-life view by supporting the death penalty.
His is a true non-interventionist position. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have a faux non-interventionist position. They make the colossal mistake of thinking that pulling out of Iraq is enough non-intervention. Ron Paul correctly and consistently points out that Iraq is only part of the entire foreign policy portrait. Obama and Clinton do not preach non-interventionism because they don’t believe in the principle. They will not bring our troops home from Germany or Korea. They advocate repositioning troops from Iraq to Afghanistan. This is hardly any real “change” from George W. Bush. Chances are neither would even follow up on their promise to bring our troops home from Iraq. Certainly, some new excuse to keep troops there can be manufactured when the time comes.
There is some beauty in the world as a result of the REAL ID Act. The beauty is in its ugliness for the Constitutional rule of law. We’ll get to the beauty in a moment. First lets check out the ugly. At this point I could go into a litany of “your momma is so ugly…” jokes, replacing “momma” with “REAL ID”. The truth is the ugliness of it is so awful that humor is entirely inappropriate.
Ron Paul, as usual, pulled the mask off of the REAL ID Act back in 2005 during the debate prior to passage. He railed against the violations of privacy, the first amendment, and the tenth amendment within the law.
This REAL ID Act establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical characteristics. The legislation also grants open-ended authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to require biometric information on IDs in the future. This means your harmless looking driver’s license could contain a retina scan, fingerprints, DNA information, or radio frequency technology. - Ron Paul, May 2005.
John McCain has said publicly that he is against reinstating the draft. He also has admitted that we need 100 thousand more troops to effectively wage the war on terror. Perhaps McCain has some magic pill to feed our young people so they will enlist in the service “voluntarily”. Without a draft or another 9-11 like event he will be hard pressed to get enough young people to raise their hands to fight in the doomed perpetual war on terror.
Ron Paul had some predictions back in 2002 about where we may be headed due to our government intervention into our economy and overseas. Many of these predictions have come true. One of the predictions was the the reinstatement of the draft. He made this prediction prior to the US going into Iraq. Certainly, John McCain would balk at the idea now, but if he were to become President would it surprise anyone if he pushed for the draft? After all, he has a history of voting against his own rhetoric.
Liberty Maven
