I attended mainly to support Ron Paul and secondly to witness the reaction. This largely confirmed my original notions that this Republican primary has been all about beating Ron Paul. That's why they ran the seven dwarves, desperate to find a non-romney, non-paul. One by one, they "took one for the team" and showed the inevitability of the Presumptive Romany. But the presumptive romany has one hand tied - he is unable to mention any position on any real issue, because at some point in the past he has said the exact opposite. So, he must run an issueless campaign against Paul. and lo, he is winning. It turned out to be a good strategy against Paul; he intends to use the same against Obama, and he will fail, because the press doesn't have to pretend that there is no Obama, To further confirm this theory. I got a four-page fund-raising letter from Romney, asking me several times to donate, that never mentioned policy at all; just that we need to defeat Obama and Obama care.
Running against Obama will lose, and that's all they got. I'm sure he doesn't care that he's taking the noble loser role from thomas dewey, gerald ford, bob dole and john mccain. Both parties have shown total consistency on squelching reform, all the way down to the district level, and there is no shortage of those "taking one for the team". It is completely obvious that both Parties are happy to take turns drinking deeply of the sweet river of taxpayer honey. Whatever it takes to divert attention from anyone who may possibly threaten it.
Paul Gottfried;
"Nisbet said that what he called the “sociological tradition” owed a great deal to conservative critics of the French Revolution. These enemies of progress had analyzed the value of hierarchical relations and the link between community and custom. But Nisbet, who was an old-fashioned Taft Republican in American politics, did not believe this conservative legacy was alive and well in the US. And it wouldn’t seem from anything he wrote that he thought that either the conservative or traditional liberal legacy had much to do with the American present.
One can learn from Nisbet’s work on conservatism more than one ever could from the made-to-order GOP polemics that pour out of the Rupert Murdoch empire. One does not draw significant ideological distinctions by accusing the Democrats of not playing fair in the communal sandbox. Getting paid for throwing back sand at the other toddlers is a nice gig but hardly a scholarly activity.
I am amused to learn that Democratic sociologists imagine that Republicans are suffering from some mental disorder. I had hitherto assumed that Republicans were people addicted to zombie-like centrist presidential candidates, all of them resembling Bob Dole. Perhaps the “psychopundits” have something to teach us after all."
So no. I wouldn't try to work for anything within the formal party; it is carefully constructed and tended to promote and perpetrate various frauds on it's own members and the taxpayers, and would be destroyed if it ever really threatened the gravy train. I could see some possibility of success outside of this area where the entire economy is directly or indirectly based on Federal spending. Bushco wrecked the Republican party; it is now the rump opposition to the Great Society, stuck forever lost somewhere in Viraq-namistan, cursing hippies.
Can you "work within" the borg? If the Republican party were reformed completely along favorable lines, and became an effective force for good, it would then, be somehow bent back to serve the insiders, or negated. The convention is the last chance to prove loyalty and crush the Paultards. Will they sacrifice everything else? Bill Kristol assures us they will, and I believe him. It's just a shameful irony that after all Dr. Paul's work and our money spent, the next president will be Gary Johnson.
Ron Paul really was your last chance, Americans. You blew it. Now chew it.
No comments:
Post a Comment