Rocker and Sage

The Quintessential Optimist and the Quintessential Cynic - Working Together to Build a Better America.

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Retaking the Party

My blog is a bad news blog. I am forever trying to say the nastiest things in the nicest way. I have a gift, or some might say a curse, of seeing what is deficient in the machinery of any thought almost before it has expressed itself. Rocker calls me "the quintessential cynic" I take no offense at this either, for it is the truth. I will always counter by saying that "a cynic is nothing more than a realist with experience", but I think it is time to let everyone see another side of me, a more "optimistic" side, because I've got good news, in fact some very good news!

As anyone who has ever read my blog knows I am a "free thinking" constitutionalist leaning toward, but not committed to the principles espoused by the Libertarian Party, at least not entirely, as my thinking is not constrained by any party line.I usually have little enthusiasm for any of the "spin" coming from either of the two dominant parties. My "gift" does not allow me the luxury of any such indulgence. As a result, my enthusiasm is usually held "tongue-in-cheek". There are, however,occasional moments of optimism breaking through the clouds of doubt that give even me some hope. This is one of them.I believe that we have an opportunity for what might be a pursuit worth thinking about-retaking the Republican Party.

According to an Associated Press report released late last week, Dr. Ron Paul(R-Tx) is contemplating a run for the presidency in 2008. He has filed papers in Texas allowing him to form an exploratory committee that can begin to raise the money necessary for such a venture. The nine term Congressman from southeast Texas has already done so before in 1988 as the Libertarian candidate. He received over 400,000 votes on election day. This time around he will be running as a Republican, which means he will be facing much better known, and funded candidates such as "RINO" John McCain, however, I think that we may have a very small,but distinct window of opportunity here.

Both parties are controlled from the top, make no mistake about that, but I have been reading in my "sources" of compelling arguments that a power struggle has emerged among the ranks of the super-elites of the GOP. Arrayed on one side are the longstanding internationalist bankers who want to operate through entities like the UN, and the IMF. On the other side are the neo-cons and their wealthy ilk that have a vision of some great "Pax Americana", a global empire run from Washington (thru Israel). Lest there be any misunderstanding; both camps are internationalists through and through. Both are in the business of promoting neo-socialism, and communitarianism. Both would dissolve our national sovereignty, and our constitutional republican form of government in a heartbeat if they thought they could get away with it. But they differ over certain specific issues. One of them is the war in Iraq.

A few months ago, Richard Haas, President of the Council on Foreign Relations,published an article in which he declared the Iraq war unwinnable, and has called for an exit strategy. The neo-con controlled Bush Administration wants to "stay the course" without informing the American people as to what this really means, however, with the president having just called for 21,500 troops to be sent to Iraq it doesn't take too much of a brain to see what is to come-war with Iran, which the neo-cons have been salivating at the mouth for for quite some time. I sometimes wonder if the corporate interests that put both Hitler, and Stalin into power ever imagined the pure evil, and bloodlust that would be as a result of their myopic vision. But that is another thought to be argued another day because all of this is good news. The "freedom movement" has an opportunity to retake the Republican Party now that the warmongering neo-cons have been stalemated by the neo-socialists, thus dividing the party in two.

As far as Ron Paul is concerned, he is one of the very few true constitutionalists in Congress. The Constitution is his bible. If its not in there, he doesn't even attempt to do it. He casts his votes exclusively on what he believes the Constitution empowers the federal government to do, and votes consistently against bills he believes exceed the authority given Congress in the Constitution.As a result, he usually finds himself at odds with most of the rest of Congress, including the power brokers of the Republican Party. Its no secret that both of the major parties endorse the "nanny state", and have long since departed from the concept of a constitutional republic in any real form. Ron Paul has no "secret" agendas that include the dismantling of America in the name of "free trade"(NAFTA) which isn't "free" unless you are part of the corporate elite. There is nothing in the Constitution that empowers the feds to "partner" with big business, or supply it with corporate welfare in the form of either money or "workers"(read-slaves). As a result Paul has co-sponsered a resolution(H.C.R.487) to put a stop to the ongoing merger of the US with Canada, and Mexico, which would be a de facto reversal of the Declaration of Independence.

None of this can be said about John McCain the "beloved" of the mainstream. As a matter of fact, I doubt that we can say it about any of the others who seek the Republican nomination except for Tom Tancredo who is also sending out "feelers"(he was the co-sponser of H.C.R. 487 along with Paul).

"There's no question that it is an uphill battle, and that Dr. Paul is definitely an underdog," said Kent Snyder of the exploratory committee, "but he feels very strongly about his chances in light of the present situation, and that it is well worth the doing. We'll let the voters decide."

So here's what "we the people" have to do; we, of course, refers to everyone who wants to live in a free society. Should Ron Paul officially announce his candidacy for the Republican nomination in 2008, we need to get behind him, and roll up our sleeves in preparation to go to work.

Whether it be by making financial contributions, knocking on doors, making presentations, or producing written articles like this blog. If Ron Paul is in the race, we should begin sending mainstream newspapers with guest columns, and letters to the editor. If those columns, and letters are refused print, continue circulating them online through the many resources available to us there. Where possible, and visible post banners, and signs along interstate highways, exits, and intersections where traffic slows. That way thousands of ordinary commuters that are fed up with a government bureaucracy that takes upwards of 30 per cent of their income in taxes will see: RON PAUL, REPUBLICAN, AND CONSTITUTIONALIST FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008! The mainstream media will do their best(or worst) to blackout any grassroots movement that is not of their own making so we will need to be ever more diligent by taking direct action to thwart these efforts.

This will call on the "Freedom Movement" to do something that many of its members will find very hard to do. We must set aside our differences and work together for a common goal- establishing the credibility, and plausibility of a Ron Paul Presidency that would reverse the present direction of this country. The inability of different groups and organizations to cooperate has hurt the "Freedom Movement" terribly in the past. Christians refusing to work with non-Christians and vice-versa. Libertarians who will not work with Christians because they are "too religious", Christians who will not work with Libertarians because they are "too secular".

And Christians don't always get along with each other-nor do Libertarians who have fallen into an in-house argument over who is the "purist" Libertarian. Both have their differences with the Constitution Party. C'mon people, its time to shit, or get off the pot! Christians need to lighten up and share God with the rest of the world,it won't hurt you to let a Libertarian have a beer on Sunday; they wouldn't even think of pissing in the front yard of your church much less stand in the way of you going inside. Libertarians need to get their heads out of the clouds, and realize that their vision of a "free" America is not the only one out there, because after all, they are not going to be hosting the Inaugural Ball in "08"! Conservative Republicans that are already in the fold need to shed the "Republican Light" image that they have cast themselves in by throwing away their vote on candidates that are not worthy of them in the name of "the lesser of two evils" philosophy, which, if you've read my last post, only adds to the problem rather than attempting to solve it.

Should Ron Paul take the plunge and declare himself a candidate, every single one of us needs to set aside our factional differences of opinion and join together under one umbrella. I will even go as far as to say that if Ron Paul runs, all third parties should refrain from nominating a candidate of their own and throw all of their support to him. Are we not ALL nothing more than disenfranchised conservatives who would be Republican if only...? Other groups also need to get on board: the John Birch Society, Sons of Confederate Veterans, the League of the South and so on.

WE DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE IN THIS!!! Cooperation among all of us "underdogs" is the only way that a candidacy of this kind can succeed against a firmly entrenched Establishment. Tyranny is always better organized than freedom, but liberty is a fourth quarter team looking for a big play! WE CAN SORT OUT OUR DIFFERENCES LATER, THIS IS NOT THE TIME OR PLACE!!!

Congressman Paul has stepped up to the plate because he knows what we all know if we're honest with ourselves; the noose is tightening, and there isn't much time left for liberty's team. If we ever hope to restore Constititional government to the USA its now, or never.

There isn't a man better that I can think of for the job. He has an impeccable voting record. He is "right" on every freedom, and sovereignty issue. In a time of universal deception, Paul dares to commit the revolutionary act of being truthful.

Of course there will be the usual parade of naysayers, and sceptics who will claim that his views are outdated, and archaic, and that his candidacy can't possibly succeed... and they will be right unless WE THE PEOPLE prove them wrong!!!

I for one am sick of the moaning, and groaning coming from so many Libertarians about how terrible things are in Washington. I recently sent them a blog/comment that read to the effect, "When you guys are ready to do something beyond whining, and hand-wringing, give me a call." With that I terminated my membership, and have withdrawn my support($).

I think it all comes down to this, with Congressman Paul, we have an opportunity to finally do something. Let's not blow it by fighting among ourselves, but rather take the fight to the real enemy that is truly the enemy of a free people. A Ron Paul anywhere near the White House is a certain step in the right direction. But he has got to get there first. If this does not happen at the grassroots level, it won't happen at all. I normally support men/women before parties, and philosophies/ideas before men/women. I have never endorsed a candidate for office on this forum, but to quote another famous American, "extreme times demand extreme measures".

It is the fourth quarter, and time is running out; time for a "hail Mary", so go deep, its our last chance-RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT!!!

The Revolution will not be Televised.

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Dictatorship by Democracy

I recently learned of a poll taken last week by WorldNetDaily that asked the question: "Who should the Constitution Party nominate for president?"

A list of names followed which included these patriotic Americans:
1. Tom Tancredo
2. Ron Paul
3. Alan Keyes
4. Jim Gilchrist
5. Jerome Corsi
6. Howard Phillips
7. Chuck Baldwin

The first three are favorites of mine, although I could support any of them were they the chosen candidate.There were several other choices on the menu which included some alternative choices to the naming of a particular candidate, they were:
1. "I've had it with the major parties, and will vote for a third party.
2. "I need someone of more prominence than these names.
3. " A vote for any Constitution Party candidate will virtually assure that
Hillary or another Democrat will win."

Guess which of the ten options the majority of the respondents selected?

If you chose number three of the alternative options than you are feeling the heartbeat of America! Nearly forty percent of the poll participants expressed that they would cast their vote for the "lesser of two evils(?)" presented by the two dominant parties. To ignore what are obviously superior third party candidates to vote for the least deficient of what are clearly two deficient candidates is absolutely ludicrous, if not criminal thinking. To make my case in point of the absurdity of such thinking, I offer the following illustration.

Suppose that you had a daughter, a beautiful young lady who is the apple of your eye.Since she is your pride, and joy, you will naturally want only the best for her. Now lets suppose that your daughter is being courted by three eligible men from about town, two of which come from very prominent, wealthy families with great influence, but who you know to be lacking in character. One is slightly more corrupt than the other if that is possible, but the thought of either of them becoming your son-in-law is rather distasteful. The third suitor comes from modest means, and has neither wealth, nor influence, but is nevertheless possessed of both intelligence, and integrity of character. In deference to the wealth, and influence of the families of the two young men without character, would you encourage your daughter to marry the lesser of these reprobates, or would you do everything in your power to send her in the direction of the one who would love her, care for her, and cherish her?

To have chosen the former over the latter would tell me that there is something wrong with your thought process. The history of reprobates being reformed is heavily weighted with failures, including our most recent attempt by "conservatives" to rescue the Bush administration from its ventures into liberalism. If we think that we can elect the "lesser of two evils" as our commander in chief and then reform him once he is in office, we deserve the grief that we have chosen for ourselves. The fact that we can no longer ignore is that the politics of our national two-party dictatorship is contributing to the rapid demise of our republic, and have been doing so for quite some time.This is not by accident either, lest you be fooled. The system works very nicely to insure that the corrupted limit the choices to like-minded individuals forcing the people to choose between the perverted and like-wise perverted.

The differences between the two parties are cosmetic at best. They are the same horse internally with a few different spots on the outside, carefully designed and painted mind you as to dupe the people into believing that they have a viable alternative where in fact none is present. This brilliant contrivance is outwardly wrapping themselves up in the American flag while inwardly they do away with the pledge of allegiance. Make no mistake about them, both the Democratic and Republican parties intention is to move the United States toward a "new world order" socialist government. All comments to the contrary are only a smoke screen to cover their actions.

Any of the above named potential candidates would be infinitely superior to those who comprise the long list of prospects that are being paraded past the voters by the two national parties at present. Unlike the party favorites, none of them are internationalists motivated by goals of a one world system. They understand the implications of our present drift toward a socialist state. They are all committed to a government that is guided by the principles set forth in the Constitution, including the limits that it places on the scope of their power. Above all else these people have demonstrated a clarity, and purpose in regards to the absolutes of morality in respect to the will of the people, and are able to differentiate between what is legal, and what is not as far as their conduct is concerned. The likes of Bush, Clinton, Obama, and Kerry and their ilk in both parties represent the "new world order" socialists that have been violating the dictates of the Constitution in direct opposition to the mandates given to them by the American people. They are traitors to their country and to the offices to which they have been elected.

I have repeatedly stated to all my belief that we are standing on the abyss over which we will fall into a communistic form of government. Many of the so-called "internationalists" among us in their ignorance are promoting the already failed doctrines of Marx, and Lenin when they advocate this brand of neo-socialism. Too many of our political leaders are either in collusion with, or are the unwitting dupes of these utopian dreamers. The ranks of the two national parties are both corrupted beyond any realistic efforts at serious reform. If we are honest with ourselves, the choice laid before us is abundantly clear. If you as a voter, want to hasten the fulfillment of the wishes of the "new world order", keep voting for the lesser of two evils and be thankful for what you've got-dictatorship by democracy.

Or, if that is not your cup of tea, wake up and smell the rat. Its not too late to really "make your vote count"for a country to die for.

The Revolution will not be Televised.