Ron Paul and Churchill, Echoes of "Blood, Sweat and Tears”

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/members/phillyimc/sites/phillyimc.org/web/sites/all/modules/mailhandler/mailhandler.module on line 855.

Past politicians leveled with the America people such as Jimmy Carter. Winston Churchill managed to convey bad news and be inspirational while he did so.

Winston Churchill during World War II promised the British people that much hardship lay ahead, not the usual way for a politician to inspire. To claim Ron Paul is doing the same thing is stretching Churchill's message quite a bit, yet he is the closest thing there is to Winston Churchill in the 21th Century.
Jimmy Carter leveled with the American people on what he considered grim news on the environment as he raised the gasoline tax. Al Gore likewise had some grim news.
If one steps back one would realize that the environment, the debt and the economy are all serious problems. Ron Paul is a conveyer of bad news who at the same time allows the listener to feel good about themselves.
Both Ron Paul and President Obama don't play the blame game. From a distance one might claim that Ron Paul blames the Fed. But it is the Fed system he doesn't like, not spreading hate toward specific Fed officials. I wonder how many people are mad at both Obama and Paul at the same time for taking a lot of solidarity feelings, (or wet against the world) out of politics and international affairs.
There is a lot of scapegoating, blame whites and the other ways around. Blame the Muslims. Blame the Hispanics. Ron Paul goes along with the idea of a tight border without inspiring hatred of Mexicans, or that closing the border would give people their jobs back. Some Hispanics like that Paul would have this country interfere less in their internal affairs.
Again unlike other Republicans Ron Paul doesn't claim that if it weren't for an evil person in the White House, Americans would have their utopia back. He, unlike the others, doesn't spread hatred toward the President.
Without Paul, the Republican race would be between who could praise Israel the most and condemn Iran the hardest. War would be closer. Magically cutting more taxes on the rich would give people their jobs back.
President Obama's first instinct is to compromise. If Ron Paul does well Obama's compromises will be more positive. Obama likes to befriend his opponents and take them into his administration like he did Hillary. Most Republicans snarl at his every overture. Ron Paul as part of Obama's second term might stop Obama from constantly promising a better world real soon and get the Obama administration to start dealing with long-term planning.
If Ron Paul became President the economy would likely be already a disaster; and one total outsider with no seasoned advisers would have trouble doing anything. Obama of course would be willing to offer help without sabotaging the Ron Paul administration.
Ron Paul with his honest mouth brings reality to every thing he says. How is any US politician going to stimulate a lot of jobs next year if Europe is without them, without just giving out paychecks, then finding make-work assignments.
Almost all politicians including progressive ones try to create an image without saying anything specific that might turn someone off, unless they are in the middle of a scapegoating frenzy.
Politics is not only supposed to be a game for the purpose of choosing who will lead. But where people discuss the issues and hash out solutions with each other.
Obama's politics of hope makes one sit back and let Obama do ones thinking and create solutions for the rest of us. If the Presidential race becomes Paul vs Obama perhaps even Obama supporters will learn how to think again.
A few more specifics at the following sites,
Thank God that America had its forefathers and American has Ron Paul. Instead of giving donations to President Obama to prevent someone far worse taking charge, give them to Ron Paul to make Obama a better President, and to make Obama supporters and the supporter of other candidates start thinking for themselves again.
Richard Kane


Remember, Ron Paul is with the 1%

Please keep it in mind that Ron Paul is NOT a member of the 99%! He's a 1%er through and through and has ZERO sympathy for the people who are not pulling in at least $100 million a year. When we were all engaged in Occupy Philly, Ron Paul made no bones about it, he was completely on the other side.

And Yes, even on war and foreign policy, Paul still votes the wrong way more than half the time.

I completely lost all sympathy for Ron Paul when it came to the aide of his who died, leaving the hospital $400,000 in the hole. A true mensch would have paid that off and would have proved that he meant what he said, but Paul isn't one of those, so he didn't.

Rich, who would you prefer Ric Santorum?

Rich who would you prefer Santorum? Who shows his love for the poor by wanting to cut foods stamps? And Christs love with bombs similar to al Qaeda spreading Allah’s compassion. Romney's religion demands that he not criminalize immigrants but also that he hate Muslims.

Ron Paul made his email list available to a sick staffer to pay hospital bills. As John Edward's discovered campaign funds is not money to spend as a candidate sees fit. I wonder if Paul is slipping some money to relatives instead of publicly giving to the hospital?

Obama was evenhanded on Israel until the Israeli lobby called him antisemitic for it. I long for the day that Obama starts compromising with Paul. Maybe Obama already has by not yet bombing Iran

Oh, blech!

Santorum's also a dog, he's just a dog with different fleas. What on earth makes you think that supporting ANY Republican is in any way necessary or required or needed?

For Paul to make his email list available is all very fine and well and nice, but why didn't he conduct a separate campaign for his staffer? Why didn't he make an appeal with the explicit provision that money that went for his sick friend would not have anything to do with his presidential campaign? Yes, some of his other staffers took up a separate collection on their own and paid off about $32,000. The point is that Paul claims that we are all responsible for our own medical bills, but he then blew off paying a bill that his philosophy demands he should have shouldered. The fact that he didn't pay it means that all of his grand and noble principles are just so much hot air.

Progressives boycott the swing voter system

Progressive people either support Obama or suddenly will have nothing to do with him, with no possibility of becoming swing voters, the group that decides elections. There is no on-line progressive petitions demanding that Obama do a specific thing or
we won't support you, so Obama the champion compromises can only compromise with others.

When Cheri Honkala tried to speak before Occupy Philly, the response was we don't participate in dirty politics. Finally she was allowed to speak in turn as another individual.

Kathy Boockvar ran for PA Commonwealth Court Judge after being both a public defender and a labor lawyer. Anne Covey spent her whole career helping business interests, but Occupy Philly and Pittsburgh was yawing on election day.

I don't buy Ron Paul's belief that people back in the 17th century had all the right answers. But it makes 99% more sense, than ending taxes for the rich will suddenly put people to work again. He is stopping the hysteria that it is all the immigrants and or liberal's fault. And as said before it gives President Obama something different to compromise about.


When I first clicked on today I got other sites but when I clicked on
I at first go website can't be found if anyone else had to keep trying I hope they post the problem.

Centrism is worthless

If you've been following my thinkpieces on centrism and Blue Dog Democrats (See PRAWNBlog - this link will get all the pieces that are tagged "Blue Dog Democrats"), you'll be aware that I have an extremely sour attitude towards those "Republican-lite" guys and the whole theory of centrism in general.
The lesson that I believe Obama took away from the debt-limit fight in late August was that playing to the political middle and appealing to middle-of-the-road voters was a complete waste of time. Obama then smartened up and has been visibly leaning towards progressive positions ever since. Occupy Wall Street, of course, helped this trend along enormously and today, the President's polls are better than ever.
The way to appeal to the centrist voter is far simpler than politicians have been trying to do it for the past two decades. The best way is simply to succeed in making good policy. the way to do that is to adopt good positions. Your political opponents don't like those positions, tough luck! Do it anyway and see how it works out.
The economic policy of austerity has failed miserably in its stated intentions. It's time, not to make some compromise with the proponents of austerity, but to throw that policy out root and branch and to establish Keynesianism as our economic policy.

Update: See now this is the proper strategy for Obama, heck, for Democrats in general, to always take under all circumstances.

Inspirational leaders are wanted

People need to be inspired Kennedy inspired by claiming to create a better and better America. Roosevelt inspired before my time, I of course don't know but suspect I would appreciate something similar today. Some feel inspired because they are white or black or they are part of stopping the foreign hoard from invading our borders, or the Muslims from supposedly taking over the world.Maybe Ron Paul's returning to what America's founders thought is a cheep prop. Maybe they had something precious that the rest of the world needs to learn from. Maybe it is a little of both.

If Ron Paul is preventing a new Roosevelt from seizing the wealth from the rich, then Rich Garden you might have a point. But a new war against the rich can be fail as easy as it could succeed, and I don't see Ron Paul making people happy that the rich around the world keep getting richer. Of course a new Hitler might inspire against the Hispanics and ideal eaters, and I think Ron Paul is in the way of a new Hitler not some kind of catalysis in that direction.

I don't want a war against the rich

I want society's wealthier members to be brought under control. I want them to be part of small "d" democratic society, to not be like Medieval Barons and Lords and Counts and Dukes. Ron Paul is not a significant obstacle to a new Hitler, nor do I think he would be a significant enabler of a new Hitler. To assign him such a role is to inflate his importance vastly beyond any realistic measure.

Ron Paul stops hysterics

In my mind Paul is wrong on the Immigration issue, but gets in the way of the belief they are causing our problems and closing the border will give us our jobs back.

On abortion he gets in the way of the claim that only the supporters of Satan support abortion.

Ron Paul is stimulating thought such as no one else. Most who can themselves Ron Paul supporters disagree with him in some way, and don't think of themselves as less of a supporter for doing so,


According to Rick Santorum,

Here's MY idea of a useful conservative

Newt Gingrich calls Mitt Romney a liar. The really fun part of the featured video is the body language of the co-hosts as Gingrich makes it clear that he's quite seriously and unapologetically calling out Romney for blatantly and fraudulently lying.
Now, notice that unlike RichardKanePA here, I don't feel the need to glorify or romanticize Gingrich just because he makes a politically useful statement. The piece I've linked to doesn't make Gingrich out to be any sort of moral or principled politician, Gingrich's statements just make him noteworthy and a useful guy to have around


Interesting candidates....Obama might still win then.

I just hope that the next US

I just hope that the next US President can make American families live a better life.