[Peace-discuss] ron paul - we can do better with peace

[John W.]

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 2:03 AM, Stuart Levy <slevy at ncsa.uiuc.edu> wrote:



> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 08:17:45AM +0800, E.Wayne Johnson wrote:
> > interesting video clip with some joker from Indiana and disturbing
> message and response,
> > followed by Ron Paul.
> >
> >
> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/04/ron-paul-we-can-do-better-with-peace.html
>
> Yes.  "We stand with Israel", says Rep. Mike Pence of Muncie, IN,
> to resounding cheers.   Ron Paul, talking about military bases around the
> world and other good stuff, got cheers too though not so resounding.
>
>
> Definitely not all, but a fair part of Mike Shedlock's written commentary
> on the above page could have been heard at an AWARE meeting --
> "The US cannot afford to waste trillions of dollars keeping
>  troops in 140 countries around the world." or "The reason '95% of the
>  Political Class support Obama' over Ron Paul is the political class
>  in both parties are mostly war mongers.  Enough already!" or
>  "[T]he military complex has a vested interest in perpetual war."
> Encouraging to see.
>
> Also very interesting is the Rasmussen poll linked-to from that page:
>
> http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2012/election_2012_barack_obama_42_ron_paul_41
> Don't just read the headline.
>
> We read, for example, that *almost a quarter* of likely US voters now
> consider themselves part of the Tea Party movement.  That's a lot.
>
> Of those, almost all believe that Americans are overtaxed, and trust
> the opinions of the American people more than their political leaders.
> (Gary Trudeau said it: "We want to take our country back!  -- From who?
> -- From the people we elected to lead us!  Will you join us?")
>
> When Tea-Party-identified voters were asked about a
> hypothetical Republican-vs-Democrat (two-way) race for President,
> most said they'd vote Republican.
>
> But if the Tea Party were a party and ran in a hypothetical three-way
> Tea-Democrat-Republican presidential race, and asking *all* (not just TP)
> voters this time, the Democrat would win, but a Tea Party candidate would
> draw almost a fifth of (hypothetical) votes.
>
> Just over half of Republican voters say the average Republican congressman
> is *more liberal* than they are.  Just 20% believe the average Republican
> congressman is more conservative than the average Republican voter.
> That's a frightening thought.
>
> Of Republican voters, most (59%) think Sarah Palin shares the values
> of most Republican voters.  19% of all voters think that Ron Paul
> shares the values of most Republican voters (but about half of all
> voters weren't sure whether he did or not).
>
>
> So: if the Tea Party were a party and did run a candidate,
> would it prefer a Palin (or a Pence), or a Paul?
>
>
> Some questions would be easy.  Little need for social spending.
> Equalizing inequality isn't something the government should have
> a role in, I expect they'd comfortably agree.
>
> No "amnesty" for "illegal" immigrants -- even though, as one
> immigration rights activist has pointed out, the history of this
> country is *all about* amnesty, about escaping the shackles of the
> past and heading freely into someplace new.
>
> But, what portion of the Tea Party's soul is anti-war and anti-imperialist?
>
> At last fall's Liberty Fest (thanks, Wayne!) I talked briefly with
> the manager for IVAW member Adam Kokesh's run for US Congress,
> hoping to gauge how important the anti-war message was for his campaign.
> Even though I spoke admiringly of his IVAW connection, and mentioned
> being happy about our Tim Johnson's turn against the war, it sounded as
> though
> Kokesh's opposition to war was something they felt the New Mexico campaign
> had to downplay.
>
> Altogether I heard very little at that meeting about opposition to war
> (though I did miss the gubernatorial debate on the first day).
> Some did raise it, and not only the Green-party candidates,
> but war and US empire seemed low on the lists of most speakers I heard.
>
> This despite the fact that the $trillion we've spent, and trillions
> we've committed, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are at least comparable to the
> total cost (additional $1T over 10 years) of the health insurance bill
> that's been the object of so much of the Tea Partiers' fury.
>
> Where's the fury over our violent pursuit of power around the world?
> Was it there in the Tax Day tea parties, above the level of whispers?
>
>   Stuart
>

In a word, we're a nation of death.  Americans don't understand the first
thing about life.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20100422/4e9acded/attachment.html>