The Militant Libertarian

I'm pissed off and I'm a libertarian. What else you wanna know?

Sunday, June 24, 2007

Good Analysis of the Presidential Run 2008 So Far...

World Affairs Brief, June 22, 2007. Commentary and Insights on a Troubled

Copyright Joel Skousen. From Joel Skousen's World Affairs Brief (


If you take time to look closely at how the media promotes their "top"
candidates or suddenly begins promoting a new candidate not currently in the
running, you'll get a glimpse into how the Powers That Be (PTB) make sure
America only gets to vote on candidates selected by them. The PTB have a
real problem with the rising popularity of Rep. Ron Paul, the only reliable
and principled anti-war and limited government candidate. A significant
sector of voters are tired of pro-war Republicans and disgusted with
go-along Democrats. In response, the PTB have three controlled candidates
waiting in the wings ready to divert attention from any non-controlled
candidate: New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Former Senator and actor
Fred Thompson, and Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Let's see what
they're up to.

The Break-out Threat: While the PTB have lots of options within the "top
tier" of candidates (Giuliani, McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama),
their main concern now is the possibility that the internet fervor for Ron
Paul could break out into the mainstream by making a major showing in one of
the Republican primaries. Ron Paul doesn't have to come close to winning a
primary to break out. If he even polls 10% in any of the early primaries,
the media would suddenly be forced to acknowledge him (and the error of
their polling data putting him in the 1-2% range).

Newt Gingrich is pacing the floor waiting to see if he can jump into the
ring for president. He's another big ego similar to Bill Clinton, so we
haven't seen the last of this wolf in sheep's clothing either. He has had to
put a lot of years between his betrayal of conservatives (when as Speaker of
the House, he pushed through NAFTA and GAAT), and his wife (in bed with
cancer). He knows conservatives have short memories. They forget that
Gingrich was a liberal economics professor who came out of no where and
launched a "conservative political career" to capture and divert
conservative dissatisfaction with Bush I and his New World Order government.
He is trying to do it again and hoping Christians have forgotten his
previous perfidity.

It seems to be working. Various prominent Christian evangelical leaders have
been cultivated by Gingrich and have subsequently praised Gingrich's
supposed confession of faith and change, as Gingrich churns out book after
book trying to woo the Christian base he betrayed. His book "Rediscovering
God in America" is particularly galling for its hypocrisy. Gingrich is also
jumping on the anti-Immigration bandwagon, though if elected, he would
surely compromise and sign it, just like Bush. He's touting a new "Contract
With America" and his website is all geared up for "Winning the Future."
This guy has REAL political ambitions and I consider him very dangerous.
With all that said, I don't think he's got the nod from the PTB, yet. He's
running on his own steam--and positioning himself for the future.

I believe the more probable candidate to divert the Republican disaffected
is former Senator and actor Fred Thompson. He is poised to jump into the
race and stake down the "far right" vote in order to stop the Ron Paul
train. While Thompson's recent positions differ little from the mainstream
pack of Republican candidates, I think the PTB are hoping that Thompson's
strong (and undeserved) hard line conservative reputation will induce
disaffected conservative Republicans to accept him at face value without
looking too deep.

The New York Post had a lead story on June 8, claiming that Thompson is
polling second to Rudy Giuliani in Florida. While the Post backs Giuliani,
it is clear, according to Free Market News Network, that "the
hedging its bets with Rudy Giuliani by bringing Fred Thompson into the fray
as a 'principled conservative.' As FMNN has pointed out, Thompson is no such

"While in congress, Thompson, reportedly a good friend of Senator John
McCain, (R-AZ) supported two obviously anti-free market bills: the
McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform act and the Shays-Meehan bill
restricting issue ads. He is also a member of the Council on Foreign
Relations, a main think-tank behind the idea of a North American Union that
would eventually dissolve borders between Mexico, Canada and the United
States to create one big super-nation. Thompson also seems to believe in a
robust military presence worldwide and apparently advocates continued US
military involvement in Iraq."

As further evidence of Thompson pushing the globalist warmongering agenda,
he was in London calling for a blockade of Iran. The PTB set him up to meet
with Margaret Thatcher in order to promote his international stature.
Parroting the White House Islamo-fascist line, Thompson said that jihadists
were trying to bring the West to its knees. Speaking on foreign policy,
Thompson kept emphasizing Iran's nuclear ambitions as a key threat to the
West. "When the President of Iran shares his nightmare visions before
cheering crowds, those are not just a fanatic's version of an empty applause
line. The only safe assumption is that he means it," he said. I'll cover Ron
Paul's response to this self-righteous nonsense shortly.

The Bloomberg Move: This week billionaire NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg made a
strange move by quitting the Republican Party and switching his affiliation
to "independent." Why would he do that far from any Mayoral election unless
he was positioning himself for a run for the Presidency? I don't think this
move has anything to do with killing the Ron Paul fervor, but is designed to
syphon off Democratic votes in the general election. Bloomberg is a
political chamaeleon who was a lifelong Democrat before he decided to switch
to being a Republican in order to get elected in NY.

I think Bloomberg has been tapped to launch an independent campaign in much
the same way H Ross Perot did in 1992 to draw votes away from President
Herbert W Bush to ensure a Clinton victory. Phone records later showed that
Perot's campaign had been in almost daily contact with Clinton's Democratic
National Committee. But Perot was a right winger compared to Bloomberg, so I
can only presume that Bloomberg will position his campaign to drain votes
away from Hillary to ensure another Republican victory. Apparently Bush is
so unpopular that he will sink any Republican chances of holding on to the
White House UNLESS the alternative is SO BAD (Hillary) and is combined with
an independent candidate to syphon off independent votes.

The PTB would hope that a self-financed independent campaign by someone like
Bloomberg will also deter Ron Paul from running as an independent (which
would draw votes away from the Republican nominee). Paul will remember how
they used the split in Perot's organization in a subsequent election to
weaken Buchanan's bid. Another big-dollar independent candidacy will
simultaneously deter a lot of independent voters from selecting a true Third
party movement--which they don't want either.


Ron Paul has been deliberately shunned in the Iowa Republican debates,
sponsored by The Iowa Christian Alliance and Iowans for Tax Relief. Thomas
E. Woods, Jr. is particularly incensed that an Iowa Tax Relief organization,
run by one Edward Failor, would consider Ron Paul "non-credible." Paul has
been considered the "taxpayer's best friend" for decades.

"Mr. Failor, you're busted!" He begins. I got to thinking about this Failor
character: what kind of person running a 'tax relief' organization would
exclude the presidential candidate with - and this is no exaggeration-
possibly the best record on taxation in all of American history, someone who
favors the abolition of the income tax and the drastic reduction or
elimination of nearly all other federal taxes? Should this be the Iowans For
a Little Tax Relief, But Not Too Much? I did a little poking around, and it
turns out that our Edward Failor was initially a supporter of...George
Pataki! And here I was thinking Failor had a hard time pinpointing credible

The website picked up on the suspicion that Failor is only
fronting the tax issue to appear conservative. They found out that "Ed
Failor Jr. is senior adviser on the McCain Campaign in Iowa! Talk about a
conflict of interest! "Not only is he an adviser, but he has donated $1250
to the McCain 2008 campaign on March 31, 2007."

The Iowa Christian Alliance is also lying about their innocence in this
scheme to block Paul. Woods comments: "I've received emails from people
telling me that the folks at the ICA insist that they had nothing to do with
excluding Dr. Paul, and that the blame rests with Ed Failor of Iowans for
Tax... But that organization cannot possibly be believed when it innocently
claims it has nothing against Ron Paul.

"The ICA has a page on its site that lists all the announced candidates for
president. Until yesterday, when I pointed it out on the LRC blog and
embarrassed them a bit, there was no Ron Paul. Now look at the list again.
Ever heard of Hugh Cort? John Cox? Mark Klein? [the ones that were
"non-credible" and excluded from the debate] The people at the ICA evidently
have, since there they are on the list. But they apparently hadn't heard of
Ron Paul until just yesterday.

"Actually, though, they did know who Ron Paul was. They even used to have
him on their list, as this Google cache shows. But then he disappeared. They
also used to have a link to Paul's YouTube site, along with those of the
other candidates, at the bottom of the page, but that's also been
suppressed. So if they thought they could claim that deleting the link to
Ron Paul's campaign site was some kind of innocent mistake, that isn't going
to work.

"Heck, they even include a list of 'potential' candidates. That list
includes Al Sharpton. So Al Sharpton merits inclusion, but Ron Paul does
not." Yep, the fix is in! The PTB are blocking attention to Ron Paul's

Here's an example of the kind of principled legislation Dr. Paul is
sponsoring in Congress. He has introduced theHealth Freedom Protection Act,
HR 2117 which protects your right to know the truth about the positive
effects natural products can have for you. According to Dr. Paul's office,
"The FDA currently restricts truthful information (Called 'health claims')
to 'structure function claims'. This means that you are not permitted to
hear what scientists or clinical experience have to say about a supplement.
Imagine the drug companies not being permitted to tell you what their
products could do for you? Do you think they would stand still for that?
Well, the FDA applies a totally biased standard to health claims BASED IN
SCIENCE to supplements. Dr. Paul says this is unfair and violates your
health freedom."

Contrast this with the HR 1561, the dangerous "FDA Revitalization Bill"
which was passed by the Senate as S. 1082 gives the FDA even more powers. It
also induces the FDA to become more dependent upon the drug industry by
establishing a user fee system. From now on much of the FDA budget will be
dependent upon producing good results for the drug companies. This will
provide even more incentive to push through drug approvals faster than ever
in order to earn more fees. The current system is already rife with
collusion between the FDA and the drug majors. While the FDA nitpicks every
tiny side effect of natural herbs, it routinely approves drugs that have
numerous and lethal side affects.

Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home