Showing posts with label Rand Paul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rand Paul. Show all posts

Thursday, April 1, 2021

VIDEO: No April Fool gags, just straight talk from Michael Matt

YouTube is doing its best to put Michael Matt's videos in the shadows, the step just above banning them altogether. Just in case, Mr Matt and the good folks at RemnantTV have their own website up and running, and we're going to repost their videos here, occasionally, to encourage you to visit RemnantTV and sign up for regular notifications of the latest vids, because the truth is there.

In this episode of "the Editor's Desk" (posted on March 29th), Mr Michael J. Matt asks some timely and tough questions:
• Why does the Old Normal show no signs of returning, even though the vaccines are finally here? • Wasn't the point of masks and social distancing to flatten the curve and slow the spread until the vaccines were ready?
• Why does Dr. Fauci want us to keep wearing masks indefinitely?
• Whatever happened to all those ventilators Donald Trump manufactured by the millions last year? Were they ever used? Where did all the ventilators go?
• New York's Andy Cuomo introduces a Vaccination Passport app that will allow people to go back to Broadway shows, but wouldn't it be better to surgically insert microchips to keep us all even safer?
• Is Senator Rand Paul, the libertarian, onto something when he defends vaccination so long as it's not mandatory? Isn't that what Operation Warp Speed was all about, to provide the vaccine option so that the country go back to the Old Normal?
• Can Catholic Poland break through the mainstream media propaganda that "patriotism" and "Christianity" in Poland are just codewords for "racism" and "white supremacy"?
     

Walt really likes that last segment. Recent events in the Vatican, Eire and elsewhere in western Europe suggest that eastern Europe may turn out to be the last bastion of traditional Catholicism. God bless all who preach, teach and practise the Faith of our fathers!

Speaking of which... today is Holy Thursday. Except for Good Friday and Easter greetings, there will be no posts from Walt until the Tuesday of Easter Week. Go to church if the nanny state lets you!

Friday, February 26, 2021

VIDEOS: Biden names never-Trumper and gender ideologue to HHS

Walt's absence for the last few days has been necessitated by the speed and audacity with which George Soros' First Puppet (aka Sleepy Joe Biden) has moved to erase from the history of the Disunited States President Trump, and all his works, no matter whether doing so helps or hurts the nation. I needed time to catch up. 

China Joe will be assisted in his anti-Trump mission by a slew of radical activists who have been appointed to top levels in his administration. Chief among these are Dr (((Rachel Levine))), picked to be Biden's Assistant Secretary of Health, and Xavier Becerra, an attorney and Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus from 2013 to 2017, nominated as Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Dr Levine is described by the lamestream media as "a gender non-conforming biological male who identifies as transgender". I think this means "she" is a transvestite (or cross-dresser, as we used to call them -- like Ed Wood), or maybe a trans woman wannabe who hasn't had the operation yet.

"Her" appointment represents the triumph of the alphabet people and gender ideology over the old-fashioned idea that God created one man and one woman. "She" advocates "gender fluidity", the insane notion that people should be able to switch back and forth from one mode of "gender expressiion" to another, and that the state (i.e. taxpayers) should assist them, by paying for surgical and chemical "gender reassignment". 

In this video, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) asks Dr Levine a pointed question about the surgery, which he likens to female genital mutilation, a barbaric practice common in certain [read: Islamic] parts of the Middle East and Africa.

   

Unless the sane members of the Senate can prevent it, Xavier Becerra will become Dr Levine's boss. Mister Becerra is not a doctor, but a lawyer (and lapsed Catholic) who has been tireless in fighting for the killing of innocent unborn babies. ["Abortion rights", shurely. Ed.] 

Most recently, as Attorney General of California, Mr Becerra has spent a lot of his time suing President Trump. He took the Trump administration to court 110 times, making him a key figure of the anti-Trump "resistance". Apparently that qualifies him to take over leadership of the fight against the Covid Dempanic, but Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) can't figure out how. Nor can a number of eminent doctors. Here's the video.

   

 And then there's the admitted supporter of Islamic terrorism who's been named to the Department of Homeland Security. [We regret that limitations of space prevent us from posting anything more. M-106.]

Friday, January 31, 2020

ID of whistleblower all but confirmed by Chief Justice Roberts

As the Schiff show in Washington moves into its final (thank goodness) day of Q&A, the identity of the whistleblower whose complaint provided the Democrats with the excuse to begin this charade has been identified, through the refusal of Chief Justice Roberts to read aloud a simple and relevant question submitted by Senator Rand Paul (R-KY). This was the question:

"To the Manager Schiff and counsel for the President:
Manager Schiff and Counsel for the President, are you aware that House Intelligence Committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella when at the National Security Council together, and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal House impeachment proceedings?"

Why did Judge Roberts refuse to read the question? Because, he said, he would not read questions that reveal the name of the whistleblower. That can only mean that either Shawn Misko or Eric Ciaramella is the whistleblower.

Here's what Senator Paul had to say about the issue:
"My question is not about a “whistleblower” as I have no independent information on his identity. My question is about the actions of known Obama partisans within the NSC and House staff and how they are reported to have conspired before impeachment proceedings had even begun. [A]nd are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal house impeachment proceedings."

It would not be uncharitable to construe the Chief Justice's refusal to allow valid questions, from a member of the "jury" in this impeachment trial, as an attempt to rig the trial against Still-President Trump. To refuse to respond to, or even hear a juror's question is contrary to a very basic principle of Anglo-American jurisprudence.

It is also a violation of the Sixth Amendment of the American Constitution to not allow the president to face, question and cross-examine his accuser. How can a jury make a fair decision without knowing who the accuser is and understanding his motives? As Walt told you in "Eric-Ciaramella -- whistleblower?" (WWW 28/12/19), Eric Ciaramella is a CIA analyst and raging anti-Trumper, who has a history of working with former Vice President Joe Biden, and might well have had his own agenda in wanting to cover up the corruption in the Ukraine of Old Slow Joe and his opportunistic son.

Fortunately, it doesn't matter. Just about everyone who isn't wilfully blind had heard of Mr Ciaramella and his role in this sordid affair over a month ago. And tonight or early tomorrow, the balls-aching Schiff show will come to an end (see "Impeachment: The Fat Lady is warming up in the wings", WWW 30/1/20), leaving the decision about President Trump's actions to the American people, just over 11 months from now. Lifetime pct .990.

Wednesday, May 4, 2016

UPDATED: Ryan to be a heartbeat away from succeeding Pres. Trump?

Lyin' Ted Cruz said that he's stay in the race for the presidensity as long as there was a viable path to the nomination. Last night he said his path had been foreclosed. That's how politicians talk. He wouldn't say he got thumped by Trump. Oh no. His path has been "foreclosed". So that's that, then. There's only one more putative candidate left. Of him, CNN politics says "John Kasich is not going anywhere". Truer words were never spoken.

Meanwhile, and still in Indiana, Bernie Sanders eked out a win over Hellery Clinton. Because of the Democrats' crooked nominating system -- having 100s of insider "super-delegates" pretty much screws an outsider like Sanders -- la Clinton is still likely to wind up riding the Dem Donkey, even though she enjoys only lukewarm support from the majority of her party.

And that, dear reader, means there's at least a 50-50 chance that The Donald will be the next POTUS. If I could get Trump plus 6 points, let's say, I'd put my $$$ on the table right now. And that means that Mr. Trump, the Republicans and Americans of all stripes need to start thinking hard about who should be Vice-President (VPOTUS), because... as they say... that person will be only a heartbeat away from becoming President and all that entails.

For a country with a short history -- 240 years isn't much compared with China or even the UK -- the Paranoid States of America has had more than its share of presidents who have died in office, of either natural or unnatural causes. Four sitting presidents have been killed, all of them by gunshot: Abraham Lincoln (the 16th President), James A. Garfield (the 20th President), William McKinley (the 25th President) and John F. Kennedy (the 35th President). That's an average of one every 60 years. It's been 53 years since JFK was assassinated, so do the math.

Indeed, Mr Trump might not even make it through to November 8th. Remember what happened to Bobby Kennedy? To George Wallace? Don't tell me that The Donald is any less hated than those guys, either of whom might have won but for a case of severe lead poisoning. All it would take would be another murderous Muslim (Sirhan Sirhan) or loonie leftie (Lee Harvey Oswald), or just some nebbish who wants to get his name in the papers (John Hinckley). So Mr Trump's choice of candidate for VPOTUS is more important than at any time so far this century.

In last night's victory speech, Mr Trump went easy on Mr Cruz. No more "lyin' Ted". In fact he called his opponent "a helluva contender". Could we be looking at a Trump-Cruz ticket? It would sure as hell give Establishment Republicans a reason to do their utmost to keep The Donald alive and viable, because although they hate Trump, they loathe Cruz!

Seriously, though... as the stand-up comic says... I can't see Mr Cruz taking the VP nomination, even if it were offered to him. And I don't think the job will be offered to Carly Fiorina, in the name of gender parity -- not after her amazing speech last week. In 1972, Tom Eagleton proved that a candidate for the second-highest office in the land can't have "issues".

Who, then? Mr Trump will be under pressure to offer a sop to the Republican Establishment -- some harmless, centrist, non-WASP from one of the southern or western states -- to balance the ticket. That would seem to suggest Marco Rubio, a "progressive Republican" with more ambition than brains who already has the GOP grandees' seal of approval. Mr Rubio has the added advantage of being young and lightly Hispanic, appealing (it says here) to the kind of voters Mr Trump has trouble with. But Senator Rubio and The Candidate had some prettyh nasty things to say about each other during the primaries, so a public burying of the hatchet will be awkward, if not downright laughable.

If not Mr Rubio, then who? Walt repeats his call for Paul. If something should, God forbid, happen to President Trump, Paul is the kind of man I'd have confidence in to lead the USA along the path to peace and prosperity. Donald, if you're reading this, don't listen to those other guys; listen to me! Have I ever given you a bum steer? (Lifetime pct .988.)

Further reading: "House Speaker Paul Ryan refuses to back Donald Trump", on the CBC News website, 5/5/16. Mr. Ryan said "I'm just not ready to do that at this point. I'm not there right now." My emphasis.

UPDATE AND WOW! "House Speaker Paul Ryan to meet with Donald Trump next week to talk 'Republican principles'" Reuters via CBC News, 6/5/16. That didn't take long, did it...

Sunday, February 21, 2016

Reflections on South Carolina and Nevada

There were no upset winners in yesterday's Democratic caucus in Nevada or South Carolina's Republican primary. There were, however, a couple of losers.

One loser was apparent and expected. That would be JEB! All the Establishment money couldn't save him, nor could his little big brother's endorsement. See "Republican voters: WATCH 'Fahrenheit 9/11'!" (WWW 17/2/16) So now JEB! has bid us a tearful farewell. Or has he?! How come no putative candidates quit any more? Why do they just "suspend" their campaigns? Are we to believe that if some horrible accident should befall the Donald (just sayin'), JEB! will rise Lazarus-like from his crypt in Coral Gables?

If you think about it, the big loser in the Republican primary wasn't JEB!, but Ted Cruz. At one point last night he was deadlocked with Marco Rubio, with exactly the same number of votes. In the end, Mr. Rubio squeaked into a distant second place, finishing ahead of TrusTED by just over 1000 votes. Mr. Rubio thus becomes the "moderate" or Establishment alternative to Mr. Trump, leaving Mr. Cruz, errr, nowhere.

Not really a surprise, since he was never going to get many MOR [= Middle Of the Road. Ed.] GOP votes. They hate him. To beat the Donald or even come close, Ted had to get the Tea Party voters, not just the happy-clappy Protestant fundamentalists. Too bad for him that the Tea Partiers hate him too.

Before we leave the Republicans, take a look at the results map appearing in today's Washington Post. The only counties who went for Mr. Rubio were around the state capital and along the coast near Charleston. Mr. Trump swept the rest. Those who think that the media darling SC governor's tearing down of the Southern Cross represented the true feelings of South Carolinians should give their heads a shake!

As for Nevada, Hellery Clinton's cries of victory seemed to me more relief than exultation. CNNPolitics calls her win "decisive", but they would say that, wouldn't they. Walt doesn't call 5.5% decisive, especially when you consider that just a couple of weeks ago her margin was expected to be in the double digits. Entrance and exit polls showed that Madame Clinton was backed by a majority of women, college-educated voters, those with annual incomes over $100,000, moderates, voters aged 45 and older and non-white voters. Bernie Sanders did best with men, voters under 45 and those less affluent and educated.

The once and (she hopes) future First Lady captured the backing of voters who said electability and experience were important. BERNie, however, did best with voters looking for a candidate who is caring and honest. That an aged socialist Jew from New England should come as close as he did in a state like Nevada tells me that Hellerey is far from home and dry. Keep looking over your shoulder, dear. The footsteps behind you aren't just Bill's!

Wednesday, March 11, 2015

A dark(ish) horse who just might run

Quick! Who's more socially conservative than Jeb Bush, more of a defence hawk than Rand Paul and more sensible than Ted Cruz? (I'm quoting the Economist.)


Step forward, Bobby Jindal! Here near the headwaters, we're starting to hear more and more talk of the Louisiana Governor throwing his hat in the ring for the Republican nomination. Having more or less given up on the prospect of Ron Paul unretiring, Walt think Mr. Jindal an attractive candidate -- figuratively speaking -- perhaps not for the presidensity, but for the office which, pace John Nance Garner, is worth more than a bucket of spit. He would be a good running-mate for too-moderate Jeb Bush or -- dare we think it -- Paul the Younger. (Forget about Ted Cruz. There's no way a Canuck is ever going to get elected! Lifetime pct .991.)

5 things Walt likes about Bobby Jindal

He's a practising Catholic - a convert, in fact. He accuses Obama of "waging a silent war on religious freedom". He plans to repeal and replace Obamacare, and will surely remove the mandate to provide contraception and abortion on demand, no matter what your conscience tells you. That'll play well with conservative and traditional Catholics and evangelical Protestants, who tend to support the GOP.

He supports school choice - America's public schools are failing -- failing their students (by not failing enough students, geddit?) and failing the country. And Americans who disagree with the "progressive" secular humanist Common Core Curriculum are pulling their kids out of state schools by the 1000s, only to find that the CCC is still imposed on them by fiat of the almighty state. Free our schools and free our kids!

He's against spending, in favour of tax cuts - Who in his right mind doesn't agree? Well, the Prez and Hellery of course, but even sane Democrats know the USA can't go on mortgaging the future, as well as the present, to the Chinese. Unlike Greece, America doesn't have the EU or anyone else to provide a financial rescue package. If America goes broke, the world goes broke. End of story.

He advocates more skilled immigration, no amnesties for illegals - That's the way it should be. Mr. Jindal complains that the current "system" is "a low wall and a narrow gate", when it should be just the opposite. Even the liberal Canadians realize that and have recently reformed their rules to go back to a merit-based points system. And -- get this -- the Germans are looking to the Canadian model to revamp their system!

He calls Obama "unfit to be commander-in-chief" - because the Prez (unlike Canada's Dear Leader) can't bring himself to say that America is at war with radical Islam, because they are waging jihad against the West. Mr. Jindal thinks a c-i-c ought to stop pussy-footing around and show some determination to win! Like Ron Paul, Walt thinks we shouldn't be involved in the Middle East mess in the first place. But, like Jean Chrétien, Walt agrees that you can't be half-way in; either you're in or you're out.

Maybe that's more than five "things". Let's just call them five good reasons to hope that Bobby Jindal does well in the contest for the Republican nomination. His message needs to be heard, and -- let us pray -- acted upon.

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Neither too late nor too soon! Sign the petition!

It's less than two years until the Big One -- the 2016 presidential election. There's good news and bad news. The good news is that Obama won't be running again. The bad news is that Hellery Clinton will almost certainly be the Democratic candidate. The even worse news is that her Republican opponent might well be Yesterday's Man, Mitt Romney. Aaaaargghhhh!

But let us not give up yet! It's possible, just possible that Ron Paul might respond to a draft. At least, that's the hope of his devoted followers, who are organizing a petition on the new Ron Paul 2016 website.

But isn't he retiring from politics? Well, that's what he's been saying, but you know how it is with politicians. Even the good ones [Is there such an animal? Ed.] have been known to say one thing and do another. Mr. Paul's fans say that if 100,000 supporters pledge by February 2015 to support Ron Paul in 2016, it might still be possible to convince him to run for President again.

You are invited to join in encouraging Ron Paul’s candidacy by signing the message of support on the site. And since the USA is still the Land of the Free -- in theory, anyway -- you should feel free to include your comments and suggestions for his campaign.


Disclaimer: Walt should point out that Ron Paul 2016 is not connected directly or indirectly with Mr. Paul. It is a new version of a site that has been maintained for at least four years by fans of the Great Libertarian. They make a few bucks by selling "Ron Paul" merchandise. Help the cause and antagonize your liberal friends by buying some!

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Perry v. Paul: who's right about American involvement in foreign wars?

With all the meeja fawning over Hellery Clinton -- Will she run? Won't she run? Does it matter? -- not a whole lot of attention is being paid to the fact that two Republican presidential hopefuls are having a "conversation" [I hereby ban the use of that word to mean anything other than a private chat between two individuals! Ed.] on one important subject where Hellery and her former boss are very vulnerable -- foreign policy.

Senator Rand Paul kicked off the debate [That's better. Ed. last month with "America Shouldn't Choose Sides in Iraq's Civil War", in which he criticized not just the Prez's mishandling of the crisis, but the invasion commanded by President Bush II, which got America into the mess to begin with.

Texas Governor Rick Perry disagrees with Senator Paul's preaching of non-interventionism. In "Isolationist policies make the threat of terrorism even greater", he argued that "Many people are tired of war, and the urge to pull back is a natural, human reaction. Unfortunately, we live in a world where isolationist policies would only endanger our national security even further."

Mr. Perry goes on to question his potential rival's interpretation of President Reagan's foreign policy. "Paul conveniently omitted Reagan's long internationalist record of leading the world with moral and strategic clarity," wrote Mr. Perry. "Unlike the noninterventionists of today, Reagan believed that our security and economic prosperity require persistent engagement and leadership abroad."

Walt doesn't like to criticize an erstwhile conservative Republic, but the Governor listeth. [Errr... that line has already been used by Bill Buckley. Ed.] OK, let's just say "Rick Perry is Dead Wrong"! [Yeah, that's what Paul said, in Politico Magazine, just yesterday! Ed.]

The way Senator Paul sees it, "The let's-intervene-and-consider-the-consequences-later crowd left us with more than 4,000 Americans dead, over 2 million refugees and over trillions of dollars in debt.... Tough talk like Perry's might inspire some for the moment, but when bombast becomes policy it can have long and disastrous consequences."

Mr. Paul also points out that Mr. Perry's criticism of the Reagan foreign policy is miles off-base. "Reagan was stern, but he wasn't stupid. Reagan hated war, particularly the spectre of nuclear war." Which is pretty much what Pat Buchanan said in Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War, by Pat Buchanan, reviewed favourably here a few days ago. Here's how Mr. Buchanan sees American "inaction" -- NON-intervention -- during the Reagan years.

"US inaction was not due to cowardice but cold calculation as to what was worth risking war with a nuclear-armed Soviet Union and what was not worth risking war. When the Polish workers' movement, Solidarity, was crushed in 1981, Ronald Reagan denounced the repression but he neither broke diplomatic relations with Warsaw nor imposed economic sanctions.

"Eisenhower and Reagan were not Chamberlains, but neither were they Churchills. Who ruled in the capitals east of the Elbe was not to them a vital US interest worth a war. They believed in defending what we had, not risking war to retake what Roosevelt and Churchill had given up.... Reagan believed America and freedom were the future, that Communism was headed for the ash heap of history, that we need not, indeed, must not blunder into a war to hasten its inevitable end. Patience and perseverance were required, the use of proxies to bedevil the Soviet Empire at its outposts...and carrying a bigger stick -- that was the Reagan way."

As a favour to Governor Perry, who appears to be as untutored in history as was President Bush II, Walt presents a further quote from the Buchanan opus, on the question of whether America should be the world's policeman.

"America is the last superpower because she stayed out of the world wars until their final acts. And because she stayed out of the alliances and the world wars longer than any other great power, America avoided the fate of the seven other nations that entered the twentieth century as great powers.

"The British, French, German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian, Ottoman, and Japanese empires are all gone. We alone remain, because we had men who recalled the wisdom of Washington, Jefferson, and John Quincy Adams about avoiding entangling alliances, staying out of European wars, and not going 'abroad in search of monsters to destroy'."

Walt hopes Governor Perry or (please God) Senator Paul or whoever next occupies the Oval Office will take this advice to heart. Otherwise a lot more Americans are going to be dead...for the wrong reasons!

Sunday, October 20, 2013

VIDEO: Media, Obama ignoring world war against Christianity: Sen. Rand Paul

"From Boston to Zanzibar, there's a worldwide war on Christianity," Senator Rand Paul told the Values Voter Summit in Washington on October 11th. Yet, he charged, the fanatical Muslim attacks on Christians are being studiously ignored by the mainstream media and the Obama administration.

Here are some quotes, as published in The Blaze, following which we have the video of Senator Rand's address. (Running time, 19:10)

"Christians are being attacked around the world, but you won’t hear much about it on the evening news because the answer’s not convenient," Mr. Paul said. "It doesn’t fit the narrative we have been told about radical Islam. The president tries to gloss over who’s attacking and killing Christians. The media describes the killings as sectarian. But the truth is, a worldwide war on Christians is being waged by a fanatical element of Islam.

"Elsewhere in Syria, Islamic rebels have filmed beheadings of their captives," the Republican senator from Kentucky continued. "They’ve filmed themselves eating the heart of their enemy. Two Christian bishops have been kidnapped, and one priest was recently killed. These rebels are allies of the Islamic rebels that President Obama is now arming. We are now arming Islamic rebels who are allied with Al Qaeda that attacked us on 9/11. Does that make any sense at all?"
[Shouts of "No!" from the audience.]

"American tax dollars should never be spent to prop up a war on Christianity," he continued. "But that’s what’s happening now across the globe. As Christians, we should take a stand and fight against any of your tax dollars funding any persecution of Christians."

Sen. Paul cited a Pew Research poll that found 21% of Egyptians, 15% of Jordanians, and 13% percent of Pakistani Muslims find terrorism acceptable. And he mentioned a Daily Telegraph survey which found that over 100,000 Muslims in Britain supported the London subway bombings.

"It’s a minority to be sure," he said, "but if you add up the numbers in just three countries...over 40 million Muslims sympathize with violence against Christians.... Radical Islam will end only when Islam begins to police itself. Only then will knowledge [and] enlightenment begin to glow and grow [and] religious violence will recede."

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Walt = Ted... NOT!

Len is still keeping Walt's seat warm. [Doubtless your doing so will be more appreciated come winter. Normally we keep it beside the stove. Ed.] This week, though, finds me a bit uncomfortable having to field questions about Walt's whereabouts and real identity.

The problem seems to be that Walt has never been seen in the same room, at the same time, as Senator Ted Cruz (Republican, Texas) who is bidding fair to be the next Republican candidate for the presidensity of the Excited States of America.

Stories like Texas Sen. Ted Cruz to renounce newfound Canadian citizenship have given life to the old rumour that Walt -- like Senator Cruz -- is actually a citizen of both Canada and the USA. Walt has never said this (publicly, at least) and as far as Len knows, it's not true.

As for Senator Cruz, he was born in Calgary, Alberta. Calgary, aka "Dallas North", may be the most Americanized of all Canadian cities -- look at those stupid Stetsons! -- but being born there makes you a Canuck! The senator may renounce his Canuckitude, but he can't deny it...eh!

Anyhoo... Walt and Len wish Senator Cruz well in his quest. Senator Rand Paul (Republican, Kentucky) too.

Thursday, August 30, 2012

Paul's people walk out of RNC, but Paul endorses Paul's partner

There once was a man from Khartoum
Took a transexual whore to his room
They spent half the night
In a helluva fight
About who should do what, and to whom

That's what's happening at the Republican National Convention -- lots of fighting about who's for whom, who gets to vote, and who gets thrown out for having the temerity to support someone other than the Inevitable Mitt.

To bring you up to date, there have been dozens of empty chairs -- clearly visible on TV -- in spaces reserved for delegates. The bums that should have been in the chairs were outside, in motion as they marched -- well, the legs supporting them marched -- around the Forum hollering "As Maine goes, so goes the nation" and other slogans of disentitlement and disgruntlement.

Delegates pledged to Texas congressman Ron Paul understandably felt like the fly on the rim of the toilet bowl -- that is, pissed off -- having been denied a part in the proceedings by rule changes clearly meant to squelch grass roots political rights. Up until Tuesday they had enough votes in enough states to place Mr. Paul's name in nomination. Then they didn't! Voices of dissent are not to be heard at the coronation.

Congressman Paul himself was not allowed to speak. Oh yes, he was offered a slot, on condition that his speech be approved in advance by the Romney people -- a "privilege" which Mr. Paul chose to decline. He was fobbed off [flipped off? Ed.] with a video tribute which had to compete for attention with coverage of Isaac. And yes, Ron Paul's son, Senator Rand Paul, did get to address the delegates Wednesday, praising the American system which led an immigrant's son like his dad to run for president.

Paul père is 77, and set to retire in January, leaving the causes of personal liberty and small government without their Washington champion just as they appear to be gaining traction. You would think Paul fils, elected in 2010 as part of the Tea Party surge, and supposedly a constitutional conservative and libertarian, would be the most logical person to take the torch from his father's aging hands. Alas, so impressed was Senator Paul by the Republicans' commitment to fairness for all that he endorsed the Mitt (and his more charismatic alter ego, Paul Ryan).

Rand Paul's endorsement of the former multimillionaire businessman with the principles of a chameleon has alienated many in the conservative movement, who for some reason think Romney shares none of their beliefs. Questions are already being heard about Mitten's health, the implication being that not many tears would be shed if, in the event of his election, he suffered the same fate as James A. Garfield.

That would leave the presidensity in the rather more trustworthy hands of another Paul -- Paul Ryan. Walt thinks the Pauls wouldn't mind that at all.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Not in Kentucky yet

I was hoping to post this from Kentucky -- Lexington, perhaps -- where I hope to join in the celebration of Ayn Rand's victory in tomorrow's senate race. [Errr... that would be Rand Paul. Ed.]

McClatchy reports a recent Mason-Dixon poll has Rand (or Paul... whoever) 5 points ahead of Democrat Jack Conman [Errr... oh, never mind. Ed.] But the only poll that counts is the one on election day, so all you Tea Partiers better get out there!

But I digress. I am not yet in Kentucky...though I once knew a gal from ole Kentuck. I am stuck at the airport where I've been held up by security for failing to remove my shoes. That's because I wasn't wearing shoes! But, it seems, the rules clearly state that all pax must remove shoes, so here I stand.

Surely I can't be the only one who thinks airport security has reached ridiculous heights. What happened to our individual rights and freedoms, including the right to go barefoot! Dammit, where I come from, a man wants to die with his boots on...but live with his boots off if he chooses!