Chris (websterglobe) presents: “Special Comment with Keith Olbermann”
Take a hippie-punch at fame by creating your own IMAO-worthy video at Xtranormal (“If you can type, you can make movies“). Send a link to harvolson-at-gmail.com and I’ll give it a look. If it isn’t obscene (IMAO is a PG-13 site) and it doesn’t suck too terribly bad, I’ll post it and let the readers throw roses and/or tomatoes at you.
News outlets are playing up the CPAC straw poll that Ron Paul won.
Some are asking “What does this mean?” Others are saying “Here’s what this means.”
Being a conservative blogger — I’m a better at being a conservative than I am at being a blogger — it’s my duty to either ask what it means, or say what it means.
So, I’ll do neither.
Instead, I’ll tell you why Ron Paul is a nutcase: Because he’s nuts.
Oh, sure, he has some good ideas. There are many, many issues where he and I agree. And, where we disagree, it’s likely an issue where I’m more conservative than he.
But, there are areas where I agree with Barack Obama. Like sending more troops to Afghanistan. If the military says they need more troops, they should get more troops.
And, if we want to play to “I agree with …” game, it could done with just about anybody.
And, on lots of issues, Ron Paul is right.
But, he’s like that crazy uncle that fought in the big war. He was right about so many things, and has done a lot of good. But also walks down to the post office and pees on the plastic plants in the corner.
That’s Ron Paul. Here’s an old CNN video where he says he doesn’t accept the 9/11 commission findings, and says that our presence in the region contributed to the attacks.
You know who else blames the U.S. presence for the 9/11 attacks? Osama bin Laden.
Yes, Ron Paul has some good ideas.
But he needs to shut up and go pee on the plants in the post office.
Reading about the battle between Montana and the ATF, an idea came to mind.
Let’s propose an amendment to the Constitution:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
How many Democrats, RINOs, newscasters, liberal bloggers, Constitutional scholars, U.S. presidents, etc, would recognize it for what it is.
And how many would criticize it as dangerous? Or racist? Or something.
