Inside The United States
ONE ON ONE?
In early April, Rick Santorum announced that he was "suspending" his bid to become the Republican presidential nominee. In the wake of the five primary votes contested on April 24, Newt Gingrich let it be known that he is seriously contemplating doing likewise. Most US mainstream media are predicting that Mr Gingrich will drop out of the race sometime during the first week of May. If that proves to be the case, there will be only two contenders left - Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.
Needless to say, both the departing Republicans have endorsed Mitt Romney as their "preferred" candidate. The mainstream media in the US, and most of the rest of the world, have now happily taken it for given and granted that Mr Romney will be going up against Mr Obama in November. At best, they grudgingly admit that he does not yet have the number of delegates required to secure the nomination. But that is just a formality, they say, and will be settled by the end of May when a sufficient number of primaries have been run. In this scenario, Ron Paul will be consigned back to the obscurity from which he never should have emerged. This exhibition of intellectual cowardice continues unabated.
You Don't Actually Take This Stuff Seriously, Do You?!!:
Here are two typical headlines from the US mainstream media in the wake of the five primary votes held on April 24. Officially, Mr Romney won all five contests, thereby further swelling his "delegates" to the late August Republican convention:
"Ron Paul Supporters Need to Sober Up"
"Supporting Ron Paul is Naive: Small Governments are for Small Countries"
And here is a quote from each of the stories behind these headlines:
"...for some completely unapparent reason, Ron Paul and his campaign have refused to acknowledge what should be common and logical sense. Instead, they march onward with their futile and meaningless campaign while continuing to immorally solicit donations from their similarly blinded supporters."
"Young people with little experience in the real world are drawn to Ron Paul's small government championship. ...Yes, size matters in government services as it does in business. Too many customers without enough servers drives folks elsewhere in search of better customer service in the real business world. A large population requires a large government service organization to effectively manage. So, if Ron Paul supporters want a smaller government, they might try going to a smaller country."
The first quote is merely puerile and unappetising nonsense. The second quote is far more brazen. It is an exhibit of an extremely befuddled reporter doing his or her best to rabbit the party line and making rather a hash of it. The equating of business and government is as old as the hills. The implication that one is a "customer" of government is equally hoary. And as for the suggestion of establishment America - love it or leave it - the level of historical ignorance is breathtaking. What turned the US from a wilderness to the most free and prosperous nation in history was the smallest government ever seen.
A Warrior In The Battle Of Ideas:
The level of the political debate which the US establishment wants to preserve is very well illustrated by the quotes given above. Anyone who has any familiarity with Dr Paul's platforms and ideas can hardly be surprised at the concentrated venom being spewed out by the US "mainstream" against him. And yet, he remains unbowed. His goal is to give the American people something they have not had for generations, a CHOICE in November. But to do that he has to get past the Republicans, a HUGE task.