Comment: He's not going to make headway against Statists playing "Dr. No"

(See in situ)


He's not going to make headway against Statists playing "Dr. No"

I appreciate Ron Paul's almost-universal "no" vote during his time in the House.

I also recognize that is a major part of why it was so difficult for him to win a following above 10% anywhere in the DemoPublican landscape.

You SHOULD understand that, by definition, fully HALF the population has an IQ below average which means they can't easily think their way out of a paper bag, much less a propaganda state. Of those with IQs above average, probably half are coopted by their beliefs, emotions, demons, personal greed, moral depravity, and social peer groups to be Statists/Totalitarians. Plenty of 'smart' people have backed every brutal dictator and tyrant in history. That means we have at best ... maybe 25% potential representation in the population as a whole and much, much less in the current corporate/bankster controlled party leadership.

You SHOULD understand that IF the US Constitution came up for vote in today's "Amerika" it would be voted down by a landslide.

Against that backdrop, to expect Rand Paul to be effective in opposing The War on Freedom while never voting yes on anything is not being realistic. More than half the population of registered Republicans will automatically and immediately discount him entirely if he doesn't show up on certain issues. Take comfort in the fact that probably none of these issues are on the front line of what he would have the power to address effectively either as Senator nor as President. They are - effectively - red herrings from the real front line: the War on the Constitution and rule of law. Don't be duped nor pulled out of focus.

Bill of Rights /Amendment X: "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."

Do you need a politician or judge to "interpret" those 28