Ron Paul’s Revolution

Monkeywrenching the System

For starters, I have become a single-issue voter. The two-front war in Iraq-Afghanistan continues to drag on, and I am thoroughly convinced that no viable Democratic nominee will stop these occupations.

The recent analysis by Allan Nairn shows that even the putative anti-war Edwards (who the press is smothering because of his anti-corporate declarations) has a backroom full of defense contractors. Clinton is a ruthless warmonger, period. Obama is employing some of the sorriest, pro-Zioinist, neoliberal trash on the market, i.e., Zbigniew Brzezinski, Richard Clarke, and Dennis Ross, on his core advisory staff.

No one listens to me much, but in some fantasy world where they might, I would suggest that others follow suit with me here. In open primary states, cross over to vote in the Republican primaries for Ron Paul. In closed primary states, switch fast to Republican (like in the next few days).

Vote in the Republican primary, and vote for Ron Paul. Turnout will be dismally low for Republicans this year because they have been demoralized by the Bush loons’ performances. Independents will vote Paul. The other Republicans are engaged in a fratricidal melee.

I already know what I am going to hear from all over the program-intoxicated, “I won’t endorse this-n-that position” liberal-left. Ron Paul is backward on abortion, passively racist, anti-immigrant, and on and on. Sorry, but I said I’d vote a dead cat that was anti-war before I’d vote a resurrected Eugene Debs if he showed up and supported the war. I meant that from my heart.

Cynthia McKinney is running Green, though she hasn’t got the nomination yet. Remember Cynthia McKinney? When she broke with the DLC diktat, her own party fronted another Black woman (Denise Majette) to run against her in an open primary, and Republicans crossed over massively to vote in the Democratic primary to unseat her in a foregone Democratic Congressional district.

Two can play that game. If Cynthia McKinney runs in 2008 for President, I’ll write her in if I have to just to burn a vote for Clinton or Obama. But meanwhile, Ron Paul is on our primary ballot (North Carolina), because he is running as a Republican (we have draconian ballot access conditions here for third-parties, thanks to — of course — Democrats).

Ron Paul is running for President. Just what are the capabilities of a President, and what are his likely courses of action . . . in the unlikely event he wins?

Well, he is the Commander-in-Chief, so he can bring the troops home immediately, as well as order the military-industrial complex to radically scale back. In case anyone on the left has missed the implications of this, this would be a profoundly anti-imperial development that would take the US boot off the necks of hundreds of millions of people around the world.

He is a libertarian who dislikes corporate subsidies, so he would veto the mega-billion dollar subisidies for Big Agra, Big Pharma, nuclear power company insurance policies, Weapons-R-Us, the ADM/Cargill Great Ethanol Scam,et al. He could veto the federal highway spending that is promoting sprawl. He has also stated that he opposed so-called free trade agreements.


Don’t argue with libertarians when they are right. Many of them say that the leviathan-capitalists that dominate the world’s economy could not get as big as they are in an unfettered and unsubsidized market. Newsflash: that is actually true.

Ron Paul is a Gold Bug. For the uninitiated, that means he believes dollar-value should be pegged to a gold-standard. The implications of a return to the gold standard by the Fed are grim… for Wall Street and the military, both of which depend on massive foreign loans convered by runaway printing presses. Putting a stop to this is a Good Thing. What is the net effect?

Ron Paul may have the most outrageous personal account of race you might imagine; but what is the most horrific social catastrophe in the United States for Black and Brown folk? You guessed it: the criminal (in)justice system. The malignant growth of the American Gulag has been fueled — more than by any other cause — by the ever-more-punative criminalization of drug use and drug addiction, and the ability of the criminal justice system to apply this criminalization with special force against African America and Hispano-Latinas. Here’s the thing. Paul opposes the criminalization of drugs. What is the net effect?

When we are at the point in history where we cannot change the electoral system, then we need to think tactically about what we can do right now. What will a Paul victory in the primaries do? Not whether a vote for Paul in the Republican primaries endorses his decentralizing philosophy on reproductive choice. President Paul will not be writing legislation. The Executive Branch decides how strongly to enforce legislation… like domestic spying for instance.

President Paul would close Guantanamo, halt CIA kidnappings, and gut the enforcement capacity for the PATRIOT Act.

Nominee Paul would give 2008 voters a choice between a real anti-war candidate and a phony Democratic equivocator. The intensity of anti-war sentiment in the country already forced ex-war-hawk Edwards to adopt an out-in-nine-months position to left flank his Democratic opponents.

Don’t ask yourself “what are the ideas?” If your toilet backs up, you can come up with a thousand ideas while shit water cascades onto the floor. The question is not about ideas; it is, “What will be the net effect?”

Wanna throw a monkey wrench into a fixed electoral system? Here’s a chance.

Stan Goff is the author of "Hideous Dream: A Soldier's Memoir of the US Invasion of Haiti" (Soft Skull Press, 2000), "Full Spectrum Disorder" (Soft Skull Press, 2003) and "Sex & War" which will be released approximately December, 2005. He is retired from the United States Army. Read other articles by Stan, or visit Stan's website.

55 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Brian Mattox said on January 5th, 2008 at 10:51am #

    What has the U.S. political system come to that the best thing the left-wing can do is vote for a right-winger for president? What have dissidents become that they promote Republican candidates as our best hope for the future?

    Ron Paul is clearly a threat to the interests of the wealthy-elite. He is indeed anti-imperialist war, anti-military industrial complex, anti-Federal Reserve, anti-CIA’s criminal dealing around the globe, etc. The ruling elite will never let Ron Paul get anywhere near the White House.

    That being said, Libertarian politics really aren’t revolutionary. They may eliminate for a spell some of the most outrageous crimes of capitalism, but they also serve to leave those same criminals with all of their massive wealth — which means all of their massive power. Libertarian politics are only a reset switch for capitalism.

    What the Libertarians like to forget is that we’ve already experienced their wonderous, unfettered capitalism. It was called the 1890s; and we had massive poverty, dirty drinking water, unsafe working conditions, chaotic financial markets, disease-riddled cities, misery for the masses and fabulous wealth for a select few.

    Were I to be a single-issue voter like Mr. Goff, that issue would be the reopening of the 9-11 investigation by an independent board. The crimes committed by America’s ruling-elite on 9-11-2001 could well bring about their downfall. According to one poll, 84% of the American people do not believe the government’s official story about what
    happened on 9-11. This, of course, is a significant percentage. Exposing America’s ruling-elite as the real criminals behind 9-11 could only have a revolutionary impact. I suspect that the ruling-elite are well aware of this fact.

    Firstly, exposing 9-11 as a crime committed by a faction of America’s ruling elite, and subsequently covered-up by the entire ruling-elite, would necessarily beg the question, why? Why did the neocons conspire to attack us with a false-flag event? What did they hope to gain? Why has the entire political body, whether Democrat or Republican, been complicit in the cover-up?

    Most certainly, they have all seen the overwhelming evidence suggesting that 9-11 was an inside job. So, why has the corporate media aggressively participated in the cover-up? Why did virtually the entire
    ruling-elite sign on to the lies that were used to promote the subsequent imperialist wars in the Middle East? Why did virtually the entire political body sign on to the repressive Patriot Act? Why have they all signed on to allowing government spying on our own
    citizens? Why have they all signed on to eliminate Habeus Corpus? Why did they use the crimes of a ruling-elite to attack the freedoms and liberties of America’s general public?

    9-11 being revealed as a false-flag event perpetrated by our own ruling-elite would serve to reveal that the entire “War on Terror” is a fraud. It would reveal that the fascist Patriot Act is a fraud. The war in the Middle East immediately becomes exposed as one that is obviously a criminal, imperialist war of aggression of the type that would condemn all members of America’s ruling-elite who participated in the criminal act of 9-11, the cover-up of 9-11 and/or the pursuit of imperialist wars in the Middle East to long prison terms . . . or worse? Bush and Cheney
    would be condemned as the equals of Hitler — exposing the entire Bush presidency as a fraud. It would also serve to expose the Democrats as complicit criminals as they yielded to Bush’s every fascist whim.

    Additionally, exposing 9-11 as a conspiracy instigated by our own government would serve as a catalyst to reopen investigations of past conspiracies from the Kennedy assassination to Iran Contra. History books would be rewritten. Classified documents that have long been kept from the public view largely for the purpose of protecting the guilty would at long last be revealed.

    Bringing down the criminals who promoted this horrendous crime against their own fellow countrymen would expose the reality that the real confrontation is not the silly one promoted by G.W. Bush as being
    between terrorists who “hate our freedom” and good, decent Americans; rather the confrontation is between the wealthy-elite and the average citizens. The needs and desires of the super-rich are diametrically opposite to those of the general public to the point that the super-rich are willing to kill us, lie to us and to use our children as pawns in an imperialist war in their insatiable pursuit of ever-growing wealth. The ruling-elite are gangsters for capitalism who lie, kill and violently intimidate the general population all in an effort to steal and secure potentially lucrative markets.

    The only way these criminals will ever be bought to justice is through an organization of working class public. We are never going to be able to plead and beg the Democrats or Republicans to reopen an
    investigation that will bring down America’s criminal ruling-elite. Hell, most of them are members of America’s criminal ruling-elite. Many of the same people that we would be pleading with to reopen the investigation would themselves face long prison terms or a death sentence were the truth of 9-11 embraced legally. We can’t plead with “them”, rather WE have to do it ourselves through the organizing of massive protests, including work stoppages and protest rallies, and the subsequent rise of a political party that represents the interests of working class people and society as a whole rather than the pursuit of

    The America that would arise from the ashes would hardly resemble the criminal enterprise that exists today. Bringing down the criminals responsible for 9-11 would be nothing short of revolutionary. The
    Bush’s and similar ilk would completely disappear from the political landscape. The O’Reilly’s, Hannity’s and the Limbaughs would become pariahs.

    Bringing down the real criminals of 9-11 would reveal the contradictions inherent in the organization of a society where a small group of super-rich, politically-dominant individuals, whose needs and desires run diametrically opposite to the needs and desires of the general public, are so easily able to time and time again conspire against our fellow countrymen. Bringing down the real criminals of
    9-11 would expose capitalism as a corrupt, social order.

    If anyone wants to be a single-issue voter with revolutionary impact, the reopening of the 9-11 investigation is that issue.

  2. Marcelle Cendrars said on January 5th, 2008 at 11:30am #

    I really trust that readers won’t think I’m self-promoting when I recommend that I believe it’s a very appropriate time for DVoice editors to post my recently submitted “Five ‘Negative’ Reasons to Vote for Ron Paul.” Hint: It’s VERY far from supporting the thrust of Goff’s guff here. Blessings, Marcelle

  3. Max Shields said on January 5th, 2008 at 11:56am #

    Stan Goff, say it, you are a conservative libertarian. Feel better now. Ok.

    Make your case for the ideology if you must. You think a president can alter the trajectory of 200 years? You must think George Bush actually created US policy!!!!

    Laughable. Really. Yes, some of what you say could fall under the role of command-in-chief. And yes none of the other clowns (Kucinich excepted) would pull the troops out of hot spots like Afganistan and Iraq; but you really think the president (well you do) is the guy who runs US foreign policy? Not to mention that you really think Paul is a viable (that is he’ll win) candidate for the Repubs.

    Marcelle Cendrars, yes I’d be interested in your post.

  4. HR said on January 5th, 2008 at 12:26pm #

    Yeah, let’s veto the federal highway spending … and stop sprawl. This assertion is pure dreaming. Cut off public funding for roads, and you will get private toll roads. As long as there is money to be made in development, developers will find backers to pay for private highways to the developments.
    People really oughta read a little history. Toll roads were rejected by most in the 18th Century in favor of public financing of streets and roads, open, and free, for ALL to travel.

    As long as there is a buck to be made in development, developers will come up with money to build their own private access roads. Besides, development requires LOCAL approval and permitting to proceed … and there are plenty of Libertarian county supervisors and commissioners who are ready bend over backward to approve even the most environmentally and socially destructive projects, upholding the private property rights so trumpeted by the right. Yeah, they’re big on local control, which means control by the local wealthy folks in reality, in a country that is a patchwork of small feudal kingdoms. No damned thanks. It’s close to that already. We need a change, in the other direction.

    Libertarians hide their goal of establishing a feudal system here that would make the horrors of 19th Century working-class life seem like a paradise. Candy coating that bitter pill with the high-sounding, but empty rhetoric of freedom and liberty does nothing to change its reality.

  5. Lloyd Rowsey said on January 5th, 2008 at 1:01pm #

    “I’d vote a dead cat that was anti-war before I’d vote a resurrected Eugene Debs if he showed up and supported the war.”

    I don’t hear anyone who’s accusing Stan Goff of being this and ignoring that…I don’t hear any one of you folks dealing with Mr. Goffs’ dead cat. Or even attempting to describe another way to enfranchise the millions of Americans who would vote for the same dead cat.

  6. Max Shields said on January 5th, 2008 at 1:28pm #

    Lloyd Rowsey,
    “Or even attempting to describe another way to enfranchise the millions of Americans who would vote for the same dead cat.”

    Be careful what you wish for. These are false choices. It tickles Mr. Goffs’ fancy to be making this argument instead of the progressive cat – Kucinch. Whether one or the other has the slightest chance of being president seems irrelevant since neither do;but Paul makes for a fun romp on the dark side.

    So, you’ve got anti-war E. Debbs (aka Kucinich) and anti-war dead cat (aka Ron Paul) and all Goffs and Frank can come up with is the funny skinny guy with the squeaky voice. No not that one! The other one!

  7. Max Shields said on January 5th, 2008 at 1:46pm #

    You know what strikes me about this post, is that it’s completely bought into an authoritarian dictatorship formerly known as the president of the USA. Bush has made an impact oh yes he has.

    If I were king, off with there heads, tap my heels and be done with it. Where’s the veto pen and the bring the troops home pen and the end the carnage in Africa pen, and the get the hell out of South America’s business pen, and….the make a wish pen. Poverty, workers’ rights, civil and other such rights can wait; first things first, we need to privatize every common area not yet OWNED.

    Oh it’s fun to be the Conservative Libertarian King, it really is.

  8. Lloyd Rowsey said on January 5th, 2008 at 2:08pm #

    Who’s Frank?

  9. Max Shields said on January 5th, 2008 at 2:27pm #

    Joshua Frank (DV) who has been posting sporadically on the virtues of Ron Paul.

  10. John Smith said on January 5th, 2008 at 3:17pm #

    This one is good:…..hp?t=76805

    Ron Paul supporter complaining about the unfairness of state-based politics. Another supporter reminding him/her this is what they are fighting for.

    ” it just seems like it woudl be smarter to have a standard and have each state do the same thing… it seems like it would be more fair that way.”

    “That’s what we’re fighting for though isn’t it? States rights and all…”

  11. Paul C said on January 5th, 2008 at 3:31pm #

    The one-issue line from Stan is almost exactly the same line Hitchens used after 911.

    There is something odd about the two Brits from the Nation – Hitchens and Cockburn – mirror images of one another; each getting old and encouraging us to support cons – neo and paleo.

    Sorry Alex if I misrepresented you, but Counterpunch overlaps just a bit too much.

  12. Lloyd Rowsey said on January 5th, 2008 at 4:12pm #

    You know what strikes me about your posts in this stream, Max? We’ve GOT about as much an “authoritarian dictatorship” as we can have under the circumstances, given that America is a very big country, and given that the dictator is an idiot and a religious nut and his minions are the same. But the circumstances can certainly degenerate further, and quickly. While the internet ego-games and lifeless disputes persist and even intensify. Wake up, Max – the wars with the explosions are inner-directed. Bush couldn’t care less who’s a libertarian or a socialist or a little blue-haired lady in Pasadena. He’s a nuclear missile on inertial guidance oh yes he is. And we’re all downrange.

  13. Donald Hawkins said on January 5th, 2008 at 4:40pm #

    Many factors affect climate, including position relative to land and water masses, altitude, topography, prevailing winds, ocean currents, and prevalence of cyclonic storms ( N. Pag.) However, the most important factor is latitude, or position between the equator and the North or South Pole. In general, warmer climates are found closer to the equator, while colder climate are found as one moves nearer to the poles.
    This is because the sun, which is the primary source of warmth and energy on earth does not shine equally on all parts of the planet. The earth rotates on an axis defined by the north and south poles, and the sun is located perpendicularly to this axis, meaning that its rays are received with greater intensity near the equator and with less intensity near the poles. The result is a difference in climate.

    Ice has been building up in the Arctic for 2.7 million years. Until now, no-one has been able to prove what mechanism brought about this accumulation of ice.
    However, a team of international scientists led by Antoni Rosell, a researcher for the Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, and Gerald H. Haug of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (Germany) has discovered the mechanism that set off the accumulation of ice.

    A sudden fall in average world temperatures 2.7 million years ago caused the Arctic Ocean to freeze and Europe and North America to become covered in ice. The reason seems obvious: the cold temperatures caused ice to build up.

    But the drop in average temperatures is not enough to explain why so much ice built up and has remained to this day. For many years, scientists have been speculating on what caused this accumulation of ice and have proposed many theories.

    A team of international scientists led by Antoni Rosell, a researcher for the Catalan Institute for Research and Advanced Studies and the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology at the Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, and Gerald H. Haug of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (Germany) has discovered the mechanism that set off the accumulation of ice.

    The researchers have worked mainly with existing data from the remains of marine organisms that have built up over the years, as well as with climate models.

    According to the research, the most important change during the period was a 7ºC (13ºF) increase in the difference between summer and winter temperatures within just a few centuries

    The summers became warmer and the winters cooler, causing more water to evaporate from the sea into the atmosphere during the summer. The air became more humid and snowfall increased. When Winter set in, the sharp decrease in temperatures enabled ice to build up.

    But what brought about this difference in temperatures? The researchers are the first to find evidence showing that this was caused by the stratification of ocean water, due to an increase in freshwater. This means that water mixed less than previously, forming layers of different densities in different strata and at different depths.

    When spring came, the layers closest to the surface began to heat up. Since the water did not mix, the temperature of those layers continued to rise, and increasing amounts of water evaporated. During the summer months, this effect intensified, as higher temperatures increase stratification; in winter, however, the water began mixing again, and temperatures dropped more than in previous years.

    The authors of the research have reconstructed the seasonal changes in temperature in the North Pacific by reinterpreting the data obtained from analysing the remains of marine organisms and by checking these temperatures using a climate model.

    This reconstruction shows how the ocean, in terms of its surface temperature and its size during different seasons, and water evaporation from the sea can generate significant general changes to the climate, as well as more intense glacial cycles and a general cooling of the planet’s temperatures.

    According to Antoni Rosell, “through this research we can understand in greater detail why climate change occurs, and more specifically, the role of the ocean in producing climate change. This information will improve climate models used to predict how today’s climate will change in the future.
    Did any bodu notice that storm going into the West coast and there is a few more behind that one. The Planet is still warming and change is the name of the game. This summer will be different to say the least. Change is what is needed will that happen as it looks like we have all these opposing forces. Well that storm going into the West is a force. You would think reasonable people would work together but somehow it doesn’t seem to be working out that way, why? If we can answer that question truthfully then we can see change until then I don’t think so.

  14. jesus was a monkey said on January 5th, 2008 at 4:45pm #

    i agree with brian mattox and every little thing he says. i’m afraid stan goff lost his credibility a long time ago…

  15. Lloyd Rowsey said on January 5th, 2008 at 6:35pm #

    Gee. I thought DV’s editors reviewed articles. Or, WHAT pray tell does Donald Hawkins’ previous post even purport to have to do with the article “Ron Paul’s Revolution”?

    Marcelle. I for one won’t think it’s “self-promoting” if you just post your piece on Ron Paul, whether or not DV’s editors think it’s an “appropriate time.” Apparently anyone can make that decison.

  16. Marcelle Cendrars said on January 5th, 2008 at 7:11pm #

    I just skimmed through the commentary…briefly. So I’m sure I missed a lot. Maybe that’s good, maybe not. But I do want to thank those who asked to see my Ron Paul piece. I do hope that DVoice chooses to post it or ask me for it (again) in the next couple of days. If they do not post it, perhaps I’ll take Lloyd’s advice…and take a shot at posting it here. Perhaps those interested will keep checking for it or request it from me at moc.oohaynull@ardnecb. It does seem quite appropriate as per this blah blah. One final note: Lloyd’s passing comment about this being a “big country” should not be dismissed; the fact should be pondered seriously. For one, one can make a very good case for our post-democracy milieu not being able to accommodate “our size” even if necessary reforms were pushed through. Much too much focus, regardless, on presidential blah blah. Vote for who you like…and get on to meaningful activity to change the status quo. Best, Marcelle

  17. Deadbeat said on January 5th, 2008 at 7:49pm #

    Ms. Cendrars,

    Could you start a blog where we can link to your articles? This way if your articles are not posted by DV you can always post a link to your blog.

  18. Max Shields said on January 5th, 2008 at 8:35pm #

    “Wake up, Max – the wars with the explosions are inner-directed. Bush couldn’t care less who’s a libertarian or a socialist or a little blue-haired lady in Pasadena. He’s a nuclear missile on inertial guidance oh yes he is. And we’re all downrange.”

    I’m awake and I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

  19. messianicdruid said on January 5th, 2008 at 9:39pm #

    Change, change, change; most of you are is begging for and while some of you are promising change. The reason: Americans have changed from being people who believed in Liberty to people who want someone to give them security in exchange for Liberty.

    All Ron Paul can do is get the Executive Branch off our backs, you all will have to do the rest. He has not changed his ways in the last thirty years, he still believes that the Consitution and Liberty are what matters.

    The problem is you people do not deserve a man like Ron Paul. Here’s a Bill Moyers interview: pay attention…

  20. Abe said on January 5th, 2008 at 10:29pm #

    Excellent article. I’m a left-leaning Hispanic civil libertarian who disagrees partially with Ron Paul on immigration. However, I wholeheartedly support him as the only candidate in either major party who will bring an end to U.S. imperialism right away. Obama-speak won’t do it. Hillary will continue playing Napoleon. The only change Obama is interested in is taking more change out of our pockets for big business that is controlling the Democratic Party. Look at how much Microsoft supports both parties. Ron Paul has always OPPOSED domestic spying, the Patriot Act, the Iraq conquest, the 100 U.S. foreign military bases, the racist War on Drugs, the heartless ban on medical marijuana and the big bankers’ hidden tax on low and middle class Americans through inflation and the devaluation of the American dollar. The Ron Paul Revolution is the real deal. Liberals and conservatives continue to unite behind Ron Paul.

  21. Lloyd Rowsey said on January 5th, 2008 at 11:11pm #

    The Max whom I urged to wake up posted, in ridicule of Goff’s article making the strongest anti-Iraq war statement of any article I’ve read at DVoice (and I admittedly haven’t read them all), and as far as I can tell simply because he considers Goff to be a libertarian:

    “Bush has made an impact oh yes he has….If I were king, off with there heads, tap my heels and be done with it. Where’s the veto pen and the bring the troops home pen and the end the carnage in Africa pen, and the get the hell out of South America’s business pen, and….the make a wish pen. Poverty, workers’ rights, civil and other such rights can wait; first things first, we need to privatize every common area not yet OWNED.”

    Whereas the Max whose opinions I respect posted, on New Year’s Eve:

    “The old industrial/corporate/endless growth paradigm spouted by Dems and Reps has given us endless war.”

    Are these the same Max Shields?

  22. Ken Smith said on January 6th, 2008 at 12:07am #

    I don’t know Stan Goff, but it’s likely that we have some friends in common. I have been reading him for several years, I’m aware of his passion for some issues, and I recognize that his endorsement of Ron Paul is a significant departure. I also recognize why he is doing this.

    Rewriting a mantra from several elections ago, “It’s the war, stupid.”

    It’s the war. Nothing else matters as much. Stop the war and pull back troops scattered all over the world and this will cause changes in domestic policies. These changes will be tough and not always pleasant, but changes must be made.

    It is too simple to blame only George W. Bush. The USA has been involved in foreign wars for much of our history. Just consider the first line of the Marine Corps Hymn: “From the Halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli.” Montezuma refers to the Battle of Chapultepec in Mexico in 1848. Tripoli refers to the First Barbary War and the Battle of Derna in North Africa in 1801. That’s two centuries of warfare, some of which may have been justified, but mostly the wars were to protect commerce or to gain access to natural resources.

    It’s time for a change. It was a long run, but world politics and economies have changed and are continuing to change, and the imperial model is a bit long in the tooth.

    Like Stan Goff, I am a one-issue voter. I’m a 67-year-old, semi-retired American who has lived outside the USA for the past six years, first in France and elsewhere in Europe, and now Mexico for the past ten months. I live fairly comfortably on Social Security and, yes, I realize that Ron Paul as president may try to tinker with
    my monthly check. I will worry about that when the time comes, but for now I’m more concerned about my personal degree of responsibility and culpability in the killings of innocent civilians.

    Three months ago, I registered with Democrats Abroad Mexico so that I could easily vote in the primary election. I also attended several meetings where I met some decent and good people, many of whom are as opposed to the war as I am. But, they are trying to work within the current system. At one gathering of Democrats, I said I am a one-issue voter and my issue is the war. I added that I would vote for the ghost of Richard Nixon if I were convinced it would bring an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    There was an audible gasp by the staunch Democrats — a reaction quite similar to some of the responses to Stan Goff here. I explained that I plan to vote for Dennis Kucinich in the February 5 primary, even though it is certain that he will lose. Then, in the general election it is likely that I will vote for Ron Paul, who will not get the Republican nomination and it is possible that he will run as an independent.

    I know that I’m in the minority in my singular view to the coming election. But, I also know for certain that this is a sizable minority of good Americans who oppose the current wars not only on moral and legal grounds, but also because our country is going bankrupt.

    I manage the web site for my good friend, Joe Bageant ( Joe is back in Belize, writing his next book, and lately the web site has been updated only with letters from readers, sometimes with a reply from Joe. I am convinced that these letters from readers represent a large percentage of Americans — maybe not a majority, but still enough to eventually influence politics.

    Take a look at these letters. They’re real, from real people. We only post a fraction of the letters received, but those selected truly reflect the tenor of almost all. Sometimes I delete personal information or change a name to protect the letter writers. Sometimes I correct minor typos and grammatical errors. Other than that, these are real letters from real people who see the big picture and they are worried about the future of our country.

    I’m in the middle-of-nowhere Mexico and it is not possible for me to change my registration to Republican, as Stan Goff suggests. But, now that Kucinich has been pushed off the playing field, I believe changing registration is a good idea and I encourage you to do so.

    In short, I applaud Stan Goff.

  23. Alice said on January 6th, 2008 at 12:25am #

    Why would anyone vote for a person who is anti-choice?

  24. Marcelle Cendrars said on January 6th, 2008 at 12:47am #

    Merci mucho to Deadbeat for the idea of posting elsewhere. I’m looking into having a friend (who’s got an interesting blog of his own)…post some of my articles –perhaps all– as they come down the chute. Thanks, again, too to Lloyd for the encouragement. Blessings, Marcelle P.S. Will wait to see what comes down posted within the next 48 hours or so…and then…all else being equal (and “unfair,” by disgruntled me)…you can look forward to my announcing my buddy’s site (replete with MC blah blah).

  25. Donald Hawkins said on January 6th, 2008 at 6:49am #

    Despite these early warnings about likely future nonlinear rapid response,
    IPCC continues, at least implicitly, to assume a linear response to BAU forcings.
    Yet BAU forcings exceed by far any forcings in recent palaeoclimate history. Part of the explanation for the inconsistency between palaeoclimate data and
    IPCC projections lies in the fact that existing ice sheet models are missing
    realistic (if any) representation of the physics of ice streams and icequakes,
    processes that are needed to obtain realistic nonlinear behaviour. In the absence
    of realistic models, it is better to rely on information from the Earth’s history.
    That history reveals large changes of sea level on century and shorter timescales.
    All, or at least most, of glacial-to-interglacial sea-level rise is completed
    during the ca 6 kyr quarter cycle of increasing insolation forcing as additional
    portions of the ice sheet experience albedo flip. There is no evidence in the
    accurately dated terminations (I and II) of multi-millennia lag in ice sheet
    response. We infer that it would be not only dangerous, but also foolhardy to
    follow a BAU path for future GHG emissions.

    James Hansen and a few other scientists wrote this in the middle part of 2007. A lot has changed in just those few months. The ice up North that melted was big very big and just these storms so far this winter are changes pointing to one thing we are all in big trouble. Lloyd I will keep putting climate change anywhere I can as without a one hundred and eighty degree turn Worldwide we are all sunk. What it will take is more than say World War Two, total focus by all countries there is still time but not much. Last night on the debates Clinton was the only person who seemed to understand what we are up against. Rommey I think that is how you spell his name said we need longer than 10 years to make this little change over, sorry we don’t have ten years and remember things are going to start to go haywire anyway as we do this tuff times ahead but it won’t be borning

  26. Max Shields said on January 6th, 2008 at 6:50am #

    Lloyd Rowsey same Max. I was simply saying, as I have else where, that when given a choice between a progressive and a conservative libertarian, it appears there are DV posters who would rather flirt with the latter. I was, perhaps ineffectively, mocking the notion of a conservative libertarian as “king”. I have not changed my position one iota from NY eve .

    messianicdruid I agree that the heavy lifting must be done my us. The real work is at the grass-roots. And the idea that Paul will become the nominee of the Republican Party is more than fanciful it’s delusional (not that I’m against long shots).

    So, if we’re talking about a theoretical win by Paul, than why not the same theoretical win by Kucinich? Then, point by point, see who comes out on the issues that matter most to progressives. Both have shown undaunting consistency and straight talk on the issues over many years.

    As someone noted else where the disappointment is that both will forsake their convictions and support their party’s nominee.

  27. Donald Hawkins said on January 6th, 2008 at 7:09am #

    On that boring part what do you see in today’s World? What I see is people living in a dream World. Yes the system makes it easy to go there and we are all told to buy this or that to be a real person and go there thinking we are doing something special. Gave me a break. It sure looks like this economy is coming to a screeching halt and of course many people will try and get it going again anyway they can. Like I said not boring is one way to put it. Just in the next few years the changes to climate well listen to “White Rabbit”, Jefferson Airplane. This is a tuff one but to start now is key as it only gets harder the longer we wait.

  28. Donald Hawkins said on January 6th, 2008 at 7:52am #

    In late September — after pools closed down for the year — state officials indefinitely banned most outdoor water use in North Georgia to conserve water. Unless someone draws from a well or trucks in water, that means no filling or adding water to outdoor pools. That applies regardless of whether they’re in back yards, at subdivision clubhouses, in public parks.
    “Anybody in the pool business can tell you all you have to do is leave a pool unmaintained for a few weeks in warm weather and you have a festering pot of algae and bacteria and bugs and frogs,” said Craig Sears, owner of Sears Pool Management Consultants Inc., which manages about 175 community pools across the Atlanta area. “In a pool you have a contained body of water that can really become a health hazard.”

    American style it’s the pool stupid. Oh no it isn’t when that snow pack starts to melt out West watch that one unless you live there. The heat this summer and that little problem with the Greenland ice sheet and sea level rise and in China water and food. Australia drought and India flooding and this is for 2008. In just five years is it going to get better, no. We can still slow this down but tuff times ahead. We can do this but to dial an 800 number and buy the handy dandy whatever is so far from reality that if you listen real closely off in the distance you can hear the laughter of the gods. Sleepwalking to Extinction not me I am going to keep trying. Change is what is needed will that happen as it looks like we have all these opposing forces. You would think reasonable people would work together but somehow it doesn’t seem to be working out that way, why? If we can answer that question truthfully then we can see change until then I don’t think so.

  29. Lloyd Rowsey said on January 6th, 2008 at 7:55am #

    Thank you, Marcelle Cendrars, Max Shields, and Donald Hawkins.

    My question to Donald is: if we don’t prevail on “the war” — whether its newest surge is mainly in Iraq, in Iran, in Pakistan, or in Eastern Africa — how can we prevail on the environment? My only criticism of environmental politics is that it detracts from anti-war politics. You say melting ice gives us at most the “next few years” and you’re bored with non-environmental politics. At most we have the next few months to do something about the war.

    I don’t have a question for Max. Just another statement. As of 01.06.2008, Ron Paul has a chance assuming he’s not assassinated; Dennis Kucinich does not.

  30. Donald Hawkins said on January 6th, 2008 at 8:39am #

    I am not bored with anything the war when it first started I e-mailed CNN, MSNBC and kept saying it’s not to late to turn those ships around. Last night on the debates the Democrats almost to the last person said if elected they would get the troops out in one year. Well whoever becomes President is going to have there hands full. It has to be a total focus China, India, all the countries on going talks on how to slow this down and at the same time do what it takes to do that. Stop the war about nothing, Oh that’s right it was about oil the very thing we need to keep in the ground. Everything changes everything you knew about how stuff works out the window it’s a new age and a very tuff age it will take imagination, focus and hard work. Somehow I know this well be good for all of us as the way things are going now is well not good for the mind as we can all see. We have no choice in the matter it’s now or later and the later part means there is a good chance we can’t slow it down. The people who know and who I might add have no skin in the game are trying there best to tell people but of course there are those people who live in that dream World or a better way to put it want you to live in that dream World. Sorry I am not going there. I could keep witting for an hour but time is short total focus, total focus. A few million people standing in front of the Capital all saying one thing Change now, change now will that happen maybe but the sooner the better. Remember the people who stand to lose the most because of a total change are going to be kicking and crying all the way. It has already started to happen because of the economy and the funny part they are the ones who played the biggest part in this little downturn that could be a big downturn because of something called greed. I know it’s been talked about for thousands of years well let me say it again it’s called greed. Total focus the people who read and write for DV are very smart people so I think most know what is needed. Make that 5 million to start.

  31. messianicdruid said on January 6th, 2008 at 9:14am #

    You guys bought into the “we’ll get them out” promise two years ago, and the demopublicans ain’t done squat. I don’t know Kucinich well enough to say that he hasn’t changed his message in thirty years. I do know Ron Paul well enough.

    “Remember the people who stand to lose the most because of a total change are going to be kicking and crying all the way.” Yes, I talk to them everyday. They say Ron Paul cannot be elected, and I ask why? Their answers boil down to the fact that they {the people I’m talking to – not TPTB} don’t want him elected. They are sucking the gooberment teat, and can’t or won’t learn to grow a garden, or learn to fish, or eat a squirrel, or forage for dandelions.

    My grandson has been crying at daycare. My kids have had to go with him because they thought there was a bully or something {3 years old}. My wife asked him the other day over the phone, “why do you cry at school” the little guy says “I need my mommy”. My son is working full time and my daughter-in-law is working a full time job and about 25 hours a week part time, because they believe they are just getting by. Maybe so, but, part of it is 300 a month credit card debt.

    I am sick of this massive open-air mind control experiment. The subjects look at you like you are the one that’s crazy when you say anything derogatory about it. “They” also keep us arguing with one another with all these ridiculous labels. I think what Stan Goff is saying is – stop being so frigging label bound that you can’t do something smart. Use the system to defeat the system. The only reason RP can’t be elected is if enough people don’t vote for him.

    It is a revolution. If you sit on your arse pretending it’s not then you have only yourself to blame, when 15 years from now you are sitting around a camp fire some where in northern Canada, thinking about the good-ole-days.

    I hope some of you are from NH and can spend the next few days doing something real, ie: that really matters. IOW, it is my hope, Ron Paul is going to surprise you in NH.

  32. Donald Hawkins said on January 6th, 2008 at 9:42am #

    Messianicdruid thank you. We all need to get on the same page and how do we do that unplug. The dream World is just that a dream World. Remember it is there for one reason to hide the World to control your thoughts. Last night on the debates to listen to those candidates was like listen to little children talk about the World. That is of course if you don’t live in a dream World. There is a few of us out here. Last night Obama said about climate change we need wind. solar, biomass but the biomass part he almost forgot. Sorry you need to know your stuff a little better than that.

  33. Marcelle Cendrars said on January 6th, 2008 at 9:45am #

    My “The Weight of It” is posted at I’ve asked my friend there to consider posting “Five ‘Negative’ Reasons to Vote for Ron Paul,” but I don’t know if she’ll want to or be able to; interested parties might consider checking there for the next few days. Another friend is in the process of posting all of my writing since September…but he won’t get to the Ron Paul thang for a bit ’cause he’s moving along chronologically.

    Regarding Kucinich…I thought the scorecard was in in terms of him discrediting himself…by attaching himself to Obama, etc.

    Regarding The Environment. Sure, the points are all no-brainers, worth repeating as long as activism doesn’t stop with despair or demanding that only that be addressed for now. Chomsky, for one, makes a very good case for activists focusing on the nuclear proliferation simultaneously…an issue which he considers “the” primary concern as I write.

    A recommendation for people to scream at the top of their lungs at the White House is not the road you want to take. My “The Weight of It” provides another approach…which, granted, assumes that we’ll be around for another few years to address the environmental catastrophe…from a new angle.

    Again, anyone who wants a particular piece alluded to can request it from me directly at moc.oohaynull@ardnecb.

    Blessings, Marcelle…wishing you all a lovely day. Hugs, Lloyd.

  34. Marcelle Cendrars said on January 6th, 2008 at 10:18am #

    By the way, what’s Ron Paul’s position on Socialized Medicine? I haven’t looked it up yet on his site, in part, ’cause I want some feedback on this public table first. I’m guessing that Goff believes that pulling out of our “wars” would funnel $$ into such a program. Is that an accurate take? Best, Marcelle

  35. messianicdruid said on January 6th, 2008 at 10:25am #

    “Last night Obama said about climate change we need wind. solar, biomass but the biomass part he almost forgot. Sorry you need to know your stuff a little better than that.”

    The reason they don’t understand climate is they have no idea what causes “climate”. We have a hurricane dumping ten feet of snow in “sunny california” and these idiots cannot even call it a huuricane because their definition of a hurricane doesn’t fit what is actually happening on the ground. Until people understand what causes weather they will be jumping through hoops for the mattoids.

    Marcelle: I think he talks about that at the link above…

  36. messianicdruid said on January 6th, 2008 at 10:27am #

    Sorry, I meant way above…

  37. messianicdruid said on January 6th, 2008 at 10:33am #

    As long as you are checking out weather stuff:

  38. Max Shields said on January 6th, 2008 at 10:58am #

    Marcelle Cendrars, “Regarding Kucinich…I thought the scorecard was in in terms of him discrediting himself…by attaching himself to Obama, etc.”

    Look can we keep the argument straight. Before entering into political calculation (which is what Kucinich did unwisely with Obama), the score card hasn’t even begun between Kucinich and Paul. First things first. I dare say Kucinich would score pretty high on your health care point (single Payer non-privatized health care for all). And Paul?

    Again, this is all an academic exercise. Neither Paul nor Kucinich will be the candidates on their respective party tickets. The point is to flush out the differences between a Dem progressive and a Conservative Liberterian Republican.

  39. Donald Hawkins said on January 6th, 2008 at 11:12am #

    Very good it was a Hurricane. Unfortunately the reality will be right out side your front door. Drought, flooding and on and on. Although some people will be slow to catch on because of that dream World just a few more years and then what. I hope we will be at the total focus in just a few years. Going fishing and hunting. Remember when the Vice President’s aim was just a little off? What I found interesting was the birds were put in cages then let go and after the hunt if you call it that the birds were cleaned by other people then vacuum packed and taken to I guess Washington by jet where I am sure somebody cooked them and then eaten I guess if they had enough energy left to do that after all that hard work. My first thought after hearing of this was these people and that reality and they are in control of how many nuclear weapons. Frightening to say the least. Good Job Brownie and Mission Accomplished. The next President how about Ok people I am parking Air Force One I have got all the top people in there field on many subjects and it is now a total focus on climate change and how to help other countries and how they can help us. Tuff times ahead but we will all get through this if we work together. Something like that. Come on is it that big of a problem it sure is

  40. Marcelle Cendrars said on January 6th, 2008 at 11:35am #

    There is no reference to socialized medicine on the link that was recommended for Ron Paul…his interview with Bill Moyers. In fact, there’s talk about not wanting a “nanny” society…which kind of places him on the other end of the spectrum via suggestion….

    Kucinich’s health plan is not anything like the truer socialized medicine supported by the Peace and Freedom Party; it’s VERY short of doing the trick. And speaking of Kucinich in terms of miscalculation vis-a-vis Obama is like saying we made a “mistake” in Iraq and Vietnam. Poor choice of words, to say the least. Anyone worth a dime on the presidential stump could not possibly have a kind word to say about Obama.

    The “choice” is not to be limited as per the parameters put forth my Max Shields. The choices are much greater.

    I recommend that readers go back up to the site I recommended above. It is the White Light Black Light blog which has posted the P&F Party stance vis-a-vis socialized medicine. That’s not to recommend voting for the P&F Party. That’s simply to give readers a shot at seeing Kucinich and his “health coverage” (and others’) approach in a better (more disgusting) light.

    There are loads of people on my end here who are dying of cancer and the like. All the talk about the health plans offered by the “major candidates” is far worse than silly. It’s highly offensive.

    Talk about Iraq and talk about The Environment –though absolutely necessary along with action on those counts– must not push aside the immediate need to embrace free health care for one and all. I believe that Stan’s article fails miserably on that count. As do some of the comments here.

    There is no reason whatsoever to be involved in a discussion regarding where the money will come from when it’s obvious that there’s plenty of money available…if people will move in solidarity. Which means they must stop talking, lecturing and writing exclusively with their heartbeats.

    To get motivated, sit in any local Emergency Room for a bit. Check in with yourself…to see to what degree you “relate” to the suffering people. Then resolve –if it’s in you– to get with people who want to change that easily changeable, disgusting fact of life…that people suffer unnecessarily.

    We need to pull back from spending so much time going blah blah about the pros and cons of this and that prez candidate, and get with real people on our block…following a new paradigm.

    Anyone who thinks that we’ve exhausted the means available for creating solidarity is greatly mistaken. I’m personally meeting with –or one of my colleagues will be meeting with– a few Hispanic students today at San Jose State University…to discuss mobilizing their community on counts touched upon above. In a NEW way.

    That NEW way was derived from…first giving up on the old approaches…one of which was debating the worth of this and that Prez Candidate…and voting along the usual lines. Throwing up the old…in order to clear the air for new ideas. And that’s what happened.

    You can see one approach that I came up with by viewing my “The Weight of It”…posted on the link I’ve provided above. Or you can contact the editors at DVoice and ask them to post the piece.

    Blessings, Marcelle

  41. Max Shields said on January 6th, 2008 at 12:17pm #


    My challenge is really to Goff (as was yours) as well as the ever-the-Ron Paul promoter, Joshua Frank.

    I’m not offering Kucinich as an ultimate alternative, but a comparative one given the field at this moment and most specifically the Conservative Libertarian Ron Paul.

    The attractor for most pro-Paul progressives seems to be the US empire’s foreign policy and endless war. But, on that basis, Kucinich offers a very strong progressive comparison and then ups that with many other issues which Paul would never support.

    So, again, I don’t want to cloud this straightforward comparison with the flavors of socialism vs single payer for all health care. We can save that for another discussion (in my humble opinion) and I’m more than happy to look more closely at the site you mention.


  42. Marcelle Cendrars said on January 6th, 2008 at 1:07pm #

    Would welcome feedback on that P&F Party statement from anyone. Thanks, Max for the follow-up. Best, MC

  43. Donald Hawkins said on January 6th, 2008 at 1:48pm #

    How about this. Does anybody watch CNBC I do as it’s fascinating to watch. After watching them for years I am almost sure a flying saucer could land in front of the Washington Monument and this is what you would hear. “We just got a report a large flying saucer has landed in front of the Washington Monument and it is reported a tall humanoid and a 10 foot silver robot are standing in front of the ship”. ” The tall humanoid has requested a meeting of the World policy makers.” “Anyway Apple is up today on good sales numbers and housing is still headed South”.

  44. Donald Hawkins said on January 6th, 2008 at 2:14pm #

    A true story and it just happened about 10 minutes ago. I have a small bait and tackle shop and many people come in during the day. We also have 9 puppies about six weeks old and today we started to give them away. Well this nice family just came in new young people from Mexico. They were well mannered, disciplined and in good shape as they probably don’t eat fast food. They took one of the puppies and one of the little boys kept looking at this model airplane I have had for years DC6 sitting by my computer. I gave it to him and said,”it’s all yours have fun”. What do you think should I have called immigration instead? No

  45. Jim said on January 6th, 2008 at 2:41pm #

    This is a good compilation:

    including one of my favorite:

    Title: To restore the inherent benefits of the market economy by repealing the Federal body of statutory law commonly referred to as “antitrust law”, and for other purposes.
    Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron

    Funny thing about market economies. They are based, in the modern age, on limited liability and juridical persons, i.e. government -sanctioned corporate power. Rothbard supported limited liability. These corporations are bound by their shareholders to maximize profit. Where possible this means eating up rivals. Where necessary this means bribing government.

    And wasn’t Jeffersonianism ended by Jefferson, with the Louisiana purchase?

  46. messianicdruid said on January 6th, 2008 at 2:47pm #

    Test Returns:

    I’d like to see some for “the other side”…

  47. Alice said on January 6th, 2008 at 3:45pm #

    Ron Paul is anti-choice.

  48. Binh said on January 6th, 2008 at 6:04pm #

    Mr. Frank I have to say I’m disappointed that you’ve taken to Ron Paul. You say that “he’s a pretty strict Constitutionalist” but his voting record indicates that he missed the part about the separation of church and state.
    Talking about Ron Paul’s supporters misses the point: he’s an anti-war reactionary who stands against everything progressives stand for with the exception of Iraq and government spying. Again, I will refer you to his voting record since Sherry Wolf took apart the contradictions of his ideology.
    Refusing to endorse Paul doesn’t mean we can’t engage his supporters who are doing the wrong thing for the right reason any more than refusing to support Hillary Clinton (or Kerry back in ‘04) would prevent us from engaging with their supporters.

  49. messianicdruid said on January 6th, 2008 at 6:22pm #

    “Ron Paul is anti-choice.” Wonder why? Oh yeah, he’s an Ob-Gyn doctor. Go figger…

  50. Marcelle Cendrars said on January 7th, 2008 at 9:09am #

    My friend hasn’t posted my “Five ‘Negative’ Reasons to Vote for Ron Paul” yet ’cause he’s posting my stuff chronologically…and that’s proceeding at a snail’s pace so…anyone who wants to receive the piece should contact me at moc.oohaynull@ardnecb. Thanks, Marcelle

  51. Alice said on January 7th, 2008 at 10:16am #

    Here is a link to your article, Marcelle…

    “Five ‘Negative’ Reasons to Vote for Ron Paul”

  52. Lloyd Rowsey said on January 8th, 2008 at 9:39am #

    messianicdruid. On the Weather Channel yesterday was an advertisement for an upcoming program named, “When Weather Changed History.” I’d think someone over their would sorta think that the weather has ALWAYS changed history, wouldn’t you?

  53. Lloyd Rowsey said on January 8th, 2008 at 9:41am #

    Are you getting all this, Marcelle? Smiley.

  54. Lloyd Rowsey said on January 8th, 2008 at 3:09pm #

    “The Weight of It” is absolutely first rate. Thank you, Marcelle, and thank you, Alice.
    🙂 = Smiley.
    – Lloyd

  55. Marcelle Cendrars said on January 10th, 2008 at 8:29am #

    Very good comment about the weather, Lloyd. Your energy is superb. Ditto for Alice. And others…as I accept my award at this podium. Seriously, even though I’m getting disappointed daily with the lack of support for doing something along new lines…the need to change the weather (which is making a different kind of historical change) remains. Loving best, Marcelle