Saturday, April 30, 2011

"Is Ron Paul More Progressive Than Obama"

An article by the commies over at CounterPunch explains how the good doctor is far less fond of massacring brown people en masse than the sainted president. Author Charles Davis rails against "corporatists" overly much, forgetting that the Great American Corporations are all owned by the Feds and so real anti-corporatism demands a separation of business and state, but his praise for Paul's commitment to "stop killing poor foreigners with cluster bombs and Predator drones" makes him a toke-worthy companion. About Paul, he writes:
He has never authorized a drone strike in Pakistan. He has never authorized the killing of dozens of women and children in Yemen. He hasn't protected torturers from prosecution and he hasn't overseen the torturous treatment of a 23-year-old young man for the "crime" of revealing the government's criminal behavior....
Can the same be said for Barack Obama? … Sure he's a murderer, in other words, but at least he's not a Republican!
 ... Democratic partisans – liberals – are willing to trade the lives of a couple thousand poor Pakistani tribesman in exchange for a few liberal catnip-filled speeches and NPR tote bags for the underprivileged. 
Davis also positively notes Paul's opposition to the drug war, which has spared society from (his numbers) 2.3 million mostly nonviolent poor Americans by caging them in reeducation camps. Of course, this helps rehabilitate "dangerous people" into productive members of society through intimidation, impoverishment and bunghole plunging.