I continue to believe that Hillary will face Ron Paul in November.
Among others reasons, Obama is to the left of Hillary and most Democrats know that’s a losing proposition.
Obama speaks of change and if you examine his stump speech you discover that the change he favors is bigger government, much bigger government.
Here’s s checklist of new spending programs or new regulatory power he favors:
*universal health care
*higher fuel standards
*ending “tax giveaways to companies that ship out jobs overseas” (whatever that means)
*annual increase in the minimum wage
*federally-funded early childhood “education” (he means schooling)
*recruiting an “army of new teachers and paying them ‘better'” (better would be less in my view but that’s not what he means)
*a cap on carbon emissions (except from the mouths of politicians)
*corporate welfare for “renewable fuels”
He also promises to “finish the fight against al Qaeda in Afghanistan.” Another ten years?
After that specific checklist, the rhetoric resumes:
“I will lead the world against the common threats of the 21st century – nuclear weapons and terrorism; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease. That’s what Democrats must stand for, and that’s what America must stand for. And I’ll be a President who finally sends a message to the black, white, and brown faces beyond our shores; from the halls of power to the huts of Africa that says, ‘You matter to America. Your future is our future. And our moment is now.’”
It’s not clear what any of that means but you can bet your inflated bottom dollar that it will cost you dearly.
Coming after the biggest-spending administration in history, Obama’s “change” will be making it much bigger.
Yawn. That’s why Ron Paul is getting the support of those who favor real change.
After 110 years of Hamiltonian rule, isn’t it time for a change?
7:42 pm on November 23, 2007
