Various media buffoons, most notably Bill O’Reilly, claim to be shocked or offended by a recent statement by Ron Paul., which O’Reilly labeled as a “gaff.” In the course of a discussion on the Lew Rockwell radio show Ron mentioned that the Congressional Black Caucus was a part of the small anti-war contingent in Congress, but its members were not opposed to war for the same reasons that Ron is antiwar. Their main motivation as ideological “liberals,” he said, was to decrease defense spending so that more could be spent on welfare programs such as food stamps.
Some left-wing “journalists” predictably cried “racism” when they heard this, whereas a few neocons like O”Reilly implied that Ron has lost it.
In reality, the position on war of the Congressional Black Caucus is in fact the position of ALL “liberals” during the entire Cold War. They understood the Guns vs. Butter tradeoff, but “butter” to them stood for welfare, not private spending and investment. Indeed, when the Cold War ended “liberals” celebrated the prospects of what they called the “peace dividend.” By this they meant that, at long last, they would be able to achieve their dream of cutting defense spending in order to spend more on things like food stamps. O’Reilly is either ignorant of the history of the Cold War political scene or he is being dishonest. The same goes for left wingers like Rachel Maddow.6:25 pm on February 27, 2015 Email Thomas DiLorenzo