Interesting to see where this will lead. Also I wonder if anything similar will occur on the left.
I've been a Lyndon LaRouche supporter for years. . . . well, not a groupie laying the big bucks out for every hysterical crisis in their view. But more or less on the same page about the necessity for technology, the rejection of MSM/Brit Orbit population and environmental doctrine, and their more populist brand of socialism. We need to expand our population and improve our concept of education to enable people to address the need to create the conditions necessary to sustain life, improving on our good earth and colonizing whatever niches we can in the universe. The LaRouche folks are calling for the impeachment of Obama even while they claim the mantle of FDR and the New Deal. They say Obama is practically a genocidal British agent crazed with militarism and leading us into a nuclear holocaust. They also claim the Constitution as their own, with expansive views of what government can/should do for people under the "general welfare" clause. . . . .
While conservatives like Joel Skousen call him an owned communist (Russian) operative, I've never heard him use marxist rhetoric, and I believe he views Marx as a British asset who was paid to set up a tool for manipulating world politics, a classic Brit (and Machiavellian) political tactic of creating a useful division among the people that can be exploited to leverage your own power.
Ron Paul, on the other hand, is just an honest, independent man with sound principles for preserving some human liberties/rights/values in the face of an out-of-control ideological fascism denominated in elitism claiming the power of governance over the interests of the general people. There is a lot of crossover thinking going on between democrats of the LaRouche mindset and republicans with an emphasis on preserving human liberty.
Lyndon LaRouche has probably been an inspiration to Ron Paul in regards to political tactics. LaRouche people have routinely scored minor upsets around the country, and they have some viable democratic candidates in some national races, including one Texas congressional race. They just have never been able to energize a very large base. What the LaRouche people have is a strong black base, including the ear of some national level elected officeholders in both the Senate and the House. Some of the Martin Luther King legacy people have found a home with the LaRouche movement.
What Ron Paul has is a positively spotless personal history, and character beyond reproach, and he's standing in front of a very significant sector of American political ideals. He was practically the instigator/organizer of the Tea Party folks, before the mainstream Republican party moved in to compromise it.
Ron Paul has also succeeded in creating an organization/movement that will move right on without him, since it is solidly based on basic principles and not on his personality. And Ron Paul does draw democratic folks into his camp precisely because he is standing for principles that once formed the central idea of the Democratic Party, before it became the subordinated elitist tool it is today. Ron Paul has found a message that will unite thinking democrats and republicans who remain basic Americans in their values.
