Another reason Obama is disingenuine:
A recent example is Barack Obama, who said last year that the problem with popular culture is that it “saturates our airwaves with a steady stream of sex, violence and materialism.” But only this week, he seemed to endorse one of the three. “If the economy continues to decline in the coming weeks, we should” send checks to people, he said. “This is the quickest way to help people pay their bills and get them to start spending.”
At least he wants to restore taxation to sane levels. (This is from the same article as the last post, just a different enough subject.)
We are in an election season, so of course people ask who would be the least bad person to head the state in the years ahead. The answer here is not at all clear, if it is not Dr. Paul. As with the 1930s we face a choice between militaristic fascism and Keynesian-style socialism combined with environmentalism. These are two very grim choices.
Obama is the least bad person that is electable. Ralph Nader and Ron Paul would be the best leaders, because they truly believe and understand fiscal and international conservatism (starting a war is not conservative), but, unfortunately, they are unelectable because they do not squeeze themselves into the narrow, polarized values of American society. I like parliamentary democracy – it may be harder to get anything done, but at least it is more truely representative of a society than our system.