Update: Notice that Nader is the author of the piece on Ron Paul on the list of top 100 influential people on Time’s 2012 list.
That list is pretty much a list of elite–approved figures. Of the two Indian figures on the list –
Anjali Gopalan is a gay rights advocate and her bio is written by Suketu Mehta (author of Maximum City and a Marxist writer given the “brown” beat in New York) and Mamata Banerjee is the “strong woman” from Bengal who can out-Marx the Marxists.
The 2012 list also included E. L. James (the alias of Erika Leonard) of “Fifty Shades of Grey” (read by many astute critics as a manual of pedophilic rape and grooming), who is coyly described as a writer of “saucy” stories whose work has “deeply stirred” people. The book, in my estimation, is not simply a mainstreaming of BDSM, or even of pedophilic rape (see my earlier blog post), but almost certainly an elite psyop full of trigger words and memes for any careful reader. If one believes in the existence of “Monarch mind-control” – and the evidence I’ve seen is suggestive but mostly speculative – this is surely an instance of it.
That Ron Paul figures on such a list is almost as good as placing a sticker on him with the word “elite-approved” on it.
His presence on the list also belies the notion that he is somehow a dark horse, being suppressed by the media.
I also noticed another figure promoted a lot at LRC – Salman Khan. And his write up is by Bill Gates.
ORIGINAL POST
Ralph Nader on the pros and cons of voting for Obama:
“He’s below average because he’s above average in his intellect and his knowledge of legality, which is violating with abandon.”
“I don’t know whether George W. Bush ever read the Constitution,” said Nader. “This man taught the Constitution, and this is what we got.”
Nader gave Obama this much: He’s the lesser of two evils when compared to GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. But he said Obama is “the more effective evil because he brings credibility, he brings the democratic heritage to it, he has legitimized the lawless war-mongering and militarism abroad of George W. Bush.”
Comment:
This is why I don’t recommend voting for Obama, even if he is more the “peace” candidate than Romney… on paper.
In the first place, peace or war can be thrust on a president by external circumstances, so we can end up with war even if we did vote for Obama.
Second, Obama is quite an effective and plausible imperialist, being both brown-skinned (and thus more palatable when he’s assassinating brown folk) and smooth-talking. You could make a good case that ineffective evil is always to be preferred to effective evil. Having a Goldman Sachs-related, Wall Street hustler in office, with a Mormon background (not that I have anything against Mormons), might make it quite easy to unite people against the empire.
So, as I’ve been saying, forget about voting. Don’t waste your time or energy or money. Save them for yourself. Leave the handicapping to people paid to do it and take care of yourself first.