Friday, July 22, 2011

Who can run with the big dog?

Well, by now unless you reside under a small rock at the bottom of the ocean you are aware that our hero, Ron Paul is once again committed to waging the good, big fight for the perhaps once again constitutional office of the Presidency of the United States.

With the record breaking home run knocked out of the park(at 75 years old,) is there any doubt that the good Lord is with him? He is the personification of the proverbial "idea who'se time has come."

America is finally catching on to the stature and wisdom of this great statesman. With the advent of the internet and sites like you-tube it has become clear that the things everyday Americans find critically important are coincidentally the very things Ron Paul zeros in on as a matter of his daily to-do list.

So, the question becomes, Who can this wonder of constitutionality select as a running mate, whom is worthy of the responsibility adeemed of the person who is a heartbeat away from the leadership of this great country?

I'm sure all of us loyal Ron Paul supporters can bandy about at least a couple of names as our suggestions.

Unfortunately many of these have built-in, shall we say, disadvantages, in terms of baggage they will bring with their presence, and will be shot down with ease by fortune's outrageous slings and arrows, becoming liabilities.

I however, after careful consideration of the options being proffered by the usual suspects have happened upon my own solution to the quandry, albeit one that would require some, ahhh, adjustments perhaps as far as party affiliations may be concerned. This man is one of the most intelligent and knowlegeable former presidential candidates I have ever heard speak and is unquestionably loyal to the constitution insofar as I have been able to ascertain. I invite any interested parties to access this patriot's blog at


I can give dozens of reasons why a Paul-Keyes ticket would be unstoppable, but perhaps one of the most cogent would be that Alan Keyes is not a carreer politician, but a statesman who would continue the policies endorsed by the electorate should he be required to fill the shoes of our "Refounder."

Of course, the fact that he is a Black anti-abortion, conservative constitutionalist would go a long way toward dispelling the canard that Dr. Paul is somehow biased toward any particular racial type, not to mention the fact that potential voters of all racial persuasions would be delighted to witness the advancement of any man based on the content of his character rather than the color of his skin, to paraphrase.

Perhaps someone out there in the ether can prove to me why I am wrong about my suggestion, but until that happens I will continue to urge Dr. Paul, if he's listening to consider drafting this man as an invaluable asset to his campaign.

Thank you for your consideration.-Marsupial out