As much as it pains me to do this (ok, maybe it doesn't) it is that time of the election cycle once again. It seems that every four years, Ron Paul shows up at a debate and says some things that are so good on domestic issues that some Republicans forget the insanity of his foreign policy and they start getting excited about his candidacy. Perhaps you are one of those people. If not, you may know one. If you are not one and you don't know one, you can usually find one on an internet forum board typing in all caps with horrible spelling. If you recognize any of these traits in yourself, or someone you know, please read this and share it with the others. Ron Paul will never be President of the United States, and his candidacy is a complete non-starter to most Republicans because Ron Paul is a bigot. Now I know, that is strong language. And perhaps you don't want it to be true so badly that you will convince yourself it is not. That is fine too, because you will see here that I can make such a convincing case that it doesn't matter if it is true or not. He can never win.

It's amazing how much can change in 3 years. In 2008, it was a Senator who told us that it was the policies of a President that were responsible for the shape of the economy. Now that Senator is President, and he is telling us that it is the failure of the Senate to work with him that is shaping our economy. 3 years ago, 7.2% unemployment was the worst economy since the Great Depression. Today, 9% unemployment is a recovery. $8 trillion in debt was unsustainable then. $12 trillion isn't enough now. It has been only 3 short years since the man who is complaining about Congress not working with him told us we should not vote for the other guy because he voted with the President 80% of the time. Yes, a lot has changed in the last 3 years. But do you remember then Senator Obama's reaction to Phil Graham's take on the economy?

At this point, I would like to declare that the verdict is in on Joe Paterno. Well, not so much on Joe. But it is on saying anything good about him. Score another point for the huddled masses yearning to be ignorant. Yes, I know that is a bit harsh, but even when the defense attorney for Sandusky allegedly produces the boy from the shower scene who is telling the same story that everybody except McQueary is telling, they are not deterred. It's either a hoax from the lawyer, the boy is lying, or Sandusky brainwashed him and he is covering for him. Isn't it even slightly possible that everyone but McQueary is telling the truth? "Of course not", they scoff.

Recently, Paul Krugman was on CNN describing how an alien attack would help our economic recovery. If you have not already seen it, no, this is not a joke. He said it and repeated it, so it was not a slip up either. In the video below, I have a little fun at his expense pointing out how silly of a notion it is, and discussing what it means for the Obama economic efforts if some far out scenario is needed to make his plans work. What I did not address in the video is the intellectual dishonesty contained in Paul Krugman's statement. In 2003, Paul was speaking at Berkley when he said the following. (below video)

I'm sure that some of my readers are ingredient hawks, and you never eat anything without knowing what is in it. Others, like myself, are more concerned with how the food tastes. But somewhere beyond the trans fats and monosodium glutamate, there might be something in your food that you don't know about. Might be. Oklahoma Senator Ralph Shortey hasn't found any instance of a specific case of a human fetus being used in the production of food, but his internet research has led him to believe that a law banning the process is necessary. Of course, he wasted no time in getting the wheels of justice in motion to stop this horrific practice, assuming of course that it has even started. He said the bill would also "raise public awareness", which is naturally low, since this isn't actually happening.