"Paul is dangerous to the status quo. And that's a reason not to ignore him." So said John Kass, a columnist at the Chicago Tribune, in a piece which appeared in yesterday's Sunday paper.
Many of you who don't get the Tribune missed his comments. But since his column is one of the few things in the "Trib" worth reading, no one could be blamed for not subscribing to it. I often wonder why we do.
The article is worth your time for a few reasons, but the most compelling of them is that Kass goes where most journalists refuse to go. He actually covers a story that only is a story because of the purposeful manner by which it is being ignored by the vast majority of the media. Heck, even lefty comedians pretending to be journalists (John Stewart) have noticed the "ignoramuses" cover-up attempts.
It's amazing that "journalists" who see stories in almost everything that isn't important, can resist the temptation to write about a trend that definitely is a story. I suspect it's because they find it unsettling to their worldview. After paying so much lip service to "change" that wasn't, they seem terrified at the prospect of actual change.
And "statusquoers" at both ends of the political spectrum have good reasons to be afraid. If Ron Paul or someone like him gets elected, they will lose the power they have, to ideas, instead of merely to other people. And power lost to ideas is decidedly more difficult to regain. Just look how many hundreds of years it took to destroy the constitution and the ideas behind it.
To have it back (as it was written) would end their power to meddle in even the most minute details of our lives for the rest of their lives. So the stakes are high, and the political poker game may be down to the last bet. In ignoring Ron Paul and his ideas they are trying to put on their best poker face.
It's a helluva way to go "all in." But it may be their best strategy.
Be sure to read Kass' column, it can be found here.