As this thread approaches 2000 views, "anyone noticing something?", less than 1% of "we the people" have commented/replied/offered their own "solution".
You just touched on a major pet peeve of mine: the annoying tendency of most within the loosely defined "liberty" movement -- Alex merely being the most visible -- to be all whine and no solution
And I'm sorry, but gushing over Rand Paul all day isn't even a partial solution.
Six years ago the antiwar movement had become a pathetic shell of what it was just two years earlier. Why? "Obaaama! Obaaama!"
Now the presidential candidacy of Rand Paul is having essentially the same pacifying affect on libertarians and conservatives that Obama had on liberals and progressives. Consider a few examples.
Agenda 21! Globalization! UN takeover of America! Ain't it awful? Are you cowering in fear yet?
Meanwhile, have you ever once heard Alex even mention, let alone promote, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act
? Neither have I. Why? "Raaand! Raaand!"
The private Federal Reserve! Elite bankers have seized control of our government are using it as a tool to advance their NWO agenda and destroy America in the process! Ain't it awful? Are you cowering in fear yet?
Meanwhile, have you ever once heard Alex even mention, let alone promote, the NEED Act
-- the one bill collecting dust in Congress that would actually put private banks in general, and Wall Street mega-banks in particular, out of the money-creation business -- and hence out of power? Neither have I. Why? "Raaand! Raaand!"
Illegal NSA spying! A surveillance control-grid right out of Orwell's 1984. Ain't it awful? Are you cowering in fear yet?
Meanwhile, it wasn't until about two months ago that Alex finally
mentioned the Surveillance State Repeal Act
on air, even though that bill was first introduced in July 2913. At first I saw this as an encouraging sign. Unfortunately, and to my usual disappointment, it proved to be a mere aberration from the norm, as he went right back to ignoring it again even when complaining for the millionth about just how awful Soviet-style surveillance of the American people is. (My hunch is that, at a subconscious level, he realized that the more he talked about that bill, the more likely it would prove politically embarrassing for his hero, Rand Paul, because many of his radio listeners would start asking annoying questions like -- "Hey, if there's a bill that's been collecting dust in Congress for nearly two years -- two years
-- that, if enacted, would actually repeal the entire Patriot Act, not just certain 'provisions' of it, and Rand Paul is being paid nearly $200 thousand a year in taxpayer money to occupy a seat in the legislative branch of government, then why has Paul never even mentioned
this bill publicly, let alone used his power as U.S. Senator to reintroduce it?" When push comes to shove, it seems, maintaining Paul's perceived reputation
as a heroic defender of the Bill of Rights takes precedence over exerting political pressure on him to actually do
something to defend the BoR. In other words, don't focus on actual solutions collecting dust in Congress; just pick up your pom-poms, and in your best sheep-like voice, chant "Raaand! Raaand!")
I could go on, but I think the point is made.
Now, having said all that, does that mean I think Alex -- despite whatever faults he may have (we all have them) -- isn't sincerely committed to defeating the NWO agenda, and is not (on balance) a positive force for change? Absolutely not. Quite the contrary. He deserves all the credit in the world for putting 9/11 truth on the map, and for all the hard-hitting documentaries he's made over the years exposing the global fascist agenda of the ruling elite.
However, as he so often says, "we're all in this together," and that, I would suggest, means he should be open to constructive criticism -- not from trolls who want to do nothing but spend all day nitpicking each and every thing he does -- but from fellow patriots who are as sincere as he is about defeating tyranny and securing a truly free and prosperous society for everyone.
Presidents have a "council of advisors" for a reason: because when you're trying to accomplish something on a national scale, and you want to see what the best course of action is, four eyes are better than two, six eyes are better than four, eight eyes are better than six, and so on and so forth.
That's my take on the whole issue, for whatever it's worth.