Barack Obama, who, according the major media is practically the personification of “change,” has selected one of the longest-serving and status quo senators to be his running mate: U.S. Senator Joseph Biden.

Disenfranchised conservatives, nicknamed Obamacons, have been flirting with the idea of possibly voting for him if for no other reason than to end America’s deadly and dangerous foreign policy.

Before analyzing the likelihood of that possibility, it’s important to recall the events of 1976, when an obscure outsider from Georgia claimed he would go back to Washington, D.C. and shake things up.

At the time, America was reeling from high energy costs, a growing list of enemies, a shrinking list of allies, and a soft economy. The mainstream media, in giving presidential candidate Jimmy Carter non-stop publicity and coverage, promoted him as the man for the moment. Jimmy Carter was, claimed the Christian Science Monitor, “truly … indebted to no one man and no group interest.”

In a speech in Boston, candidate Carter said: “The people of this country know from bitter experience that we are not going to get ... changes merely by shifting around the same group of insiders.... The insiders have had their chance and they have not delivered.”

After Carter was elected, but before the inauguration, a top Carter aide named Hamilton Jordan remarked: “If ... you find a Cy Vance as Secretary of State and Zbigniew Brzezinski as head of National Security, then I would say we failed. And I’d quit. But that’s not going to happen.”

It did.

The man who promised “changes” began to sing a different tune than the one he promised voters. Both men filled those positions, Jordan didn’t quit, and numerous other Establishment insiders filled the ranks of the Carter administration. Most came from the globalist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), who, like every preceding presidential election for the previous 40 years, remained in control of the Executive Branch.

Like so many of his predecessors, Biden is also very close with the Washington establishment. In 2006, Biden co-authored an op-ed in the New York Times with the president emeritus of the CFR, Leslie H. Gelb, outlining a plan for breaking Iraq up into autonomous regions.

In addition, Biden used his role on the Senate Foreign Relations committee to enable the 2003 invasion. Stephen Zunes, senior analyst for the think tank Foreign Policy in Focus, wrote:

It is difficult to over-estimate the critical role Biden played in making the tragedy of the Iraq war possible. More than two months prior to the 2002 war resolution even being introduced, in what was widely interpreted as the first sign that Congress would endorse a U.S. invasion of Iraq, Biden declared on August 4 that the United States was probably going to war. In his powerful position as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he orchestrated a propaganda show designed to sell the war to skeptical colleagues and the America public by ensuring that dissenting voices would not get a fair hearing.

It's ironic that Obama's victory against Hillary in the primaries was mainly due to her vote for the war in Iraq. Biden was calling for a U.S. invasion as far back as 1998!

Obama’s choice of Biden has been heralded by the liberal media as a smart decision to offset McCain’s supposed foreign policy expertise. Apparently, when it comes to the mainstream media, foreign policy expertise is defined as a willingness to ignore the U.S. Constitution while, at the same time, expend a tragic number of lives and exorbitant resources for globalist aims. It is exactly Biden’s alleged “foreign policy expertise” which will give voters who are wary of violent international entanglements much cause for concern.

Biden, a neoliberal war hawk, who doesn’t shy away from committing U.S. troops to fight in undeclared wars, has advocated universal national service which has all the makings of an early form of a returning draft. Such a policy would be necessary to support all of the foreign interventions Biden envisions.

Biden not only voted for both the unconstitutional invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan but, much like Senator McCain, he spent the first few years of those operations advocating for increased troop levels and funding.

Biden has also gone on record as one of very few politicians who advocates immediately deploying ground troops into Darfur.

It will be interesting to see during the debates if his memory of his positions is as good as McCain’s.

Biden showed off his war-fervor in the late 1990’s when he co-sponsored a bill with Senators McCain and Lieberman to use all necessary force, including ground troops, in Kosovo.

Biden is one of the most ardent supporters of NATO expansionism, which we have recently witnessed has the potential to restart the Cold War.

Back in 1992, Biden spoke a bit too freely about his true global aims for NATO and his ideas on the UN in a speech entitled "On the Threshold of the New World Order: A Rebirth for the United Nations." On that occasion he said:
 

The new world order … also should include a new role for NATO. NATO should abandon its anachronistic posture — the defense of allied territory against direct attack — to make a great leap forward and adopt peace-keeping outside NATO territory as a formal alliance mission.

As if all that wasn't enough, Biden also has a horrendous record on domestic issues under the Constitution. Biden, who voted for the Patriot Act, is a supporter of legislators masquerading as Judges. Biden has made significant efforts to federalize the U.S. criminal justice system. He has expanded the federal War on Drugs by using RICO to go after drug dealers as well as expanding civil asset forfeiture laws.

Biden has also been behind such blatantly unconstitutional legislation as The Violence Against Women Act. Kevin R.C. Gutzman, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to the U.S. Constitution, writes: "Joe Biden cannot actually have believed that rape was commerce, let alone interstate commerce. What was really going on in the adoption of the Violence Against Women Act was that Sen. Biden was demonstrating his contempt for the Constitution’s limitations on the powers of Congress." (The entire post at Takimag is worth reviewing, as it goes into detail on Biden's disregard for the Founders' intent to leave such issues with state legislatures.)

It takes a lot to match the warmongering blood lust of McCain and whatever Establishment “yes man” "(or "yes woman" if Senator Hutchinson gets the nod) he picks to serve. Not surprisingly, however, by picking Biden, Obama has accomplished that feat.

Ultimately, no matter which candidate ends up in the White House, as usual the Council on Foreign Relations has its bread buttered on both sides. Either McCain (CFR) or Obama/Biden will continue their Establishment bosses’ policies, which continue to take America down the path of war, national insolvency, and loss of independence.

If Americans want to truly turn the country around, then we must start by electing at least 218 members of the House of Representatives who take their oaths to uphold the Constitution — against all enemies foreign and domestic — seriously.