boneyard bill
08-27-2011, 11:42 AM
I recently saw a video of political "analysts" discussing Ron Paul's campaign. One of them noted that Ron Paul wants to abolish social security and return to the gold standard. Both claims are incorrect as is the oft-repeated claim that he proposes to "abolish" the Federal Reserve.
Media claims that Ron Paul is an "isolationist" are definitely incorrect and unquestionably a deliberate smear, but the above examples are not, in my view, an deliberate attempt to denigrate Ron Paul. They indicate a lack of understanding by these media personalities, but I suggest that much of this misunderstanding derives as much from the Ron Paul campaign itself as it does from these media personalities.
Ron Paul does not want to return to government-sponsored gold money. He recognizes that the government can debase a gold or silver currency nearly as easily as a paper currency, and it wouldn't even need a federal reserve to do it. Nor does he porpose to abolish the Fed and leave the country without even a fiat currency. He wants to legalize private precious-metal currencies and put them on an even playing field with government money by amending legal tender laws and tax laws. He doesn't believe the Fed could survive against the competition of sound money, but he doesn't propose to abolish it outright.
Nor does he propose to abolish social security. Again, he recognizes that too many people are dependent on it. In fact, he wants to save social security by reforming it to keep it on a sound financial footing. Eventually, he hopes that it would be possible to allow young people to opt out and make their own retirement plans. Thus, as with the Fed, his plan is to create conditions where this program would wither away rather than abruptly abolishing the program and leaving millions of people in the lurch.
My point is that Ron Paul's ideas are represented as being much more radical than they really are. Even on spending cuts, his first priorities are to save money by bringing our troops home from overseas and cutting corporate welfare. Eliminating food stamps for children doesn't make his target list at all.
Media pundits really do have a responsibility to know what they're talking about so I don't propose to absolve the media totally of responsibility for these misrepresentations. But the world we actually live in doesn't always conform to these ideals so I think the Ron Paul campaign needs to take into account the fact that media misrepresentations are, to some extent, the result of inadequate communication from the campaign itself. After all, when the candidate has published a book titled, "End the Fed," it is not terribly surprising that some people might think he wants to abolish it very quickly.
Few candidates throughout history have bothered to make the subtle distinctions that Ron Paul does, and the voters are even less inclined to do so. So I suggest that the campaign should go on an "information offensive" to correct these misrepresentations. Such a campaign might best be led by the campaign itself and various campaign spokesmen rather than by the candidate, but my prime point here is to suggest the strategy change itself without getting too much into the details of it.
Media claims that Ron Paul is an "isolationist" are definitely incorrect and unquestionably a deliberate smear, but the above examples are not, in my view, an deliberate attempt to denigrate Ron Paul. They indicate a lack of understanding by these media personalities, but I suggest that much of this misunderstanding derives as much from the Ron Paul campaign itself as it does from these media personalities.
Ron Paul does not want to return to government-sponsored gold money. He recognizes that the government can debase a gold or silver currency nearly as easily as a paper currency, and it wouldn't even need a federal reserve to do it. Nor does he porpose to abolish the Fed and leave the country without even a fiat currency. He wants to legalize private precious-metal currencies and put them on an even playing field with government money by amending legal tender laws and tax laws. He doesn't believe the Fed could survive against the competition of sound money, but he doesn't propose to abolish it outright.
Nor does he propose to abolish social security. Again, he recognizes that too many people are dependent on it. In fact, he wants to save social security by reforming it to keep it on a sound financial footing. Eventually, he hopes that it would be possible to allow young people to opt out and make their own retirement plans. Thus, as with the Fed, his plan is to create conditions where this program would wither away rather than abruptly abolishing the program and leaving millions of people in the lurch.
My point is that Ron Paul's ideas are represented as being much more radical than they really are. Even on spending cuts, his first priorities are to save money by bringing our troops home from overseas and cutting corporate welfare. Eliminating food stamps for children doesn't make his target list at all.
Media pundits really do have a responsibility to know what they're talking about so I don't propose to absolve the media totally of responsibility for these misrepresentations. But the world we actually live in doesn't always conform to these ideals so I think the Ron Paul campaign needs to take into account the fact that media misrepresentations are, to some extent, the result of inadequate communication from the campaign itself. After all, when the candidate has published a book titled, "End the Fed," it is not terribly surprising that some people might think he wants to abolish it very quickly.
Few candidates throughout history have bothered to make the subtle distinctions that Ron Paul does, and the voters are even less inclined to do so. So I suggest that the campaign should go on an "information offensive" to correct these misrepresentations. Such a campaign might best be led by the campaign itself and various campaign spokesmen rather than by the candidate, but my prime point here is to suggest the strategy change itself without getting too much into the details of it.