The Militant Libertarian

I'm pissed off and I'm a libertarian. What else you wanna know?

Sunday, July 22, 2007

How Will They Destroy Ron Paul?
by Mike Whitney

How will the media destroy Ron Paul?

We all know the drill by now. Whenever a politician with character and
principles throws his hat in the ring the media descends on him like feral
hounds on a pork chop. It'll be no different with Paul. The only difference
this time is that we should all be aware of what's really going on.

Did you see the Republican debates?

Paul won hands-down. He stood out in a crowd of colorless toadies and became
an overnight internet-sensation. In fact, an ABC survey showed that Paul won
the first debate with an 85% majority; while C-SPAN showed him at 70%. Maybe
the stats are just a fluke of internet voting, but it's sure made the boys
in the boardrooms nervous.

You see, it doesn't matter if Paul wins or not. What matters is that his
anti-government message is a hammer-blow to America's biggest
powerbrokers---and they don't like it. They'd rather he just shut up and go
away. They've heard enough about the Military Commissions Act, martial law,
and the fraudulent war on terror. They've put a lot of money and energy into
the new American police state and they aren't about to let some libertarian
party-pooper destroy all their hard work.

That's why the right wing think tanks are buzzing like a hornets nest right
now. The sleeves are rolled up, the ash trays are full, and America's best
propagandists are putting the finishing touches on a plan to topedo the Paul
campaign. They want to take him down now, before he causes any more trouble.

My guess is that they will use a strategy similar to the one they used on
John Kerry, that is---keep it simple---attack on 3 fronts and repeat the
charges from every soapbox in America. In Kerry's case, the mantra went like

1. Kerry "flip-flops"

2 He's a Massachusetts liberal.

3 He faked his war injuries to look like a hero.

The effectiveness of this strategy depends on how often the charges are
repeated and from how many outlets. If it is well executed, the voter will
naturally feel confused and less enthusiastic about his candidate. The
propaganda-barrage had a withering effect on Kerry's support-base.

It may be that the media will take a different tack with Paul. Perhaps,
they'll use a saturation-campaign similar to their attack on Howard Dean in
the 2004 Democratic primary. The infamous "Dean Scream" appeared over 900
times in the major media in the first 72 hours. Now that's the way
propaganda is supposed to work!

Technicians were able to isolate Dean's yelp from the background noise of a
crowded convention hall and succeeded in making him look like a complete
It worked like a charm. Dean's star sunk overnight and the country was
"spared" the prospect of an antiwar candidate.

Isn't that what media is for---to eliminate the enemies of the warmongering
corporate chieftains?

My guess is that, sometime in the next 2 weeks, we'll see a big push by to
derail the Paul campaign. Already Sean Hannity, Glen Beck and FOX News have
taken a few cheap-shots, but so far no one has laid a glove on him. Its time
to wheel out the heavy artillery and pound him into the sand.

But what is Paul saying that rattles his rivals so much? Is it because he
stands out in a crowd of plaster-hair phonies and talks about liberty and
non-intervention instead of fear and torture?

This is how Paul summarized 9-11 and our misguided war in Iraq:

"They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for
10 years. We've been in the Middle East [for years]. I think Reagan was
right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics.
Right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the
Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China
was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? Would we be

Or this:

"I believe the CIA is correct when it warns us about blowback. We overthrew
the Iranian government in 1953 and their taking the hostages was the
reaction. This dynamic persists and we ignore it at our risk. They're not
attacking us because we're rich and free, they're attacking us because we're
over there."

The rest of the Republican candidates use every opportunity to invoke the
hobgoblin of Islamic fanaticism---the prevailing myth which is fuels the new
American fascism. Paul is the one exception. He sees the war on terror as
inherently threatening to personal freedom---and he's not afraid to say so.

He's also outspoken on other issues which are typically verbotem in the MSM.
Here's what he has to say about the maneuverings of the Federal Reserve, the
secretive cabal that controls our money:

"Congress created the Federal Reserve System in 1913. Between then and 1971
the principle of sound money was systematically undermined. Between 1913 and
1971, the Federal Reserve found it much easier to expand the money supply at
will for financing war or manipulating the economy with little resistance
from Congress-- while benefiting the special interests that influence

Since printing paper money is nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of
the international currency must always be the country with the military
might to guarantee control over the system. This magnificent scheme seems
the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that
issues the de facto world currency. The one problem, however, is that such a
system destroys the character of the counterfeiting nation's people-- just
as was the case when gold was the currency and it was obtained by conquering
other nations. And this destroys the incentive to save and produce, while
encouraging debt and runaway welfare."

Do you really think that the board-members of the "privately-owned" Central
Bank want the American people to know about the extortionist racket they've
been running for the last 90 years in contravention of the US Constitution?

Paul's demand that we abolish the Federal Reserve is strikingly similar to
that of his ideological ancestor Thomas Jefferson, who said:

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of our
currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the
corporations that will grow up will deprive the people of all property until
their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
The issuing of power should be taken from the banks and restored to the
people, to whom it properly belongs."

Isn't that what is happening right now? Doesn't the Fed inflate one massive
equity bubble after another so that working class people are lured in by
low-interest rates and then lose their shirts when the bubble pops? This is
how the banking elites shift wealth from one class to another. It may be an
old scam, but it never fails.

Jefferson and Paul are both right. Free people cannot control their own
destiny unless they control their own currency. The Federal Reserve must be
abolished and, as Paul says, "The sooner the better".

He's right about deficits and monetary policy, too. Here's what he says:

"The greatest threat facing America today is not terrorism, or foreign
economic competition, or illegal immigration. The greatest threat facing
America today is the disastrous fiscal policies of our own government,
marked by shameless deficit spending and Federal Reserve currency
devaluation. It is this one-two punch - Congress spending more than it can
tax or borrow, and the Fed printing money to make up the difference - that
threatens to impoverish us by further destroying the value of our dollars".

The men who own the media don't want this type of populism on the air-waves.
After all, they love deficits. The trade deficits provide cheap capital for
the stock market while the budget deficit borrows money from future
generations for lavish tax cuts for Bush's wealthy buddies.

No wonder they hate Paul!

Most of all, Paul is feared for his defense of liberty and his rejection of
Bush's sweeping changes to the Constitution. He's been a strong critic of
the Military Commissions Act, which permits torture and arbitrary detention
of American citizens or foreign nationals on the orders of the executive. He
has also condemned warrantless wiretaps, presidential signings,
extraordinary rendition, the Real ID Act, and the Orwellian-sounding
"Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act'' which allows Bush to
declare martial law at his own discretion.

Paul's tireless defense of personal freedom makes him the de facto enemy of
the Bush Brown-shirts. He's watched the country slide further and further
towards military dictatorship and now he's put himself on the firing-line to
defend our way of life.

That's real patriotism. And, that is why they want to destroy him.

In a recent speech on the floor of the House Paul said:

"Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a
blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards
of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that
maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a
society respectful of individual liberty".

Thanks for that, Mr. Paul. And, good luck.

Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home