How Will They Destroy Ron Paul?

Mike Whitney, ICH

"Whether the resistance against government tyrants is nonviolent or physically violent, the effort to overthrow state oppression qualifies as true patriotism". Rep. Ron Paul "On Patriotism" May 24, 2007 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 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 sensation on the internet. 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 he is delivering a message that is damaging to America’s biggest powerbrokers---and they don’t like it. They would rather he just shut up and go away. They’ve heard enough about the Military Commissions Act, and martial law, and the fraudulent war on terror. They’ve put a lot of energy into the new American police state and they aren’t about to let some "no account" libertarian destroy all their hard work. Right now, the right wing think tanks are probably buzzing like a hornets nest. They have their work cut out for them. The sleeves are rolled up, the ash trays are full, and America’s best propagandists are working out the details for a full-blown assault on Ron Paul. They want to take him down now, before he can cause any more trouble. My guess is that they will use a similar strategy to what 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 was as follows: 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. The media will have to devise a saturation-campaign similar to the full-blown 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. Technicians isolated Dean’s holler from the background noise of a crowded convention hall, which made him look like he was emotionally unstable. 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 obliterate the enemies of the corporate chieftains who enrich themselves through foreign wars? 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 swipes at him, but they proved they are not up to the task. Its time to wheel out the heavy artillery and pound Paul into rubble. But what is Paul saying that makes him such a threat to the corporate powerbrokers? Is it just because he stands out in a crowd of plaster-hair phonies--or is it because his campaign is focused on the traditional American values of liberty and non-intervention rather than demagoguery 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 objecting? 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 support the "official narrative" that Iraq is just a battleground in a larger war against Islamic fanaticism---the prevailing myth which is fueled by the media and assures decades of conflict. Clearly, the bankers, neocons and weapons manufacturers are not sympathetic to Paul’s analysis nor do they want to pollute the public air-waves with his common sense alternatives. Here’s what Paul 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 government. 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? And, what do you think they’ll do to stop further embarrassing exposure? Paul’s demand that we abolish the Federal Reserve is no different than 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 the other so that working class people are lured in by low-interest rates and then lose their shirts when the bubble collapses? This is how the banking elites shift wealth from one class to another. It’s an old scam, but it never fails. Paul is 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 also right about deficits when 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 reviled for his defense of liberty and his rejection of Bush’s sweeping changes to the Constitution. He’s been an outspoken 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. Ron Paul is a friend of personal freedom which makes him the de facto enemy of the White House brown-shirts. He has watched as our country has continued to slide towards military dictatorship. He has put himself on the firing-line to defend our way of life. His candidacy is an act of patriotism which is why the Bush Throng will try 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.