The Real Ron Paul Story: 7/26/11 update

Frankly, it is getting a bit confusing surfing for articles these days. Take this collection of words here, for example.

Is this an article from the well-circulated if not well-respected Time magazine?

Or is it simply the blog posting of some acerbic political hack (the "Swampland" title might lead one to think so- perhaps with a focus on Foggy Bottom and foreign policy).

Well, author Michael Crowey is actually pretty high on the Time food chain and despite the aqua-title to his subsection of the magazine's website, the writing is legitimate (that is, non-blogging) journalism.

His review of the 2012 GOP candidates and their propensity to avoid conflict with the president is spot on, with one exception.

When asked how they would cut the federal budget and by extension the national debt, the other candidates obfuscate. This is cowardly. The candidates should, as detailed as possible, outline where they imagine saving money. Paul has been clear: end military involvement overseas, severely cutback assistance and intelligence efforts, end the TSA and much of DHS, get rid of basically every federal cabinet office created since 1980, once that is done, if necessary, raise the retirement age for Social Security.

How is it Crowley so articulately outlines the failures of the other GOP candidates to explain their plans to cut the debt, yet ignores Ron Paul's very loud and very firm and, yes- perhaps-, very radical approach to the problem? He is, after all, asking for ideas, not necessarily one he agrees with- but ideas.

Ron Paul is full of them.

But Crowley claims "For weeks it’s been clear that the 2012 GOP candidates are mostly reacting to the debt-limit debate, not driving it."

Reacting to the debt-limit debate? Ron Paul? Hardly, the man practically created the debate. While the GOP was busy spending away on everything from prescription drugs to predator drones to bills that would leave no contractor behind, Ron Paul was the only man from either side of the aisle to stand up and point out where it was taking us.

And now that we are there, it would seem reasonable to at least hear what his suggestion is to resolve the problem. Disagree with Paul all you want, but the fact is he has a plan, indeed he has had a plan, and that plan deserves to be considered, even if no one else from the GOP is willing to offer one.