The Real Ron Paul Story

Campaign season is upon us again, which means libertarians can look forward to the regular onslaught of mainstream media nonsense about who is suitable to lead the nation based on their "likability" and which candidates should be ignored because they speak too much about the issues.

In the spirit of that phenomenon I am delighted to present what I hope will become a regular piece here at USGwaste.com: The Real Ron Paul story. I will comment on stories, polls, and other happenings which clearly omit or mischaracterize the importance of Ron Paul in the presidential race. (Or maybe I hope it will not become a regular piece- how wonderful it would be to not see Ron Paul being ignored).

Congressman Paul is not being kept down by any concerted conspiracy or intended plan to prevent him from winning the GOP nomination. The mainstream media does ignore him though and that constitute poor journalism. The press has done him one worse than they did in 2008, when they considered Ron Paul insignificant until finally his extraordinary fundraising and actual poll results caught their attention.

This time, they are taking the defender of liberty a bit more seriously. Yet the reporting suggests that they have already decided that he is unelectable. Therefore, even though Ron Paul is making waves and those developments are worthy of attention, they ignore him.

Case in point, this article relating the results of a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll of voters, conducted nationwide.

That poll found the candidates ranked in the following order:

Mitt "Look at the hair not the healthcare" Romney- 30%
Michelle "Let me tell you what to do in your bedroom" Bachmann- 16%
Rick "Dubya II" Perry- 11%
Ron "The Constitution" Paul- 9%
Newt "Nationbuilder" Gingrich- 8%
Herman "Loyalty oath" Cain- 5%
Rick "Don't click on the first Google results for my name you see" Santorum- 3%
Tim "Ground troops for Libya" Pawlenty- 2%
John "I worked for Obama" Huntsman- 2%

In this poll of nine candidates Ron Paul place a respectable fourth, a mere two points behind his fellow Texan Perry. Yet the accompanying WSJ piece by Jonathan Wiseman does not mention Paul until the second to last paragraph, and this is only after mentioning Cain, Santorum, and Pawlenty, who all rest firmly behind the good doctor.

A second article worthy of criticism is Chris Baines' treatment of Ron Paul in The Motley Fool.

The world is on its head when someone is characterizing Bernanke as heroic for telling Ron Paul gold is not money. Even if that statement were correct, which it patently is not, the fact is Ron Paul has bravely stood up against Bernanke and his money printing amigos for decades. He has consistently voted based on his beliefs and integrity- often alone in the entire Congress. He has been ridiculed as quixotic and idealistic, mocked for being married to that crazy idea of the Constitution, and ignored as an old dreamer too caught up in notions of liberty and freedom to "play the game" or "compromise." Baines is a financial reporter and has every right to question Paul's stance on fiscal policy. But calling Bernanke a hero (let alone suggesting Paul can learn from him) and implying Ron Paul is some sort of establishment figure, is pure lunacy.

And as for his suggestion that Ron Paul divest himself of his equity positions in gold and silver because he might have a conflict in his new committee leadership position- HAH! Since Paul believes (quite correctly) gold is money, would Baines also suggest that Paul rid his accounts of dollars too, since they might be influenced by the actions of Congress?

Actually, Baines' writing about Paul's holdings, and the holdings of other Congressmen, illustrates that the byzantine campaign donation and conflict of interest laws we have are unneeded. A vigilant press and studious electorate are what is needed, not bureaucratic regulations. If voters think Paul's, or any other Congressman's investments, are a problem, they can read about it in an attentive press and vote their representatives out of office.

Or, as someone who has admired and followed Ron Paul's intelligent investing in gold stocks, they can copy them and invest those proceeds in campaign contributions. On that note, I am off to give to the latest Ron Paul money bomb.