RECLAIM
THE CONSTITUTION
RON PAUL'S RECORD REFLECTS REAGAN'S RECORD
By: Mike Smith
Face it friends, Ronald Reagan is dead. The "Reagan
Revolution" was not really a revolution, per se, but merely a realignment of some
members of the political class. And it was a reaction to the financial calamity that
preceded Reagan's 1980 presidential victory.
While few believe what I am about to write, the fact is that
the late 1970s so-called "Carter-caused" financial calamity was less about
President Carter than the fact that the dollar* having recently been finally-
and completely- severed from real money, that is gold, went into free-fall as it
sought its new, unsupported level. No longer backed by gold, the
dollar became merely a green piece of paper with pictures of some great Americans (and
some not so great Americans). The only reason that it retained any value is
because Americans were/are compelled (under threat of incarceration) to pay taxes with
dollars.
That was for a short period of time.
Then came the agreement for large oil-producing nations to
accept only dollars for payment for their oil and the dollar then stabilized, having been
buoyed by this second, very significant action of linking the dollar to a valuable,
tangible and useful asset. If a nation wanted to purchase oil it needed dollars
and could only get them from us, the US (and the Federal Reserve Bank; the FED). That made the
dollar stabilize significantly so that the FED could then continue its larcenous practice
of inflation at a slower, more easily sustained and hidden rate. The FED
benefited greatly from the stagflation during the time between the destabilization
(completely being severed from gold) and the re-stabilization (being linked to oil from
the greatest "producers" of oil) the dollar underwent. But
as useful as stagflation was to the FED, it had to end or the golden goose- that is
inflation- would have been cooked if allowed to continue without re-stabilization of
the dollar. |
So what is this about Ron Paul's record reflecting Ronald
Reagan's rhetoric you ask? Well the fact is, as you all know, that MOST people, when
running for office merely tell voters what they believe voters want to hear. At
least they tell voters what they believe enough of them want to hear so as to pull the
lever for them come election time. Reagan was no different in that. However,
it does seem that when Reagan told voters what he believed they wanted to hear, he
was telling them what HE believed. Anyway, that's the common story among Reagan
supporters who've turned President Reagan from a person into a legend into a desire to
have, again, what they think they once had.
Reagan rode into office on the back of deep financial
troubles. Ronald Reagan benefited from uncertainty in the future of the United States because the
financial calamity that gripped our nation was real- and real Americans were real
scared. So Reagan said that he would restore America to the
place it had traditionally been: In adherence to the Constitution; practicing sound
financial policies (less- only necessary and Constitutionally allowed- spending); A strong
military DEFENSE; and, yes, honesty in budgeting. This was his rhetoric; these were
his campaign promises.
His rhetoric included, in a nutshell (I paraphrase, offering
no quotations): Government, at times anyway, is not the solution, it is the
problem. Government that taxes less, that burdens its citizens less, is
better. Unconstitutional agencies, departments and laws are anathema to
freedom. Less government is better than more. While President Reagan did raise
taxes eventually and did not rid us of the Department of Education which he said he would,
and which is not Constitutionally allowed to exist, his rhetoric was astonishingly
American. And when I say astonishingly American I mean that his rhetoric was
astonishingly about governing by the Constitution, governing by law, not governing by
the opinions of a man.
As we look back at his Presidency, and the actions the
government took at that time, we realize that Reagan's rhetoric was better than his
actions. With Congress, he raised taxes, he (with Congress) spent profligately (some
argue justifiably) nearly tripling the national debt and, alas, the unConstitutional
Department of Education survived his eight years and continues to plague American
taxpayers and students today; President Bush allowing Senator Ted “Aqua Man”
Kennedy to write the education bill.
Now, take a look, not at Congressman Ron Paul's campaign
rhetoric but look at his record also. It's there for all to see. If
you're looking for somebody to "be Reagan" to be the Reagan that Reagan
supporters wanted, check out Ron Paul's record. If you liked Ronald
Reagan's rhetoric, you will love Ron Paul’s record. Ron Paul's record reflects
Ronald Reagan's rhetoric: http://www.ronpaul2008.com/about/
* It is important to make note that what we call a dollar
today is not what it is legally defined as in accordance with its creation by the 1792 Coinage Act.
In fact a dollar is a unit of weight, as is a
grain or a gram or a pound. The dollar is defined as (approximately) 1/20th of
an ounce of gold (actually 495 grains). Therefore, 20 dollars is defined as equal to
one ounce of gold. As of today (March 1, 2008
A.D.) an ounce of gold will buy approximately 1000
dollars. Therefore the larceny of the Federal Reserve System has debased the dollar
to the extent that the dollar is now equal to two percent of what it originally
was. An ounce of gold has always been able to feed you and your family for a
week. At one time (nearly 100 years ago) you and your family could have been fed for
a week on 20 dollars. Would 20 dollars, today,
feed you and your family even for a day?
"Published originally at EtherZone.com :
republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
Mike Smith is a freelance writer from Wisconsin. He is probably
not either of the Mike Smiths you know. He is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.
Mike Smith can be reached at: AllenWinston100@hotmail.com
Published in the March 5, 2008 issue of Ether Zone.
Copyright © 1997 - 2008 Ether
Zone.
We
invite your comments on this article in our forum! |
