In my first essay in this series, I outlined a change that might “stun the world” and terrify the establishment defenders of the “Status Quo.”
What, I asked, might happen if someone like Rush Limbaugh started preaching from the Ron Paul prayer book?
What if issues that we “stackers” take for granted - issues largely blocked from public discussion by mass media “gate keepers” - suddenly went mainstream?
If this happened, real change via the democratic electoral process might actually occur.
For this to take place, not only would the most influential talking heads have to search their souls and admit they’ve been wrong (or silent) about crucial issues, they’d also have to start talking about the policy changes that, if enacted, could actually save a nation.
What are some of the issues talk radio host do NOT talk about but need to talk about? Or said differently, what could those with the power of the microphone do to make real political change a real possibility? For example, they could ...
• Advocate for the abolishment of the Fed.
• Implore their listeners to send a message to the government by beginning to stockpile gold and silver.
• Discuss the implications of (and likely reasons for) China stockpiling as much physical gold as this nation can.
• Discuss the possibility/likelihood that precious metal prices are capped and rigged ... and why it’s crucial this occurs.
• Perhaps mention a few news items we “stackers” are very familiar with, but the masses remain clueless about.
For example, bring to the wider public’s attention the fact that Germany put in a request to receive a small portion of its gold back from The Fed and Fed leaders/Government officials essentially denied the request and are unable to even deliver a portion of their reserves over a period of several years.
“What’s up with this?” they might ask.
• Openly question whether America even has the physical gold it says it does. Or whether America may have some sum of gold in its vaults, but the gold may have been leased out, or “ownership” determinations are cloudy at best.
At at minimum, radio hosts could call for an independent audit of our alleged gold .... “for kicks and giggles” if nothing else.
• Discuss/explain how “official” economic reports dealing with inflation, unemployment and GDP are almost certainly bogus.
And then explain why this matters!
And then take a shot at explaining to listeners how these reports tie into issues involving gold and silver and how these issues, in turn, tie into issues dealing with protecting the dollar, which is all about keeping the government spending spigot flowing.
All of the above also involves the activities of the Fed, Treasury and maybe even the President, the Talking Heads might attempt to explain.
Are conservative talk radio hosts fans - even defenders - of the “Politburo”-type central planning activities of The Fed?
Are they somehow not aware that The Federal Reserve conducts trillions of dollars of business, involving countless “cronies” in America and around the world, in total secrecy? Does this not bother them?
I’ll take a stab at this one. Yes they are probably aware of this, but no, they are not trying to do anything about it. This, I suggest, must change.
Conservative talk radio hosts purport to be for “limited government,” but strangely never direct their ire at the organization whose bond purchases make possible the endless money printing and spending in Washington.
In contrast to these guys, The Fed is almost all Ron Paul talks about. That and the Constitution. Has Rush Limbaugh spent 10 minutes lobbying for the passage of Paul’s Audit the Fed Bill? If he has, I missed it (and I’m a regular listener).
All of the above, in the opinion of Ron Paul (and probably the readers of this column), best explain and predict the “bubble-busting” disaster that is about to happen in our nation.
If talking about such topics is deemed too esoteric, or “connecting all the dots” requires too much brain work, maybe conservative radio talk show hosts could use some examples of the “what this means to you and me” variety.
For example, want to know why the cost of the twinkies, milk and meat at your grocery store are sky-rocketing - start paying attention to these issues.
The above are examples of topics -- or cause-and-effect logic progressions -- that certainly never get mentioned by stalwarts of the liberal mainstream media.
However, these topics also rarely if ever get mentioned by the stalwarts of “conservative media,” including the talk show hosts that reach tens of millions of voters every day and week.
For real change to happen this must change.
How likely is it that the talk show gang admits they’ve been wrong?
But how likely is it that Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or Mark Levin (or all three of them plus others with large audiences) suddenly start to discuss topics like these, or the importance of “sound money”in making possible a better world?
Part of me says this is about as likely as my alma mater (Troy University) winning the Division I football national championship this season.
But it’s probably more likely than Mitt Romney, Jebb Bush, Rick Santorum, Chris Christie or (ha!) Hillary Clinton suddenly adopting a major planks of Ron Paul’s campaigns as their own.
And if change is going to come via the ballot box, it better come soon. People, after all, aren’t becoming less dependent on government.
The rugged individualist who wanted to take care of himself and his family on his own and wants government off his back was a voter from your granddaddy’s day. Today, voters want only their government checks (and subsidies and government jobs).
If it takes suppressing the price of gold to keep the printing press running, suppress the price of gold.
That is, the concepts Ron Paul has tried to sell to Americans aren’t exactly an easy sale anymore (believe it or not, they once were).
People don’t want to be told “no” and politicians clearly don’t like to tell their constituents “no.” Thus, a politician nicknamed “Dr. No” is going to face an uphill battle.
Which is why such a candidate needs a little help. Some allies in high places. Not in government but in the hinterlands where people routinely listen to Rush Limbaugh on their way to and from lunch.
If by some miracle another candidate emerged on the political scene who basically echoed Ron Paul’s warnings and policy prescriptions would he fare any better than Paul did?
Almost certainly, no. He (or she) would be ostracized, marginalized, vilified by the “gate keepers” just like Paul was/is.
Sadly, it’s not the messenger whose message is wrong, it’s the fact the ideas of such messengers are not being treated with an ounce of respect. Not by the liberal “mainstream media” or, sadly, by the titans of “conservative” media either.
For such a candidate(s) to have any chance, he or she would have to first be embraced and enthusiastically endorsed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh (and/or Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Thomas Sowell, Charles Krauthammer, George Will, the editors of National Review, etc.).
Such a radical sea change in political thought COULD change the way “conservative” voters view candidates.
The likes of Bob Dole, John McCain, George W. Bush, Mitt Romney - the GOP’s “usual suspects” of late - might be rejected like a quart of stale milk.
Desperate times don’t call for the Sam- Old Same-Old, Rush might belatedly opine (better late than never, right?).
It’s Iraq, Stupid
So why do the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and Sean Hannity seemingly detest the likes of Ron Paul (and thus never discuss the key policy issues broached by Paul)?
The answer, to me, is simple enough. Paul doesn’t suck up to them and indeed believes that much of the stuff they talk about is just ratings-driven “applause lines” or red meat for those fixated on their dislike of the Democratic Disaster of the Moment.
In Paul’s opinion, these people aren’t talking about things that actually matter or could make a difference (see examples of possible show topics that never become show topics).
But, deep down where uncomfortable truths reside, they probably hate Paul because he was right and they were wrong on Iraq and Afghanistan. And they know it.
Note: Final part coming tomorrow or later today.
***
Bill Rice, Jr. is managing editor of The Montgomery (AL) Independent. He can be reached by email at: bill@montgomeryindependent.com
About the author
