Fred Snowflack on Ron Paul - my response

Fred Snowflack, Editorial Page Editor of the Daily Record and a respected observer of Morris County politics, remarked on Ron Paul in his most recent editorial. I took issue with several of his points, as shown below from my correspondence with him.

Snowflack's editorial is quoted in italics, my responses are the indented bullet points beneath each statement.

Paul is a Republican congressman from Texas, but his party designation is really a misnomer. Paul is more libertarian than Republican

  • Ron Paul has been elected to Congress 10 times, each time as a Republican candidate. He was a backer of Ronald Reagan in 1976 (one of only 4 in Congress), even serving as a delegate for Reagan in the bicentennial Republican National Convention. Ron Paul was way ahead of his time and foresaw the Reagan legacy long before it became fashionable. Remember, at that time Reagan was considered "too conservative" to win, but that didn't stop Ron Paul from backing him on principle.

  • Yes, Paul was the Libertarian Party candidate for President in 1988, having felt that George HW Bush's vision did not carry the limited-government hallmarks that originally attracted him to Ronald Reagan. But to say that Ron Paul is not a "real" Republican simply doesn't hold water. (continued...)
...an anti-establishment trait that seems responsible for him attracting a loyal and mostly young following.
  • Perhaps the fact that he is the only candidate with the courage to point out that Social Security offers nothing at all to young people but another black hole from whence their hard-earned money will never return is responsible for his devoted following of young people. Republicans seem to forget that President Bush made an abortive push for Social Security reform several years ago that failed to spark consensus on Capitol Hill, maybe because he squandered so much of his political capital on an elitist neoconservative agenda. Too bad for all of us, especially Republicans, that he neglected a legitimate traditional American conservative agenda, which most certainly does include offering young people the choice to be free of Social Security.

Paul opposes the war in Iraq, which immediately sets him apart from the mainstream Republicans seeking the party's presidential nomination.

  • True, he is the only candidate to have voted against the Iraq War, just as he voted against Clinton's Balkan Wars in the 1990s (like most other congressional Republicans) - because his opposition is based on the traditional American conservative principle of non-intervention. Ron Paul's foreign policy positions are influenced not by the latest poll, like the flip-flopping Democrats - but by careful consideration of the advice of the Founders like Washington and Jefferson, who warned us to beware of foreign entanglements. How right they were.
On domestic issues, he sees much of what government does as unconstitutional and wrong. He talks of getting rid of the IRS
  • I admit on first glance this seems far-fetched, but consider: 2007's Federal Budget was $2.5 trillion, and nearly $1.2 trillion of that is derived from Individual Income Tax revenue. That means about $1.3 trillion is collected by the Federal Government from other sources. In 1995, do you know what the total Federal Budget was? You guessed it: $1.3 trillion. So for the same level of government we had only 12 years ago (I don't know about you, but it suited me just fine), we would not need Income Taxes.
...it's easy to portray the Fed -- the nation's central bank -- as an entity controlled by the dark forces of money and greed.
  • The criticisms of our monetary policy have much less to do with conspiracy theories than with protecting the middle class and the poor. The fact is, since the Federal Reserve was created, the US dollar has lost 93% of its purchasing power - due to massive inflation. However, if our monetary system was based on gold and silver, this trend would have been averted, and staple goods would be much more affordable.

  • For example, in 1970, silver was $1.64 per ounce. Gas was 36 cents per gallon. That means an ounce of silver could buy almost 5 gallons of gas. Today, gas is about $3 per gallon. But now, an ounce of silver sells for about $14.50, equivalent to almost 5 gallons of gas. You guessed it - if the US dollar were still based on silver, gas would still be the equivalent of what it was in 1970. This is why Ron Paul supporters heed his warnings about the Federal Reserve - for the good of ordinary consumers.
He veers left in opposing the nation's so-called war on drugs and the Patriot Act.
  • Believing that Amendments 1, 4, and 5 should not be thrown to the wayside is considered veering left? I beg to differ. Ron Paul's opposition to the Patriot Act is stemmed from his deep respect for the US Constitution, and his belief that citizens should never surrender their rights to the Federal Government - this is the traditional American conservative position.

  • Remember the horrific abuse of the Federal Government's power in the case of Elian Gonzalez, under the Clinton Administration? Imagine what the likes of his wife would do to conservatives with the Patriot Act. This is why Ron Paul opposes it as a Republican, because the Constitution is not meant to be disregarded or upheld based upon our moods or a particular political climate - it is the supreme law of the land and must be respected.
But Paul jumps far right in calling for a crackdown on illegal immigration. He wants to toughen border security
  • If we were serious about protecting Americans, we would have a President that cared more about who seeps through our own borders than those of Iraq - 6,000 miles away. And instead of having the US Army directing traffic in Baghdad, we ought to have them inspecting containers arriving at American ports, to ensure that no future terrorist attacks will occur.
The Paul campaign may not have much of an organization in the state other than the Internet.
  • Lavish accommodations and all-expense-paid trips for volunteers do not determine the winning candidates, the voice of voters on February 5 does. Right now the Ron Paul campaign is focused on the early January contests - but they are ready to spring into action in NJ at a moment's notice - mobilizing their vast army of volunteers, a small example of which Denville witnessed last weekend. And as far as NJ Straw Polls go, there have been 2, with roughly equal numbers of turnout - Rudy Giuliani swept the first, and Ron Paul swept the second. Imagine what they will do with a full-fledged organization.
To read Paul's New Jersey Internet site is to see a mixture of enthusiasm and political naivety.
  • The site you mention is one of many run by individual supporters, without the guidance of the official campaign. Ron Paul's official website is http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ - I challenge you to find me a better-presented, more professional or more compelling official campaign site from any of Ron Paul's competitors. By the way, votes from those who demonstrate "political naivety" do not count for less than those of wily political insiders.
In truth, Paul has no chance to become president. A Rasmussen poll Tuesday showed him with 5 percent nationally and 4 percent in Iowa, scene of the first caucus. In New Jersey, Rudy Giuliani is far ahead of his fellow Republicans in every poll.
  • Where was John Kerry in the polls at this time 4 years ago? How about Bill Clinton in 1991? Which is not even to mention the fact that the individuals being polled do not include a large segment of those previously disinterested in Republican politics, or politics in general. Many of the polling arguments against Ron Paul's candidacy smack of political elitism - as if the voice of "regular" voters should count more in an election than those heretofore disaffected by the system.
Keep your eyes on Ron Paul, Fred - he is going to surprise a lot of people on February 5.


AlbertM said...

Great rebuttal. Please keep a tab on our friend Fred. We'd like to follow up with him when Ron Paul wins one primary after the other.

We'll ask him to defend his credibility. His level research on Ron Paul was just deep enough to dampen the soles of his shoes.

It's pathetic how these political pundits stare out you from the corner of their eyes, pontificate and try and sound ever so wise.

Once you know a little bit about their subjects you discover that they are no more informed than the pretty gal behind a FOX News microphone; or is it CNN with the pretty gals?

His knowledge of Ron Paul is woeful, hence his lame-brain observations, regurgitating what all the other news stooges broadcast.

At least he provided you with great fodder to explain Ron Paul to whoever cares to notice.

Is there any hope of an intelligent response?

Anonymous said...

Excellent responses. Thank you for putting this out there, it bothers me to no end that people like to quickly try and shoot down the legitimacy of Dr. Paul's campaign with uneducated attacks on his record and policy.

For those that don’t know much about Ron Paul, I really suggest you not only read his site www.ronpaul2008.com but also visit youtube.com and search for videos of him speaking. Specifically you should look for videos of him speaking to Ben Bernake and talking to people on CNBC where he really displays his economic prowess. There is not another candidate, Republican OR Democrat that has even a small fraction of this man’s knowledge on the economy or foreign affairs. Hearing this man speak his ideas is so enlightening, and shows the level of class, integrity, and knowledge that he has and will use to lead us as our next GREAT President.

Once you have read more about him and watched some of the youtube videos, I strongly suggest you do something to make a difference…go to his site and donate to his campaign. In this quarter alone over 107,000 Americans have donated (source: www.ronpaulgraphs.com) almost $9.5M to his campaign, and this is what is needed to help him beat the other cookie cutter candidates who will only continue to lead us in our current downward spiral.

If you really feel compelled to vote for one of those other cookie cutter candidates, remember this quote attributed to Albert Einstein: “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” By all accounts, not voting for Paul falls right into that definition of Insanity

akak said...

I think we what we are witnessing here in Mr. Snowflake's sophomoric editorial, and the responses to it, is just another example of the death throes of the old media elites and their power to frame and control the news.

It is not surprising to me at all that most of the "pundits" and establishment media hate Ron Paul and his supporters ---- precisely because it is WE, not they, who are framing the debate and controlling the dialogue, at least on the internet. Of course they are going to fight the loss of their power; but lose it they will, and are.

Please, everybody, collect and save all of the stories and articles from the mainstream media shills who repeatedly bleat that Ron Paul "has no chance", "will win no primaries", etc. etc. I simply can't wait to rub it in their faces, and beat them over the head with it all as much as they did to us originally, one year from now! Let them learn that we will no longer be told what to think and how to vote, and we not longer want their self-serving, establishment-pimping "opinions".

Fascist Nation said...

Very good rebuttal. I am guessing it won't be published in the same publication. But you can call the publication's opinion/editorial page editor and see if they will accept a guest rebuttal. Because this is good enough to make the guy you are responding to want to kill you. Finest kind.

Anonymous said...

If that guy doesn't think that Ron Paul has an organization in New Jersey, he is seriously mistaken.

I will not go into details of what we have done or are doing in the Garden state. But we have amassed a huge amount of grassroots volunteers and been active for MONTHS. We have attended dozens of pubic events handing out literature and our activist base has become a well-oiled machine.

No other candidate has campaigned or put any effort into NJ (from what I have seen), because they assume Giuliani has it won. WE AIM TO SURPRISE, BIGTIME.

Anonymous said...

Why is Ron Paul right and Fred Snowflack wrong on the nation's War on Drugs? See for yourself: