Ron Paul's "Extreme" Views Christopher S. Bentley Ron Paul spoke on Saturday to a crowd of over a thousand in Salt Lake City. While some local media coverage ostensibly seemed to be balanced, others labeled the Congressman's views as "isolationist" and "extreme." Follow this link to the original source: "Ron Paul in Salt Lake City, KUTV News, CBS affiliate" COMMENTARY: Whether one supports Ron Paul or not there are many lessons to be learned in observing the Texas Congressman's growing popularity. First, Americans who want to elect a candidate who is friendly to the Constitution and the principles of limited government - to any political office - would do well to pay attention to the potential of the Internet as a vehicle for getting the message out. Without the Internet, there would be no "Ron Paul Revolution." Second (and this is the flip side of the coin), don't expect the major media or its local affiliates to give balanced and fair coverage. To wit, even though all of the local Salt Lake City outlets reported Paul's support numbers as only being between 1% and 2%, that he is a "long shot," or that he is "struggling in the polls," they ignored his consistently high placing in straw poll events, as well as his strong results after nationally-televised debates. Granted, media bias is par for the course in today's ratings obsessed news industry with its politically-driven agenda disguised as news coverage. Nevertheless, it is worth analyzing what the media considers to be "extreme views." The local Salt Lake ABC News affiliate, for example, described Congressman Paul's views as "miles away" from his fellow Republicans on Iraq, being one of only six Republican Party members of Congress to vote against the war. In its coverage, ABC also singled out Paul's promise to do away with the IRS and Federal Reserve if elected. Even though the local affiliate also stated that Ron Paul is one of five most searched names on the Internet, it claimed that Vegas is giving his odds of winning as 200 to 1. As reported by the Salt Lake Tribune, "Paul spoke fervently of his support of smaller government, including the abolition of agencies, such as the Internal Revenue Service, and of his support for strictly following the Constitution. He also spoke out against the war in Iraq and any pre-emptive military action." Ironically, it was the Über-Liberal "Trib" that was the most balanced out of the whole group. The neo-con Fox 13 News described Paul as "often at odds with the rank and file of his party," as if he is way out of step with mainstream Republicans. The Fox News sponsored debate - notwithstanding his hecklers on the stand - indicated otherwise. BYU's NewsNet reported that Ron Paul "called for the Department of Education to be abolished along with the Federal Reserve, which he said is a 'secret bank.'" It also labeled Paul's call for withdrawing from the United Nations and bringing our troops home "an isolationist foreign policy." Of course, you wouldn't expect the neo-con shills from Happy Valley to label the policies of the anointed right - the McGiulibeeRompson Big Guv'mint Five Pack - as "nation-invading-wrecking-and-rebuilding with privatized profits and taxpayer-subsidized losses." For once, that would be truth in reporting. CBS wins the award for the worst reporting on display, with the news anchor chortling and openly depicting Paul's adherence to the Constitution, support for limited government, and desire to abolish the IRS as "rather extreme views." Local CBS Report on Ron Paul Since that's what serves as news reporting these days, it's no wonder that more and more Americans are turning to the Internet for alternative news and coverage of events. A growing number of mainstream Americans - regular people like you and me - are very concerned about our nation's $9 trillion debt (caused by the Fed and socialist spending policies), our elected leaders endlessly meddling in the affairs of other nations leading to blowback on our own soil (that's the fruit of internationalism), our trade policies favoring Communist China and the obliteration of middle class jobs (outsourcing), and the collapsing borders around our country (illegal immigration). But the major media considers any views favoring national independence and sound economic policies as quaint and out of touch: Dismantle the funny money magician machinery that got us into $9 trillion in debt? "That's extreme!" Repeal the Marxist progressive income tax, which serves primarily as the revenue collector to pay the interest on the debt? "That's extreme!" Bring our troops home because our presence in the Middle East is destabilizing the entire region and creating the conditions for a global conflict to break out? "That's extreme!" Stop waging wars on countries that never threatened us and keep our nation from going bankrupt fighting such needless conflicts? "That's extreme!" Stop government wiretapping and rendition programs, and restore habeas corpus - the bedrock of protection of liberty in our country - so that Americans won't get caught in the widening War on Terror net and hauled off to Gitmo or some Godforsaken hell-hole in a host country that tortures on behalf of the U.S. government? "That's extreme!" Turning education back over to the states, and giving parents more local control over their children's education? "That's extreme!" A gut reaction to this "extreme" treatment by the press is that the message of limited government is not extreme at all - it's mainstream and the press coverage is extreme. After all, it was the message of limited government that got Ronald Reagan elected way back when. Remember, as a cadidate he promised to abolish the Department of Education, though he failed to follow through on that once in office. But his apparent advocacy of freedom and limited government got him elected, and even loved, by millions of Americans. But then again, maybe the message of freedom is extreme. Consider: An accurate political spectrum depicts limited government toward the right side (with anarchy on the extreme right), and shades of centralized government power moving toward the left (with total government on the extreme left). On this spectrum, advocacy of limited government and individual freedom is on the extreme right side of the scale, just like the mainstream media's advocacy of near total government is a species of extremism from the far left side of spectrum. In aggregate, it is from the extreme left side of the political spectrum from which the local Salt Lake press reported Paul's strict adherence to the Constitution and limited government, his call for abolishing the Fed, the IRS and the Department of Education, and non-interventionism into the affairs of other nations as extreme. This is a telling admission as three of the Communist Manifesto's 10 planks (numbers 2, 5, and 10) call for: a central bank (the Fed) a progressive income tax (which is enforced by the IRS) and centralized control over education (which the Department of Education seeks to expand every year). Had the local media in Salt Lake City told its viewers the truth, they would have reported (with some exasperation): "Ron Paul wants to repeal three out of the ten planks of the Communist Manifesto! That's extreme!!" With the major media establishment and America's corporatocracy marching in lock step ever further toward the extreme left of the political spectrum, it's easy to see why the distance in political views between them and mainstream Americans widens each passing year. Fortunately, the technology revolution is providing once again another medium for liberty-loving Americans to get a different perspective on political issues and news coverage: the Internet. It is also becoming more of a means for those Americans to organize and to work together to restore the principles of limited government. As reported in the most recent issue of The New American, Ron Paul's surprising success is due directly to his capturing the attention of many Americans in what is functionally the last bastion of a free press. Is the freedom message of limited government and an adherence to the Constitution finally attracting the attention of a large number of Americans? Will the press still be able to stifle out of campaign politics the open and honest discussion of the proper role of government? Mark me down as one who sees 2008 as being one of the most interesting years in recent decades. Christopher S. Bentley Chris is the Manager of Office Operations for the John Birch Society.