…..When Ron Paul says he wants to cut military spending on foreign wars, that is all that is generally heard. The whole story, that he does not want to cut DEFENSE spending, the funds which defend the country, does not get told. The difference between defense spending and spending on nation building and policing the world is a distinction Ron Paul sees very clearly. Why is this not seen by much of the country? Is it because this cannot be explained in a 60-second debate answer or 15-second soundbite?
Apparently, according to Time Magazine, Ron Paul’s message actually is getting through to lots of people:
Time Magazine, in preparation for their 100 most influential people of 2012, had a poll. In this poll, you could vote for the person you considered most influential person in the world. Ron Paul was the highest rated 2012 presidential candidate in this poll, and in fact had tens of thousands more votes than Mitt Romney. Presidential candidate Ron Paul received more votes than President Obama.
Time Magazine took their poll and used that data to create their own list of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2012. That list is now available. The 12-term Congressman from Texas has made the list.
So why does the mainstream media, the Republican establishment, and much of the country, not consider Ron Paul a serious candidate for POTUS? Perhaps it really is the soundbites. Though Paul’s message actually can be summed up succinctly, as evidenced by is commercial set to air in Rhode Island:
So in Ron Paul, we have a candidate who believes in individual liberties, understands the economy and how to fix it, strongly supports the Constitution, and has been consistent for decades. Naturally, this could not be a serious presidential candidate……….