Well, to me, bitcoin fails the smell test. Moreover, think about it.
A gold-backed money is convertible (to gold), whether at a fixed or floating rate; ultimate it is convertible on demand. The asset that it is convertible to has historically had a lot of value (gold is seen as currency); moreover, gold has some industrial use which gives its value some kind of safety. If a nation has a gold-standard, they can also allow it to be used to satisfy government debts.
Fiat money is not convertible and is on a floating exchange rate, but can be used to pay governmental debts. That is a huge built-in value. Secondly, from a practical standpoint, huge amounts of debt/balance sheets are denominated in dollars, meaning dollars are required to pay them off. Additionally, there are legal tender laws backing the ability of the dollar to pay off even non-governmental debts.
Bitcoin has none of those. It is not widely used in the economy, so debt isn't priced in it. There are no legal tender laws forcing it to be accepted as a payment of debt. No government accepts it as payments for debt. It is not convertible to anything, much less a historically strong asset.
Bitcoin is merely a real asset, with a very tiny cost of creation, implying that it is a largely speculative asset.
Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:
Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a