I got into it with Biggest NeoCon AM talk host in SoCal today.

hey great job for calling. Simple rules for debating. Remember to always ask questions- whoever asks the questions controlls the conversation, even if they ask questions, answer thier questions with questions.
This guy doesnt understand- no you dont need gold coins instead of paper oney, just backed by something so its restricts congress from spending.

Dorry worry Bro, this guy is an idiot who sounds smart.
He made no sense even though he's well articulated and has a radio voice.
Gold Coins in our pockets, what a moron!

you did a great job.

I'm sure you've already been corrected, but Reagan actually put a committee together to return to the gold standard. You know, it was completely abolished just 35 years ago under Nixon. It hasn't been that long ago.

Reagan said, "One economist pointed out a couple of years ago ... when we started buying the oil [from] the OPEC nations, 10 barrels of oil were sold for the price of an ounce of gold. And the price was pegged to the American dollar. And we were about the only country left that still [was] on a gold standard. And then a few years went by, and we left the gold standard. And as this man suggested, if you looked at the recurrent price rises, were the OPEC nations raising the price of oil or were they simply following the same pattern of an ounce of gold, that as gold in this inflationary age kept going up, they weren't going to follow our paper money downhill?"

I'm not going to take the time to educated you on all the details of Reagan's policies. If you wanted to be educated, you'd have done some research before you spat off that Ron Paul is a nut and Reagan didn't talk about the Gold Standard because the idea is nutty.

Ron Paul IS more in line with Reagan than not, and he's definitely more of a Reagan politician than any of the others!

I understand your job is to be a complete liar and deceive the public. I'm happy that you are able to do it with such little conscience.

More like Hedgeprick. He was so disrespectful and nasty to you, but you held your own. Good job!
Glenn Beck interviewed RP on his radio show last week about the economy. This is something that RP said about Ronald Reagan:

"You know, you should never be embarrassed about the gold standard because one of our most favorite Presidents, Ronald Reagan, told me personally once, he says, you know, he says, I'm interested in gold because, he says, if you study history, you find out any great nation that has gotten off the gold standard will no longer remain great. And we just got off the gold standard totally in 1971 and if you look at the statistics, in '71 when it comes to spending and deficits and inflation and the value of the dollar, I mean, they're dramatic. And I just want to make sure we wake up before the dollar totally collapses because that is a real tragedy if we let that happen."

This is the whole transcript of the interview:
http://www.glennbeck.com/...

You did great. The only thing I'd change is I'd mention that Dr. Paul wants to introduce a competing hard currency and let the market decide. He says there's no need to abolish the greenback, just let people choose for themselves.

This guy showed his utter lack of understanding by his comments on carrying around gold coins in his pockets. "Wah, it would be too heavy!" Moron. Does he understand that dollars were exchangable for silver or gold for the vast majority of our history?

Renewable Wealth - Profitable Green Investing

It just goes to show how diluded they are http://www.youtube.com/wa... if you want me to take this off YouTube let me know but otherwise I think its great to show just how far the conservative base has fallen with their fed loving ,scared of gold,peace and freedom bull .

because one Ron Paul supporter does not know every detail about how a "new" currency gets distributed, but it's okay for a Huck supporter to "just like the way he talks"? I guess if the host asks enough questions, he's going to get to a question for which the caller doesn't have Ron Paul's answer.

Hedgecock is an ass. He speaks down to all his callers(maybe thats why rush has him as sub). I really don't know how this guy even has a talk-show he's the most boring character on the dial.

Next time consider having an IM session open so we can help feed you information. Use the power of the group knowledge and the internet to beat back ignorance.

Examples of things we could have sent you via instant message - (we would need to send one line statement if you were “live” for quick reading)

1. The idiot was wrong about needing to "carry" gold coins in his pocket.

The US was still partially on the gold standard until 1971. Federal Reserve notes (dollars) were BACKED by gold. We didn't carry gold.

Also from 1928 to 1957, Silver certificates (silver backed currency) were used just like dollars. The same could be done with any precious metal. We didn’t carry silver bullion. They looked, felt, and worked like Fed reserve notes (fiat dollars). Here are pictures of a $1 and $5 silver certificate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
Notice the difference? It says "This certifies that there is on deposit in the Treasury of the United States of America (number) dollar(s) in silver payable to the bearer on demand."
This also answers his idiotic “where do you keep the gold” question. In the US Treasury buildings. Fort Knox, NY reserve, San Francisco reserve, etc.
Main article http://en.wikipedia.org/w...

2. The idiot was wrong about Reagan and the Gold standard.

Ronald Reagan DID investigate the gold standard.
“..Republican National Convention in 1980. In general terms, Reagan pledged to return, or advance, to a free market and to "get government off our backs." Specifically, Reagan called for a massive cut in government spending, an even more drastic cut in taxation (particularly the income tax), a balanced budget by 1984, and a return to the gold standard, where money is supplied by the market rather than by government.” (sounds just like Ron Paul)

Reagan set up the “GOLD COMMISSION” in 1981 to determine the best course of action. Unfortunately it was determined that the commission was filled with lifelong opponents of the gold standard with connections to the US Federal Reserve. They scuttled the process.
http://www.cato.org/pub_d...

Ron Paul's message is excellent. We need more people like you to "get the message out" and we can assist you!

I sent this letter to Phil Valentine. He's been sympathetic on the rare occasion (FAUX debate) but lately has been pretty abusive of Ron Paul supporters.

Phil,
I have tried very hard to keep an open mind regarding your show. I realize that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and in no way expect everyone to agree with me on every issue, however, your ridicule of Ron Paul supporters and blatent ommision of Ron Paul from your discussions of the primaries and "serious" candidates is disturbing. If you honestly look at Ron Paul's positions, he is the only true conservative in the race that supports the Constitutional principles on which our country was founded. To ridicule and marginalize the people in this country who passionately support Ron Paul is to ridicule and marginalize the Constitution, liberty, and the Founding Fathers. Of course people are passionate about Ron Paul! Why wouldn't we be? He has offered the nourishment of freedom to a nation in despair..... to a nation of people who have been lied to, robbed, and stripped of our rights. We've been desparate for someone to have the courage to speak the truth, and now we have Ron Paul.
Ron Paul doesn't poll well in the national polls because he's not included in them. You are well aware of the media bias against Dr. Paul, and have made some effort in the past to at least mention that it was unacceptable (especially the FOX debacle), but lately it seems that something has changed. You speak passionately about our loss of freedoms, liberal Republican candidates, the problem of more and more government, the dangers of entitlement programs, personal responsibility, etc, and how we need a new party to represent these ideas, yet ignore the obvious! I find it hard to believe that you don't see that almost everything you espouse to believe in is represented in the message of Ron Paul.
I understand that you strongly disagree with his foriegn policy. That is your right, even though I personally believe that Dr. Paul is correct and that you have been manipulated by the media spin doctors as badly as any other neocon. If you can look past that issue, however, and realize that the gravest danger to Americans is from our own government, Ron Paul might make more sense to you. The move towards Marxist thought, the push for a North American Union, and the out of control expansion of power of the exectuive branch are MUCH more dangerous to the average American than terrorists. If we loose American lives to terrorists, it will be because we are either somewhere we don't need to be, and/or we are not protecting our borders here at home. We're already loosing American lives in this farce of a war, and I don't think that anyone feels any safer today than we did before we went over there. If American lives have to be lost, I would rather loose them protecting OUR borders and fighting for our individual liberties here at home. Just imagine how secure we could be if we had the bulk of our military force protecting OUR borders! What is irrational about that? With our troops spread all over the world we're a sitting duck, and what's worse, the department of homeland security seems to be more concerned about keeping tabs on Americans than the "terrorists"!
The campaign of Ron Paul is a fight for our human spirit, for the very thing that motivates us to sacrifice, work hard, to excel..... rational self interest. Anyone who believes that our individual rights should be sacrificed at the alter or someone else's "need" is the mortal enemy of freedom. The campain of Ron Paul is a great big "NO" to those who want to dissolve our individual rights, national soverngity, and make us work half the year to fund wars and programs we didn't ask for and which will ultimately cause more harm than good. A man is not free if he HAS to pay almost half his income to the government every year or risk imprisonment, or confiscation of property. This is feudalism, not freedom!
When you omit appropriate discussion Ron Paul's campaign from your show, ridicule the passion of his followers, and aid the mainstream media in suppressing the message of freedom and the Consitiution, you are, by default, supporting the idea that it's ok for us to live in a society where we pay up "or else". You are saying that those who dissent and fight for their very freedom and the right to their own life and property are flakes, crazy, or out of touch with our "modern" age..... that it is somehow wrong to try to preserve the remnant of what was once the greatest country on earth.
As hard as I've tried to keep from believing it, you have placed yourself firmly in the camp of those seeking to censor the only message of freedom available to the American people. I will no longer listen to or support Supertalk 99.7, your show, or ABC News. If you are not for us, you are against us. One day, when America collapses, what a few of us are fighting for will make a lot more sense.

Dr. William "Doc" Holladay
Nashville, TN
http://www.myspace.com/do...

I think we should keep speaking logic and the message of freedom. It's got 'em scared.

Whoever is asking the questions controls the conversation. You want to be the one asking questions, even if it is a statement followed by a question, such as "blah, blah, blah, doesn't that make sense?" or "wouldn't you agree?"

Thanks for going to the mat!

Let's Reign! (Rev. 5:10)

Hedgecock the fool who thinks he knows more than the founding fathers. It is frustrating talking to radio people. I have spoken on my local station twice and have been cutoff both times for no reason. They know the tricks and speak very quickly. I am determined to improve my message to an art form and will keep trying. I think it may be an advantage to have some talking points in advance. You really do have to think fast. Well done Malum. I think the local shows are better. Keep trying

I commend your effort in getting the word out.

First off, guaranteed, 90% of his audience are morons who hasn't got a clue what you were talking about to begin with. so easiest thing to do is call you names, AFTER he hangs up on you, which he did, calling you a "nutcase," bblah, blah, blah. Because he kept changing minutia of the topic in question.

He asked you about treasury notes. Well, a bit more complex. The dickhead was testing you. Because how Feds are able to print money IS by "selling" T-notes. An IOU, then they can lend exponentially based on that amount.

The other detail left out when he brought up China is the fact that the reason why we have a huge trade deficit is because American manufacturers based in China, when their products reach American shores, it's considered an IMPORT, not export, despite the fact that the product is made under an American brand. So for instance, you'd think that when you buy a toy at your local Walmart, made by Matel in their factory in China, it'd be considered an American export because it is an American brand, but unfortunately no.

And because we have lost over 5 million manufacturing jobs in the last decade alone, under GWB, we essentially have no means of getting out of the current bind. At least in the seventies, we had our manufacturing base. People still wanted American products and liked our policies, even with Vietnam.

In fact, our biggest export now, is the DOLLAR, a monetized debt vehicle. Except, now, no one wants it, okay exaggerating, they want it much less. So aside from the dollar's loss in value, but foreigners are not willing to fund our militarism. That's also reason why they are not accepting the dollar. Since 1971 Dollar has been a reserve currency, as in, good as gold, though not backed by anything. So once foreigners don't accept paper money that's considered as good as gold, it becomes literally worthless.

Believe me, it's a topic even "experts" are not settle on. The neocon radio host hasn't got a clue either. And you know, if wouldn't be as bad if the owners of the Federal Reserve don't actually fund both sides in a war, cause boom and busts, and strictly bunch of academics whose sole intent is to ensure a strong economic infrastructure it'd be a different story.

The real intent to rid the Fed is to STOP endless wars and deficit financing of our military empire and welfare state. Key is transparency and oversight. Treasury will be in charge of monetary policy, along with Congressional oversight. So his whole notion of wanting a privatized entity unaccountable to no one is the biggest fallacy in that argument.

Besides, since RP has not announce the specifics, all we can do is guess based on what some experts, and academics that have studied this in depth, as far as how we should actually transition out of this mess. If we do nothing else but require the Fed to be transparent, and accountable, rid IRS, we'd be on the right track.

What I do know so far is, he wants no tax for gold and other commodities. No regulation of them. Essentially making it a competing currency. The dickhead radio host's suggestion that you're gonna be carrying gold coins in your pocket is ridiculous. It will be BACKED by gold reserve. Look into what the Feds do with gold reserve. More gold pass through NYC Federal Reserve bank in a single day than anywhere else in the world. And since Ft. Knox has never been audited, we have no idea if they even have any gold after so many cyclicle lending of gold reserves. So in a similar fashion the banks trade lease on gold to artificially lower the price of gold, otherwise no one will take paper money, I suppose similar sys, but with more appropriate math can be used to run it more fairly.

As you can see, it's complex, no one knows for sure. But I reckon, there would still be some level of central planning involved, because someone has to determine money supply. Be it the Treasury, or Congressional Oversight committee.

Ron Paul talks about competing currency and phasing out Federal Reserve. Because eventually when gold back currency is more valuable, it would make FedRes notes moot. But I do believe the quickest remedy would be to require full, transparent, televised oversight hearing with the Treasury heads, and Congressional Committee on Finance. And according to the original 1913 bill, I believe the Congress has the indefinite option of "buying" them out, in the amount of some $600 million. Which they can do.

Hope that helps.

But believe me, that douchebag has no idea how to work it out either. It's always easy to criticize someone else. That's why he never answered anything but kept challenging you, testing you with minutiae just to establish, based on his criteria and bullshit logic, to say that we are somehow nuts and cooky. Simply put, he yapped bullshit for 5 min, just so he can call you a bad name. Childish. But keep on rockin. Keep challenging them. Arm your self with more ammo, that's all.

Good luck!!!

Thanks for putting yourself out there on the line.

He shut you down in the beginning in a rude, belittling fashion to throw you off balance and prove he had control. Propaganda move. There is no way to win with these bullies. They are aggressive, rude, hateful people who have an agenda-to promote their boss-CFR and Fed Res. There is no way that the most intelligent man/woman on the face of the earth would have won with him. I think I would have hung up on him in the beginning when he rudely interrupted you and told you basically that he was in control. He is fighting for his life and he will get you any way he has to do it. He has learned every underhanded tactic in broadcasting and is not above using every dirty trick in the book. This is his business and no one ever wins. While I appreciate your courage, the only thing I would ever do with these idiots is say what is on my mind and then politely say thanks and hang up. Don't give him a chance to run you into the ground with his well rehearsed vipers tongue. Of course, the moment you are off the phone, he will spew his venom.

Interesting and a very educational thread, from which I certainly have benefitted. You are an outstanding representative of our campaign.
Thanks

I remember Roger Hedgecock when he was mayor of San Diego. He is a politician through and through and a sleazy one too.

He was quite good at manipulating the conversion, so here are my suggestions.

Hedgecock already acknowledged that the Fed is a private organization. Kudos that he is as intelligent as considers himself, in some ways. Dr. Paul advocates repealing legal tender laws (in effect, ending the monopoly of the Fed). He understands that abolishing the Fed is a radical move and can be harmful if done too quickly. Next time ask if he thinks a monopoly on money is a good idea, and why should the Fed be in control. Doesn't Congress handing that power to them put them in the same position as Congress itself.

Regarding Reagan, is it not the height of idiocy to claim that because the Fed wasn't an issue that Paul's not Reaganesque?! Of course the Fed was an issue! Reagan appointed Paul Volcker to reign in the out of control Fed of Arthur Burns as soon as he could. Volcker immediately instituted a very hard money policy that brought on a very severe but necessary recession to correct the imbalances brought on by easy money in the 70s.

Look, if people in power were trustworthy and righteous, yes, they could trusted to print little pieces of paper that they say represents a store of value and not breach that trust by printing lots of additional pieces of paper claiming they all have the same value as before. Gold is just insurance against the weaknesses of man. In any case, you can also point out the massive price increases we've witnessed in the last few years, how most of it (even oil, which many wrongly claim has gone up because of increased demand in China and elsewhere) when compared to units of gold, has remained flat. Meaning, one ounce of gold at today's dollar price, buys approximately the same number of goods today as one ounce of gold did several years ago.

Gold certainly was an issue in the 70s. You'll have to do more research on this. I remember reading that THE reason Dr. Paul got into politics was because of Nixon's closing the gold window. It could be Reagan thought it wasn't worth raising to win the election, and he pursued the next best thing anyway, hard fiat money.

Regarding where the gold would come from...it's a good question but he asked in a very mocking manner. Obviously, if people lost confidence in the dollar, they would buy gold, and lots of it. They could also take their jewelry to the new private money banks, who would almost certainly offer a service of accepting gold, and assaying and coining it for a fee (seignorage) and providing either the newly minted coins, or certificates redeemable for gold. Of course, Roger would respond that it's an absurd answer, but it's perfectly realistic.

Mises.org has articles on making the dollar convertible again, and the gist of it is, take the dollars in circulation and divide by the gold held by the government or the Fed to reprice the dollar. Using that methodology, the price of gold might really be many tens of thousands of dollars per ounce.

Regarding China, of course they are "loaning" money, but being a dim-witted government goon, he doesn't get it. China accepts dollars for goods. Since the dollar is redeemable for nothing, and there's nothing China can buy with the dollars (except for oil, which they need far less of than the number of dollars they have on hand, and which is rapidly changing anyway), China is indeed "loaning" the money to America to buy its goods. The only thing it can do with the money is invest it. Mostly in T-bills, but also in private companies. But Roger is an idiot, so he thinks that it's only a loan if America goes to a Chinese bank and walks out with dollars.

pretty good in the convo. The one thing I'd of said about the Reagan/Congress coining money issue is this. Doesn't matter what anyone says, the Constitution says it, end of story.

Also, more to the point of what RP has said is that he backs COMPETING CURRENCIES and gold and silver (such as Liberty Dollars, I'd presume).

These guys always go off on tangents when debating about the gold standard.
He kind of set you up with a straw man type argument that was to his favor.

Next time, ask and answer the questions for them. Ask rhetorical questions to get them going....

I think the main thing is you should let Ron Paul describe his
platforms himself, unless you really know your onions on a subject.

He kind of seemed to catch you a bit flatfooted, and he really
doesn't understand Ron on sound currency.

Better to get someone who does to talk with him.

But if you call in to radio shows, it is ok to say you are not an
expert, and try not to act as one.

The place he got you on the get go, was that Ron is not
a Regan Republican.

I would have just said, I don't think he ever claimed to be.
He is a Ron Paul Republican.
Then you would have had an entirely different conversation.

Become a Precinct Leader
Donate to the Campaign

Hedgecock was mayor of San Diego in the early 1980's, and was forced to resign when he was indicted on several felony counts for failing to declare illegal campaign contributions. The source of the money was a Ponzi scheme (Google "J. David Dominelli" and "hedgecock").

First, the gold standard was around until 1971, when it was finally done away with to enrich private bankers through the Fed. It took from 1913-1971 to finalize those plans. That's why Ron Paul was talking about this in the 70's. 1971 was also the year the Libertarian party was formed because Republicans were obviously abandoning their platform. So...looking back Richard Nixon finally killed the gold standard AND created HMO's. Sweet.

From this article, Ronald Reagan was VERY interested in returning to the gold standard.

"Reagan defeated communism, stopped runaway inflation, cut government spending, and called a Presidential Commission to study returning to the gold standard. "Reaganomics" was the most serious attempt to change the course of U.S. economic policy of any Administration since Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. "Only by reducing the growth of government," Reagan maintained, "can we increase the growth of the economy."

"Reagan also understood that gold should be a part of the foundation of a sound monetary system. As he remarked at a question-and-answer session at a breakfast for newspaper and television editors on Feb. 19, 1981: 'One economist pointed out a couple of years ago ... when we started buying the oil [from] the OPEC nations, 10 barrels of oil were sold for the price of an ounce of gold. And the price was pegged to the American dollar. And we were about the only country left that still [was] on a gold standard. And then a few years went by, and we left the gold standard. And as this man suggested, if you looked at the recurrent price rises, were the OPEC nations raising the price of oil or were they simply following the same pattern of an ounce of gold, that as gold in this inflationary age kept going up, they weren't going to follow our paper money downhill?' "

There's a reason why economists LOVE the idea of returning to the gold standard.

There's also a reason why those in the media call the gold standard "nutty." They simply want to control the way the masses think, thereby ensuring the masses ALWAYS LIVE IN DEBT.

The dude from KOGO doesn't really know his ass from a hole in the ground. And it's very obvious. You did a great job, though.

Oh wow...further in the article I posted, it even says Nixon removed us from the gold standard.

The gold is no longer in Ft. Knox like the talkshow host mentioned. The Fed took that years ago when they struck a deal with Nixon. I'm sure we can find plenty of places to house gold! Who cares where we put it?

He's flat out lying about the U.S. NOT borrowing money from China just so he doesn't sound stupid.

Who is this idiot? I'm going to email him.

Again, good job.

First all you did fairly well but this guy is an idiot. However you need to study What Dr. Paul wants to do with the gold standard and be more assertive. You let the guy falsely characterize the issue as putting gold coins in your pocket instead of dollars. Next the idea that the Fed issuing the currency is somehow free market privatization a la Reagen is just unbelievable that you let him get away with it. They hold a monopoly on the currency and charge us interest on money they print from thin air.

You did ok on China but you should have pointed out the yeah anyone can buy t bills but not may buy billions yearly and that is how we are financing the Iraq war along with printing money

--------------------------------------------------------
If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin. Samuel Adams

oh, so he's a jackass...

well, most neo-cons have absolutely no real understanding of such economic policies...

as for me, I trust a man who has served on the joint banking committee and several other economic committees in congress, has a degree in Austrian Free Market Economics, and is supported by two of the most respected economists today.