Did Ron Paul Have A Mole @ The Federal Reserve?

by JASmius



And the whole time, "Old Yellen" never knew it.  I never would have credited a Paulnut with anywhere near that level of subtlety:

A former aide to Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen has broken ranks with his former employer and issued a blueprint for a sweeping reform of the U.S. central bank, including regular government audits and shorter term limits for policy makers.

Dartmouth College professor Andrew Levin targeted four areas of change for the Federal Reserve system: make the Fed a fully public institution; ensure the process of picking regional Fed presidents is transparent; set seven-year term limits for regional presidents and Board governors; and make the entire Fed subject to external review.

The proposals were taken up by the union-backed [extrem]ist group Fed Up, which promoted them Monday in a conference call with journalists, and come during an election year where the central bank has been a campaign topic.

“There is one key principle in this document which is the Fed needs to become a public institution,” Levin said. “Pragmatic, reasonable Fed reform should be able to be passed by the Congress, by both parties. That is my hope.”

I'd like to think that Professor Levin is aware that NOTHING passes during an election year.  I also can't help but notice, at least on the Fed issue, how much overlap there appears to be between Paulnuts and the Left, which I find more than a little amusing, as I can't fully discern in which camp he stands.  Or is he straddling?

So what say you, Tea Partiers?  Is fully nationalizing the Fed, and therefore the money supply, worth a bow-to-stern financial cavity search of the place?  'Cause Professor Levin isn't proposing to get rid of the Fed, but quite the opposite.

Not that any of it will ever happen, of course.  I'm just interested to see how far you futilely get your hopes up about it.