Posted on 11/13/2007 1:10:40 PM PST by SJackson
Daniel Sieradski, November 9, 2007
Ron Paul has a Jewish problem.
Last month, the dark horse Republican candidate was barred from the Republican Jewish Coalition’s Candidate’s Forum due to his stance against providing further foreign aid to Israel.
Typical of his view, at an event on September 11 of this year at Johns Hopkins’ School of Advanced International Studies, Paul argued for withdrawing from the Middle East, telling his audience that “Israel is quite capable of taking care of itself” — though interestingly adding that US policy has “hurt Israel tremendously.” Paul also downplayed the threat Iran poses to Israel, saying that even if Iran does develop nuclear arms, that it would not be a serious danger to Israel, which, he added, possesses roughly 300 nuclear weapons of its own.
Paul’s position towards Israel is not innately anti-Jewish, nor is it necessarily even anti-Israel — particularly with such a caveat about America impeding Israel’s interests. Such a statement lends weight, for example, to Zionist extremists who wish to terminate Israel’s Herodian dependence on the US, such as the members of Zionists for Ron Paul, a group run by American expatriates now living as religious settlers in the West Bank.
Nor is it a particularly uncommon position, especially within paleoconservative circles. Pat Buchanan led the charge in March of 2003, writing in The American Conservative that neoconservatives participating in and advising the Bush administration were steering the United States into wars that were not in America’s interests, but rather Israel’s.
Now fed up with the neocon’s wars abroad and the diminishing of civil liberties at home, many conservatives are rallying behind Paul, whom they view as the only Republican candidate who isn’t in the pocket of the Israel lobby. They have helped him become an Internet sensation — the Republican Howard Dean, if you will — who in the last quarter raised over $5 million, outpacing more mainstream candidates like John McCain.
Even with his hardline protectionist stance, Paul has managed to garner the support of Jewish Republicans and Libertarians alike, some of whom have banded together to form an ad hoc coalition called Jews for Ron Paul, which condemned the RJC’s decision to bar the Congressman from their Candidate’s Forum.
Yet, much to his Jewish supporters’ chagrin, Congressman Paul’s willingness to stand up to the neocons has also had the effect of making Paul a popular candidate among those from whom Presidential candidates would typically not desire support: Bona fide antisemites.
Indeed, Ron Paul has become the most popular candidate among right-wing extremists, including white separatists, neo-Nazis, and conspiracy theorists who believe that “the Zionists” were behind 9/11. This group includes Frank Weltner, creator of the antisemitic website JewWatch.com, who in a YouTube video, accuses the “Zionist-controlled media” of attacking Paul’s candidacy. Paul has also received favorable coverage from the Vanguard News Network, a White Nationalist news organ, members of Stormfront, an online neo-Nazi community, as well as the National Alliance, the “mainstream” White Nationalist group featured prominently in Marc Levin’s 2005 film Protocols of Zion.
Of course, Congressman Paul cannot be held accountable for the views of his extremist supporters, unless he publicly acquiesces to those views. Yet, when his extremist supporters begin providing a substantial amount of campaign funds, things get a bit dicier. And that’s Paul’s biggest problem.
According to the Lone Star Times, White Nationalists have become a noticeable source of financial contributions to the Paul campaign. Indeed, even Don Black, the founder of Stormfront, and one of the most notorious neo-Nazis in America, has personally contributed $500 to Paul’s campaign.
Though it’s true that Paul’s campaign has no control over who sends them money in advance, once it becomes apparent that a neo-Nazi leader is sending money, any sensible politician who does not wish to be identified with neo-Nazism should send the money back. Not so for Ron Paul, however, whose campaign is still making up its mind as to whether or not to return Black’s money.
Paul’s spokesman Jesse Benton told the Lone Star Times:
At this time, I cannot say that we will be rejecting Mr. Black’s contribution, but I will bring the matter to the attention of our campaign director again, and expect some sort of decision to be made in coming days.
Frankly, this is a no-brainer. Any other candidate would unequivocally reject that money as soon as its donor’s identity was known. That Paul’s campaign needs time to think about it is shocking.
Also of concern is the fact that Paul’s campaign has ignored my repeated attempts to interview the Congressman for JTA, the Jewish newswire service by which I am employed. I had intended to write a story about the Congressman, and to provide him with the opportunity to distance himself from his extremist supporters, to clarify his position on Israel, and to state his case to the Jewish community. Yet, after three weeks of repeated telephone calls, two chats with his Deputy Communications Director, and several left voicemail messages, I have yet to receive a callback to schedule an interview.
Which leads me to conclude the following about the Congressman from Texas: Ron Paul will take money from Nazis. But he won’t take telephone calls from Jews.
UPDATE: The Ron Paul campaign finally contacted the JTA.
[This essay was cross-posted at Orthodox Anarchist. Daniel Sieradski responds to comments here and explains his own Libertarian take on Paul here.]
http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/capital/2007/11/12/does-ron-paul-have-a-jewish-problem
Interesting piece today from the Jewish Telegraph Agency by Daniel Sieradski about the neo-Nazi types who have been attracted to the Ron Paul campaign. (As part of his libertarian agenda, Paul wants to cut off air to Israel--and other countries, too, it should be added.) Sieradski notes that there's nothing to indicate Paul himself is antisemetic in the least but his campaign hasn't said if it will return contributions from White Nationalists. The great test of any movement is how it will deal with the crazies who are, for whatever reason, attracted to its cause. Organized labor purged the Communists; William F. Buckley drove the John Birchers out of the mainstream conservative movement. Now it's the Libertarians turn. By inclination, I'm sure the Freedom Lovin' Paul campaign doesn't want to trounce on anyone's rights. But do they really need to accept money from antisemites? See more here from the Lone Star Times.
I'm not a Libertarian but I like Ron Paul and his campaign and I think efforts to discredit him like what Rudy Giuliani said at the presidential debate aren't fair. But this seems like a valid criticism.
What non-Democrat candidate doesn’t have a Jewish problem?
I read this story earlier today and understood that much of Paul’s supposed jewish problem is that he won’t return the phone calls of this reporter.
Ron Paul can take donations from whomever he wishes to take donations from, he also should have his feet held to the fire for accepting them, which is a completely valid criticism.
Paul wants to cut off air to Israel?......That would be a bit difficult...............
Ron Paul doesn’t have a Jewish problem... he has a solution, a final solution.
RP is a nut bag. His supporters are loons and idiots and a 5th column of libs trying to scuttle the conservative movement by pretending to be conservatives supporting the midget.
Ron Paul has Paulistinian belt bomber supporters.
Enough said.
Another John Bircher Paul-bot...
If no Jew votes for Ron Paul, it will drop his maximum possible vote in a nationwide election from 5% to 4.9%. And that’s being very, very generous.
“”Does Ron Paul Have a Jewish Problem?””
Well, if he advocated ending aid “to” Israel but not “to” Egypt, maybe.
But he’s not advocating that.
I think Paul is a secret tool of the Russians, South Africans and Canadians, given his support for return to the gold standard...why not??
>>>>Marc Levin’s 2005 film Protocols of Zion. <<<<
That’s pretty Kafkaesque, considering the Jewish-sounding last name.
Seriously, though, that’s why I’m glad the second amendment is here. I might not be able to stop every Jew-hating idiot who tries to kick in my door, but I will leave life with the enormous pleasure that I’ve just taken three or four of them with me.
I would be a lot happier with Ron Paul if he had a stance against providing further foreign aid to the United Nations, an organization that hates the USA, instead of a nation that believes in democracy.
So does his ally--the president of Iran.
Posting this on a website that won’t condemn user comments calling for turning Mecca and Medina into glass parking lots takes the wind out of your sails regarding trying to antagonize the libertarian members of FR. There are thousands of Democrat machinery monkeys who would love nothing more than to force every Republican candidate to return campaign donation funds from every Christian minister received.
So before you go off on the nazi campaign contributions, consider what a legislative response to your concerns would regard, and how it would be twisted under a Clinton administration.
That being said, Paul is going to sink in the next few weeks, his celebrity lifecycle probably peaked on Sunday’s tv interviews.
I don’t believe Ron Paul hates Jews like many of his supporters do (just go to any ron paul forum-its sickening). But he should distance himself from the truthers, nazis, white supremacists, etc
“Paul wants to cut off (US) aid to Israel?......”
So do at least 15% of the Jewish Knesset members, for decidedly realistic reasons.
Jim, you must know Jennifer Coffey from SAS?
Fer Shure!....Israel can do a lot of “cutting off” on their own! As Syria and Saddam before them found out!............
Then prepare to be a lot happier. Ron Paul advocates America's complete withdrawal from the United Nations, the eviction of the entire UN apparatus from America, and the revocation of all treaties implemented under UN auspices (in addition to most other MULTIlateral treaties). He has been advocating this for at least a decade, and IIRC, dropped a bunch of stinkies in Congress regarding eviction of the UN (much to the consternation of his mostly global-collectivism-pushing colleagues).
The single greatest threat to Israel, and one of the greatest threats to America and humanity writ large, is indeed the United Nations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.