Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul's Fair Weather Friends
BC Magazine ^ | 11/29/07 | Dave Nalle

Posted on 11/30/2007 4:33:59 AM PST by davenalle

Much has already been made of the interest shown in the Ron Paul campaign by groups on the reactionary right, from 9/11 'truthers' to white supremacists. Less widely reported but of growing concern to those watching the Paul campaign and wondering if it is going wildly astray is the involvement of far-left groups who are flocking to Paul's banner for reasons which may be genuine or may mask an effort to undermine the entire Republican primary. I like Ron Paul and what he stands for on a great many issues and especially his devotion to the Constitution, but I can't help but worry about the unsavory character his campaign is beginning to develop.

Stories are circulating on GOP email lists of interested Republicans attending Ron Paul meetups around the country and being confronted by openly hostile leftist/progressive/socialists who seem to be supporting Paul, but have no love for regular Republicans who also support the candidate. There are accounts that confrontations have become heated at some of these meetups, particularly the one held in Las Vegas earlier this month. Suspicion particularly focuses on attendees who are believed to be MoveOn.org operatives and why they are so interested in Ron Paul. Is their interest genuine, or is it only part of a campaign to disrupt the Republican primary?

The involvement of MoveOn.org in the Paul campaign can be confirmed on their page at meetup.com where they are shown as co-sponsoring a number of the regional Ron Paul meetups and they have also released a video ad in support of Paul. Paul's campaign has also received positive public response from a variety of prominent leftists, including Cindy Sheehan. One socialist in the Netherlands of all places, makes a compelling argument for why US socialists should support Ron Paul.

Most Republicans see the objectives of MoveOn.org as inherently antithetical to the basic beliefs of the Republican Party. MoveOn.org is an openly anti-Republican, anti-Conservative and anti-Libertarian organization which is openly funded by a wealthy international socialist whose goal is to undermine and control the Democratic Party, and it is largely run by people with past associations with the Communist Party USA and the Democratic Socialists of America. With its position at the far left of the American Political spectrum and as the main instrument through which George Soros seeks to undermine and control the American political system, it is understandable how Republicans might be concerned about MoveOn.org's interest in and support of Ron Paul.

The key to Paul's popularity on the left lies with his opposition to the Iraq War, but also with the suppor the has from a segment of the traditional Libertarian Party constituency, the left-libertarians or social anarchists. This element of the broad alliance which makes up the Libertarian Party, where Paul was once a prominent figure and presidential candidate, is philosophically compatible with the most extreme parts of the socialist leaning wing of the Democratic Party. As typified by Justin Raimondo, they are the anti-property, anti-war and anti-nationalist element of libertarianism. They differ from typical 'minarchist' libertarians and neolibertarians in their outspoken hostility to the Republican Party and their unwillingness to compromise their extreme principles in the interest of political reality. Strangely they don't have the same hostility towards the Democrats, and many of them see socialists as their natural allies. As the Democratic Party becomes more dominated by socialist factions it becomes more appealing to them. Their enthusiastic support for Paul means that there is a nucleus within his following which is already allied with forces within the farthest left part of the Democratic Party, and they have been drawing on that association to bring more leftist/progressives into Paul's camp.

Paul seems willing to take support from wherever he can get it and doesn't seem particularly concerned that socialists may try to influence his campaign or distort the nomination process in the Republican primaries. Although he has promised that if he fails to get the nomination he will not jump parties and run as a Libertarian, he doesn't seem to care that the newly registered pseudo-Republicans he's creating will leave the party the moment the primary is over, even if one of the more moderate somewhat libertarian candidates wins.

In a recent interview with LibertyWatch Paul makes very clear that he's aware of his appeal to the left. He commented that:

"Right now, liberals are the most enthusiastic about my campaign. If I get a speech on the House floor on foreign policy, I’ll get many hundreds — sometimes thousands — of comments sent to my office. I would say 90 percent of them are from Democrats."
He doesn't seem particularly concerned, and even accepts the idea that these supporters are 'liberals', even though it's pretty clear that they don't believe in most of the same liberal ideas that Paul or other libertarians in the Republican Party support. Paul even acknowledges this:
"liberals are very, very frustrated with their own Democrats. Although they know I have shortcomings from their viewpoint — because I’m for free enterprise and free markets — they love my position on civil liberties and they love my position on war."
He's clearly willing to take support from wherever he can get it, which is understandable, but it does put his loyalty to the Republican party and true libertarian ideals in question, as much as his unwillingness to speak out against the racists, conspiracy fanatics and other extremists who support him does.

It is Paul's anti-war position which seems to drive much of the interest of the left in his campaign, which begs the question of whether their support is genuine, or just based on the single issue of the War in Iraq? Do they support Paul and everything he stands for or do they just see his candidacy as a chance to strike a blow against the evil Republican warmongers in their own primary. What will leftist/progressives who are flocking to register Republican so that they can vote for Paul do if he doesn't get nominated? Would they stick with a candidate like Mike Huckabee or Fred Thompson who share many of Paul's positions on issues other than the Iraq War, or will they flee back to the Democratic party once Paul loses the nomination and they've done as much damage to the primary process as they can? Perhaps the most important question for Republicans is whether Paul could hold onto some of their votes in a national election if he were a Vice Presidential candidate?

Paul seems to have decided that whatever advances his campaign is a good idea, no matter where that support comes from or what strings may be attached to it. Distressing though it may be to admit, it looks like ambition is turning Ron Paul into a real politician.


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: election; libertarian; moveonorg; ronpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 last
To: SJackson
Outstanding, an agreement from one of Paul's most rabid supporters that Paul has no leadership ability.

I didn't say he doesn't have it, I said he wouldn't need it. He'd have unified support from the people, who'll in turn be a check on Congress. So he doesn't need to be a Reagan or a Roosevelt, but he'll surely be more commanding than the Bush-Clinton axis we've enjoyed for 20 years now.

I'll ignore the mandate till it develops, but the contension that a President of the United States doesn't need leadership ability is absurd.

The position of the Presidency itself gives Paul leadership. What do you think being President is?

Paul has no Congressional support, as evidenced by his complete inability to accomplish anything legislatively in his career.

Well, when you're a member of a political party that opposes the very beliefs they supposedly support, opposing legislation that advances the party's ideals but have no problem embracing and voting with the opposition, not getting your legislation passed is bound to happen.

That's additional evidence of his lack of leadership skills. And their importance, because while Paul vegitates, people with names like Kennedy, McCain and Feingold have accomplished all sorts of things.

That's because Paul doesn't "compromise" for the sake of "bipartisanship" like the other spinless, feckless Republicans do.

61 posted on 11/30/2007 9:29:06 AM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Actually he said what he meant, that he'd do the one thing he can do as President, pull the troops out immediately. That's what his campaign is about.

Of course it is, because wars cost money.

62 posted on 11/30/2007 9:31:23 AM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; SJackson
The position of the Presidency itself gives Paul leadership. What do you think being President is?

Actually, leadership is an attribute. The Presidency gives the holder a title and authority, but it doesn't create a leader.

63 posted on 11/30/2007 9:36:18 AM PST by mnehring (..one candidate did not display any moderateness or liberalism...Fred Thompson - Rush Limbaugh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
About 1/3rd of the people there were Ron Paul supporters Does that mean that 2/3 were leftist infiltrators? Dave
64 posted on 11/30/2007 11:33:44 AM PST by davenalle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
Actually, leadership is an attribute. The Presidency gives the holder a title and authority, but it doesn't create a leader.

Amazing, a candidate whose supporters view a lack of leadership skills as a plus.

65 posted on 11/30/2007 11:36:17 AM PST by SJackson (I really wish the Jews in Judea an independent nation, John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
I didn't say he doesn't have it, I said he wouldn't need it. He'd have unified support from the people, who'll in turn be a check on Congress. So he doesn't need to be a Reagan or a Roosevelt, but he'll surely be more commanding than the Bush-Clinton axis we've enjoyed for 20 years now. … The position of the Presidency itself gives Paul leadership. What do you think being President is?

Good thing he doesn’t need leadership skills. Cause he doesn’t have them. Being President is something Ron Paul won’t.

Bye

66 posted on 11/30/2007 11:40:17 AM PST by SJackson (I really wish the Jews in Judea an independent nation, John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
As to the utter contempt for the GOP, it's a position of pure arrogance when held by those who take the position it, like the nation, has been "hijacked", an act of force. Time for those "Republicans" to leave.

Can I take that as a promise that you won't bitch and moan if Rudy is the nominee and freepers go 3rd-party?

67 posted on 11/30/2007 11:50:15 AM PST by jmc813 (#1 in the hood, G)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Amazing, a candidate whose supporters view a lack of leadership skills as a plus.

I'm an adult. I don't need a freaking politician to "lead" me. This "leadership" business seems to be the mantra of the Rudy people, since he pretty much sucks on all of the issues.

68 posted on 11/30/2007 11:58:16 AM PST by jmc813 (#1 in the hood, G)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
Can I take that as a promise that you won't bitch and moan if Rudy is the nominee and freepers go 3rd-party?

I don't think that's likely, but if Rudy is nominated the anti-war contingent will need somewhere to go, there are several parties in waiting, the Constitution Party offers an immediate withdrawl, and the LP would work too.

If you're implying a third party Paul run, perhaps with Kucinich, I think that's a probability, and I'm sure his supporters will back him. In general that's a GOP plus, more one issue hate the war hate Bush voters on the left, but will I criticize the 3rd party effort, you bet I will.

69 posted on 11/30/2007 12:01:14 PM PST by SJackson (I really wish the Jews in Judea an independent nation, John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
I'm an adult. I don't need a freaking politician to "lead" me. This "leadership" business seems to be the mantra of the Rudy people, since he pretty much sucks on all of the issues.

Awesome, another voter who thinks leadership skills are irrelevant to an executive position. Congress will take care of leadership domestically, the State Dept overseas. In that context I suppose a candidate with fewer demonstrated leadership skills that Jimmy Carter, he managed to get elected but not much else, would be attractive.

As to Rudy, leadership like the war, the GOP has a talented pool to draw from, excluding Rudy and Paul. Every one superior on those issues. Crime too. I've addressed those topics in detail on several threads back when there were Rudy supporters here to persuade. Go back, read them, then come back and disagree.

70 posted on 11/30/2007 12:06:49 PM PST by SJackson (I really wish the Jews in Judea an independent nation, John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
If you're implying a third party Paul run, perhaps with Kucinich

I'm implying any third-party run. Or simply sitting things out this time around. Because that's where the majority of freepers are going to be at. This ain't wideawakes.

71 posted on 11/30/2007 12:07:48 PM PST by jmc813 (#1 in the hood, G)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
As to Rudy, leadership like the war, the GOP has a talented pool to draw from, excluding Rudy and Paul.

I actually think that his views on the war are about the only good thing about Rudy. Excuse me while I go wash up. I feel dirty defending him.

72 posted on 11/30/2007 12:09:11 PM PST by jmc813 (#1 in the hood, G)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson