Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul Has Betrayed The GOP! (Former Staff Member on Ron Paul's change after 9/11)
AFK at Townhall ^ | 04/18/2007 | Cary Wesberry

Posted on 08/31/2007 5:28:19 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007

Is this what my grand party has come to?  Ron Paul is insulting, incompetent, and now I am sure he is an outright nut.  What I am posting here stupefied me after I read it.  I could not believe I was reading about a Republican... in Congress for 20 YEARS NO LESS!  I've posted the statement from Eric Dondero in its entirety; emphasis mine.  I suggest you take the time to read the whole thing.  It is a sad and pathetic story.  Read my previous post on this so-called Republican and after you do that, read this:



________________________________________
My name is Eric Dondero Rittberg.  For 12 years I worked on and off, mostly on, for Ron Paul.  I started on his staff in 1987 during his Libertarian Party Presidential campaign.  I served throughout 87 and 88 as his Personal Travel Aide.  Ron and I campaigned in over 40 states, including Alaska. 
 
In 1992, I organized Ron's Presidential Exploratory Committee.  We operated the effort for about 4 months.  We aborted the effort when Pat Buchanan declared for the GOP primaries.
 
In 1995, Ron agreed to serve as my "boss" as National Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus. 
 
In 1996, Ron decided to test the waters for a Congressional Campaign.  I moved to Texas and served as his Campaign Coordinator.  Ron won first in the Primary and then in the General with 51%.
 
In 1997, Ron hired me as his Senior Aide and District Representative.  My job title was to represent the Congressman at all functions throughout the District, to speak in his absence, and to handle all District Scheduling.  I was also in charge of Local Governmental relations. 
 
I served in that capacity til February of 2004. 
 
I can honestly say that the Congressman was more than just my boss, he was also my friend.  We had a good understanding, after years of working together, and were very good Travel mates.  Him and I would literally spend hours in the car traveling from one event to another, during campaigning and for District events.  We would debate everything under the sun, in a friendly and fun sort of way.  Our differences were always over abortion - I am Pro-Choice, he is firmly Pro-Life, and over foreign policy - I am Pro-Defense, he has always been more Non-interventionist.  But we always maintained our friendship. 
 
Then September 11, 2001 hit.  My boss, Ron Paul, all of a sudden changed dramatically.  Whereas before he was a reasonable non-interventionist, he was now rabidly so. 
 
I must say that Ron always knew how to play the game before 2001.  He always campaigned as a die-in-the-wool rock-ribbed Conservative Republican.  Coming from the Libertarian Party there was always suspicions about him on this.  So, he went the extra mile within the District to allay such concerns.
 
He also campaigned as a "Bush Republican."  I recall two specific events when Ron publicly backed Bush for President, quite enthusiastically; Once during a big GOP dinner in Wharton, and another time during a Bush for President fundraising in Corpus Christi.  He also had Bush's photo on the wall at our District Office in Freeport. 
 
I should also note that I personally spoke with Karl Rove twice in 1996.  After Ron won the GOP Nomination, mainline Republicans were unsure as to how to treat him.  We reached out to the Bush people.  After my conversations with Rove, he put out the word to key Houston-area, Austin and Victoria Republicans to back Ron Paul.  All of a sudden like a tidal wave all the GOPers came on board our Campaign.   
 
Though privately, Ron leaned non-intervenionist, publicly he was always Pro-Troops, Pro-Veterans, Pro-Defense and quite Patriotic, particularly in his Campaign style. 
 
He made extra sure to attend as many Veteran's events as possible.  And when he couldn't go, he would always send me, as the only Vet on staff to represent him.  He always made it quite clear that I was to emphasize "my views on foreign policy" more so than his non-interventionist views at such events.  And I did. 
 
But after Sept. 11, things changed.  He became morose.  He became bitter, and quite pessimistic. 
 
I had to literally beg him to support the vote authorizing the President to send Troops to Afghanistan.  I actually threatened to resign if he did not vote that way.  And another key District Staffer, practically threatened to resign, as well.  At the last minute Ron voted in favor of the Authorization.  I suspected he only did it, cause he knew if he hadn't he would cause the Republicans in the District to oppose him, and he wouldn't win reelection. 
 
But 9/11 served as a wake up call for me.  I started questioning how it is that I could work for such a man. 
 
Before it was always just a fun-loving disagreement; debating in the car from event to event to pass the time.
 
Now, I saw he was quite serious, and cared even less for how others, even constituents took his views on foreign policy.
 
Ron and I grew apart.  I served as his Travel Aide less and less in 2002/03. 
 
Finally one day in the Summer of 2003, he called on me to accompany him to an event in Victoria.  He was acting quite strange in the car.  He kept prodding me on foreign policy.  I knew he was trying to get me to debate the War in Iraq with him.  But I kept my cool the whole trip.
 
Finally, when we reached Victoria, I made a slight comeback, that I didn't think his particular view on the War was correct.  He jumped out of the car and lunged at me. Poking his finger into my chest, he looked me in the eye and said, "I will have nobody working for me on my staff who supports the War in Iraq, even you."  I'd only seen this look on Ron maybe once or twice in all my 12 years working for him.  He was clearly quite angry with me. 
 
I knew he was trying to provoke me so that he could have justification to fire me.  But I kept my cool. 
 
For 6 months after than we didn't speak. 
 
Finally, Chief of Staff Tom Lizardo suggested that Ron and I not talking to each other was not helpful to the "atmosphere" in the District offices.  I offered to my friend Tom to resign.  We discussed a date, two months out, and a compensation package and I agreed. 
 
I've been asked by others if my former boss is an Anti-Semite.  My answer is an emphatic NO.  I am half Jewish.  I am familiar with Anti-Semites.  Ron is not one of them.
 
But I would say he's very insensitive to issues concerning Israel and for other concerns of Jewish Americans. 
 
Houston Jews were always suspicious of Ron Paul.  But Ron could always point to me as his "Jewish Staffer."  He would even send me to Synagogues in the District and to Jewish events.  But I do remember one time, when a group of Houston Jewish Young Republicans wanted to lobby the Congressman on some issues.  I begged Ron to meet with them.  He was very hesitant.  He finally agreed.  But the meeting turned out to be a disaster.  The Jewish YRs came all the way from Houston, and all Ron did was berate them in our District Office about how the Israel Lobby was too powerful in Washington, and other issues.  He also got defensive when the Jewish YRs expressed concern over Palestinian violence against Israel. 
 
I ran down the hallway after the meeting chasing the group, and apologized profusely to them. 
 
After 9/11 Ron also became much more upfront in his anti-Israel views.  He'd even criticize Israel in public speeches which would make me cringe. 
 
Ron Paul and I agree on about 95% of all domestic issues.  We disagree on a myriad of foreign policy and defense issues.  Still, he was my boss.  He was paying me, so I was obligated to toe the line.
 
This is not why I think less of him today.
 
Rather, what concerns me most was the fact that for many years he played both sides of the aisle.  In the very Conservative South Texas CD, he was always Mr. Red, White, and Blue.  If he couldn't make a Veterans event, he made damn sure that his one Vet on staff could go, even if it was just 8 VFW guys meeting for a couple hours 3 hours drive away. Ron was very careful to portray himself in the District as Pro-Troops, and even Pro-Defense. 
 
But after 9/11 and most especially after the War in Iraq, he played up his non-interventionist side to a national audience.  This while still keeping the facade of Pro-Troops/Pro-Defense in the District.  As late as last year I got a constituent mailing from RP with 4 pages of nothing but Patriotic/Pro-Troops/Pro-Veterans information from the Congressional office.  I suspect the reason why RP has gone south on foreign policy for the national audience is simple: To gain more dollars from a National fundraising base, and to gain more National media attention from Liberal media sources.   
 
In closing let me just say, that I don't believe his views represent the views of Congressional District 14 any more.  The District, which I live in, is quite considerably more Conservative of foreign policy/defense issues than Ron Paul. 
 
I would endorse Chris Peden, or some other Republican candidate other than Ron Paul for this seat.
________________________________________



Eric Dondero is a US Navy Veteran, former Libertarian Party National Committeeman, Founder of the Republican Liberty Caucus and fmr. Senior Aide to US Congressman Ron Paul R-TX.  He is now a national Republican Political Consultant based in Houston, Texas. 

Thanks to Edd Hendee at KSEV in Houston for passing this information along.  Do your country a favor and go donate to Eyes On The Border; something Dr. Ron "Strangelove" Paul surely has not done.

A big "thank you" to the one and only Ace of Spades for linking this up on his fine blog.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Politics/Elections; US: Texas; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2008; 911truther; asseenonstormfront; assenonstormfront; cutandrun; electionpresident; elections; isolationists; keywordspammer; mrspaulsshrimp; nationalsecurity; paul; paulbearers; paulestinians; paulhaters; rino; ronpaul; ronpaulcult; rupaul; scampi; truthers; wildshrimp
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-147 next last
To: George W. Bush
In my experience, the very same people who pile insults upon Ron Paul or his supporters, are the evry same ones who defend every socialist move concocted by President Bush (Medicare part D, No Child Left behind, Harriet M, the kennedy/Bush amnesty plan ,nation building etc). Kind of strange, don’t you think? And I personally don’t have any feelings one way or another about Ron Paul, just an observation.
81 posted on 09/01/2007 6:36:12 AM PDT by Rush4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

“Rittberg was more conventional early on. He just became more and more a nutjob over the years. Finally, Ron Paul and the Republican Liberty Caucus and the Libertarian Party all disavowed him.”

According to this article, Ron Paul was more ‘conventional early on’ too. One could argue that it was Ron Paul who became a ‘nutjob over the years’. And, it’s not at all surprising that the libertarian party would disavow any one who supported the War in Iraq.


82 posted on 09/01/2007 6:54:27 AM PDT by DugwayDuke (Support Ron Paul. He's against abortion just like he's against earmarks. Sometimes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Ultra Sonic 007

Ron Paul is not a patriot.


83 posted on 09/01/2007 6:58:32 AM PDT by sauropod (You can’t spell crap without the AP in it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

You can pimp for him all you want E3, but the FACT is that Paul marginilized himself with his own whackjob comments in at least two debates I saw on TV this year.

Paul is precisely like a friend of mine that declares we are in an unjust war b/c there is no “Declaration of War.” The authorization to use force is precisely that. If Paul has a problem w/ it then he should look to Congress (who apparently do not posess any testicles among the lot of them). To me, the difference between the authorization to use force and a formal Declaration of War is a distinction w/o a difference.

Paul’s position on why they (Islamists) attack us over here is utter bullsh!t! I lost a friend in 9/11 and this is personal w/ me. People like him can go suck eggs.

I used to respect Paul. No more. ‘Pod.

PS, I hate what the GOP has become as much or even more than you do. By no means am I a cheerleader for it.


84 posted on 09/01/2007 7:15:37 AM PDT by sauropod (You can’t spell crap without the AP in it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

President Giuliani - three cheers for Sanctuary Cities!
Vice President McCain - three cheers for Amnesty!


85 posted on 09/01/2007 7:17:47 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

Comment #86 Removed by Moderator

To: Rush4U; jmeagan; gondramB
In my experience, the very same people who pile insults upon Ron Paul or his supporters, are the evry same ones who defend every socialist move concocted by President Bush (Medicare part D, No Child Left behind, Harriet M, the kennedy/Bush amnesty plan ,nation building etc). Kind of strange, don’t you think?

No, we've noticed that it is the most liberal FReepers who trash him. Open-borders, members of that WAnker site, secret Giuliani supporters, etc. The most regular Paul-bashers are the remnant of the old Harpy crowd that drove so many conservatives off of FreeRepublic and crowed about it. Judging by how slowly that last fundraiser went, I think maybe it wasn't so wise to let them run amok here for so long.
87 posted on 09/01/2007 7:39:46 AM PDT by George W. Bush ("I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: sauropod; jmeagan; gondramB
PS, I hate what the GOP has become as much or even more than you do. By no means am I a cheerleader for it.

Yeah, but we're not the ones throwing poison in the GOP well either. It's not just with Ron Paul either. Look at some of the horrible anti-Mormon crap and the baiting on the Mitt threads.

Many of us make very positive posts about Fred, Mitt, Duncan, Tanc, etc. If we get a fair shot at the nomination, many (probably a large majority) of us want to support the GOP nominee as long as it isn't that leftwing mayor. But we get the strong impression that we've been drummed out of the GOP here and elsewhere.

If they don't even want our votes, we're not going to run crawling and begging for them to take them.

It's fine not to agree or support Ron Paul. Everyone has their favorites. But utterly trashing Ron Paul and his supporters on dozens, perhaps hundreds, of threads is just extended personal attack. This thread is only a minor sample of it. For another, take a look at this one which some mod placed in Breaking News. When it turned more positive toward Ron Paul and became probably the most popular thread on FR after over a thousand posts, they had to remove it. Apparently, it was doing too well. I suppose that's our fault too.

Ron Paul supporters urged to attend MoveOn.org Rally !
88 posted on 09/01/2007 7:54:59 AM PDT by George W. Bush ("I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush; jmeagan; gondramB

I do not participate in baiting on the Mitt threads.

I would oppose Romney b/c I think he is a johnny-come-lately to conservatism and I don’t believe he really is one.

All I can say is that I view Mormonism as a cult wrt the doctrine of my faith. I’m sure Mitt is a nice guy and all, but there is no reason to accept Mormonism as something it is not. The fact that Romney is a Mormon would not be a deciding factor into my vote for him as president, but it is part of who he is. The only religion that a candidate would profess that would disqualify him for my vote is Islam.

My personal vote is for Tancredo. Unfortunately, he does not have a chance b/c of the oligarchy the GOP has become.


89 posted on 09/01/2007 9:06:31 AM PDT by sauropod (You can’t spell crap without the AP in it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

Dondero is merely a disgruntled ex-employee. He surfs the internet trying to make friends and win support for his own agenda and campaign. You’ll see.


90 posted on 09/01/2007 9:22:56 AM PDT by AndreaThorn (The dogs of war don't negotiate......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

What he has sais is that a new investigation would show is typical big-government ineptitude and masmanagement, but he does not believe that anybody excect terrorists brought the plane down. In fact he’s the only politician I’ve heard refer to them as “Saudi terrorists.”


91 posted on 09/01/2007 9:26:34 AM PDT by AndreaThorn (The dogs of war don't negotiate......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
Paul is precisely like a friend of mine that declares we are in an unjust war b/c there is no “Declaration of War.” The authorization to use force is precisely that.

Actually, it was precisely an attempt to avoid declaring war.

Paul’s position on why they (Islamists) attack us over here is utter bullsh!t!

Actually, among foreign policy experts, his position is not even a subject of controversy. Check out the "Educating Rudy Press Conference".

BTW, the man appearing in that video with Paul, Michael Scheuer, is the former head of the CIA's Bin Laden tracking unit.

I lost a friend in 9/11 and this is personal w/ me.

I'm sorry for your loss, but it doesn't give you any special insight into these matters.

92 posted on 09/01/2007 11:31:00 AM PDT by JTN (‘We achieve much more in peace than…unconstitutional, undeclared wars’ - Dr. Paul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
why would people who want a Republican to win and who say Paul can’t win try so hard to drive his supporters away? This is not good or smart.

I do know that the GOP ignores or denigrates Paul at their own peril. When the GOP establishment continue to treat Paul like dirt his supporters see that and they're going to stay home or vote 3rd party. Then the GOP and their blind faithful will once again bitch about those "losertarians" just like they did in last year's midterms.

You think the GOP would buy a clue and start listening to libertarian and swing voters who want true limited government and not the borrow-and-spend fiscal "conservatism" or the nanny-state big government under the pretext of Christianity. I say let Paul give the keynote speech at the GOP convention.

93 posted on 09/01/2007 11:45:53 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: jmeagan
I was pleasantly surprised to see so many Ron Paul supporters here, but then, we are everywhere.

And you'll notice that these folks are supporting Paul on their own time, with their own money. How many supporters are holding seminars at malls or stands at fairs for Giuliani? Obama? Romney? Fact is, is that the anger at Paul is pure sour grapes and jealously. None of their candidates have fired up supporters like Paul has.

94 posted on 09/01/2007 11:51:42 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
The only religion that a candidate would profess that would disqualify him for my vote is Islam.

Agree. Islam is a totalitarian cult that expands by violence and subversion. Personally, I don't like Mormonism either. Nor Catholicism (though I think our Catholic Supremes are just fine and I only dislike the one who claims to be Catholic/conservative but never votes that way and I was one of those throwing Aunt Harriet under the bus to get the mackerel-snapping Alito on there. And I'd do it again too because he is a great justice, perhaps even a historic justice). But we're not voting for Pastor-In-Chief either. I like Ron Paul but thought he was a Presby, turns out he's been attending a Reformed Baptist church lately (the big difference between the two is baby-splashing and their preachers often share pulpits). Duncan is a Baptist which is fine but gets no extra points. Huckabee is a Baptist preacher turned politician which makes me a little wary but I don't favor him because of his slick talk and tax-raising liberal tendencies, not because he's a Baptist. And I don't even know what Tanc is but I do like him and I could vote for him even if he was Mormon. Or Catholic. Or Baptist. Or Presbyterian. Or evangelical. Whatever. He's just a good man and he has, like Ron Paul, had many nasty shots taken at him that were entirely undeserved. That nastiness in the first debate over the Know-Nothing wing of the GOP was directed at him and it made me mad to see him treated that way. If I hadn't hated Giuliani already, seeing that would have done the trick for me.

My personal vote is for Tancredo. Unfortunately, he does not have a chance b/c of the oligarchy the GOP has become.

It's hard to elect a single-issue candidate as president. Tanc and Duncan have good records overall besides borders/illegals. But in the public's mind, if they know anything about them, that's about all they've heard about. Ron Paul has a bit more diversity in his support, a larger small-government and pro-liberty agenda. But even RP isn't as "broad" a candidate as generally gets elected. Generally, it's true that we elect candidates to stop something or stop someone, not to enact a whole slew of new stuff which usually scares off enough voters that they lose. And that is why Ron Paul, overall, is the radical candidate in the race. In both parties, no one else is advocating such fundamental changes to our bloated and incompetent federal government.
95 posted on 09/01/2007 1:27:32 PM PDT by George W. Bush ("I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: JTN
You are straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

The Islamists attack us because it is an article of their faith to do so. A cursory reading of their Suras will lead you to that conclusion.

My point in mentioning my loss was basically to say that I do not care if the Islamists are offended or not. They declared war on us by capturing the hostages in Iran in 1979 and have continued actions ever since. War is what they want and war is what they are going to get.

>> I lost a friend in 9/11 and this is personal w/ me.

I'm sorry for your loss, but it doesn't give you any special insight into these matters.

Au contraire. It hasn't caused me to be blinded by kookery, which, unfortunately, you appear to be.

96 posted on 09/01/2007 1:34:17 PM PDT by sauropod (You can’t spell crap without the AP in it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
This is the "Gulf of Tonkin" statement:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d8MIENVtKw

97 posted on 09/01/2007 1:37:23 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ultra Sonic 007
Ron Paul Has Betrayed The GOP

This is news?

98 posted on 09/01/2007 1:41:36 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN

I went back and reviewed the you tube video you linked to.

While I understand the points Scheuer and Paul were trying to make, their premise is fundamentally flawed.

If we had pulled up stakes and left Saudi prior to 9/11, that action would have still occurred.

Both Scheuer and Paul are stating that the radical Islamists are doing what they are doing b/c of “occupation.” While that may be have some basis in history, it fails to explain why people like Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg were beheaded. It fails to explain the forced conversion of newsmen like Steve Centanni of Fox News.

There is no justification for such acts, just as there was no justification for both attacks on the WTC and other places.

Why all the trashing of cars etc. last year by the Muslim youths? What has France occupied lately?

There are countless other examples and American “occupation” of other countries does not begin to explain it. To insist that and that alone is the reason for Islamist actions is to severly underestimate the enemy. Paul and Scheuer do a disservice to the country by putting that forward as the sole reason.

Quite simply, the Islamist position to non-Islamists is “Submit or Die.” They wish to establish a Caliphate. I believe that Zawahiri has stated so.


99 posted on 09/01/2007 1:56:40 PM PDT by sauropod (You can’t spell crap without the AP in it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
And that is why Ron Paul, overall, is the radical candidate in the race. In both parties, no one else is advocating such fundamental changes to our bloated and incompetent federal government.

I would say Tancredo would be just such a candidate.

100 posted on 09/01/2007 1:58:01 PM PDT by sauropod (You can’t spell crap without the AP in it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-147 next 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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