Ron Paul Super PAC Secretly Funded By Gay Billionaire Peter Thiel

On Top ^ | February 29, 2012 | Staff

[2ndDivisionVet]

Ron Paul's super PAC is secretly funded by San Francisco gay billionaire Peter Thiel, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

Thiel, who co-founded PayPal and invested early in Facebook, has given $2.6 million to Endorse Liberty, the super PAC which has released several ads attacking Paul rivals Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry, without ever meeting Paul.

The German-born Thiel is a 44-year-old conservative Christian who has previously supported gay rights causes and artificial intelligence research.

“He has great insight,” Jimmy LaSalvia, the executive director of gay GOP group GOProud, told the paper. “He also is inquisitive, and most of the conversations I've had with him have been him asking questions. He gathers a lot of information.”

Thiel, who currently helms Clarion Capital, a global hedge fund, has provided more than half of Endorse Liberty's proceeds.

“I think Peter has a gift for seeing trends,” said Endorse Liberty founder Jeffrey Harmon. “PayPal and Peter's early investment in Facebook are examples of the vision. I believe Peter can see that Ron Paul is the future of the Republican Party.”

Others interviewed by the paper disagreed with Harmon's assessment of Thiel.

“You're only a genius if people don't know about your bad bets,” said Wade Randlett, a fundraiser for President Barack Obama's re-election campaign, who noted Thiel has lost a “gigantic” amount of money in his own hedge fund.

Paul has previously denied any knowledge of racist and homophobic writings in the newsletters he published in the 1980s and 90s.

[SaraJohnson]

The German-born Thiel is a 44-year-old conservative Christian who has previously supported gay rights causes and artificial intelligence research.

“He has great insight,” Jimmy LaSalvia, the executive director of gay GOP group GOProud, told the paper. “He also is inquisitive, and most of the conversations I’ve had with him have been him asking questions. He gathers a lot of information.”

---

GOProud. Annie’s people.

[NoLibZone]

Paul voted to end Don’t Ask don’t tell. Despite almost 20 years of claiming he supported it.

He and his supporters are homosexuality.

[NoLibZone]

Paul voted to end Don’t Ask don’t tell. Despite almost 20 years of claiming he supported it.

He and his supporters are pro homosexuality.

[Antoninus]

character assassination is a liberal tactic, useful when the facts don’t favor one’s position

Oh? Whose character is being assassinated here? The homosexual billionaire or the phony politician who is the beneficiary of his largesse?

[2ndDivisionVet]

How are the facts “character assasination” bud?

[2ndDivisionVet]

Let me guess? I don’t love the constitution...

[TheBigIf]

The pervert Paul is not a conservative, is not a Constitutionalist, and is not supportive of the traditional values of our Founders. He is a leftist who seeks to pervert and corrupt the conservative movement with sly ways of painting leftist positions as being conservative positions. The pervert Paul is a Code Pink anti-American leftist who supporters tend to even march at times side by side with Marxists at anti-war rallies.

In every debate I have ever had with a Pautard they could never defend his position on forcing homosexuality upon our military and Paul’s statements that he thinks that homosexual beahvior has to be treated equally to hetereosexual behavior. This thinking is anti-Constitutional and the Founders of this nation would have been appalled at the pervert Ron Paul and yet this corrupt politician conitinues to be able to keep on a charade at being a Constitutionalist.

[CzarChasm]

perhaps I misinterpreted what you meant by

The picture becomes clearer and clearer.

Care to elaborate?

[CzarChasm]

perspective:
- a billionaire donating $2.3M to a cause is the same ratio as the average middle class American donating $200 to a cause
- only 25% of all super PAC donations come from billionaires
- this guy’s donation to Paul’s PAC is no more significant than casino billionaire Adelson’s $10M donation to Newt’s PAC

Frankly, I don’t like anyone that’s running. But I like weak logic and guilt-by-association even less. ;)

[2ndDivisionVet]

Rand Paul Says ‘It Would Be An Honor’ if Romney Asked Him to Be VP
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/2850000/posts

GOProud Cheers Romney & Paul
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2012/01/goproud-cheers-romney-paul.html

GOProud Congratulates Romney for Standing up For Gay Americans
http://www.gaypatriot.net/2012/01/08/goproud-congratulates-romney-for-standing-up-for-gay-americans/

GOProud Backer Peter Thiel Is The Main Money Man For Ron Paul Super PAC
http://legalnews.findlaw.com/article/09Jhca42eG8JU?q=Ron+Paul

GOProud Statement on Victory of Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) in Michigan and Arizona Primaries
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=333237480044748

Gay GOPs still backing Romney
http://www.keennewsservice.com/2012/03/01/gay-gops-still-backing-romney/

[CzarChasm]

Interesting links, so you're saying that gay donors make the candidates gay also? Perhaps some virus transmitted via money? :D

Hedge fund chiefs lead donors group backing Romney
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/02/02/hedge_fund_moguls_top_list_of_donors_to_super_pac_supporting_mitt_romney/

One of the most prominent of its donors was Paul Singer, founder of the hedge fund Elliott Management Corp. and chairman of the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. He gave $1 million to the PAC. Singer, who is a fund-raiser and adviser to Romney, has given hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years to the National Republican Senatorial Committee and contributed to numerous Republican politicians. He is also known for supporting gay marriage. Singer’s son is gay, and Singer was one of three wealthy Republicans who helped bankroll New York’s campaign to legalize gay marriage, donating $425,000 and marshaling other Republican donors, the New York Times reported.

Michigan, Arizona: Gay GOPs still backing Romney
http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=51868

Super PAC top donors
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/super-pac-donors-revealed-who-are-the-power-players-in-the-gop-primary/2012/02/21/gIQAPU3BSR_story.html

Some of these guys are supporting candidates they believe in (to quote Ron Paul, "There are no group rights, there are only individual rights" - which he probably lifted from Ayn Rand "The smallest group is the individual"), others are probably just hedging their bets.

[2ndDivisionVet]

You can’t be that obtuse. Show me where I said either Congressman Ron Paul or Governor Mitt Roomney were homosexuals. I’ll wait.

[TheBigIf]

You said:

“(to quote Ron Paul, “There are no group rights, there are only individual rights” - which he probably lifted from Ayn Rand “The smallest group is the individual”), “

After Ron Paul voted with the democrats to end DADT he is quoted as saying (I’m paraphrasing) that homosexual behavior should be treated equally to heterosexual behavior. His exact quote could be found online but the meaning is basically the same.

The pervert Ron Paul shows himself to be a liar. He doesn’t stand for individual rights but for special rights granted per a person’s BEHAVIOR. And a person’s perverted sexual beahvior even!

The Founders would have strongly opposed Paul and condemned him as a pervert.

[BaBaStooey]

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

What do we need to do in order to make the government more massive and all-encompassing so that people like Mr. Thiel can no longer spend their own money however they want? After all, we cannot have anyone going around inventing something people need, making billions off their own genius, and then spending that money in support of their own self-interest. It is bad enough that the government allows Mr. Thiel to keep any of this money in the first place, especially if the guy is going to go around doing stuff like this.

Or let’s put it another way. Here’s a guy supporting someone I don’t like! Let’s throw rocks at him!

[CzarChasm]

The exact quote does not mean what you want it to mean; emphasis mine, to make the point a little clearer:

Ron Paul: “I have received several calls and visits from constituents who, in spite of the heavy investment in their training, have been forced out of the military simply because they were discovered to be homosexual. To me, this seems like an awful waste. Personal behavior that is disruptive should be subject to military discipline regardless of whether the individual is heterosexual or homosexual. But to discharge an otherwise well-trained, professional, and highly skilled member of the military for these reasons is unfortunate and makes no financial sense.”

Frankly, I don't think gays belong in the military, and I don't think that women belong in the military - for completely different reasons that don't matter, because I don't run the military.

The problem I have with people's condemnation of Paul - and I'm not singling anyone out in particular here, as FReepers tend to be fairly rational creatures - is that they get upset at what other people said he said, instead of what he actually said.

The other day there were hundreds of oh-my-god-he's-an-evil-bastard-that-wants-you-to-die-in-a-tornado articles, none of which actually quoted what the man said ("There's no such thing as Federal money").

Now, before you dismiss all of this as the ravings of a Paulite, you should know that (a) I've always been a libertarian, and (b) I've only started to like Paul as a choice recently because [1] I stopped listening to what others said he said, and started reading what he actually said, and [2] the other GOP choices all look like more-of-the-same to me. Even Newt (sorry Newt, you'd make a great cabinet member though).

But I didn't intend to hijack the thread, I just thought the initial smearing by association was ridiculous. Have a great week!

[CzarChasm]

"You can't be that obtuse"

That's funny, that's exactly what I thought when I read your original commentary

The picture becomes clearer and clearer.

Which you still haven't explained. I'll wait.

[2ndDivisionVet]

You can “wait” until Fluking Hell freezes over. Get over yourself, numbskull.

[CzarChasm]

Clearly, I have offended you somehow. Not my intention.

Have a great weekend!

[TheBigIf]

You have grabbed the wrong quote, that is all. The pervert Paul has said that he believes that homosexual behavior should be treated equal to heterosexual behavior (though I am paraphrasing).

Even the quote you are giving clearly states such as well though. Why would he say ‘regardless’ of whether behavior is homosexual or heterosexual unless he is implying that they should be treated equally.

This position of Paul’s is 100% not consistent with the Founders of this nation. They would view Paul as a pervert.

But since you think that I am not giving Paul’s real poisiton on his vote to end DADT then why dont you explain his real position. Why should we disregard whether or not the behavior is homosexual or heterosexual?

You claim that Paul is being misrepresented but the reality is that the pervert Paul misrepresents himself. He is not aligned with the Founders of this nation in regards to National Security or in regards to our God given rights. He is a corrupt and perverse liar in this regard.

[CzarChasm]

I think the point of what Paul said was the behavior should be evaluated, not proclivities.

If I grabbed the wrong quote, perhaps you’d be so kind as to post the right quote.