[Proud2BeRight]

FYI, The full title is “The Company Ron Paul Keeps
Meet Alex Jones.”

[FatherofFive]

and his continuing espousal of extremist views, that should make him unwelcome at any respectable forum, not only those hosted by Jewish organizations

Hard to admit it, but 0bama the marxist is a better choice than Ron Paul.

We can get over 0bama with a conservative House and Senate.

Ron Paul is dangerous.

[Riodacat]

While I’m no Ron Paulinista, I think it is a mistake and petty for the Republican Jewish Coalition not to invite him to the forum. His point of view has every bit as much right to be heard as anyone else’s particularly when his views are shared by many Americans of different political bents.

[pterional]

The people that dislike or call Ron Paul crazy don't understand the evils of the Federal reserve. Ron Paul has been consistent in his message and is probably the only candidate that can save this country from spending itself into oblivion.

Alex Jones talks about some crazy stuff but one world order and loss of our sovereignty is a reasonable concern. Especially when people like Hillary Clinton are trying to be president of a World Bank.

[hosepipe]

Absolutely pure campaign treasuries are BROKE campaign treasuries..
America is not so pure.. but a bit corrupt.. even more corrupt in some places..

Thats why we have the exact federal government we deserve..

[Theophilus]

Ron Paul is right for the wrong reasons.

Iran is not nowhere near as dangerous as God is. God's enemies: secular humanism and islam are on a collision course. Whenever we go to war against Iran it will be God's wrath upon us. No amount of clever diplomacy or brute force can protect us from God. 9/11 shows us that it will not take a superpower to bring us to our knees. We can crumble from within and without like Rome.

[2ndDivisionVet]

[rmlew]

One newsletter reported on the heretofore unknown phenomenon of “Needlin’,” in which “gangs of black girls between the ages of 12 and 14” roamed the streets of New York and injected white women with possibly HIV-infected syringes. Another newsletter warned that “the AIDS patient” should not be allowed to eat in restaurants because “AIDS can be transmitted by saliva,” a strange claim for a physician to make.
Gangs were doing this in the 90s.

[jmc813]

This joke of an author is a disgruntled Rudy-bot whose pants are still weatened that he didn’t have his boy running things. Is this the best you people can do?

[mo]

Ron Paul has a shot ONLY because.

you want to have ANY hope of repealing ObamaCare....shuttering Education, Energy and EPA...your ONLY shot is Ron Paul. That’s it.

Gingrich is doin’ none of that. Perry is doin’ none of that ‘cause he’s goin’ nowhere. And Romney will expand them all and try to tell us otherwise...

AND NO_I’m NOT a PaulBot..at all...just callin’ it like I see it...

[Zionist Conspirator]

I've little use for the Weekly Standard and I reject the idea that being opposed to foreign aid is a fringe position (I'm against foreign aid myself, as is Chaim Ben Pesach of the Kahanist Jewish Task Force), but I nevertheless agree that Ron Paul is way beyond the pale of respectability. It is unfortunate that the point is being made by a not-so-conservative magazine and an author who apparently believes every "decent" American should support foreign aid.

Some supporters of Ron Paul think that his anti-Israel reputation comes completely and only from his opposition to foreign aid for all countries, including Israel. This is not so. Many militant Zionists also oppose American foreign aid for Israel as something that makes Israel dependent and buys the American government a say in Israeli policies. Paul is not merely opposed to unconstitutional foreign aid to Israel, he is hostile to Israel itself.

Others believe Paul's anti-Israel positions are merely the result of his consistent libertarianism. I reject this as well.

Ron Paul's hostility to Israel (and that of so many of his supporters) comes neither from opposition to foreign aid or libertarianism but from the fact that he represents the old anti-Semitic "right" of Father Coughlin, Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh, and Van Horne Mosely.

Paul is close to the John Birch Society, which has in the past been very hostile to Israel. And the JBS most definitely is an old right, not a libertarian, organization. Consider the case of the late John Schmitz, former Congressman from California (and high ranking JBS member). Schmitz was as far from "libertarianism" as a conservative can be; he was a supporter of such decidedly non-libertarian regimes as that of Papadopoulos in Greece and Salazar in Portugal and was expelled from the Society after saying that only a military coup d'etat could save America--a position one will probably never hear from Paul. But the non-libertarian Schmitz had the exact same hostility to Israel that the libertarian Paul does. (Schmitz was also a fan of Willis Carto and his racialist, Holocaust-denying Institute for Historical Review.)

Some of Paul's other positions also come from this non-libertarian "old right" position. For example, hostility to the Federal Reserve is not a libertarian monopoly by any means; many more authoritarian "old right" personalities, such as Father Coughlin (but also the advocates of social credit and falangism/national syndicalism) actually advocate(d) the nationalization of the entire financial sector.

One cannot understand Ron Paul without understanding the anti-Jewish, anti-Israel "old right." Libertarianism and opposition to foreign aid are both false leads.