Justin Raimondo: What Does Ron Paul Want?

[sailingaway]

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2012/05/17/what-does-ron-paul-want/

[Indy Vidual]

What Does Ron Paul Want?
This is the question puzzling Paul’s friends, as well as his enemies.


Why can't we ask Ron?
There are some things we cannot talk about.

[Indy Vidual]

Precinct by precinct, county by county, state by state, the Ron Paul Revolution is racking up victories – and the Romneyites are in a panic... :)

[No1butPaul]

Overall, a very well-written article I thought. Turned off a bit, however, by the fundraising pitch at the end. It was like they had a meeting and said, the RP money has to go somewhere -- let's try to get our piece of the pie. How does a website like that need $100,000 to exist?

Great advice to delegates to stay inconspicuous at the convention -- we will do much better if our delegates can contain their affiliation in that way. The article also had me thinking though, Tampa might be bigger than any of us even imagined and I hope, I pray, Ron and his family have very good protection. I know his stance on Secret Service, but I wish he would take it!

"Given the highly militarized "security" being prepared for the convention, Tampa will be swarming with cops, Homeland Security thugs, and private agents provocateurs, all just itching for an incident – a defining moment, if you will – that will frame the Paulians as kooky disruptors and assert Romney’s hegemony over the party in a symbolic – and violent – way. I wouldn’t be surprised if even the act of wearing a Paul button is grounds for harassing delegates and their guests. Anyone who acts or looks out of place, who isn’t wearing a suit and tie and exhibits other tell-tale signs of not having the correct political leanings is bound to find themselves under intense scrutiny, and worse."

Anyway we can remind all delegates of this "fact" before they head to Tampa??? Worried about all of our people a bit.

[sailingaway]

I think with Obama president they lost a lot of interest in anti war from those on the left who were just using it as a red team blue team wedge issue, and their funding dropped off. They've been having money trouble for a while.

I did wonder if the moneybomb spurred the timing of this article....

But it was still a good article.

[green73]

How does a website like that need $100,000 to exist?

On top of website costs they have staff, writers of both of original article and new releases, Scott Horton's radio show ect. I don't think anyone is getting rich there.

[specsaregood]

Overall, a very well-written article I thought. Turned off a bit, however, by the fundraising pitch at the end. It was like they had a meeting and said, the RP money has to go somewhere -- let's try to get our piece of the pie.

effing backstabbing raimondo aint ever seeing a dime from me. some of us haven't forgotten what he said about Rand, when support was critical.

[green73]

Great article. Shared. rep+

[jbauer]

Don't know about their past comments but this article was pretty much spot on. The pleading for donations part at the bottom was annoying. The article was clearly written to pull at RP supporters hearts and minds and then their wallets.

[BKom]

effing backstabbing raimondo aint ever seeing a dime from me. some of us haven't forgotten what he said about Rand, when support was critical.

I didn't know he did that. Did he say anything about Rand that was untrue?

[specsaregood]

I didn't know he did that. Did he say anything about Rand that was untrue?

You decide:
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/09/23/the-hollow-man-rand-pauls-father-complex/

Either way, if he had his way there would be no Rand Paul in the Senate sponsoring anti-war legislation, fighting the patriot act, standing up for our rights.

[No1butPaul]

On top of website costs they have staff, writers of both of original article and new releases, Scott Horton's radio show ect. I don't think anyone is getting rich there.

Hey, we write for free here! It is an activist website, everyone knows activists do it from their heart. I have to say, it almost sounded like a bribe ... you support us and we can continue writing Paul-positive articles.

[angelatc]

Overall, a very well-written article I thought. Turned off a bit, however, by the fundraising pitch at the end. It was like they had a meeting and said, the RP money has to go somewhere -- let's try to get our piece of the pie. How does a website like that need $100,000 to exist?


Uhm - they have employees?

[FSP-Rebel]

I didn't know he did that. Did he say anything about Rand that was untrue?
It's the same with some folks around here when Rand doesn't speak the foreign policy gospel to a T. Even FTL, I listen daily, were throwing fits over Rand's less than pure rhetoric. But yeah, big neg to Raimo for not understanding Rand walking the tightrope. If he would've spoken on foreign policy like his dad does, I'm not sure if he coulda become Senator.

[angelatc]

Hey, we write for free here! It is an activist website, everyone knows activists do it from their heart. I have to say, it almost sounded like a bribe ... you support us and we can continue writing Paul-positive articles.

This isn't our living. It is their living. The stuff we write is mostly opinion pieces, or stuff based on snippets of actual information we found in the work that other people have done. The AntiWar.com people spend their whole lives researching and writing about what they've found. We produce pieces writing about what people like them discovered. If you don't see the difference, then don't donate.

[No1butPaul]

This isn't our living. It is their living. The stuff we write is mostly opinion pieces, or stuff based on snippets of actual information we found in the work that other people have done. The AntiWar.com people spend their whole lives researching and writing about what they've found. We produce pieces writing about what people like them discovered. If you don't see the difference, then don't donate.

No, I'm not planning on donating. Like I said, very turned off by the way they pitched to RP supporters, especially at this specific time in our campaign.

[Lucille]

Raimondo (http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/11/07/lindsey-grahams-desperation/):


Shame on Amanpour for throwing him that curveball, and kudos to Rand Paul, whom I seem to have seriously misjudged. I guess that meeting with Bill Kristol and the neocons didn’t mean what I feared it meant (http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/09/23/the-hollow-man-rand-pauls-father-complex/). His remarks not only validate his anti-interventionist credentials, but they also show what a good politician he is becoming: in these war-weary days, you can’t say “bring the troops home” often enough. I’m glad to admit I was wrong about Rand Paul because I can breathe a lot easier, now, knowing he’s going to be a credit to the libertarian movement and his father’s legacy.

Oh, to be sure, I don’t agree with his opposition to the renewal of the START treaty: does he really think we need to spend billions on nuclear rearmament and re-start the cold war? Is there really a possibility of a Russian nuclear attack on the United States – which is what our nuclear posture is geared up for? To ask the question is to answer it in the negative, to be sure. But then again, as I said, Rand Paul the politician is coming into his own: he owes a lot of chits to Jim DeMint, who is making opposition to START his signature issue in the Senate, and it wouldn’t do to cross him, just yet. Very crafty, or too crafty by half: we report, you decide.

While we’re on the subject of Rand Paul: I predict it won’t be long before we start hearing about his presidential prospects. After all, I seem to recall another freshly-elected US Senator who made it to the White House without serving out his term. Rand is young, he’s very presentable, and, although he does a good job of hiding it, he’s just as radical as his father. Why, he even had me fooled.

[specsaregood]

Raimondo (http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/11/07/lindsey-grahams-desperation/):

Yes, he apologized after Rand was in the Senate. He stabbed Rand and all of us in the back near the end of the race when it was most important. Like I said, Rand would not be in the Senate if Raimondo had his way. He tried to screw us all over when it was most important and failed. And now he wants your money. eff that.

[angelatc]

No, I'm not planning on donating. Like I said, very turned off by the way they pitched to RP supporters, especially at this specific time in our campaign.

Rainmondo was here before Ron Paul ran the first time, and he's been fighting the fight for probably longer than you've been washing your own clothes. But if you want to make sure he's not here after Paul retires, then that "me me me" attitude is certainly the right attitude to have.

[angelatc]

Yes, he apologized after Rand was in the Senate. He stabbed Rand and all of us in the back near the end of the race when it was most important. Like I said, Rand would not be in the Senate if Raimondo had his way. He tried to screw us all over when it was most important and failed. And now he wants your money. eff that.

THere's no "us" in that statement. I think what he wrote was perfectly fair.

This is why libertarians don't win elections. If you dare wander off the ranch, they'll never let you back on. Which is especially funny when the piece would have been hailed as dead on if it had been written about anybody who didn't have the last name "Paul."

[specsaregood]

THere's no "us" in that statement. I think what he wrote was perfectly fair.

There may not be "us" including you, but I'm certainly not alone in my sentiment. We'll just have to agree to disagree, freedom is great like that.

[angelatc]

There may not be "us" including you, but I'm certainly not alone in my sentiment. We'll just have to agree to disagree, freedom is great like that.

But Rainmondo wasn't the only person to feel that way either. There are plenty of Paul supporters who have absolutely no faith in Rand's foreign policy precisely for the reasons that Rainmondo wrote about.

Again, once you wander off the ranch, nobody is ever allowed back in....

[specsaregood]

Again, once you wander off the ranch, nobody is ever allowed back in....

It is less about wandering off the ranch and more about having a history of trying to burn the ranch down. I don't let arsonists into my home.

[jbauer]

Well from what I've read prior to this Rand hasn't had the same hardline stance that Ron has had within foreign affairs. To be frank, I don't either. I think if we want to fight wars we should PAY for them NOW. If you require the citizens of america to pay a war tax and thus have skin in the game then it pretty much clears our whole foregin policy up. The only reason we have necons is they get to play for free. We're billing our children for our own warcrimes.

If we tacked on whatever % it would require tax to all income, earned or unearned we would have a SIGNIFICANT difference in our military spending. If you want to change america start with the pocket book.


You decide:
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/09/23/the-hollow-man-rand-pauls-father-complex/

Either way, if he had his way there would be no Rand Paul in the Senate sponsoring anti-war legislation, fighting the patriot act, standing up for our rights.

[No1butPaul]

Rainmondo was here before Ron Paul ran the first time, and he's been fighting the fight for probably longer than you've been washing your own clothes. But if you want to make sure he's not here after Paul retires, then that "me me me" attitude is certainly the right attitude to have.

Huh? Me, me, me? Clearly you are fond of the author and what he is doing and I am not disparaging him, I just said I didn't like the $ pitch to RP supporters, especially at this particular time -- seems much too opportunistic. I fail to see how you think that is me, me, me? I think you are lashing out in the wrong direction here.

Anyway, regarding your comment about the length of time I have been washing my own clothes, I am flattered that you think I'm that young! :) Appreciate that!

[green73]

Hey, we write for free here! It is an activist website, everyone knows activists do it from their heart. I have to say, it almost sounded like a bribe ... you support us and we can continue writing Paul-positive articles.

People love that site. It's the 10th most visited libertarian website in the world and the only one focused almost exclusively on the mass murderous empire. They do what they do on a shoestring budget made possible only by donations. Maybe you should start reading it.

[green73]

You decide:
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/09/23/the-hollow-man-rand-pauls-father-complex/

Either way, if he had his way there would be no Rand Paul in the Senate sponsoring anti-war legislation, fighting the patriot act, standing up for our rights.

LOL!

[Hook]

But Rainmondo wasn't the only person to feel that way either. There are plenty of Paul supporters who have absolutely no faith in Rand's foreign policy precisely for the reasons that Rainmondo wrote about.

Again, once you wander off the ranch, nobody is ever allowed back in....

I see it as a good thing. Principle should be more important than loyalty. If Rainmondo thought that one of the Pauls was doing something antithetical to his principles, then he should call them out. Blindly following leaders and excusing their faults is what go us into the current situation.

[No1butPaul]

People love that site. It's the 10th most visited libertarian website in the world and the only one focused almost exclusively on the mass murderous empire. They do what they do on a shoestring budget made possible only by donations. Maybe you should start reading it.

I don't want to.

By the way, I couldn't even tell you the 1st most-visited libertarian website let alone the 10th!!! We are not all libertarians here you know -- Dr. Paul has a very large tent.

[specsaregood]

I see it as a good thing. Principle should be more important than loyalty. If Rainmondo thought that one of the Pauls was doing something antithetical to his principles, then he should call them out. Blindly following leaders and excusing their faults is what go us into the current situation.

There is a time and place for everything. My opinion is that in the last month of a tough election was NOT the time to attack, let alone specifically target a bit portion of Rand's base of support. That's when you keep your mouth shut and give somebody like that the benefit of the doubt. Especially when the other candidate is DEFINITELY opposed to you on almost every single issue, and even relishes in being a warmongering anti civil libertarian.

[angelatc]

I see it as a good thing. Principle should be more important than loyalty. If Rainmondo thought that one of the Pauls was doing something antithetical to his principles, then he should call them out. Blindly following leaders and excusing their faults is what go us into the current situation.

That was the way I felt about it. If any other politician had said what Rand did, we wouldn't be having this conversation with the people here insisting that we should have given him a pass on it . It troubled me at the time, because I'm not ever going to again believe that the politician will "come around to my side" after I elect him. I'm past the point of giving anybody the doubt.

I didn't live in Kentucky so I didn't have a vote, but the points that Rainmondo made were valid at the time. I think it's silly to eternally crucify him for speaking what he believed to be the truth.

[Feeding the Abscess]

That was the way I felt about it. If any other politician had said what Rand did, we wouldn't be having this conversation with the people here insisting that we should have given him a pass on it . It troubled me at the time, because I'm not ever going to again believe that the politician will "come around to my side" after I elect him. I'm past the point of giving anybody the doubt.

I didn't live in Kentucky so I didn't have a vote, but the points that Rainmondo were valid. I think it's silly to eternally crucify him for speaking what he believed to be the truth.

This. We need purists on that wall, and we want purists on that wall.

[green73]

I don't want to.

By the way, I couldn't even tell you the 1st most-visited libertarian website let alone the 10th!!! We are not all libertarians here you know -- Dr. Paul has a very large tent.

The 1st is LewRockwell.com. Start reading that and you'll really wake up.

[juvanya]

Of course he turns it into a fundraising pitch. Justin is a clown. He does a lot of good work, but hes a complete stooge in many areas.

[devil21]

Hey, we write for free here! It is an activist website, everyone knows activists do it from their heart. I have to say, it almost sounded like a bribe ... you support us and we can continue writing Paul-positive articles.

Welcome to the world of politics.

[John F Kennedy III]

What does Ron Paul want?

1776

[paulbot24]

1776 or 1913 and a few minutes alone with Woodrow Wilson.

[Occam's Banana]

I didn't like the $ pitch to RP supporters, especially at this particular time -- seems much too opportunistic.

antiwar.com is a donor-supported operation. If you regularly read their articles, you'll find that they frequently hit their readers up for contributions. And rightly so.

IOW: This is NOT an "opportunistic" attempt to milk $$$ from "RP supporters" - it's how they stay up-and-running. Embedding requests for donations in their articles is SOP.

They were doing it long before RP's campaign started & they'll be doing it long after the campaign is over.

[Occam's Banana]

That was the way I felt about it. If any other politician had said what Rand did, we wouldn't be having this conversation with the people here insisting that we should have given him a pass on it . It troubled me at the time, because I'm not ever going to again believe that the politician will "come around to my side" after I elect him. I'm past the point of giving anybody the doubt.

I didn't live in Kentucky so I didn't have a vote, but the points that Rainmondo made were valid at the time. I think it's silly to eternally crucify him for speaking what he believed to be the truth.

THIS & +rep. ^^

Raimondo genuinely believed his assessment of Rand was correct - and he acted on the basis of that belief. He'd have been a hypocrite to have done otherwise. He was not attempting to stab Rand in the back; he just didn't recognize Rand as one of "us." He was wrong, but he erred on the side of the angels. And when he discovered that he was wrong, he was man enough to admit it publicly. How is this a bad thing?

Another Rand (Ayn) said a few things about the importance of standing up for one's principles - and about the importance of forgiving others for their honest errors of judgement. She (Ayn Rand) wasn't right about everything, but she nailed it on these two.

[papitosabe]

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2012/05/17/what-does-ron-paul-want/

What does Ron Paul want???


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfzg_0SGm-Y

[SewrRatt]

Like others have already said, antiwar.com runs on donations, every article gets a request for donations in it when they're doing their drive, and without antiwar.com we would all have much less information about all the innocent people being killed overseas. The kind of in-depth foreign policy news that antiwar.com provides, you CANNOT GET anywhere else.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Also, readers of antiwar.com will recognize many of the things Ron brings up on the campaign trail. According to Ron, it's one of the sites he reads each morning.

[NewRightLibertarian]

I'm going to be sure to donate. Antiwar.com is one of the best websites on the net, and it would be a shame if they were forced to close because of lack of funding.