Ron Paul’s firing.

Shortly after the news that once again Ron Paul had won the CPAC straw poll, came the more negative news, that Young Americans for Freedom, (YAF) had fired him from their board of advisers, on which he has served for more than twenty years. On the surface it appears that there is a disagreement over his anti war stance, although indications are that it goes much deeper than that.

If it were really just a policy difference I doubt that the degree of vitriol involved in the announcements on the act would have happened. The language YAF have employed indicates that they do not simply wish for a parting of the ways, they want to ridicule and destroy him.

Senior National Director Jordan Marks said:

“It’s a sad day in American history when a one-time conservative/libertarian stalwart has fallen more out of touch with America’s needs for national security then our current socialist presidential regime.” “Rep. Paul is clearly off his meds and must be purged from public office. YAF is starting the process by removing him from our national advisory board. Good riddance and he won’t be missed,” added Marks.

In the main I have few disagreements with Paul on domestic issues, but on foreign policy he really sucks. He is inclined to be totally in the grip of the antiwar crowd, and some of his statements have been bizarre. His reference to Wiki leaks; that it wouldn’t have happened if the government hadn’t gone around spying on people is a prime example. Intelligence is an important defense function whether at war or at peace.

More from Marks:

“Rep. Paul’s refusal to support our nation’s military and national security interests border on treason, aside from his failure to uphold his oath to the United States Constitution and defend our country and citizens against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” Marks continued.

“Rep. Paul has strayed to the left of Obama and allied himself with the radical anti-war left by laying the blame on America for the unprovoked attacks of Sept. 11th. Additionally, Rep. Paul has not condemned the 9/11 “Truther” conspiracy theorists that support him.”

Some of Ron’s young and exuberant supporters have earned the ire of many CPAC delegates owing to their tendency towards rowdy heckling of speakers they disagreed with during the conference and there is considerable sentiment against him on that score. Many feel that he should ask them to tone it down and respect the right of others to express their opinions.

This is however no excuse to make these sort of attacks on him which are patently untrue and have no basis in reality.

There is no reason to believe that Paul is anything other than a patriotic American, and I hold him in the greatest respect even though on some issues I feel he is misguided or wrong. The very idea of accusing him of treason is at best intemperate, and more likely, malicious.

Truthers tend to gain some comfort from his statements that he does not tend to take government statements on face value. I doubt that many of those here are inclined to do so anyway, but that does not make us conspiracy nuts. Paul has said on the record on a number of occasions that he does not think 9/11 was an inside job.

YAF appear to be following some sort of agenda they are not stating.

48 thoughts on “Ron Paul’s firing.

  1. I quite like his foreign policy stance. America is over extending itself globally. Not only does it cost a lot but it is dysfunctional. It makes no sense to be giving vast sums of money to Israel whilst also giving vast sums to the enemies of Israel. I like America but I don’t want them running the world. I’m not sympathetic to the Islamic domino theory. I don’t want a world government, not even a proxy world government administered from Washington.

  2. Jim – I wouldn’t say Ron Paul was in the “grip” of the antiwar crowd or any other crowd. He may say stuff that the antiwar crowd like, but he also says stuff that plenty of the same people hate. I doubt many of the pacifists like his views on gun ownership. I don’t believe he is motivated by a desire to be popular.

    Do you really think the number of foreign US bases is a rational use of taxpayers funds, or good foreign policy?

  3. Is there another group called ‘Young Americans Against Freedom’? Who would be for slavery? If they mean ‘Free Enterprize’, then they should call themselves ‘Young Americans For Free Enterprize’.
    And I agree with TerjeP- Governments should stick to their own territories as much as possible. If other governments want extra troops to defend their lands, let them be hired from the pool of mercenaries and security firms!

  4. Well Terje, the map of all those foreign bases that gets featured here occasionally lists some of them as containing as few as 7 troops who at a guess would be decorative personnel at embassies, which makes it somewhat irrelevant.

    Yes there are too many troops overseas and this has tended in the past to cause unintended consequences, such as the welfare state in Europe which was only made possible by the continuing guarantee of US protection. Had the US told them around 5 – 10 years after WW2 that it was about time they stood up for themselves and withdrawn significant numbers Europe might not be the screwups they are now.

    By the way, did you notice the bit in the post about Ron Paul being fired by YAF? The thing about the average Paulista is that if I had said that I agreed 100% with Ron but I felt he should do something about the freckle above his left eyebrow, someone would object.

    This guy is a typical representative of YAF:

  5. Thats not the map I was referring to but it does give some indication of excessive numbers in Europe, although they could be there for strategic reasons.

    Another insight on the firing was just given to me by Bawb, an ex military guy who blogs from Montana:
    Bawb has left a new comment on your post “YAF fire Ron Paul.”:

    I hear one of the reasons they’re all pissy is that Ron Paul is against the renewal of the “Patriot” Act bits that are expiring. The Patriot Act “protects” this country from terrorists (such as bloggers), don’tcha know.

    As for the YAF, I wish I could remember who said, “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.”

    I’ve dealt with pro-war rah-rah Chicken Hawks before. Just give them the address of the nearest Armed Forces recruiter and see how fast they disappear.

    There could be something in this.

  6. Really Terje, the more I look at this, the more I think his presence with them is a redundant thing from 20 years ago. They seem to bear little resemblance to what he stands for.

    They have probably shot themselves in the foot in this action, Ron can afford to lose them a lot more than they can afford to lose him. As well as this they have probably alienated a great deal of the younger libertarian leaning people.

    The Republican Liberty Caucus element is on a surge in the party, and conservative elements are feeling threatened.

  7. That is interesting Damien as I have a Fox editorial opinion piece by Kevin McCullough a SoCon, that I saved to use in this post but had enough without it. This guy is a radio host who predominantly writes for Town Hall. The article, Disrespectful Libertarians Hijack CPAC Poll And Its Mission which was previously published at TH is a litany of hatred of libertarians and their attendance at CPAC. Here are some of his gems:

    Gary Johnson was only added to the lineup at the last minute, his presence stoking the flame of immoral libertarianism that actually advocated for legalized pot and the redefinition of marriage to include homosexual unions.

    In other words, this year’s CPAC wasn’t about advancing conservatism. Rather, it exposed the radically disrespectful element of the libertine.

    (Here’s a ripper.) The truth is libertarians are the worst form of political affiliation in the nation. Combining the desire of economic greed, with the amoral desire to promote any behavior regardless of its cost to our culture is a stark departure from the intent of the Founding Fathers.

    Libertarian elements, because of their strange combination of policies that add up to anarchy without moral limits, don’t mix with conservative ideals. And, because of that, perhaps they should have their own conference and let all the pot-smokers and gay marriage supporters come and complain about how the U.S. shouldn’t be fighting terrorists, while they slander public servants.

    Geez, I hope you guys aren’t giving me a bad name. :)

  8. “Combining the desire of economic greed, with the amoral desire to promote any behavior regardless of its cost to our culture is a stark departure from the intent of the Founding Fathers.”

    Bullshit. Why does Fox News hate freedom?

  9. I think Ron Paul’s foreign policy stance sucks. He’s an anti-Israeli isolationist and pacifist who basically hates his own country.

    By contrast his domestic policies are generally admirable.

    Young people in politics tend to see things in black and white. I wouldn’t try to interpret their disagreement with him too deeply.

  10. Jim – the libertarians are trying to take over the GOP. I hope they succeed. As long as they are making progress in this regard they are going to evoke hostility from the old guard.

    David – being an isolationist is not the only alternative to being an interventionist.

  11. I’m very much pro-Israel but I dont think that America should be giving Israel foreign aid. I’ve heard Ron Paul call Gaza a ‘concentration camp’. No shit, a concentration camp!

    There are good libertarian arguments to bring the troops home, end the military/industrial complex etc but Ron Paul’s foreign policy is identical to Noam Chomksy’s.

    Gary Johnson all the way

  12. Interesting development given that the tea party has become hijacked by the neo-con shortly after Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign ended in 2008.

  13. From what I’ve seen Gary Johnson has been fairly quiet on foreign policy so far. In practice I don’t think he would be that much different to RP. Withdrawing American troops from all the corners of the world they are not needed, cutting defense spending etc. He would just do it without all the “why do they hate us… root causes… poor palestinians” leftist self loathing we hear from RP.

    I haven’t heard Johnson say anything about the UN yet. That’s one area RP has him beat

  14. “Interesting development given that the tea party has become hijacked by the neo-con shortly after Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign ended in 2008.”

    You reckon? You really reckon they were always the light, the truth and the way all along?

  15. This comment is a reply to a comment on anther Website, and the reader should keep this in mind.

    I had to reread a comment that I wrote to discover the inconsistency that I had written, and the inadvertent lack of explanation to that comment.

    I will therefore correct the apparent inconsistency in the next few sentences, and then I will provide supplementary background information to place that comment in its proper context, to allow for additional personal research.

    Even if the current Puppets and Traitors in Serbia recognize Kosovo to receive a lifelong supply of vaccines against genetically engineered lethal viruses, then as long as the United Nations Security Council Vetos it; then Serbia and Northern Kosovo, and its Province of Southern Kosovo can be one Country again.

    If Serbia does recognize Kosovo to join the European Union, and if the United Nations Security Council does not allow a New Serbia with Northern Kosovo, or an Independent Southern Kosovo to become Countries, then the European Union could allow Serbia along with Northern Kosovo, or Southern Autonomous Kosovo to join the European Union in Cyprus Type situations.

    A Definite Veto at the United Nations Security Council against any Countries in the Balkans breaking up will help this process of a Cyprus Type situations being considered more seriously as an Option for the European Union with regards to the Balkans.

    The other option is of course for Serbia along with its Province of Kosovo joins the European Union at the same time with no need for a Cyprus Type situation.

    A Definite Veto at the United Nations Security Council against any Countries in the Balkans breaking up will help this process of Serbia with its Province of Kosovo joining the European Union at the same time, with no need for a Cyprus Type situation.

    Britain and America have Puppertized the Continental European Politicians, with promises of a lifelong supply of vaccines against genetically engineered lethal viruses.

    These genetically engineered lethal viruses will only become more lethal in time with the advancement of technology, and all Anglo-American Puppet Politicians and Judges want these vaccines for themselves and their families, slightly more than they want the Dirty Bribe Money.

    These genetically engineered lethal viruses will be able to kill 99% of all those who are not vaccinated within one week of being released.

    The best Strategic Places at which these genetically engineered lethal viruses will be released will be British and American Military Bases like Camp Bondsteel in Serbia, and the other Anglo-American Military Bases in other Countries of the World.

    We should not overlook American Funded and vaccinated Non Government Organizations, and the Anglo-American Funded and vaccinated ‘Human Rights’ and ‘Democracy’ groups could also release these genetically engineered lethal viruses at Anglo-America’s Dictatorial Decree.

    If we have been reading about advancement in Technology, then we would be in a better position to understand the situation, even a Cyprus Type situation.

    If anyone thinks that I have not understood something correctly, then I hope that we can agree to disagree without becoming disagreeable.

    I have found that on occasions; if someone does become disagreeable, but provides no assistance to help the one they are accusing of being ignorant, then it is because they totally agree with me.

    I have further found on occasions, that such a disagreeable person will not Confess to totally agreeing with me for the Obvious Reasons.

    A Northern Summit of Nordic States and Baltic States was held in Secret in London on January 20, 2011.

    It is vital to Completely Understand That Extremely Generous Amounts of Lies mixed in with some truths have been given to the Puppet Media to Publish.

    Those who wish to be above Moron Status Must take this Fully into Account when deciphering the Secret Meeting, or whenever Nazis open their mouths.

    I should have mentioned that I copied and pasted a Puppet Journalist’s Article, and I used Poetic Licence to make it closer to the Truth.

    If you type: Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt noted that debate among northern countries “differs a little sometimes from discussions in central and southern Europe”, into an internet search engine, you will find the original Article that contains many lies.

    If you type: UK Prime Minister David Cameron has insisted that countries in northern Europe should form an “alliance of common interests” ahead of a London summit, into an internet search engine you will find more Articles.

    The Official Title of the Nazi Summit was, UK Nordic Baltic Summit London 2001, and if type that into an internet search engine you will find many Articles that do of course contain many lies mixed in with a few truths.

    I consider myself to be an amateur analyst, and an amateur investigative journalist, who goes looking for the News behind the News, in order to contribute to the Public Debate.

  16. the notion that bad guys are plotting and manipulating everything. The Empire is so vast, freedom happens in the inevitable cracks.
    I suspect partly it’s just due to the dominant assumption that tv audiences today don’t have the time/interest to focus for lengthy, non-inflammatory discussions of serious ideas. they require thinking and tolerance for the pursuit of truth with give and take and actual listening to the other side.
    I too hope the Judge can shift over time toward more depth, but the program has already improved. He’s a very smart guy, and I trust he’ll keep improving the format.

  17. The Tea Party started as a Ron Paul event in 2007 and quickly became hijacked by the neo-conservatives. Look how Palin became part of it, the Tea Party even paid her a speaking fee…there somebody that ran as VP alongside John McCain who is opposite in nearly every way from the platform that Ron Paul stands for. Yet she became part of that movement. Just as Paul Ryan associates himself with that movement when he has all but a conservative voting record.

  18. “You’re gilding the lily. Tax day protests had been around for years.”\

    I’m very aware of that, but not to the extent as during the Ron Paul Presidential campaign. Further the tea party in 2007 was about more than just taxes. It was about getting the government back to its Constitutional roots.

    I’m just stating the obvious that many people fail to recognize. The tea party movement quickly got hijacked by the neo-conservatives.

  19. The Tea Party started as a Ron Paul event in 2007 and quickly became hijacked by the neo-conservatives.

    The reality is that Tea Party is a relatively generic term used over there in pretty much the same way as Eureka and the associated flag is used here. The Eureka flag thing is more abused as those leftist moonbats marching around under it on Labour Day have nothing in common with the original event, and are philosophically opposed to everything the rebels stood for. Still its a good symbol of rebellion, allowing the marchers to claim the spirit while they toe the union/party line.

    The Boston Tea Party was formed in July 2006 which predates the one you have given here. I would imagine “Tea Party” has been in use constantly since 1773.

    If Paul had a tea party going, it probably still is, but it should be pointed out that he has addressed numerous gatherings of the current one, so he doesn’t seem to mind them. The current model was inspired by the ‘Rick Santelli rant, in which he called for a “Chicago tea party in July:

    Polling by Rasmussen a couple of months ago indicated that the Tea Party is made up of around 50/50 libertarian/SoCon who seem to have fiscal conservatism in common. While it is not ‘pure’ it is never the less a great vehicle for movement libertarians to actually achieve something.

  20. The tea party isn’t so much a new organisation as a theme that has successfully mobilised a large array of pre existing organisations. It’s lack of specificity is part of it’s power.

  21. His foreign policy stance is absolutist for the sake of clarity. It does go too far. Actually funnily enough this subject is something that myself and Humphreys agreed upon.

    The Americans have 700+ bases around the world. They need about 20. With such a big country like the US the commander-in-chief really needs the other politicians behind him, in order to win quickly and come home.

    Wars must be BIG AND SHORT. So there is method to the apparent madness of the Paul approach. The war would be late in starting. It would be overdue. Ron would have had to be forced by Congress to go to war.

    But then it would be over so fast.

  22. Essentially they have two strategic threats. Russia and China. So it would be to do with pinning these two to the Coast.

    In terms of Russia that threat will fade in time and can be mostly eliminated by necessary civil defense measures mostly initiated by tax exemptions. We are only ever ten feet from safety in a nuclear war. But there is also missile defense that they need to invest in.

    Now the thing is that some of their bases were conceived of as places for Americans to be sacrificed. So for example the 5000 soldiers they had, and still may have, in South Korea were there for one reason and one reason only. And that was to die. To die in order to draw the US into war.

    Such was the ethics of pre-Randian America. Human sacrifices were to be made all over the show to preserve peace. But there was a sort of mania for sacrifice.

    The importance is not the precise location of the bases. Except to the extent that you have to keep waterways open. But if you have forward bases they ought to be unassailable. So that you will never face the prospect of a human sacrifice.

    You are doing okay if you have forward bases that are unassailable that can guarantee you never fight a serious war within your own borders.

    See where the Brits lost Singapore. Thats what you get for diverting materiel to help a communist. Its worth surrendering turf if it avoids slaughter. But if those bases that you have are totally unbeatable, then neither the issue of surrender, nor the issue of sacrifice need arise. And thats the way you want it when you are working under a less primitive sort of ethics than that which prevailed during the cold war.

    We want to look after the lads. Send them all in one peace back to their Mothers.

  23. A peace-loving country ought over-invest in those defense measures within ones own country that can help security. One of the best military strategists of the last century said the following:

    “Dig tunnels deep, store grain everywhere, and never seek hegemony”

    Note that we can effect that strategy 90% through tax exemptions alone and with supplementary benefits.

    Time may tell us that the Americans ought to have emulated that strategy. But having said that you really don’t want to be fighting on your own turf ever. And a few extremely righteous bases are worth it to make sure that this ought never happen in theory.

  24. Ron Paul is a joke. He talks about wasting money yet runs for President for what? Only to suspend his Presidential run only a year later…As much as I love Freedom, but Ron Paul is a no go, especially after he endorsed Chuck Baldwin in 2008 over the Libertarian Party. To the very last, seeing that it looks like that Islam and Freedom is pretty much incompatible, I really don’t see the flaw in building an Empire overseas. His Logic is more like screw you Muslim women, but you don’t deserve being free from Muslim Fascists.

  25. What about China, Selim?

    Clearly Bush and Co. don’t care about the Chinese yearning to be free. Otherwise they would have invaded.

  26. That wasn’t Chuck Baldwin’s agenda. Chuck Baldwin was candidate for the constitution party. His goal was to bring US society into a state of legality by bringing it within the confines of the constitution.

    Like I said. That was a good call from Ron Paul. And Chuck Baldwin wouldn’t have even run if Ron had stayed in the race.

  27. Its probably worth mentioning that Ron didn’t endorse anyone until Bob Barr started mouthing off about how he should do so, probably thinking it could only go one way.

    If Barr only learned one thing in Congress, it should have been that you just don’t get anywhere by telling Ron Paul what he can or can’t do.

  28. “We call on our local, state and federal governments to uphold our cherished First Amendment right to free speech by vigorously enforcing our laws against obscenity to maintain a degree of separation between that which is truly speech and that which only seeks to distort and destroy.”

    In other words, Chuck Baldwin and his fellow Christian Fascists from the Constitution want to control Speech. Oddly enough, they are way worse than the Republican party.
    Again, THANK YOU MR. PAUL FOR ENDORSING A MAN WHO WANTS TO CONTROL SPEECH!

    http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php#Pornography

    LIBERTARIAN PARTY 2012!!

  29. Basically on a quick look through the platform I can see why Ron could go along with it. He is an older guy, so possibly a bit more conservative than the average libertarian.

    Generally when he opposes stuff he tends to refer to constitutional reasons rather than individual rights issues, which given the nature of the Constitution boil down to pretty much the same thing anyway.

    While I have not gone into this in depth, pornography is an issue as abortion which should remain a moral issue, but in the main I doubt that many libertarians would feel terribly oppressed were they to come to power. If they were to implement restrictions on porn, the black market would provide the consumer with quality products in the same way as it always has.

    I do have to question your rationale in that you seem to have picked on one issue that they oppose on religious grounds and assume that this makes them fascists. Even the most moderate fascist would hardly support the US Constitution to the degree that these guys do.

    You are contributing to the frivolous misuse of this term which has caused it to lose most of its impact.

    It is a mistake to assume you own the support of Ron Paul. Ron has done more than anyone else to promote the libertarian cause, not the other way around.

  30. Hi Fleeced, this is ‘Mad Dog’. Remember me?

    Anyway, I heard that the YAF is an irrelevant organization that was only recently brought back from the grave to essentially punk Ron Paul. It seems like it is run by a bunch of old William F. Buckley conservative trolls who are neither young nor really favor freedom, nor even have more than 50 registered members.

    More people commented on your post than are actual members of that troll group.

  31. Actually the government’s own 9/11 report laid the blame on US foreign policy for the 9/11 attacks as Dr. Paul pointed out in May 2007. Way to stay current neocons. As for your nations military and national security interests non-intervention serves both. It would be nice if after losing thousands of your troops for no gain you guys would admit that.

  32. YAF has been a joke for 40+ years. Case in point Murrary Rothbard rubbishing the communist infested movement way back in 1969.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard90.html

    Also given this site is called libertarin.org.au I can’t believe there are people who criticise RP for wishing to withdraw the coercive redistribution of billions in taxpayers to Israel and his anti war stance. Run along guys your signed copy of Lazarus Rising needs another read.

  33. Michael – stop whinging, not being 100% behind Ron Paul doesn’t make you a neocon.

    Since when has anyone here supported foreign military aid? Hello!

  34. The major Sun Tzu power in the US is clearly connected with the money creation power. So its inevitable that once a person can be found to attack Ron Paul from behind such a person would find resources coming his way and be quite unaware why it is that he suddenly was having an outstanding run of luck.

  35. “Also given this site is called libertarin.org.au I can’t believe there are people who criticise RP for wishing to withdraw the coercive redistribution of billions in taxpayers to Israel and his anti war stance.”

    Ron never claimed that Israels survival wasn’t important. He pointed out that the first Gulf War pre-empted a needed anti-Saddam alliance between Arab bigshots and Israel. Indeed the only chance to bury the hatchet lay in situations where Israel was needed for its martial virtues.

    From Ron’s perspective therefore; America blew it.

    Now I think of the survival of Israel in pretty absolutist terms. And I feel there is a perpetual need to be able to pistol-whip the Muslim world whenever she concentrates on her more loathsome lines of the Koran.

    But Ron Pauls foreign policy had a safety valve for that. The Congress declares war. Not the President. Then the President is compelled, as commander-in-chief to kill those whose death will lead to an acceptable peace.

    Prior to war the constitution also provided for the government to issue letters of Marque and Reprisal. There is this nonsensical notion that the people of earlier times were less smart than us. The opposite seems to be the case, and the letter of Marque and reprisal is clearly the better targeted action for the dogma that terrorism is a stand-alone matter and not a thing created by regime intelligence. Were this the case the letter, or more correctly the procedures associated with such an undertaking would be sufficient to bring the Dr Moriati types down.

    So its a well thought through system. But I would be no part of some extremist ideology which suggested that the libertarian ethos meant that we had to always lose strategic ground or let allies like the Israelis go under.

    But that wasn’t the Ron Paul line of reasoning.

Comments are closed.