It was perhaps inevitable that the GOP would turn on the Ron Paul supporters to eliminate them from their version of a body politic. I predicted it would take place and so did a number of others. But what has been surprising is the timing. It seemed reasonable to assume that the Republican gatekeepers would wait until after the convention or even the election to keep the Paulistas in harness and supportive, nurturing their faint hopes that their message would somehow have an impact, encouraging them to vote for Mitt Romney. But the Republican Party leadership decided instead to purge Paul supporters at both the state and local level and also on the convention floor. As Justin Raimondo has noted, a harrowing worthy of Josef Stalin took place in a number of states employing procedural ploys, stripping delegates of their accreditation, and even illegal closing of caucuses, which denied to Ron Paul’s supporters any ability to have significant impact at the convention. The deal was sealed when the GOP rules committee revised its convention guidelines, initially to make it impossible to cast dissident votes or to propose nominations from the floor, and subsequently to allow the national party to veto and replace state delegates. As one Associate Press report put it somewhat laconically in an early report on convention preparations “Republican officials have reduced the ranks of Paul delegates.” Jordan Bloom, who attended the Paul events in Tampa, reported that Paul’s supporters were angry and frustrated, many having experienced political corruption up close and personal for the first time. One friend of mine on Capitol Hill likened the caucus deals finally arrived at in various states to having a burglar steal everything you own and then return a couple of days later to give you half back if you do not complain. That’s what happened. The Paul supporters were outgunned and out-muscled and, led by a campaign team that wanted accommodation, wound up taking what they could get.
Through it all, Ron Paul himself has emerged with his dignity and values intact. It is precisely because of his honesty and integrity that he succeeded in attaining near rock star status among his followers. The media is reporting that Ron Paul was offered a last minute opportunity to speak at the convention but refused when he was told he would be required to offer a full endorsement of Mitt Romney and have his speech reviewed by Romney’s staff. Would that Paul’s integrity had somehow trickled down to his senior campaign staff, which Tom Woods has correctly described as “handlers who are concerned with their long term careers in politics.” Or, in the vernacular, the “go-along to get-along gang.”
The New York Times plays along with the charade, describing how, “Paul campaign leaders decided to cooperate with Romney forces for a smooth convention, while eschewing compromises that would have alienated core supporters even more.” That’s called remaining viable in the system even though you know perfectly well it has done its best to delegitimize you and will end up forcing you out completely. And who cares whether or not Ron makes compromises or not? His son and heir presumptive Rand, Senator from Kentucky, has already sold out, endorsing Romney and specifically approving of his foreign policy, with The Times explaining “Senator Paul has shown a greater commitment than his father to operating within Republican Party institutions.” Sort of like plucking a nettle and calling it a rose.
Jesse Benton, married to Ron Paul’s granddaughter, ran the Paul campaign and ran it badly, failing to take advantage of opportunities in states like Virginia where Ron might have actually defeated Romney head-to-head if a minimum of support had been forthcoming from the national campaign. Benton explains to The Times how he has had to reject those who “dress in black, stand on a hill and say, ‘Smash the state.’” Benton, who reportedly has morphed into a multitasking paid political consultant and deal-maker with several businesses registered in his name including offices in Washington, D.C., generously paid himself $586,616 along the way while keeping the revolutionaries in check. He also confuses passion with craziness, possibly because he lacks the former. Most Paul supporters that I have encountered are completely rational and dedicated to turning our country around. They support the message of small government, non-interventionism overseas, constitutionalism, and sound money policies all because they make good sense. But I suppose Benton would argue that he is, as The Times adroitly puts it, “balancing pragmatism and principle.” Too bad pragmatism wins out every time for those who are ambitious.
And then there is the little matter of foreign policy, which is of particular interest to readers of antiwar. Ron Paul bravely opposed foreign aid and foreign interventionism, both as endorsed and practiced by the two mainstream parties, raising challenging questions about the status quo in the Republican debates and also in his speeches. He understands how central what occurs overseas is to America’s malaise, note his comment “If I didn’t have the foreign policy [views] I do, I don’t think we would be here tonight” delivered in his farewell speech to his supporters in Tampa on Sunday night. But go over to the pathetic Campaign for Liberty website and you will detect nary a whiff of that, nothing on foreign affairs more recent than April, as if self-congratulatory blurbs on auditing the Fed will solve all the problems actually caused by America’s evolution into an imperialist police state. Campaign for Liberty is sponsoring a Liberty Political Action Conference in Chantilly Virginia from Sept. 13–15. Check out the list of speakers. Out of 32 speakers, only one, Antiwar.com contributor Ivan Eland, can be regarded as having genuine expertise on foreign policy, but I’ll bet there will be some hot discussions on deregulating light bulbs and washing machines and lots of armchair revolutionary talk about how to get organized.
Which is all to say if you want to continue the Ron Paul revolution on foreign policy after November, his self-designated heirs and successors are a dead loss. So ignore those constant email solicitations for funds to continue to fight the good fight because the pleas are mostly designed to maintain the status and incomes of those who have already failed so miserably to deliver on Ron Paul’s promise. You might begin by emailing back and asking exactly how the money being raised is used. If you even suggest that America’s foreign policy mess is the driving force in America’s decline, they will ignore you.
The highly paid Paul advisers, some of whom have been negotiating with the Romney camp for many months, have already been co-opted and do not care about what interests the rest of us if it has anything to do with America’s shameful behavior overseas. Why? I suspect it is because they understand that attacking U.S. foreign policy eventually works its way around to the issue of Israel, which is something they choose not to deal with, for whatever reason. Whether foreign policy phobia was a tactical decision or something more deeply rooted matters little, but the end result was to produce a campaign myopia about what is really wrong with the United States and its policies.
So if you think that auditing the Fed will do it (which might never happen anyway), be my guest, but those of us who are frustrated and angry about what we are seeing must continue to fight against the corporatism and consensus politics that are producing a police state and destroying our nation. We must not stop in November and we must not be bought off by the lies of Mitt Romney and Barack Obama who, apart from expressing their love for Israel, will not discuss foreign policy at all. We must continue to speak out, to support websites like antiwar as well as the increasing number of individuals and groups that are challenging the system. America’s rush to empire must continue to be our focus and a sustaining a vibrant discussion of our failed foreign policy must always be our principal objective. Truly, if we do not tame the beast we are all fated to suffer when it finally turns on us.
Read more by Philip Giraldi
- Don’t Forget Syria – June 12th, 2013
- National Security by the Numbers – June 5th, 2013
- John McCain: War Hero or Something Less? – May 29th, 2013
- The New World Order is Unimpeachable – May 22nd, 2013
- Boston Becomes Toxic – May 15th, 2013





skulz fontaine
August 29th, 2012 at 9:24 pm
Republican National Convention. Yawn. Nothing changes except the faces of the war criminals. Oh wait, the RNC dug up Condo Rice. Rehash the war criminals with some fresh lipstick and presto. Say, you can put lipstick on a war-pig and call her "heir apparent."
Dr. Ron Paul SHOULD run 3rd party. Oh yes and leave Herr Benton somewhere west of Yuma, Arizona.
JLS
August 29th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
Anybody who thinks there's anything left to fight for is crazy. Americans have rejected freedom for a big socialist paradise world empire.
It's over. Come to terms with it or get out.
davidgrayling
August 29th, 2012 at 10:19 pm
Whether Romney or Obama win, the world is lost. America will be led by a warmonger and will pursue its objective to ensure that most of its money ends up in the hands on the 1%.
The screws are tightening, fascism is growing, and freedom is disappearing.
I did not sign up for this!
Curious
August 29th, 2012 at 11:30 pm
Napoleon had a problem with nepotism too: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/his/CoreArt/art/…
Curious
August 29th, 2012 at 11:30 pm
Napoleon had a problem with nepotism too: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/his/CoreArt/art/…
john
August 30th, 2012 at 4:37 am
I guess we Paulians all dreamed of an American spring knowing deep down in our souls that it would not come. A third party candidacy would have been more successful both in spreading the word and making an impact that the Republican Party could not have ignored or subverted. And who know's but he might have won. This was a tactical and strategic error and I believe Ron Paul must share the blame for his lack of courage in this regard. If yor're in for a dime, you should be in for a dollar. I think that the senior Paul was also motivated by his concern for the career prospects of hiis son Rand who has sold out completely. And with Ron Paul retiring the movement is on life support, unless of course a like ionded leader emerges. How about it Phil. One more thing: we must continue and increase our support for antiwar.com. Theses quaterly fund drives always go down to the wire and make so many of us very anxious. We have to put our money where our thoughts are.
kaylee
August 30th, 2012 at 5:48 am
Great article, I thought that I was starting to imagine things as I watched and supported Ron's campaign. I could't understand many of the decisions they made. As far as Rand is concerned anyone who will stand quietly by as their father and his delegates receive such shabby treatment says it all. To me Ron will always be the "best ever", he like all good and trusting people never seem to notice that many of the people who surround them can be brought off in the long run.
Steve
August 30th, 2012 at 7:59 am
I've agreed with a lot of the positions that Ron Paul has espoused – primarily his anti-interventionist, anti-War policies and his desire to zero out foreign aid – including and starting with Israel.
But, the issue of this out of control third world invasion and colonization of the United States visi vi both illegal and legal immigration is running neck and neck, in my book, with the critical importance of putting a permanent halt to all these neo-con wars and then arresting every last one of these neo-con war criminals, putting them on trial, swiftly convicting them, and then promptly executing them in public.
Ron Paul recently ended my limited support for him by having the audacity to chastise the GOP for not being sufficiently subservience to the illegal alien, open borders loving, nation-wrecking, amnesty supporting gang of traditional American hating lobby. Thus, Paul is now permanently consigned to my list of political sleaze balls.
Massive immigration of uneducated, unskilled, incompatible and openly hostile to traditional American values – and by that I mean White Western European derived values – aliens from every backwater third world failure of a nation on this Earth is transforming America into a nation that is impossible to govern, at least not by the definition of a representative Republic form of government that was promised to us by our European Founding Fathers. For any nation to survive and to remain intact, there absolutely MUST BE social cohesion – and nobody with a brain bigger than a marble can survey the landscape across America in the year 2012 and see any sign of a healthy and socially cohesive society.
What I see are steadily increasing levels of conflict between the various ethnic and racial groups as each group clamors for a bigger piece of the welfare and social entitlement pies or, in the case of the White middle class – an increasing level of burning hot anger over being feasted upon by the Democrats via confiscatory taxation that is used to subsidize the distribution of goodies and social entitlements to the largely parasitic minority base of their party. ObamaCare is but one recent, albeit gigantic, income redistribution scheme that can be seen as a clear warning shot as to what Whites can expect to see even more of, if America becomes a majority non-white controlled nation. The feasting will very quickly turn into a feeding frenzy – once the demographics reach a tipping point – and the White middle class will be literally devoured and destroyed, along with the most productive segment of American society.
Ron Paul officially supports every bit of this, as we can see by his criticisms of the rather timid GOP efforts to try to save their own party and the nation as a whole, by getting serious about addressing this illegal alien invasion.
Mike
August 30th, 2012 at 8:31 am
"hus, Paul is now permanently consigned to my list of political sleaze balls. "
Dude, you are a #1 class grade a f***ing idiot.
Geez, most people just seem to be a waste of oxygen.
Giraldi has a few things to say… « Kuyperian Commentary
August 30th, 2012 at 8:44 am
[...] how some of the Paul advisers handled the RP campaign. In the end, Audit the Fed is not enough, we need to dismantle the empire. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. Categories Foreign [...]
Nelson_2008
August 30th, 2012 at 9:31 am
Why doesn't Ron Paul run as an independent? The Republican Party has been trashed and has betrayed and cheated him (and the whole country); and the continuation of the status quo will most certainly lead to the complete economic, moral, political, and ultimately, physical destruction of the U.S. If he's who he appears to be and holds his apparent views in good faith, then he has to realize this, doesn't he?
In light of this, running as an independent is really the only proper moral choice he has at this point, isn't it? Or is it too late alreadly?
John Uebersax
August 30th, 2012 at 9:54 am
Good article. Why doesn't Ron Paul just endorse Gary Johnson at this point?
Outsider
August 30th, 2012 at 11:20 am
Dr Paul will soon be 77. He is too old to run as an independent in 4 years. Such a campaign for a then 80 year old will not be taken seriously.
Outsider
August 30th, 2012 at 11:33 am
Steve's comments from 3 hours ago went way over the line. However, many of his politically incorrect sentiments are, I think, worthy of discussion. Pat Buchanan said much the same thing in his great recent book, "Death of a Superpower." There is no disputing that Deomgraphy is Destiny.
One reason I am not libertarian is because it rejects many common sense ideas due to ideaology. Mass immigration, esp from the 3rd world, IS a major problem and libertarian calls to Open Borders are very shortsighted. Do we want a billion people in the country? This is why I mostly side with the Pat Buchanan paleoconservatives who believe in America First and who want to end the Empire.
JonnyMuffin
August 30th, 2012 at 11:51 am
I agree with the sentiment toward C4L and the campaign, but I disagree that FP is more important than the FED. The fed funds the wars (as well as the rest of the tyranny). The fed is the heart of the beast and is the #1 issue. Ending the wars is my next important issue because of the murder and violence
anon
August 30th, 2012 at 12:08 pm
In a free society immigrants wouldn't hurt you at all, but we have a fascist/socialist society which can't afford both open borders and immigration. So it isn't so much the immigrant that is the problem but the way we have chosen to run the country? Just a thought.
anon
August 30th, 2012 at 12:13 pm
If the majority of Independents supported Ron Paul, why didn't they do so? Was it the word Republican that stopped them? What's in a name?
anon
August 30th, 2012 at 12:22 pm
In Rand Paul's defense, oh just this once, I'll suck it up and try to be nice…you will never have peace without freedom.
Mike Ehling
August 30th, 2012 at 12:25 pm
I'm not a Libertarian, at least not with a capital L. Too many capital-Ls are the types who've only ever read one book — and too often, it happens to have been Atlas Shrugged. I follow the principle of subsidiarity, not at all anti-government but trying to keep things as local as possible. Abolish the NEA and the NEH, both grossly offensive to the First Amendment. Abolish the US Department of Education, transferring functions like Pell Grants to other agencies and leaving anti-discrimination efforts to the Justice Department, because education has long legitimately been a function of the states (or as delegated by the states to local government).
On the other hand, again based on subsidiarity, I support a national health insurance system for all along the model of Medicare. I don't support Obama-care, which is a sell-out to the private health insurance industry. We've got to recognize that health care "rationing" will occur in some form or another (and I have to respect Eric Cantor for his frankness on this point, even if I disagree with his free-market conclusion), but I'd rather have it occur through public policies set by government agencies in some manner of transparency than have the rationing occur as it now does in the corporate back rooms of the HMOs. Trying to ration through "free market" competition among insurers just doesn't work when the insurance premiums are paid by employers, leaving employees with no real "choice" of insurer, but there's no way that system will be eliminated unless it's replaced by a publicly funded system.
That's what subsidiarity is all about. Try to keep it local, but be realistic where a good result can only be obtained at a much higher level of government.
But my post isn't about economics or social policy. It's about the anti-war and the anti-imperialism issues, and it's about protecting basic civil liberties. That's something on which Old Right and New Left (to use perhaps antiquated terms) can agree, it's something on which libertarians and paleo-cons and "subsidiarists" or whatever can agree, and it's something on which the Old Right and the Greens can also agree.
Be perfectly willing, in other words, to support Dennis Kucinich at the same time that you're perfectly willing to support Walter Jones — or their younger counterparts.
There's no way I vote for either Barack da Bomber or Etch-a-Sketch Mittens, and I'm uncomfortable with the stridency of the Constitutional Party (and Virgil Goode won't be on the Pennsylvania ballot anyway). If Gary Johnson isn't tossed from the Pennsylvania ballot, I'll happily vote Libertarian, but if he is I've still got the choice of Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala on the Green ticket. Considering that Honkala hails from Pennsylvania anyway, the Greens might make a better "protest vote" showing than the Libertarians will anyway in Pennsylvania.
What I'm saying is that we've got to make alliances and be perfectly accepting of the genuinely anti-war Left, even in cases where we might not agree on some other issues. The emphasis has to be on putting an end to wars and empire and restoring basic civil liberties, and when that finally happens (if it does) will be plenty enough time to worry about economic and social disagreements.
Some of this outreach seems to be occurring on both sides today in the Occupy movement. It's got to stretch beyond that, though, to take in those of us who aren't comfortable camping out in public parks. ;->
Mike Ehling
August 30th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
Or, I might add, as Ted Turner once told Jane Fonda, "Don't worry, you're alright, Jane. Some of my best friends are communists."
Jaime
August 30th, 2012 at 12:48 pm
Why do you complain fool? Didn't your kind invaded, overwhelmed and stole a land that was not yours? If this "third world invasion" ever does what you fear, it will only be justice being made. However, that's not the problem as anon puts it. The problem is the murderous and corrupt ways of the people that govern your country. Rather that ranting against, on the whole, diligent people, you should go out and fight against the policies that will eventually enslave you all, and maybe us as well.
peter vojta
August 30th, 2012 at 12:54 pm
Soonner americans take their guns into their hands, soonner can we people in Europe rise and fight corporate fashism…if US people wait, change we all hope for, will never happened…Unfortunaly, You people in US allowed this situacion happened , You must be first to stop it at any cost.!!!…peter czech.
Philippe
August 30th, 2012 at 1:05 pm
You're absolutely right. I'm 80 now. Even if I was John-the-Baptist I'd probably be retired. I think things should have been stirred up, new blood perhaps found, if Ron had run in a third party campaign. "Now what?" indeed.
Kelley V
August 30th, 2012 at 2:13 pm
Hot column today Phil !– I hope the sr. campaign staff has read this, and everyone else who's considering now how to carry on the message and the movement.
Mick
August 30th, 2012 at 2:26 pm
Great post Steve. But you have to take it one step further. A country is only a reflection of who lives in the country. All these other issues of the Fed, Libertarism only matter if we can keep our European heritage.
Those issues do not matter in South America or Africa. What me and you have to root for is total collapse before Whites are totally outnumbered. If that happens it is in the bag. All these Multuculturalists will disappear immediately without a job or money.
George
August 30th, 2012 at 2:45 pm
I agree with many of Graldi's points and I agree that Benton, Tate, and others running the campaign could have done a better job (e.g., not a single commercial on foreign policy or protecting civil liberties), but Giraldi doesn't really give much of a strategy for advancing our agenda. Perhaps out his frustration and disgust with the system, he seems to be throwing up his hands and saying let's just do education, and forget politics. That is a big mistake. If the Ron Paul campaigns proved anything the last two election cycles, it is that people (mostly) get educated and mobilized about issues through politics. You can post a lot of good material on websites about how neoconservativism or whatever is running this country into the ground–and this is indeed is worthwhile, but nothing quite educates and focuses people as a political effort to actually change the evil things our government is doing. In terms of the life and death issues this web site regularly deals with, you simply can't beat a politician like Ron Paul saying the things he has said about foreign policy and civil liberties. If you forsake politics, the powers-that-be will simply run wild. They respect challenge and power, not words.
W_ThePoster
August 30th, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Like your post, and learned from it. Listening to libertarian thinkers here has led me to realize that restraining the war machine entails reforming the financial system, which in turn means overthrowing the corruption-serving structures of political campaigning and representation. Outside of fantasies of jiu-jitsuey heroics in revolt against the System, it seems to me that the only serious approach has to aim at a huge popular rebellion against money in politics, which means boycotts and that means organization, after the fashion of the labor movement. Can libertarians stand to get organized? Can free society theory ever actually affect the power of the suits and uniforms? I'm waiting to hear more thinking like yours, aimed at prioritizing exactly which liberties are so central to the future of a free society that they are worth making dangerous desperate alliances with liberals, labor and local government to bring them into focus as the main beneficiaries of a big last ditch effort. Otherwise, libertarian idealism is just a booger on GE's windshield.
jrs
August 30th, 2012 at 3:13 pm
There's no way to enforce a strong border without a strong government and this is obvious when you think about things like walls along the borders, drone patrols of the borders, more money poured into law enforcement and just generally measures that only enforce the police state, and so it looks more like East Germany than anything else (tell me again are the walls to keep them out or to keep us in?). Less concern about immigration is logically libertarian and civil libertarian.
Press TV Talks to James Morris on Republican CNN debate about Ron Paul on Iran
August 30th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
[...] http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2012/08/29/where-do-we-go-next/ [...]
Curious
August 30th, 2012 at 5:03 pm
I agree mostly.
I think the main issue is that the elite has set it up so they can get cheaper labor which causes resentment with people who just want a comfortable life. The wealth of the elite gets protected by the law. Most of the jobs are going to be low wage in the future. The elite get cheap labor and the people will be at each others throats (the goal of NAFTA?). We can't have a calcified economy and laissez-faire immigration. The country is going to be run into the ground. People are a lot nicer when things are going well. Iraqis got along better before their country was destroyed. They lived in mixed neighborhoods. Bad times came and then the ethnic cleansing. The US had to build walls so it could keep them from killing each other.
There is only so many people a specific geographic area can support, especially parts of the country that have water shortages. I do not want gangs, racist, Salafi jihadist, and Likud members flooding the US. Also I'd urge caution on where people settle because some parts may not be as open and friendly as other parts of the country. This would be for the safety of the immigrants themselves. Also they need more protection under the law.
If the War Party was the immigrants flooding the country, leading to huge demographic and political change for the worst then I think everyone would be interested in defending our border from them. I wish the immigration issue would be disentangled from racism.
Phil Giraldi
August 30th, 2012 at 5:11 pm
I hear you George and understand that we have to make things happen politically but we have to be completely honest about what went wrong so we can learn from our mistakes and not let the same group who failed us so egregiously this time around to lead us down the same road a second time. We need people dedicated to the cause who aren't cutting deals that benefit them personally, which is what killed the Paul campaign.
anon
August 30th, 2012 at 5:59 pm
I think foreign policy is important because the country is broke, and we are getting poorer. The best first step is stop the wars, interventions and foreign hand-outs and try to get this country on somewhat of stable footing. It's just my opinion, but I think that should be cut first, before cuts in medicare, medicaid, and help to the poor. Even Ron Paul, never wanted to throw people into the street, which in my opinion is why he always went after the empire and interventionism. I could be wrong but that is how it seemed to me. Reigning in the FED is a good idea, but even that, you can't just throw our right away. It's too bad so many were convinced to be afraid of Ron Paul, or think he was a kook.
So like the headline; Where do we go from here? I haven't got a clue.
A Fork in the Revolutionary Road « economicharmonies
August 30th, 2012 at 8:29 pm
[...] in foreign affairs and vehement opponent of overseas intervention, asked “Where Do We Go Next?” His answer is that no matter which direction the revolutionaries take, if it’s not founded on a principled [...]
The Liberty Restoration Project » Blog Archive » A Fork in the Revolutionary Road
August 30th, 2012 at 8:44 pm
[...] foreign affairs and vehement opponent of overseas intervention, asked “Where Do We Go Next?” His answer is that no matter which direction the revolutionaries take, if it’s not founded on a principled [...]
anon
August 30th, 2012 at 8:44 pm
Whose fault is it that the politician offers up everyone's piece of the pie to get elected? I can't see how this could be the immigrant's fault either. Seems to me it is the politicians making all these promises.
I also don't feel Nafta was to make us fight, politicians and think tanks and others have some weird ideas about lifting up the masses, I don't think these should be discounted as part of their motivation, like that saying…the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Curious
August 30th, 2012 at 11:02 pm
It is the plutocrats fault. I'm not blaming the immigrants for wanting a better life. The American economy isn't structured in a way to generate wealth for anyone who isn't like Romney. Supply and demand is where capitalism fails the people and I am really blaming it. A larger pool of workers in a land of fewer opportunities equals hardship for those workers while the plutocrats grow richer. The stuff they own through stocks can't be tampered with. Take and improve an Xbox 360 or Iphone and you are likely to get sued. There are laws that protect the wealthy from the poor. If everyone could make Iphones then the price would drop due to supply and demand. What is good for the goose is not good for the gander. It is one of the reasons people want draconian rules on the internet to protect their intellectual property from improvement and cheaper distribution. The American population doesn't get the same concern.
The goal of NAFTA was to start instituting regionalism like the EU. The EU is in poor health now from what is said in the media. If the last decade didn't happen then I'd agree regarding the good intentions but I don't believe these people have them.
Jacques
August 31st, 2012 at 6:17 am
Ron Paul is also to blame for his loss. Politics is a dirty business, and when time after time his wins were discarded, the votes miscounted or not counted or simply ignored, when he was ignored & marginalized at the debates – all he could do was play nice.
Well, no good deed goes unpunished, and nice guys finish last.
He had the momentum, and let it slip through his fingers. I didn't see one serious challenge to any of the official primary or caucus results – even when the theft was blatant.
Simply put, Dr. Paul snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
And so the Republicans nominated their hollow man, their suit and tie marionette, a man so bland as to make white bread seem exotic.
Will the last free American turn off the lights before leaving?
Articles to Begin Labor Day Weekend » Scott Lazarowitz's Blog
August 31st, 2012 at 10:29 am
[...] Philip Giraldi: Ron Paul Supporters and the Liberty Movement: Where Do We Go Next? [...]
Jed
August 31st, 2012 at 12:33 pm
No detail escapes her notice!
Well, except for the fact that she had more lipstick on her teeth than on her lips.
Jed
August 31st, 2012 at 12:35 pm
LOL, Never change, Ron Paul supporters!
joe
August 31st, 2012 at 2:01 pm
"If you even suggest that America’s foreign policy mess is the driving force in America’s decline, they will ignore you. "
yeah no kidding. that's because our terrible foreign policy is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.
karen
August 31st, 2012 at 4:55 pm
A perfect assessment Mike! I second it.
Karen M.
August 31st, 2012 at 5:10 pm
Speaking of Rand Paul, I think he is positioning himself in the only place where he might be able to exert some influence and reasoning on the tired, old thinking of the establishment Republicans. It's like the saying, "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer," I want to believe that Rand Paul is going to find the right times and the right places to bring forth the ideas his father has been preaching for decades. He is well educated, well spoken, and certainly well versed on the ideology of Libertarian viewpoints as well as Republican. As a Ron Paul supporter, I can only hope that Rand will keep the fight going to convince more and more of the Republicans that we must end the wars, we must stop our money from going overseas, and we must bring back sound money. And those are just for starters!
Jaime
September 1st, 2012 at 10:46 am
Nobody is trying to outnumber or even enslave whites. This is the problem when people read too much apocalyptic writings. Rather than thinking about you versus us, you should try to build bridges between civilizations and cultures. And no, people don't hate you because of your freedoms.
L Brantley
September 2nd, 2012 at 7:40 am
I agree, John. In March of '06 a couple of us greybeards from '74 met with Ron and Penny and suggested he consider running for Pres (head shaking no) as an Independent (head shaking more vigorously) since we could see the GOP was going to jackboot itself into obscurity. I think our foresight has proved prescient. After the '88 debacle (I was there) Ron seemed to become more insular and paranoid. I can well imagine after Nadia Hayes, and suffering Eric Dondero Rittberg for a while, you would become a bit more careful, duh. Ron's personnel failures and then paranoid shortsightedness kept him away from people who were his true friends, but not religious, that may be the problem. I don't know if Phil is religious, or you, but it seems to be a blind spot for all who kneel. I don't kneel for anybody or anything. If there were angels and gods on this earth, I believed they arrived in machines, as revealed in Ezekiel. If this doesn't scare you away, contact me at mcrilansing@yahoo.com
Ike_Hall
September 2nd, 2012 at 2:16 pm
Excellent article, Mr. Giraldi. I was a guest of an alternate at the RNC. I read this in Tampa the day after Romney's coronation and the evisceration of the grassroots with the kidnapping of key members of the Rules Committee, followed by the scripted acceptance of the changes to the Rules over what may have been a majority voting them down. I despaired to think that all our work within the GOP had been for naught, and your article raised some important questions about the future of our movement.
Clearly, we are not wanted by the GOP. We are hated, in fact. We must accept and embrace this hatred if we are to continue to be effective and make additional gains through this vehicle, and that's all it is. We have a long way to go but we have triumphed in important ways.
In my county, liberty activists came out in droves during the delegate selection process and forced the leadership to reckon with us. In fact, no establishment Republicans went on in the process without our approval. We also sent a small number of Ron Paul delegates (and a more considerable number of alternates) to Tampa, and they did their duty, despite public opposition from the state GOP chairwoman.
We also managed to get a Ron Pauler elected to the state house (defeating a 16-year incumbent in the primary), kept one of our champions in the legislature, and may yet elect another to the state house in November. We will not abandon our Liberty Republicans, nor will we let them off the hook.
I am also a state coordinator for Campaign for Liberty, and I think your comments on C4L's seeming abandonment of the non-interventionist plank should be well considered. After all, you were a frequent contributor to C4L's foreign policy stance in the early days.
Whether C4L has abandoned the noninterventionist plank must still be determined. If this is the case, it should remove it from the mission statement so the rest of us have no illusions that the organization will pursue it effectively. The remainder of its mission is essential, particularly on the state level. While the national C4L organization may be Fed-obsessed and too closely associated with the now-controversial Rand Paul, there is no need to replicate their mistakes on the state level. Please don't forget, though, that war is principally funded through inflation and that ending the Fed would be an essential step towards a just foreign policy.
We must therefore split what can be done within the C4L and the GOP with what must be done on foreign policy and war, and have no illusions about what can be accomplished either way. How one spends their time in either task is up to them, but it is vital to remain active.
Assuming C4L won't pick it up again, we need an effective pressure organization that focuses solely on an noninterventionist foreign policy, with no other issues clouding our focus. I look forward to participating in such a venture.
RockyRococo
September 3rd, 2012 at 4:51 pm
so now that the antiwar wings of both parties have gotten the boot in the butt from their respective establishments, can antiwar types of left and right, of R and D and no partisan allegiance, begin to have an authentic dialogue based on the understanding that the problem isn't this party or that one, this pol or that one, that the problem is the entire American establishment and the structures it has built on our backs?
REAL NEWS Oct 05 2012 « DaniMartExtras, Too
October 4th, 2012 at 10:23 pm
[...] Where Do We Go Next? – August 29th, 2012 [...]