Ron Paul's Jewish Problem, maybe you guys want to comment?

Michelle Malkin's Jewish husband is the Puppet Master shes just a doll who repeats everything he says it's widley known

And I reapeat im not a nazi or a Antisemite .I just Really hate Neocon/Zionist who have hijacked the United States Governmnet by sneaky subversive greedy doggs.

The black community understands Paul's opposition to forced redistribution of wealth.

The financial community understands the destruction of people's savings through inflationary practices.

The military understand that his non-interventionist policy makes the country safer.

The jews should easily comprehend his opposition to a forcible taking of dollars from Americans to be given to any foriegn country.

I think it just needs to be explained more.

"Ron Paul's PROBLEM is that his campaign's willingness to accept support from white supremacists, anti-Semites, and their ilk, renders his campaign unnecessarily, but justifiably, vulnerable to accusations of ideological sympathy for such venomous elements."

why is that justifiable? dr paul is selling a political program and people are buying it - for various reasons about which we know nothing. the moral standing of buyers doesn't affect the seller. by your logic, we should be disgusted at everybody who provides any service to white supremacists or child molesters. i am sure there are murderers donating to other campaigns (as well as paul's). so what? is campaign supposed to return the money to everybody who ever did something immoral?

i mean, i might be willing to consider that it is politically oportune to give the money back. however, i am personally disgusted by that sort of pressure.

I think all our comments should be worded with a minimum of caution so they can never be distorted and cited out of context in the future.

I can think of no better way to lay to rest this particular thread than to refer everybody to Walter Block's authoritative article on www.lewrockwell.com. Walter Block is a Professor at Loyola University, and one of the world's foremost living economists of the "Austrian school". He is as much of an intellectual heavyweight as you'll ever find on Ron Paul's side.

In a nutshell, three of his main points are:
- Cutting off all US financial support to foreign countries (as Ron Paul advocates) would withdraw more money from Israel's enemies than it would withdraw from Israel.
- Abolishing the income tax (as President Paul will do) would stimulate private charity, some of which would be directed to foreign countries, including Israel. The total flow of funds from the US to Israel, if you include private donations, could very easily go up as a result.
- The US government's aid to Israel comes "with strings attached", which implies that the Israelis are not allowed to deal as they see fit with some of the problems they face. Ron Paul's plan is to remove the aid and the strings.

I am obviously not doing justice to Dr. Block's painstakingly researched article, but I just wanted to give a sampler for people who are interested. After having read his pretty thorough article, I don't think there is whole a lot more to add.

The ADL is a very powerful Non-American Nefarious organization they have no loyalty to the United States they have been linked to Espionage.As soon as the first primary is over then eveyone will have to recognize that DR. Paul is for real .He will need to have extra security possibly Secret Service . They assasinated there own Prime Minister who tried to bring peace to Israel .I really hate to lump everyone toghether I don't belive every person of Jewish heritage is out for blood but the NEOCONS,Zionist Christians like Pastor John Hagee these people are sicko's heres a video by a Jewish reporter
This is scary
http://www.youtube.com/wa...

I really think this is bs. RP is not against Jews. He is not an anti-semite. He simply doesn't believe the American taxpayers should pay for ANY foreign countries defense. He is absolutely FOR friendship and cooperation and trade. Israel as a nation is competent. They have very educated citizens, very well-trained military and diverse resources. RP doesn't single them out for 'no aid', he also doesn't want us to support Korea, Germany, etc. Their taxpayer money should support their own countries. Maybe if we actually had money to throw around, we could afford to be generous. Right now, we need to hunker down and get back on a solid financial basis, then we can argue about which countries need/deserve our help. How much "aid" will all of these countries be sending us if our irresponsible foreign policies destroy our currency and bring on a depression? Will they be rebuilding our bridges and paving our roads?

http://ivorypower.com/blo...
http://www.jews4ronpaul.o...

Get serious. The actual money amount of support from white supremacists and from Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites is NOT the issue. The candidate's position on policy towards Israel is NOT the issue.

Ron Paul's PROBLEM is that his campaign's willingness to accept support from white supremacists, anti-Semites, and their ilk, renders his campaign unnecessarily, but justifiably, vulnerable to accusations of ideological sympathy for such venomous elements.

I do not know what PRINCIPLES prevent the Paul campaign from dissociating itself from white supremacism or anti-Semitism---in no uncertain words.

Is the support of such elements essential to the campaign's success? NO.

If contributions or endorsements from such elements can be identified, or are brought to the attention of the campaign managers and the candidate, of course they should be rejected. Extremists are entitled to First Amendment rights but candidates are not obliged to accept their support if offered. Candidates are entitled to, and ought to, exercise good judgment.

Neo-nazi support of Ron Paul, if the public becomes aware of it, will derail the campaign. As we know, word travels fast on the internet. I think it is imperative that the campaign inoculate itself against that lurking virus---by formally and emphatically repudiating any association with or support from white supremacists, neo-nazis, and Holocaust deniers. Don't bother to "screen" donations, but be willing to return contributions if their origin from such elements is confirmed.

The 1924 campaign of Robert M. La Follette was enthusiastically greeted with support from American communists. La Follette, although a civil libertarian, and willing to accept the support of democratic socialists, unequivocally rejected the support of the communists. A valuable precedent.

I know that some who object to this stand will say that many politicians have received support from fringe elements, and anti-American elements, and from racists, without being disturbed about it. Which kind of politician do we want to support?

Dr. Paul's supporters should realize that this question of neo-nazi support is this campaign's ACHILLES HEEL. Please take it seriously.

This is from Pat Buchanan's latest column of 11/09/07.

http://www.humanevents.co...

Those people who believe we must keep Israel on welfare will vote for a different candidate, period. Paul is against all foreign aid, and there's no reason why Israel should be an exception. This is not an anti-Israel position, no matter how AIPAC tries to spin it. We don't give billions of dollars to Canada every year, but no one calls us anti-Canadian. We don't give billions to Poland, but nobody calls us anti-Polish. People who want to send their own money to Israel can do so. But why should an Arab immigrant living in Detroit have to have his tax dollars sent there?

In today's world if your not supporting Israel or any Jewish groups you are automatically anti-semite. Sorry but that's the truth. I am concerned that ADL might start strring up some problems for our man.

"We talk about it all the time—freedom brings diversity. It brings people together. Big government divides us, and we become competitive, and we fight over the spoils."

As quoted in the USN&WR article

The whole idea that I have to give grants to another country while some of my fellow Americans don't have enough food, clothing or shelter is preposterous and evil. It is not that I am for social services either, but it just makes more sense. It is not against Israel, it is pro America.

I am a Jewish Christian American.. I love ISRAEL... Israel is a STRONG COUNTRY.. and does not need the U.S. money..

there is NO DOUBT that when Dr. Paul is president, should Congress declare a war in SUPPORT of Israel... Dr. Paul would excute the war in a winning manner...

of that I HAVE NO DOUBT!

what more could we ask?

The constitution does not provide for support of other countries. Why should an average american, who is basically just making it by be forced to support another country? Better still why should our children be burden with this support when we don't have the money? This policy is insanity, we are the largest debtor nation and were handing out money we don't even have!

Mike
Ron Paul is my HERO!!!

Ron Paul is against foreign aid to Israel, AND EVERY OTHER COUNTRY. How does that make Ron Paul anti-Jewish? American Jews, just as American Christians and American Muslims will all benefit from a Ron Paul presidency. We all want to be free.

As far as Nazi support goes, it seems that every time a neo-Nazi leader is identified, it turns out that he is a "federal informant". I am thinking about the "Reverend" Robert Millar and Andreas Strassmeir, both of the Elohim City neo-Nazi group. It was Andy Strassmeir that McVeigh was trying to call with the famous calling card.

I think the same thing can be said about the KKK. I wonder how much taxpayer money is funneld through the Justice Department to keep these racist and anti-Semitic groups alive.

It's a case of history repeating itself.

At any rate, Ron Paul's message appeals to almost everybody. I don't know how Nazis, who are totalitarians like the Communists, would be attracted to Dr. Paul. I would think that Nazis would be attracted to the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and of course torture. These laws have a lot in common with the Enabling Act passed by the Reichstag to give Hitler the powers he needed to "restore order and make the streets safe".

The current USA foreign policy does not help Israel. A foreign policy of non intervention would help Israel. The Jewish Republicans have probably been hijacked also. I do not think they represent any of my Jewish friends.

Israel can take care of themselves. Americans who wanted to aid Israel would be free to do so. Israeli and Jewish people also want Freedom peace and Prosperity. We are forcing Socialism on them by forcing them to be dependent on Aid.

We tie Israel’s hands, aid her enemies then we give Israel money to balance out the scale.

If there was no foreign intervention in the middle east things in the middle east would be a lot better.

Why do I really dislike to hear the word "Jewish or Jew" spoken as if it is some kind of a Hitler reality. It is such a generality, that it disburses people’s attention away from truth.

If a banker was bad, he is bad; it has nothing to do with who his grandmother was.

Jewish people in general do seem to have a higher rate of excelling at what ever they do. They are second only to the Scottish (hehehehehe). Perhaps 1000 years of turning the other cheek and ending up being butchered had something to do with them learning to think in survival.

So they excel at the piano, at physics, and even do a good job of being a bad banker or corrupted republican .

It is a stupid statement when you put that "JEWISH" in it.

The Jewish Republican Group that banned him made a mistake. I expect you will see their leaders blowing off shortly.

There is no problem, no need to make one out of stupid mistakes of others.

this is an interesting movie that explains why the US should get out and stay out of mideast politics.

http://video.google.com/v...

Ron Paul's platform is basically freedom. That means people can be FREE to be the best they can be. It also means people are free to be idiots.

If a jewish persons loyalty lies with Israel and not their own country then there is not much Paul can do about that. If the jewish person sees themselves as Americans first and "zionists" second then Pauls message should have the same meaning to them as anyone else. ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL... that includes jews... we are all one here in America... except for those that dont put America 1st...

I haven't heard any comment from Ron Paul against the Jewish people or against Israel. Of course that he wants to cut back on American taxpayers money going to support Israel, well that only makes sense. It's called Non- intervention. But that isn't because he wants to pick on Israel, since he wants to cut back on financial support by the U.S. government all around the world. We cannot be the police of the world, nor can or should it be the responsibility of the United States to finance Israel, nor umpteen other countries. Our tax dollars should go to suppport our nation, if individuals want to support Israel, England, Germany, Cuba, Korea, Vietnam ect, ect, ect... then they should be free to do so. Aren't we free to send money or move there to fight? But otherwise Israel is more than capable of supporting themselves, it is a very wealthy and fruitful country. We know they don't need military support, since it is known that they have nuclear weapons and what is considered the best Air Force on earth.
Now if we want to think on terms of religion, then according to the torah, then G_d almighty himself will provide and protect the nation of Israel, if only they put their faith in him, so I don't think they really need money.

I haven't heard any comment from Ron Paul against the Jewish people or against Israel. Of course that he wants to cut back on American taxpayers money going to support Israel, well that only makes sense. It's called Non- intervention. But that isn't because he was to pick on Israel, since he wants to cut back on financial support by the U.S. government all around the world. We cannot be the police of the world, nor can or should it be the responsibility of the United States to finance Israel, nor umpteen other countries. Our tax dollars should go to suppport our nation, if individuals want to support Israel, England, Germany, Cuba, Korea, Vietnam ect, ect, ect... then they should be free to do so. Aren't we free to send money or move there to fight? But otherwise Israel is more than capable of supporting themselves, it is a very wealthy and fruitful country. We know they don't need military support, since it is known that they have nuclear weapons and what is considered the best Air Force on earth.
Now if we want to think on terms of religion, then according to the torah, then G_d almighty himself will provide and protect the nation of Israel, if only they put their faith in him, so I don't think they really need money.

I don't get Zionism. If you believe in Zionism wouldn't you also have to believe in Native Americans taking over the US with their own form of government?

"Paul doesn't have a problem with the Jews, the Jews have a problem with Paul."

No problem at all...

We should stay out of Israel and their problems....

Ron Paul's anti-war stance includes Israel as rightfully it should. America should and must divorce itself from any devotion to foreign countries to the detriment of its own. This is what Ron Paul is advocating. There are many in this country whose allegiance lay elsewhere and it is this type of treachery that has chipped away at our sense of patriotism and love of country and it has weakened us as a nation. There is no room for mixed loyalities once you take the oath to protect American soil and support America's sovereignty. Dr.Paul's message is loud and clear: America first and foremost.

Many people who donate to other campaigns that are bigoted against Arabs, or Koreans, etc. and think we should wipe them out.

McCain sing the bomb Iran song - as if the possibility of killing thousands of Iranians is a good thing (many donors support him and Giuliani on that)

There are people that believe the U.S. should start Armagedon to hasten the rapture that give to other campaigns.

Mormons believe that the native people are decendants of Cain, from Genesis. Should we exclude donations from all mormons ?

I could go on, but you get my Drift.

just move...get out the way....

"Even with his hardline protectionist stance, Paul has managed to garner the support of Jewish Republicans and Libertarians alike, some of whom have banded together to form an ad hoc coalition called Jews for Ron Paul, which condemned the RJC’s decision to bar the Congressman from their Candidate’s Forum."

I believe Aipac does not represent the Jewish peoples as the quote from the article above supports. Aipac is the Israeli equal to the Neocon movement here in America. Aipac members define elitism, as their partner the neocon wing of American Politics.

"According to the Lone Star Times, White Nationalists have become a noticeable source of financial contributions to the Paul campaign. Indeed, even Don Black, the founder of Stormfront, and one of the most notorious neo-Nazis in America, has personally contributed $500 to Paul’s campaign."

"White Nationalists have become a noticeable source of financial contributions to the Paul campaign." Your gonna need to do better than $500 to purchase influence Daniel. This amount of money is what percent of the total funds raised by the Ron Paul campaign?

"Even with his hardline protectionist stance, Paul has managed to garner the support of Jewish Republicans and Libertarians alike, some of whom have banded together to form an ad hoc coalition called Jews for Ron Paul, which condemned the RJC’s decision to bar the Congressman from their Candidate’s Forum."

Why did the RJC bar the candidate Daniel?

"Yet, when his extremist supporters begin providing a substantial amount of campaign funds, things get a bit dicier. And that’s Paul’s biggest problem."

Daniel, substantial is not $500.

"The sad part is that, as a radical libertarian, I somewhat favored Paul as a candidate, though as a libertarian socialist, he is not my ideal choice. Now, I want him out of the running, and frankly, out of the Capitol. Those who pander to White Nationalists and neo-Nazis have no place serving in the United States government, which exists to serve the most ethnically and culturally diverse nation on Earth, which counts among its citizens Jews and Zionists alike."

You lost all credibility with "pandering to White Nationalists" Daniel .

Daniel, we dont run people out of locations and debates. This is why we are voting Ron Paul.

We do not ban points of views either, unlike the RJC.

I hate that phrase, "Jewish Problem". It's reminiscent of terminology used by the Germans. I'm just saying...

I really hate this nonsense argument, that Ron Paul should scrutinize every donor, to make sure they aren't associated with objectionable organizations. I can assure you that other candidates regularly accept checks from unacceptable sources.
Maybe we should examine the contributers to the other campaigns more closely and see what sort of people are giving them money.

Perhaps even racists have other concerns in life, like taxation, monetary policy, the war. Don't they have rights too, regardless of how repugnant their views maybe to us?

Paul doesn't have a problem with the Jews, the Jews have a problem with Paul.

Always the critic and never the criticized. Maybe if they applied some of their defamation to themselves they wouldn't have so much left over for other people.

As far as I have been able to gather, American Jews have very diverse opinions on all aspects of politics, including the Iraq war (I remember listening to a number of Jewish commentators prior to the invasion who were staunchly against the war). In fact, I have read that AIPAC in no way represents a consensus among American Jewry, but rather is backed by a small number of wealthy individuals with one political mindset.

I like to read Haaretz from time to time to get an idea of what is going on in Israel. They appear to be more left-wing, and are certainly not sympathetic to the settler movement nor to Likud. Anyway, one of the commentators from Haaretz, Steve Rosner, has written extensively about the American Presidential candidates, and on whether they would be good or bad for Israel. Here is his take on Ron Paul.

http://www.haaretz.com/ha...

====================================
Does Ron Paul single out Israel?

1.

I first witnessed the energy and dedication of Ron Paul's supporters at the Republican debate in Durham NH, on which I wrote a while ago (my focus in this article was Mike Huckabee). I was standing outside the hall where the debate was about to take place, and was amazed by the number of Paul supporters, and by the enthusiasm they mastered. Back then, Paul did not yet make waves with the surprising fundraising numbers he presented a couple of weeks later (and even more so this week).

I was following Paul (as I do with all candidates) but wasn't paying too much attention. Once in a while I would get a letter: why isn't Ron Paul of your Israel Factor? I got two-three dozens such letters. I even thought for a short while about adding him to the Factor mix, and called some of the panelists for consultation. "What for," they asked. We all know he will rank last, close to zero. This panel will not be the one to praise an assimilationist - or as the call it in Paul?s camp: A Jeffersonian Republican.

Eventually, I've decided against adding him and my response to the complaining readers was always the same: we do not rank all the candidates. Paul didn't seem to be significant enough as a candidate when we started the Factor. Even now, I don't know many experts (or polls) that give him a chance. So we just don't rank him. But I did think that writing about him (and his attitude toward Israel), at least this one time, is worth the effort.

I recall driving from Durham to Boston late at night after the debate, listening to the after-party broadcast (XML radio). Our viewers think that the winner of the debate ? so said the anchor - is Paul. This happened again in the next Republican debate. Paul's supporters can be blamed for many things, but not for being lazy or careless about the political process.

2.

So, what about Paul and Israel?

A candidate that would like to see all foreign aid taken from Israel, to sit idly by as Iran develops nuclear weapons, to abandon Iraq to its fate. "Israel would be better off" and the Israelis "could take care of themselves" if the United States ended its alliance with Israel, he said.

During the Lebanon war last year, he spoke against a House resolution condemning attacks on Israel and supporting Israel?s right to defend itself. He warned that the resolution could lead to an escalation of the war.

On Iran, Paul is the staunchest critic of talk about military action against Iran which he calls "propaganda". He said that "Iran doesn't have a nuke and is nowhere close to getting one, according to the CIA" and that Iran "is hardly a perfect democracy, its system is far superior to most of our Arab allies about which we never complain."

3.

But he also said that he was not in any way hostile to Israel.

He repeatedly stated that "he did not believe that we do Israel any favors and we actually weaken Israel by our constant meddling and intervention." On the issue of foreign aid, his supporters are right when they say that by no means he would single out Israel. Paul opposes American aid and alignment with Israel, and even blames it for attracting terrorist attacks, but says the same thing about American involvement with the governments of Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

When asked by an Arab reporter about America's "blind support" of Israel, Paul responded by saying this was a "good point" but also added that "I could talk about our blind support of Saudi Arabia." In his straight talk column he stated that "It is time to challenge the notion that it is our job to broker peace in the Middle East" (ironically, on this issue the candidate who came closest to express similar view is Rudy Giuliani, the most vocal of Paul?s critics). In regard to Israel and the Iranian threat he said that "nobody's going to touch Israel. Israel would be stronger if Israel had responsibility for themselves. Because I think we hold them back. In the 1980s they went over and took care of a nuclear reactor in Iraq."

No wonder that back in May, a NY Sun writer concluded that "Mr. Paul's approach to foreign policy", is "consistent and betrays no animosity toward Israel or Jews".

4.

And there's the "Lobby" issue. Paul did denounce, more than once, the pro-Israel lobby on Capitol Hill. He said that members of Congress have been "intimidated by the influence of AIPAC" (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee). He also said that "the assumption is that AIPAC is in control of things, and they control the votes, and they get everybody to vote against anything that would diminish the [Iraq] war".

Is this anti-Semitic? Is it biased?

I think it is the obvious price that Israel supporters are paying for being - well - influential. No, AIPAC is not responsible for the war in Iraq. But being a strong lobby comes with a price: the price of being singled out by a libertarian candidate for the Presidency.

5.

Bottom line: as far as I can tell - and spend a long time reading and talking to people about Paul and his positions - the problem with Paul is not his animosity toward Israel. It is his more the general attitude toward the role of America in the world (but this is not an issue I?m going to go into).

So why does it seem as if he deals with Israel more than with many other countries? The reason is simple: Israel's profile in America is high, and the issues of concern to Israel are also those troubling America. One can plausibly suspect that Paul is somewhat more irritated with Israel than with most other countries. But for a candidate opposing foreign aid and any American involvement in the Middle East, this is not an unreasonable annoyance.

(end of Rosner article)
=====================================

My own view is, that many Israelis as well as American Jews may see advantages to a Ron Paul candidacy. They would still have sufficient impact in Congress to guarantee Israel's safety, whereas a non-interventionist policy from Dr. Paul might give Israel a freer hand to pursue policies in its own national interests. I don't believe that the substantial American aid is truly necessary for Israel any longer, and it may be counterproductive, since it may be preventing Israel from achieving lasting, true peace with its neighbors due to competing issues of oil, etc.

when Israel became the 51st state in the union?

I could understand some of the arguments for aid to Israel. However, my question is the same with any aid foreign or domestic. How can you ask money from someone who is in debt? How could one country ask money from another country who does not have it? Could I ask my friend who is broke for money? What universe do I live in?

This question was asked at the fund raising press conference after Nov. 5th.

The stance of the campaign is that they clearly state their position on all the issues and don't waiver them based on who contributes the most. Anyone who contributes knowing Dr. Paul's positions is wasting their money if they believe otherwise. The campaign can't audit each individual contribution as they receive it and do a background check on the contributor for any potential 'crazy' connections they may have.

As far as not returning this guy's phone calls... Dr. Paul has been giving a ton of television interviews lately on top of the rallies and fulfilling his duties as a Congressman (notice most interviews are right outside the Capitol as he's leaving for the day). The fact that he hasn't returned this guy's call... he needs to get over it. Don't get so offended just because someone doesn't think you're as important as you may think you are.

And he gave birth to Satan too!