According to ex-Paul Senior Aide, Ron Paul is not anti-semitic just anti-Israel - Can an 'anti-Israel' Candidate win the election against obama? Isn't obama anti-Israel too?

Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy 2011/12/29 23:17:57
Yes - of course an 'anti-Israel' candidate can win
No - Paul can't carry the Jewish vote and will lose to obama
None of the above
Add Photos & Videos

Written By : Eric Dondero

Fmr. Senior Aide, US Cong. Ron Paul, 1997 – 2003
Campaign Coordinator, Ron Paul for Congress, 1995/96
National Organizer, Draft Ron Paul for President, 1991/92
Travel Aide/Personal Asst. Ron Paul, Libertarian for President

I have been asked by various media the last few days for my comments, view of the current situation regarding my former boss Ron Paul, as he runs for the presidency on the Republican ticket.

I’ve noticed in some media that my words have been twisted and used for an agenda from both sides. And I wish to set the record straight with media that I trust and know will get the story right: conservative/libertarian-conservative bloggers.

Is Ron Paul a “racist.” In short, No. I worked for the man for 12 years, pretty consistently. I never heard a racist word expressed towards Blacks or Jews come out of his mouth. Not once. And understand, I was his close personal assistant. It’s safe to say that I was with him on the campaign trail more than any other individual, whether it be traveling to Fairbanks, Alaska or Boston, Massachusetts in the presidential race, or across the congressional district to San Antonio or Corpus Christi, Texas.

He has frequently hired blacks for his office staff, starting as early as 1988 for the Libertarian campaign. He has also hired many Hispanics, including his current District staffer Dianna Gilbert-Kile.

One caveat: He is what I would describe as “out of touch,” with both Hispanic and Black culture. Ron is far from being the hippest guy around. He is completely clueless when it comes to Hispanic and Black culture, particularly Mexican-American culture. And he is most certainly intolerant of Spanish and those who speak strictly Spanish in his presence, (as are a number of Americans, nothing out of the ordinary here.)

Is Ron Paul an Anti-Semite? Absolutely No. As a Jew, (half on my mother’s side), I can categorically say that I never heard anything out of his mouth, in hundreds of speeches I listened too over the years, or in my personal presence that could be called, “Anti-Semite.” No slurs. No derogatory remarks.

He is however, most certainly Anti-Israel, and Anti-Israeli in general. He wishes the Israeli state did not exist at all. He expressed this to me numerous times in our private conversations. His view is that Israel is more trouble than it is worth, specifically to the America taxpayer. He sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs.

Again, American Jews, Ron Paul has no problem with. In fact, there were a few Jews in our congressional district, and Ron befriended them with the specific intent of winning their support for our campaign. (One synagogue in Victoria, and tiny one in Wharton headed by a well-known Jewish lawyer).

On the incident that’s being talked about in some blog media about the campaign manager directing me to a press conference of our opponent Lefty Morris in Victoria to push back on Anti-Jewish charges from the Morris campaign, yes, that did happen. The Victoria Advocate described the press conference very accurately. Yes, I was asked (not forced), to attend the conference dressed in a Jewish yarlmuke, and other Jewish adornments.

There was another incident when Ron finally agreed to a meeting with Houston Jewish Young Republicans at the Freeport office. He berated them, and even shouted at one point, over their un-flinching support for Israel. So, much so, that the 6 of them walked out of the office. I was left chasing them down the hallway apologizing for my boss.

Is Ron Paul a homo-phobe? Well, yes and no. He is not all bigoted towards homosexuals. He supports their rights to do whatever they please in their private lives. He is however, personally uncomfortable around homosexuals, no different from a lot of older folks of his era.

There were two incidents that I will cite, for the record. One that involved me directly, and another that involved another congressional staffer or two.

(I am revealing this for the very first time, and I’m sure Jim Peron will be quite surprised to learn this.)

In 1988, Ron had a hardcore Libertarian supporter, Jim Peron, Owner of Laissez Faire Books in San Francisco. Jim set up a magnificent 3-day campaign swing for us in the SF Bay Area. Jim was what you would call very openly Gay. But Ron thought the world of him. For 3 days we had a great time trouncing from one campaign event to another with Jim’s Gay lover. The atmosphere was simply jovial between the four of us. (As an aside we also met former Cong. Pete McCloskey during this campaign trip.) We used Jim’s home/office as a “base.” Ron pulled me aside the first time we went there, and specifically instructed me to find an excuse to excuse him to a local fast food restaurant so that he could use the bathroom. He told me very clearly, that although he liked Jim, he did not wish to use his bathroom facilities. I chided him a bit, but he sternly reacted, as he often did to me, Eric, just do what I say. Perhaps “sternly” is an understatement. Ron looked at me directly, and with a very angry look in his eye, and shouted under his breath: “Just do what I say NOW.”

The second incident involved one or two other staffers many years later at the BBQ in Surfside Beach. I was not in direct presence of the incident. But another top staffer, and I believe one of our secretaries, was witnessed to it. This top staffer adores Ron, but was extremely insulted by his behavior, I would even say flabbergasted to the point of considering resigning from his staff over it.

“Bobby,” a well-known and rather flamboyant and well-liked gay man in Freeport came to the BBQ. Let me stress Ron likes Bobby personally, and Bobby was a hardcore campaign supporter. But after his speech, at the Surfside pavilion Bobby came up to Ron with his hand extended, and according to my fellow staffer, Ron literally swatted his hand away.

Again, let me stress. I would not categorize that as “homo-phobic,” but rather just unsettled by being around gays personally. Ron, like many folks his age, very much supports toleration, but chooses not to be around gays on a personal level. It’s a personal choice. And though, it may seem offensive to some, he has every right in my mind to feel and act that way.

Finally, let me make a couple observations. The liberal media is ferociously attacking Ron this morning, on everything from the Newsletters to his various PACs. I’m amused at how off-base they all are. If they are looking for something that went un-explained after many years, it’s the Nadia Hayes incident from the end of the presidential campaign in 1988. I personally am still a little ticked off by this, and surprised that nobody has ever followed up on it. In brief, Nadia was Ron’s longtime business/campaign manager in the 1980s. On the very last day of the presidential campaign, attorneys, accountants, and even Nassau Bay police dept. investigation officials stormed into our campaign office, sealed everything off, rushed us campaign staffers into the storeroom (literally), and for hours on end ruffled through the entire campaign records, file cabinets, and other papers.

Lew Rockwell and Burton Blumert were there too. We were greatly surprised by this. Nadia was eventually convicted of embezzlement and went to jail for 6 months, plus had to pay $140,000 in restitution to Ron.

There were rumors at the time, and long thereafter, that Lew and Burt had pinned it all on Nadia, and that they had their own reasons for the “coup.” For years afterwards, Rockwell, and Blumert had complete control of Ron’s enterprises through Jean McIver and (former JBS/Jesse Helms fundraiser) David “James” Mertz of northern Virginia.

It was easy to pin it all on Nadia. She lived extravagantly, and her husband who owned a boat repair business in Clear Lake, had recently had some serious financial problems.

Nadia never resurfaced, and was never heard from again.

I will attest, that when campaign consultant Tony Payton died of heart failure, in 2002 I believe, I specifically asked Ron if I could look Nadia up, and contact her to let her know that her longtime friend had died, and he reacted sternly to me, expressing that he did not want me to do that, and if I did, there would be serious consequences. I was shocked. And this was one of the reasons I eventually left his staff.

On one other matter, I’d like to express in the strongest terms possible, that the liberal media are focusing in on entirely the wrong aspects regarding controversies on Ron Paul.

It’s his foreign policy that’s the problem; not so much some stupid and whacky things on race and gays he may have said or written in the past.

Ron Paul is most assuredly an isolationist. He denies this charge vociferously. But I can tell you straight out, I had countless arguments/discussions with him over his personal views. For example, he strenuously does not believe the United States had any business getting involved in fighting Hitler in WWII. He expressed to me countless times, that “saving the Jews,” was absolutely none of our business. When pressed, he often times brings up conspiracy theories like FDR knew about the attacks of Pearl Harbor weeks before hand, or that WWII was just “blowback,” for Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy errors, and such.

I would challenge him, like for example, what about the instances of German U-boats attacking U.S. ships, or even landing on the coast of North Carolina or Long Island, NY. He’d finally concede that that and only that was reason enough to counter-attack against the Nazis, not any humanitarian causes like preventing the Holocaust.

There is much more information I could give you on the sheer lunacy of his foreign policy views. Let me just concentrate on one in specific. And I will state this with absolute certainty:

Ron Paul was opposed to the War in Afghanistan, and to any military reaction to the attacks of 9/11.

He did not want to vote for the resolution. He immediately stated to us staffers, me in particular, that Bush/Cheney were going to use the attacks as a precursor for “invading” Iraq. He engaged in conspiracy theories including perhaps the attacks were coordinated with the CIA, and that the Bush administration might have known about the attacks ahead of time. He expressed no sympathies whatsoever for those who died on 9/11, and pretty much forbade us staffers from engaging in any sort of memorial expressions, or openly asserting pro-military statements in support of the Bush administration.

On the eve of the vote, Ron Paul was still telling us staffers that he was planning to vote “No,” on the resolution, and to be prepared for a seriously negative reaction in the District. Jackie Gloor and I, along with quiet nods of agreement from the other staffers in the District, declared our intentions to Tom Lizardo, our Chief of Staff, and to each other, that if Ron voted No, we would immediately resign.

Ron was “under the spell” of left-anarchist and Lew Rockwell associate Joe Becker at the time, who was our legislative director. Norm Singleton, another Lew Rockwell fanatic agreed with Joe. All other staffers were against Ron, Joe and Norm on this, including Lizardo. At the very last minute Ron switched his stance and voted “Yay,” much to the great relief of Jackie and I. He never explained why, but I strongly suspected that he realized it would have been political suicide; that staunchly conservative Victoria would revolt, and the Republicans there would ensure that he would not receive the nomination for the seat in 2002. Also, as much as I like to think that it was my yelling and screaming at Ron, that I would publicly resign if he voted “No,” I suspect it had a lot more to do with Jackie’s threat, for she WAS Victoria. And if Jackie bolted, all of the Victoria conservatives would immediately turn on Ron, and it wouldn’t be pretty.

If you take anything from this lengthy statement, I would hope that it is this final story about the Afghanistan vote, that the liberal media chooses to completely ignore, because it doesn’t fit their template, is what you will report.

If Ron Paul should be slammed for anything, it’s not some silly remarks he’s made in the past in his Newsletters. It’s over his simply outrageously horrendous views on foreign policy, Israel, and national security for the United States. His near No vote on Afghanistan. That is the big scandal. And that is what should be given 100 times more attention from the liberal media, than this Newsletter deal.

Eric Dondero, Publisher

Read More: http://rightwingnews.com/election-2012/statement-f...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest

  • Charles E 2012/01/05 22:01:52
    None of the above
    Charles E
    Any candidate who criticizes the racist state of Israel will be label anti-Semitic, no matter what rational thought led to that criticism.

    The Jewish vote and financial support will go predominately to Democrats, no matter what a Republican candidate might say, so there are almost no votes lost.
  • joe ramirez 2012/01/01 02:55:14
    No - Paul can't carry the Jewish vote and will lose to obama
    joe ramirez
    Any canidate that is anti Israel will NOT get my vote!
  • bob 2011/12/31 23:09:03
    Barry won and that Muslim Bastard is Anti Israel and Anti Christian, Paul is an Anti Semite and the World does not need 4 More Years of stupidity and Failed Foriegn policies.
  • Bob, the reasonable one 2011/12/31 19:05:49
    None of the above
    Bob, the reasonable one
    Of course a candidate can win without the Jewish vote....however any Jew that votes for Ron Paul is an absolute idiot.....
  • Charles R. Anderson 2011/12/31 05:53:28
    Yes - of course an 'anti-Israel' candidate can win
    Charles R. Anderson
    Proof is that Oama won, despite being anti-Israel. However, Ron Paul will not win because he is so nearly an isolationist and he is naive on foreign affairs and defense issues. He makes some good points, but carries his responses to excess. He is also too socially conservative to match his rather leftist foreign and defense policy. Otherwise, he is good on most domestic issues and he will slash our extremely bloated government.
  • Ken 2011/12/31 05:48:14
    None of the above
    Paul is a fringe candidate with no chance to win.
  • none 2011/12/31 04:49:14
  • Ms. Mom... none 2011/12/31 04:59:11
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    Who is "they" ??
  • none Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 05:05:00
  • Ms. Mom... none 2011/12/31 06:26:11
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    Since I wrote the poll - I know what I said - who is "they"?
  • none Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 06:50:37
  • TommyB 2011/12/31 04:25:32
    None of the above
    This is actually a two-fer. 1)Is Obama anti-Israel? 2) Can an anti-Israel candidate defeat Obama.

    1)Obama's actions appear to be anti-Israel. I would have to answer "Yes" to this questiion.

    2)Can an anti-Israel candidate defeat Obama? To that I would have to answer a resounding "No." The conservative Christian voting block is generally supportive of Israel and most would never vote for a candidate with antipathy towards the Israelies. I believe this voting block is large enough to seriously influence the outcome of the elections.
  • Ms. Mom... TommyB 2011/12/31 05:00:21
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    So I must conclude that you think Ron Paul should not be the nominee.
  • TommyB Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 14:39:15
    Roger that.
  • Dogzebra~PWCM~JLA 2011/12/31 04:21:33
    None of the above
    Anyone can get elected to any office if they know the proper song and dance and have enough money to pay their way. As soon as they get into office, the lying commences and our government gets bigger and nastier.

    If we can't support Israel why even bother with the rest of the world? After all they all pretty much hate our nation as it is.
  • Ms. Mom... Dogzebr... 2011/12/31 05:01:21
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    So ask the question -- where have all the good journalists gone?
  • Alphalily 2011/12/31 03:58:01
    None of the above
    Yes , I consider Obama anti-Israel , although I am sure he does not formally declare that as his stance .Paul will lose because he has declared too many crazy , and racist statements . All of this is bound to be his let down .
  • Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2011/12/31 03:44:15
    None of the above
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    Being against entangling alliances, doesn't make one "anti" anywhere.
  • Ms. Mom... Brian ☮... 2011/12/31 04:02:11 (edited)
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    How do you explain Paul's unwillingness to vote for a declaration from Congress opposing the bombing of civilian Israeli markets by Palestinians and/or Hamas?
  • Brian ☮... Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 04:08:45
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    How about, it's none of our freakin business.
  • TommyB Brian ☮... 2011/12/31 04:27:06
    It's our business when a candidate is running for the planet's highest office.
  • Brian ☮... TommyB 2011/12/31 04:40:18
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    This is America, not the planet, and a declaration of ANYTHING not related to the governance of this nation, from members of our government, has nothing whatsoever to do with the governance of our nation. Just what don't you understand about NO ENTANGLING ALLIANCES??? Israel can take care of itself, without some nonsensical and ultimately meaningless "declaration" from us.
  • TommyB Brian ☮... 2011/12/31 04:46:44
    Nice avatar. Self portrait?
  • Brian ☮... TommyB 2011/12/31 04:51:40
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    See the red circle around it, and the diagonal through it? That's made specially for people like you.
  • Ms. Mom... Brian ☮... 2011/12/31 05:07:08
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    No, your avatar is symbolic of America if people like you don't admit the reality of the world.
  • Brian ☮... Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 05:17:09
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    The reality of the world is WE CAN'T AFFORD TO BE ITS COPS!!
  • Ms. Mom... Brian ☮... 2011/12/31 05:20:00 (edited)
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    The reality is which I have explicity defined for you is ... We need to protect our oil interests which includes sweet crude in the middle east ... "If" you want to maintain your lifestyle... and fly planes.. (which is why obama is selling weapons to Saudi Arabia) ... Otherwise, you can just go apply to work in a sweatshop in Beijing.. K?

    P.S. - I find it sad that I am defending the actions of the current jolly green giant marxist in the whitehouse when it comes to foreign policy .... and completely riled by the bull crap spewed by "blow"fish Ron Paul - a leading Republican candidate! I guess you want to see Obama re-elected?
  • Brian ☮... Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 05:35:10
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    Just what makes you think that the crude oil we have as yet untapped (estimated to be greater than that of the whole of the middle east) right here in America, would be somehow lesser that the oil we obtain from that part of the world??

    P.S. - I find it sad that, knowing we're going down the tubes economically, you would continue to support anyone other than Ron Paul. I guess more of the same and endless war is what you want...how sad for our country.
  • Ms. Mom... Brian ☮... 2011/12/31 05:45:07
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    You don't understand the difference in grade. We don't have ample supplies of Sweet Crude - the easiest to refine and the best for jet fuel - highest yield of long-carbon chain fuels - So far, Shale oil does not make good jet fuel.

    Now, with regard to your economy point. I understand the issues very well..

    I keep asking this question and no one will answer it....

    What is Ron Paul's position on the $60 Trillion dollar unfunded future entitlement outlays? This is the PROBLEM. Anybody can cut a Trillion out of a budget in excess of $12 Trillion - it is the promises we can't keep!

    So you can aupine all day long... What is Paul's solution - nothing, nada, zip!

    At least Newt understands the problems and has offered solutions as a point of conversation instead of running around calling Bachmann a "muslim hater" and Santorum a "gay hater"...

  • Brian ☮... Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 12:10:43 (edited)
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    I would laugh if your utter ignorance, and wholesale purchase of deceit wasn't so stunning.

    The crude available in the Bakken formation is some of the best light sweet crude available anywhere, and it's plentiful. Don't believe me? Here's a couple links:



    But hey, why pay any attention to the USGS, and American oil producers who want to open up production...right?

    Newt Romney, are you serious?? A known liar, flip flopper, and backstabber, only free of prison by the good graces, or fear of exposure of their own duplicitous acts, of his fellow lying backstabbers in congress...and you believe a word he says. You have a mighty high delusional quotient.

    You mean Bachmann DOESN'T want to continue useless costly wars in the middle east?/ Or that Santorum DOESN'T want to deny gay people the same rights afforded to straight people?? Yep, that delusional quotient of yours is overwhelming...and you have the audacity to call me ignorant...unbelievable.

    I know it can be hard to accept legislators that actually tell the truth about issues and the people they work with...indeed, how sad for us all, that there are people as ignorant as you.
  • Freedom... Brian ☮... 2011/12/31 09:14:45
    Freedom Mom
    Yes the US has top grade oil, Listen to Lindsey Williams on You Tube. He also wrote a book called the NON OIL CRISIS!!!
  • Ms. Mom... Brian ☮... 2011/12/31 05:05:43
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    Are you one who is willing to relinquish America's SuperPower status as consequence to Ron Paul's inability to protect the world's oil interests, acquiescing control of the world's oil reserves to China?
  • Brian ☮... Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 05:16:01
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    It's not our job to "protect the world's oil interests", and we have plenty of oil right here in America, so we wouldn't be acquiescing "the world's oil reserves" to anybody.
  • Ms. Mom... Brian ☮... 2011/12/31 05:46:24
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    You are wrong about sweet crude.
  • Brian ☮... Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 12:11:40
    Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    Sorry for your delusion, no I'm not.
  • Chokmah 2011/12/31 03:44:14
    None of the above
    Ron Paul is not anti-Israel, but is indifferent to Israel. Ron Paul wants to put America and Americans first, not any foreign nation. The spin doctors and anti-semites out there are trying to twist this into, "Anyone who is not for Israel must be anti-Israel".

    Nothing could be further from the Truth. Ron Paul is pro-Israel through his principle of non-interference. The Jewish vote always goes to the Democrats anyway.
  • Ms. Mom... Chokmah 2011/12/31 04:06:28
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    No. Ron Paul wants America to be Isolationist with regard to foreign policy... which means we will not be protecting our oil interests around the world which means China will! Duh!

    No. Ron Paul can't even bring himself to vote FOR a resolution from Congress condemning the bombing of civilian markets in Israel by Palestianians and/or Hamas... What gives?

    No. The Jewish vote will NOT go democratic this time... unless Paul is the Republican nominee... is that your goal?

    Since when has the Republican party ever had in their platform to legalize narcotics? never! why? Because it would make America less productive as a nation!
  • Chokmah Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 04:19:05
    RP is non-interventionist, not isolationist.. which is the principle America was founded on.. read the Constitution.

    America should develop its own vast oil and gas reserves in the Oil Shale of the Bakken deposits and the vast natural gas deposits all across America. As well as to restart drilling in the Gulf. America has more oil reserves than ALL of the Middle East!

    Narcotics are already legalized in the form of Oxycodone. Millions of Americans are addicted to these legal painkillers and more Americans die from LEGAL drugs like percocet, oxycontin, and Xanax than die from ALL illegal drugs combined.

    Stop enriching the greedy pharmaceuticals and legalize all drugs.. stop the insane Drug War that has confined more people to prison than the Soviet Gulag ever did. The current Drug War is just another way to practice racism against the black and minority Americans.
  • Ms. Mom... Chokmah 2011/12/31 06:33:55
    Ms. Mom - profits employ, taxes destroy
    (1) matter of symantics... Ron Paul will NOT protect America's oil interests around the world which are integral to our safety - period.. shale oil does not produce the same quality jet fuel - need sweet crude baby!
    (2) No one has said America should not develop its' own oil preserves - go for it - it just won't fly our planes!
    (3) So obviously that is your passion - legalizing narcotics... so, should percocet, etc.. be available without prescription - because that is what you are proposing.

    Great - that will do wonders for the GDP - legalize narcotics and get all of America hooked. You can't 'legalize' some and not others... without prescription that is.
  • Chokmah Ms. Mom... 2011/12/31 14:25:12 (edited)
    America is hooked on foreign oil.. make America go cold turkey, get off the stuff, and develop its own resources. We have sweet crude here in our country.

    I never said that to legalize drugs would allow narcotics to be obtained without a prescription, and neither has Ron Paul. Percocet is legal but must be obtained with a prescription, the same would apply to heroin and other drugs.

    Instead of whining about what you don't know, check the facts for yourself. You'll see that deaths from overdoses due to oxycodone based products... all legal.... exceeds deaths from heroin and crack, both illegal drugs.

    Besides, it would still be up to the individual states to decide if they wanted to make something illegal. It is not the purview of the United States to get involved in regulating drugs.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2016/02/13 09:01:23

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals