39 votes

A Dream Dies but the Beat Goes On. Ron Paul and those trying to cash in on his legacy

by Philip Giraldi | Antiwar.com

I am still trying to recover from the Republican Party’s overwhelming failure to understand that only Ron Paul was speaking good sense about the dismal state of U.S. foreign policy. Depending on whom you listen to, however, one might almost think in spite of all evidence to the contrary that the revolution is still going on and just one more tweak will deliver a Brave New World. That is because hardly a day passes without yet another email from the various organizations that are seeking to cash in on the Ron Paul legacy, demonstrating that they have the moxie to continue the fight. The most recent email from John Tate and Campaign for Liberty pledged to do something about drones, the latest empty promise that comes on top of not-quite-achieved victories in auditing the Fed and Pentagon and defending the Internet. Just send $50 or whatever one can spare. We’ll spend it wisely. Really.

In spite of it all, I strongly believe that Dr. Paul’s immense contribution to the political debate forced something of a rethinking of the unfortunate direction that our nation has taken in the past 10 years. His message continues to resonate, if muted, and is worth more than an eventual footnote in a history book. In the area of foreign policy, he alone had the courage to speak out on issues that the other candidates chose to ignore while puffing out their chests, wrapping themselves in the flag, and boasting of “American Exceptionalism.”

The only problem is that many of those who are now crying “legacy,” including Tate and Company, couldn’t have cared less about foreign policy when they might have actually done something to intensify the debate. They obsess about drones in the United States while ignoring their use overseas. They were precisely the folks who failed the campaign or who sold out in the first place. Onward and upward, leaving no man behind has turned into “let us reason together” and let’s “go along to get along.”

Continued at Antiwar.com

I gotta say - I agree with EVERYTHING in this piece. Which is most unusual for any article.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

good article

Thanks for posting.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Anti-war lost it's way

Anti-war lost it's way when it started pandering to the left.

If you don't appreciate what C4L does, don't support them. But I support them and applaud them for providing the tools to materialize Ron Paul's message. The left has NOTHING that compares to C4L.

If you don't seek actualizing LIBERTY FOR ALL, by all means bash C4L.

I see these arguments that people who worked for Ron Paul made MONEY!!! Gasp! They didn't get a lousy government check, so they must be evil because they made a money. Now making money is a bad thing, yet everyone wants to make money.

Frankly, I don't believe anyone working for Ron Paul made as much as people would like to believe. And Ron Paul never discloses, or defends these kind of undermining attacks as he is very private, so his opposition, which are many on the left who want a massive government filled with people who don't make money but simply sustain, so we are all equally poor and in debt.

Those who are working to cash in on Ron Paul is GJ, write-in campaign by Richhard Gilbert trolls, and those who use Ron Paul's name, charge fees for their association.. big list.

Ron Paul is the founder of C4L and activily participating. LONG LIVE C4L!!

TO: The Granger

No, they don't make a "government" check. They make a "donors" check, though, and hence, since we are the corporation, in essence, I think we have a collective right to be critical. It isn't that people within the RP organization "made money". NOONE would expect people to devote 40 hours+ per week for nothing. It's just that after it was disclosed that Benton made a $500,000 killing, we all became very suspicious, rightfully so, of the others on "staff".

If TATE.... feels comfortable earning the amount he does, if that it's not over-kill, then, why not publish it in this forum. WHY NOT? Because he's on the take for a lot more than we all would be comfortable with.

So, stick it, GRANGER! You rationalize a sad position, imho.

Yours is the sad possition

What I mean by government check, is some believe giovernment provides jobs, and they want all job coming from the government. I don't. As for donating to a campaign, you have no right to ask the campaign what they do with the money and if you don't like it, then get a committee seat, and change it.. waving signs in hopes some committee memebr will legislate it is WEAK.

Be critical all you like. If your world is half empty I'm sure you'll find company and have your negative collective.

You have no proof Benton made half a million, so your chose to believe he ripped off the campaign.. why not blame Ron paul, it's his campaign and I'm positive he did what he wanted with the money. Then you can come out of the closet for actually not being for Ron Paul.

It's none of your business what others make.

I think it's great to make money and don't care what Ron Paul paid his staff. What I do care about is people like you who think they owe you something. They don't.

I'm sure you don't like it, because all you're proving to me is that you are a communist for bigger government and no respect for privacy.

The Anti-war

put all their intellectual weight (whatever they may have) on the premise that Zionists were driving US wars. When the wars turned into nations building, opium fields, giving cash to warlords and arming/training muslim police, the original theory became bankrupt.

Not when I was a member

Anti-war was non-partisain and very reliable in getting news about wars America was involved in. It was more against the petro-dollar, fight over oil. During the second Bush administration it changed. Paul Craig Roberts was exceptionally impressive because he was a Reagan Republican who bashed Bush better than any other writer.

A crossoever began of writers from Counter Punch and OpEdNews, Nader began writing for them,.. and anti-war went left. They did Ron Paul no favors in 07/08 and I ended my subscription then, never looked back, well a few times, but was always dissappointed.

I miss the old anti-war.com.

Huh? You're a Ralph Nader

Huh? You're a Ralph Nader voter and now your criticizing antiwar.com for allowing your candidate to write for them?! Very strange but I suppose to a true believer any argument to win.

Way more than a Ralph Nader voter

I dropped the Libertarian party and began registereing "Decline to State Party", AKA an Indy, and I worked with Nader fir three elections on ballot access and open debates for Indy's and third parties. All we won were multible law suits in multible states as both parties worked together to undermine us. In retrospect, what we did was ensure no third party or Indy will ever get to debate or have ballot access. The only way this can happen is if one party or both parties moved from within to open debates and ballots in every state. So along came Ron Paul and I see that as the opportunity. I registered GOP about a year and a half ago, my only regret that I did not register GOP in 07.

My criticism of antiwar has to do with their lack of support for Ron Paul. They could have helped Ron Paul and they did not.

Wow, awesome use of establishment tactics

why don't you just refute something said in the article?

A lot to consider

and ponder, thanks for posting.

Prepare & Share the Message of Freedom through Positive-Peaceful-Activism.