Naomi Wolf Praises Ron Paul, Part I

One of the great advantages of living in Boston is that many great writers come by to speak about their books at the Harvard Coop. Tonight I went to listen to Naomi Wolf discuss her latest book The End of America - A Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot. If you read only one book between now and the election, this is the book. Even during a period when I am so busy and cannot seem to find the time nor the attention to finish any books, I devoured this one in two days.

While listening to her speak, she sounded exactly like Dr. Paul. "We need to restore the rule of law and get back to the Constitution," were her exact words. Below is a video of talk she gave in Seattle just a few days ago which mirrors closely the talk she gave this evening. Tonight however, she made a point that Ron Paul had just introduced the American Freedom Agenda Act, and noted how very important this piece of legislation is.

After her talk, as I was speaking to her about Ron Paul and the Daily Paul, the strangest thing happened: I began to cry. Why and how this happened, I don't know. She was kind and gracious and didn't make me feel like an idiot. But she did tell me about a recent blog post she'd written: American Tears. Apparently it is not uncommon for people to cry when talking to her.

It is clear from this inundation of personal stories of abuse and retribution against ordinary Americans that a network of criminal behavior and intention is catching up more and more mainstream citizens in its grasp. It is clear that this is not democracy as usual -- or even the corruption of democracy as usual. It is clear that we will need more drastic action than emails to Congress.

The people I am hearing from are conservatives and independents as well as progressives. The cardinal rule of a closing or closed society is that your alignment with the regime offers no protection; in a true police state no one is safe.

I will have more to say about this in the future, including a more complete review of her book. At the moment, the hour is getting late. In the meantime, please watch the above presentation, buy and read The End of America, and help spread the message. Ms. Wolf clearly and forcefully articulates just how serious things are becoming in this country, and just how late the hour is. The warning - the same warning that Dr. Paul has been sounding for 30 years - is not simply bi-partisan, but trans-partisan. This transcends politics altogether.

She made the very strong point that no one is going to save us. More than once she said we need a revolution, and the only ones who can do it is us - we the people, as the founders intended.

More information from organizations she recommended:

http://www.americanfreedo...
http://www.americanfreedo...

At the end of the evening, as chance would have it, she told me she'd be having a positive blog post coming out tomorrow on Ron Paul! And as luck would have it, because I'm up late, here it is!

See Part II here: http://dailypaul.com/node...

Comment viewing options

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

Naomi Wolf

I keep thinking of how amazing it was to hear a liberal lady say that she now understands why we NEED the 2nd Ammendment and how important it is!! There are people who will listen to a liberal feminist who won't listen to anyone else and they need to hear what Ms. Wolf is saying. Go, Naomi Wolf!! You are in my prayers.

You can go to his website and see where he said he is no longer running for President. He is going to use the money he had left to help other candidates who are running for various offices - like congress! - who share his (and OUR) philosophy. He has star

When the house is on fire, don't worry about trivia

During the Clinton Administration, the Free Congress Foundation had a TV show about Liberty and the host was surprised about many things she was allies with the ACLU on.

I will have to get this book.

You forget that liberals are not evil, but misguided. Pols pander to that.

I posted on her blog the problem. To elaborate here, she is bothered about the rule of law and power. The problem is when something urgent is to be done, too many allow the Rule of Law to be bent or broken to get the urgent good end.

But law and liberty must overarch pragmatism, even in emergencies. If someone needs money to save their life, we don't let that be a defense against robbery.

Yet starting with FDR (and perhaps before, she noted Wilson), the idea was to pack the Supreme Court. It eventually came up with Roe v. Wade. It was an atrocity to law and reason, but did what some wanted. But the law itself was crippled. Don't amend, pack the court. Don't debate, argue, and reason to get laws enacted, pack the court. Where was the rule of law then?

Same with Federalism. 50 states can't all be fascist, but one federal government can.

The question she will eventually have to answer - and realizing the 2nd amendment was important, even vital there is hope - is whether she wants true liberty which can only be had with a limited central government - or whether she won't mind all those evil things as long as Hillary is dictatrix.

She assumes power doesn't corrupt, so you can have the big warfare-welfare state that can control even association (like the civil rights act - surveillance for drugs whatever?) or will she allow individuals to be really free. The same liberty to read that hardcover on the plane would also allow mein kampf.

Or as I keep trying to tell my rightwing associates, give no power to Bush which you would not give to Hillary.

Conversely, where was Naomi when Bill Clinton had the IRS audit conservative organizations? During his war? If "THE LIST" didn't include her, but was switched to conservatives under a Hillary Clinton administration, would she mind?

If she thinks this through, and give her time - it takes a while to follow truth to its end - she will support Ron Paul over every frontline democrat candidate.

Both liberals and conservatives will lose if we go fascist.

tread lightly given her

tread lightly

given her background, why is it I'm waiting for the sucker punch?

Michael Nystrom's picture

Why you're waiting for the sucker punch

I just finished watching the video. Please, watch it, listen, compare what she is saying to what Ron Paul says. Our country, our liberty, our freedom is slipping away from us before our very eyes and we - some of us - cannot bear to hear it if it comes from someone the media has painted as a "liberal."

Why are you - and many others - waiting for the sucker punch? Because we've been led to believe, and been so deeply steeped in the false dichotomy of left/right, liberal/conservative, republican/democrat - as though we have nothing in common with one another anymore as AMERICANS. Who has foisted this false dichotomy upon us? The MSM. Why have they done it? It is destabilizing. It gets us fighting one another, mistrusting one another, suspicious of one another to the point that we no longer trust one another. xd9fan's comment is the perfect example of this, and shows that the strategy is working.

The night before I went to go see Ms. Wolf speak at the Harvard Coop, I invited an acquaintance to come along - an older man who was sympathetic to Ron Paul. No, he said, he didn't want to come along, because he "knew" Ms. Wolf to be a "feminist" and a "liberal." His mind was closed after getting its fill of spoon-fed ideas from the MSM.

Wake up people!!!!!!! Why do they do this? United we are so strong! Divided we are weak and easy to defeat as we become engulfed in petty squabbles and disputes among ourselves. Please, read my comment below. Anyone who loves freedom and liberty is welcome to the revolution.

Remember Ron Paul's words: The liberty message unites us - it does not divide us.

Michael Nystrom

All art is only done by the individual. The individual is all you ever have, and all schools only serve to classify their members as failures. E.H.

A new way to unite us

Read and forward on celebrities reading the declaration of independence
www.supportthetruth.org

Good sign

To me, this is a good sign. Naomi is one of those people that the liberal extreme tend to listen to. If she is touting Ron Paul then that means there will be a lot of hardcore Democrats listening. If you are someone that is trying to reach someone that is pretty heavily entrenched in the liberal politics, this is another talking point that you can use to get them to at least listen to Ron.

When you look at what Ron Paul says and the issues he addresses, most of the ones that he will be able to hit the hardest by just being President are ones that will resonate with liberals as well as conservatives. Liberals will conflict with his domestic policies, but most of those he will not be able to enact on his own and certainly not in a short amount of time. Ask them what is more pressing - fixing our loss of freedom and deadly foreign policies, or worrying about the Dept of Education possibly going away in the next 10 years.

Naomi Wolf

I have another concern about Naomi. She seems to be promoting Hillary; one of the biggest liars and criminals of any candidate. As I do believe in all that Naomi is promoting on this speech, perhaps she needs to re-evaluate her positions and make sure she's not selling out America in a different way. Perhaps she'd like to continue wars, keep giving 30 billion of America's taxpayer dollars each year to Israel, and continue to kill our young soldiers because of someone else's agenda. It's all part of the same big scam Naomi, and you can't have one without the other.

She needs to put her money where her mouth is!.....at least her vote.

Bob W., Naples, FL

Selective Kosher History

She pats Billary on the back for being"against" the War. Give me a break. Do not trust this Wolf in Sheep's clothing. Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are the only candidates that will end this fiasco War! But Kucinich is a Marxist at heart. Another observation is that she overuses the "fascist" label like the neocons & FoxNews! She mentions the "blackshirts" (Mussolini) and "brownshirts" (Hitler) but VERY selectively doesn't even mention the MO of the most ruthless leaders in World history.....Mao & Stalin who killed millions. But they always seem to mention Hitler as the bad guy! Hitler couldn't hold a candle to these two. This is a typical ploy of the Marxists! So now everyone in the Ron Paul Nation will view this and go along with her. Not me! It is impossible to hold Ron Paul and Billary's hand up in the air simultaneously....they are extreme polar opposites. While she made some valid points, a marxist is a marxist! Marxists push the redistribution of wealth which is anti-Libertarian.

http://bulletin.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=141219

Please, Daily Paul, do your homework on what you post as worthy material.

Go Ron Paul!

Naomi

I too think I would be a little cautious about Naomi; she is a Rhodes Scholar, as was Bill Clinton and many other notables, I believe that they are educated to espouse a Globalist world view. She also used to work for Al Gore. The fact that she supports Ron Paul's recent initiative is a good thing on its face, but I always like to tread cautiously where someone with her background is concerned. Remember, there is a whole establishment that does not want to see him elected and will stop at nothing to keep their power. I also wonder why someone of such a superior education continually refers to the United States as a democracy? Certainly she would have to have been corrected on this fact alone at some point....this could very well be intentional!

"Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom." Patrick Henry

I did!

I read it and she says she's a Democrat and apparently won't be switching to vote for Ron. I also watched her video til 3:30 a.m. and she seems to elude to liking Hillary for our next president. If that's the case, she loses much credibility with me......not on the issues that she discusses on the video however....she is very accurate on that.

Bob W., Naples, FL

Michael Nystrom's picture

Trans-partisan

I have read the blog link carefully. She does say that she is a Democrat, but goes on to say:

I am not a voter on his [Ron Paul's] side of the ballot -- but I will move heaven and earth to support the passage of this lifesaving agenda.

And also:

Put aside your partisan ideal world -- sometimes issues simply transcend partisanship -- and if ever there is an issue that is above and separate from party politics, it is the restoration of the democratic system we inherited. There are good people and passionate patriots across the political spectrum.

-------

She is speaking to Democrats - the Huffington Post is a liberal haunt - but this includes Republicans as well.

I was at her talk at the Harvard Coop last night, and I found her presentation to be thoughtful, passionate and sincere. I am about 10 minutes into the above video and it seems to follow very closely - nearly verbatim - the presentation I heard her give. I have not heard her - at least in this presentation, nor in her blog post that is linked here - give any kind of endorsement to Hillary whatsover.

In fact, last night she said that we have to restore the Constitution and the rule of law so that the next president - even if it is Hillary or Obama or Giuliani - cannot abuse these powers.

Let us please try to move beyond this false dichotomy of Left/Right, Republican/Democrat when it comes to issues as serious as this one. This false dichotomy is something that has been foisted upon us by the media to get us fighting one another and destabilize the fabric of our nation. We are Americans before we are Republicans or Democrats.

Anyone who loves freedom, liberty and the rule of law is one of us and is welcome to the revolution. Remember what Ron Paul always says, "Thank you for inviting me to your revolution!"

Now that may seem funny and quaint, like he is making a joke, but I have thought about this for some time, and what I realize is that he is not joking at all. What he is telling us is that we have the power, and we've had it all along!

So Naomi Wolf calls herself a Democrat. So what? I listen to her words and I hear another concerned American, just like me, and like everyone else here. So let's welcome her, and everyone who is concerned - regardless of how they label themselves - to the new revolution!

Michael Nystrom
Editor
www.dailypaul.com

All art is only done by the individual. The individual is all you ever have, and all schools only serve to classify their members as failures. E.H.

Michael on Naomi

I also know that the "Party" is irrelevant and that it only comes down to the person. The Parties are essentially the same: both controlled by the few and powerful. What I am saying is that there is only one candidate that has the true intentions of restoring the Republic, and that is Ron Paul. If she truly wants to help this country, not just half-way, she should change Parties to vote for Ron....period. As I've said in many other posts on your outstanding website, there are talkers and there are doers. She is talking to help the cause, but is a hypocrit when it comes to doing it. I'm not suggesting switching Parties because one is better than the other, but because as we all know, she can't vote for Ron and truly help this country without doing so...unless not in closed primary state.....but she is, as she is in New York.

She did not say specifically that she'd vote for Hillary, but she emphasized her name with a smile when mentioning it. Either way, is there a Democrat that has a chance that even resembles Ron Paul?

There is no ala carte menu when it comes to Ron Paul's ideas which Naomi seems to choose. The nation building, having military in many countries, giving billions to other countries is all part of what is wrong with this country. And since she is planning on voting for a Democrat this election, she is confirming that she is for those things.

I will truly welcome her when she decides to eat from the buffet and not from the ala carte menu she seems to have chosen. As a New Yorker, it is now too late for her to change and she will eat at her own table.

In the meantime, I do respect the message she is sending and it is an accurate one.

Bob W., Naples, FL

Democracy or Republic

I have one pet peeve with her commentaries though; she keeps calling the US a Democracy. We are not a Democracy but a Republic; albeit, owned by greedy individuals who hide behind the cloak of large corporations.

The founders recognized that peoples of a Democracy (or mob rule) can easily be manipulated which is terrible for individual liberties. Hence, why they created The Bill of Rights or the first 10 amendments to the constitution. You can not vote away these rights, you need new amendments to undo the current ones - purposely, a very difficult proposition.

Down with the Federal Reserve System and the 16th amendment!
-Carl

Repeal the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and the 16th amendment - sound money for our communities and out of Washington, DC.
--------------

What she probably meant

was the principle of democracy (in the sense that the common man rules through appointing representatives) within the republic. It's fair I believe to give her that much leeway in her thinking. Perhaps it's a pet issue of yours to clarify that we're not a democracy. It's true, we're not.

In all fairness...

I believe his original point is correct, and that the definition of a democracy is not simply the ability to vote for representatives. Democracy is literally "rule by the people" -- with emphasis on the word "rule", meaning anything goes - - so long as the people approve it. The old liberal representative Republic is a far different thing. "Anything" doesn't go in that case -- as the original poster suggested, there is a set, defined, and narrow limit to what the government can do (the famous Article 1, Section 8), which the Bill of Rights simply elaborates upon.

I'd much rather live in a liberal Republic than a Democracy any day. Unfortunately, the constitution is so ignored that, practically speaking, we DO live in something of a democracy. The government can and does abridge any right they wish, so long as the people like it. And if they respect a right, its because the people like it and vote for those who will respect it. Deny or Allow, it's up to the people. That's a democracy, my friend -- rule by the people.

Ron Paul is good.

distinction between Democracy and Republic

It is not just my own issue, it was that of the founders and why they created the Bill of Rights - http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/aspects/demr...

To not know the difference is, to put it bluntly, naivety and ignorance. Would a constitutional teacher such as Ron Paul call himself a Democrat?

This subject makes me question here authenticity but I respect everything else she says.
-Carl

Repeal the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and the 16th amendment - sound money for our communities and out of Washington, DC.
--------------

One problem with impeachment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIO-tCPSfHA

Yea - Democrats, are scared if they try - Bush will invade Iran & call for an emergency crack down. Stopping the elections..

Erhm - did anyone recently hear they say something about WW3 recently? The window of liberty is closing!

Thank you!

I read this post.

I watched the vid......

I read the blog.......

We ARE the people......

This is the rEVOLution!

Ebay 'it' for Ron Paul 2008 on 11-5.

[url]http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MESE:IT&ih=001[/url]

This will work. If 20,000 all go to a garage sale or two (or 18,) and donate the ebay auction proceeds to the 11-5 date, we will shock and awe the media.

It will be a huge sum.

Yes, I can spare $100 and I will do it 11-5. But what if ebay and garage sales raises $500? And what if we all raise $500? Can we? Are you willing to sell some stuff out of your shed, tool box, attic, jewelry case, your ex's comic book...you know '[B]it[/B]'.

We can do this, we can raise 10 million.

So do it!

Yes

I failed to mention her fallacious use of "democracy" as our form of government. Once and for all, we are a Republic. That keeps us from the tyranny of the majority through the very Bill of Rights she professes to be defending.
EVERYBODY, get access to the Constitution and READ it...please.
sigh...

Great...but

Wonderful dissection of our Nazi state but her defense of Hellary (Joseph Stalin in drag), as some benign figure, stretches the parameters of believability.
The question that begs is, that given the knowledge of this supranational governance which avoids the input of the people, where is the condemnation of someone so inextricably connected to its application, as is Hellary, as to render her, mostly correct, treatise as a partisan validation and support of HRC's Communist tendencies?
To condemn Bush IS to condemn Hellary. The veiled endorsement of Hellary, by means of a subtle assessment that she was now ON BOARD, when in truth she never was nor will she ever be (politics, you know) due to her obligations to those who will grant her her pathological desire to be DESPOT of the early 21st century for the gain of the status quo.
Anything short of an endorsement of Dr. Ron Paul and his message is surrender to the state. Clinton/Bush has had its run and now it must end...forever.

Veiled Endorsement of Hillary

If she doesn't expose Hillary for being part of this mess then she must be a plant trying to gain your trust.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Not Hillary!

I did not watch this entire video - It began as she began her presentation at the bookstore where I saw her and it was late, so I didn't sit through the whole thing. However, when I saw her, she made it clear that the policies being enacted are the perfect set up for whoever takes office next - be it Hillary, Obama or Giuliani. She said this herself: The founders knew the temptations of power. It is simply human nature to abuse unlimited power, whether they are on the left or the right.

All art is only done by the individual. The individual is all you ever have, and all schools only serve to classify their members as failures. E.H.

Scary!

Very scary!

Tell a neighbor about Dr. Paul today. Nobody is going to do it for you! Ron Paul 2008!!!

Get Adjusted: From the Womb to the Tomb!

Minor points.

I like most of what she says but disagree on a few minor details. One, if she is right then Hillary is the chosen successor as evident by Bush instructing her on how to modify her rhetoric .. and two, impeachment is futile, what do you want to do impeach Hitler and replace him with Stalin? I think its a waste of time to pursue this path, a much more productive course of action is to make sure Ron Paul takes the office after him. (I don't need to tell you people naturally.)

I think she is just beginning to start on her quest for liberty.. its a learning process and old ideas don't go away. In a few years she wont call it, or even want a Democracy.

Please people, educate yourselves

We are NOT A DEMOCRACY. Nor should we be. Democracy is not a just form of government. Rather, it is necessarily the tyranny of the majority (two wolves and a sheep voting what to have for dinner). Our Founders despised and feared democracy. As much as I agree with much of what Ms Wolf says regarding the blueprint for totalitarianism, it irks me to no end that she (and just about everyone else these days), continues to repeat the error that "we are a democracy".

We are a Constitutional Representative Republic.

In a democracy, it is the will of the majority that is the highest authority. If 51% say all jews should be killed (for example), that's the law.

In a republic, the highest authority is the law (lex rex). Minority rights (the most important minority being the individual) can only be protected this way, since it is not the fickle will of the mob that rules, but the law.

Yes, the law can be changed, but the legal amendment process of the Constitution is deliberately difficult in order to allow time to subdue the inflamed passions of the easily riled public.

Then ultimately, the highest law, by which the "rule of law" is determined, is of nature and nature's God. As created beings, we are endowed by our creator with unalienable rights, and no man-made law (including the Constitution if it were so amended) is legitimate that seeks to deny us those rights (see the Declaration of Independence for this).

Though Ron Paul's writings and speeches clearly indicate he understands this important distinction (republic vs democracy), even he slips up from time to time and refers to "our democracy". In his defense, he primarily uses this in reference to our election process, which is "democratic" in that sense. But ultimately, the Constitution establishes a Republic, NOT A DEMOCRACY.

Which of course makes it even more ridiculous that people think its a good idea for America to be on a mission to "spread democracy" around the world. By force no less!

We're not a Democracy!

Thanks for the lesson in civics.

"Who is John Galt?"

Naomi Wolf

Thank you Mike....hope you feel better. I have been a fan of Naomi's for a long time. I just got to the part about torture and I have heard about two ordinary people who have been tortured in prison, for two very ordinary non-violent crimes. I always thought this did not happen in America!

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

I can see why Michael shed a tear

This speech was amazing! It got my blood boiling so bad. I nearly shed tears of anger over what she had to say.

Tomorrow I am going to do everything I can to send this video to everyone I know.

"Pick up the phone -- every

"Pick up the phone -- every day. Email your representative -- every day. Let them hear from millions of Americans a day. Let them hear from twenty. Please play hardball -- the times demand it and nice girls and boys have managed to get this Congress to do literally nothing at all to protect liberty.

Congressmen and women say off the record that they can't support liberty, much as they'd like to, because they are scared of "looking soft on terror" and they want to run out the clock -- a naive and self-serving posture in a time of crisis. Make them more scared of you if they don't. Tell them you will bombard their donors with the message that they have sold out liberty. Tell them you will denounce them as traitors to the Constitution in your local and regional letters to the editor and op-eds. Tell them they are unpatriotic to stand by while liberty is disemboweled. Tell them you will stop at nothing to ensure their future defeat unless they support this and make it the law of the land.

Let's do it. There is no excuse now. The restoration of democracy is up to you -- as the Founders intended it should be."