Connect with us


Ron Paul target: guilt by association?



Ron Paul speaks about liberty and safety

Is the Republican Party smearing Ron Paul through guilt by association? Or do any of his accusers have a valid argument? You decide.

Is Ron Paul associating with leftists?

The Republican Party seems to be saying just that. Cliff Kincaid at Right Side News and Accuracy in Media, today said that an English-language foreign network called Russia Today has “plugged” Ron Paul extensively. He mentioned an American ex-Marine named Adam Kokesh. Kokesh has a program (Adam v. The Man). RT picked it up for distribution. And Kokesh has given Paul a lot of play, and vice-versa.

More than that, RT has made several videos featuring Ron Paul. Paul features them prominently on his own site.

Michelle Malkin, two years ago, called Kokesh “an anti-war smear merchant in ‘Republican’ clothing.” Kokesh tried to run for Congress in New Mexico and failed even of nomination. Kincaid dogged the steps of Kokesh and RT earlier this summer. His thesis: Russia Today is a project of old-line Kremlin apparatchiks who can’t believe that the Soviet Union is no more. He also says that RT is overly friendly with certain media organs with known leftist sympathies.

But Kincaid has a problem of his own. He also published his article in GOPUSA, the alternative media arm of the Republican Party. In fact, the by-line at reads “GOPUSA Staff.”


True enough, Adam Kokesh left the military under a cloud. In fact, the Marines broke him in rank (from sergeant back at least two grades to lance corporal) and gave him a general discharge, not an honorable one. First he showed up in uniform at a political event, something any soldier knows not to do. A major spotted him, and Kokesh told the major in writing what he thought of him, using an unprintable word.

But what has this to do with Ron Paul? Mr. Kincaid asks why a boorish military malcontent like Kokesh, and a foreign network with ties to the old Soviet apparat, supports Ron Paul for President. He may well ask why Ron Paul welcomes such support. But others might ask Mr. Kincaid whether his questions prove anything, relate to what’s best for America, or matter (or should matter) to voters.

Where does Ron Paul stand?

Ron Paul speaking at CPAC

Ron Paul speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference, February, 2010. Photo: Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0 Generic License

Ron Paul is very forthright on where he stands on the issues of the day. He wants to abolish the Federal Reserve System and restore the gold standard. Given that gold is trading at record-high prices, every Republican candidate for President ought to sign on to that policy. If not gold, then any objective standard-of-value for US currency would be welcome.

But he also is the most consistently anti-war candidate in the history of the Republican Party. During the Iowa debate, he bitterly accused Rick Santorum and others of “beating” the “war drums.” He could not seem to make up his mind whether to say that Iran did not and could not have nuclear weapons, or whether he would excuse their having them. (After he narrowly lost the Ames straw poll to a candidate—Michele Bachmann—who out-organized him in two scant months, he has backtracked on that line.) He did say that the United States should restore full trade with Cuba.

His detractors say that his attitude toward any foreign power that might pose a threat to America and Americans is:

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

His supporters say either that no such threat exists, or that the spectacle of an America at endless war is a greater threat than any foreign power could pose.


Why would Russia Today promote Ron Paul?

Is Russia Today a creature of the remnants of the old Komitet Gosudartvennoye Bezopasnotyi? If so, then perhaps RT might want Ron Paul to become President so that Russia could rebuild its empire. But would a militant Russia do itself any long-term favors? The rest of the Paul platform gives the key: let ordinary citizens and lawful residents arm themselves. An armed society is a polite society. It is also a hard target against mass invasion, sabotage, or attempted mass murder. A most hostile environment for any invading army.

Does America have friends abroad who would suffer needlessly from such a policy? Actually, the best friend America has is the Republic of Israel. The Republic of Israel today would never want an American military guarantee. The most they would even welcome would be American citizens signing up to fight alongside their own troops, as soldiers of several nationalities famously did in 1948-9. (The most famous among them: Lieutenant Colonel David Marcus, USAR, also known as Aluf Michael Stone of the Volunteers from Outside the Land.) Under current law, no American may do that. But a President Paul might sign a new law that would allow it.

But the one group that fears Ron Paul most, are the globalists behind UN Agenda 21 and similar agendae. They don’t want to see American citizens arming themselves. And they especially do not want America to make gold, or any other commodity (some recommend oil), as the standard-of-value for the American dollar.

Seek whom the crime would profit

And that might explain why the Republican National Committee, through its media organs like, want to stop Ron Paul at all costs. For this policy has cost them their honor. This is argumentum ad hominem, with the vicious twist called guilt by association.

And why are they doing this? Because they know that Paul’s foreign-policy position is not so easy to attack as it was in the heyday of Operation Enduring Freedom. (Though your editor still finds it unrealistic, other policies that Paul promotes would make any bad effects easier to cope with.) And the Republican Party absolutely cannot support the Federal Reserve. Indeed, their front-running candidate dropped a hint yesterday that his fellow Texans would punish Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke severely if Bernanke dared print more money. Obviously the RNC dares not breathe a word against such sentiment.


So instead of challenging Paul on the issues, they decry his association with known anti-war demonstrators, malcontents, and a media organ that might or might not be a creature of an old Soviet-era apparat. Shame on them, for they have no excuse for that.

Featured article: Ron Paul’s official portrait. Photo: the United States House of Representatives.

[amazon_carousel widget_type=”ASINList” width=”500″ height=”250″ title=”” market_place=”US” shuffle_products=”True” show_border=”False” asin=”B00375LOEG, 0451947673, 0800733940, 0062073303, 1595230734, 1936218003, 0981559662, 1935071874, 1932172378″ /]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
+ posts

Terry A. Hurlbut has been a student of politics, philosophy, and science for more than 35 years. He is a graduate of Yale College and has served as a physician-level laboratory administrator in a 250-bed community hospital. He also is a serious student of the Bible, is conversant in its two primary original languages, and has followed the creation-science movement closely since 1993.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] Ron Paul target: guilt by association? […]


Look, I can read stuff and while it is ironic that you could find in some of the Russia Today reports more truth than you can find in many mainstream news reports, but still the reports were pretty pro Paul.

So why?

The only conclusion I can think of is that they think a President Paul would weaken our defenses.

Look, I don’t think Paul is in on it, but the fact that they see Paul as serving their ends has to give me pause.

The best thing Paul could do in this case is totally attack go on a rhetorical attach against Russia. And his supporters, stop giving Russia Today the time of day, damn it!


Would love your thoughts, please comment.x