Ron Paul, The “Ronulans” and The Young Americans For Freedom Kerfuffle

Let me state for the record that I am not a Ron Paul supporter and doubt very seriously if I could ever be swayed to become one.  I have a strong opinion about the Texas Congressman.  He grates on my nerves more than a rotten rendition of the National Anthem by Christina Aguilera.

Following the announcement at the 2011 CPAC that Paul had won the straw poll, Young Americans for Freedom issued a press release advising that the group had voted him off its national advisory board.

Jordan Marks, the group’s National Director, said, “It’s a sad day in American history when a one-time conservative/libertarian stalwart has fallen more out of touch with America’s needs for national security than our current socialist presidential regime.”

Marks went on to harshly say, “Rep. Paul is clearly off his meds and must be purged from public office.  YAF is starting the process by removing him from our national advisory board.  Good riddance and he won’t be missed.”

Responding to YAF’s announcement, Ron Paul’s political director and an in-law, Jesse Benton belligerently said, “I haven’t heard of YAF doing anything in years, I thought they were defunct.  Young Americans for Liberty is the group of the future.”

This “group of the future” is the national youth affiliate of the Ron Paul Revolution and was officially launched in December 2008 so it stands to reason that Benton would try to trivialize their decision to oust him.

Politico notes that the Paul group sought to skew the straw poll by buying 1,000 tickets to the conference and a Paul aide told another Republican that they’d recruited at least 700 supporters to vote for him.  What this says to me is that his “Ronulans” are more adept at winning him beauty contests than primaries.

Ron Paul’s zombie cult of “Ronulans” showed their asses when they chose to heckle former Vice President Dick Cheney who was at CPAC to present Donald Rumsfeld with the “Defender of the Constitution” award by calling him a “war criminal”.  They also yelled, “Where’s Bin Laden?”, “murdering scum” and “draft dodger.”  Nice.

It was this exhibition of incivility that prompted Donald Trump, another CPAC featured speaker and potential presidential candidate to declare, “By the way, Ron Paul cannot get elected. I’m sorry, folks. I like Ron Paul, but he has zero chance of getting elected.”

Ron Paul is so far out there that he’s literally in orbit; hence his followers are referred to as “Ronulans.”

Let’s begin with why I dislike Ron Paul. 

He proselytizes fiscal sanity yet he is one of five U.S. House members who brought home more total earmarked money—54 earmarks totaling $398,460,640—three of the five Congressmen were defeated in the 2010 November mid-term elections.  So he’s not really a crusader against spending.

Paul consistently hypes gold and the gold standard.  His personal wealth is almost entirely invested in the precious metal and its mining stocks.  He is mesmerized by the aura of gold so if his political stance is heeded his personal wealth increases exponentially. So he’s the pot calling the kettle black.

Further, Ron Paul is against “foreign entanglements”.  Isolationism is not intelligent. How would he deal with an international menace?

John Bolton, speaking at CPAC 2011, took a stand against Libertarian-leaning Republicans like Ron Paul to reduce defense spending by saying now is “not the time for indiscriminate budget cuts in our national defense budget.”

In his often recited critique of 9/11, Paul never once mentions the fiery rage of jihadi fundamentalism that aims to restore “the lost caliphate” and invoke medieval Sharia law. In Paul’s world, resentment towards “U.S. entanglements” led a group of sexually repressed Muslim men, brought up on a doctrine of aggressive Wahhabism and the promise of seventy-two virgins to crash two planes into the World Trade Center.

Not once does he answer why, if U.S. foreign policy causes so many people around the world to “hate us,” Islamic murderers carry out their suicide bombings  in India, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Nigeria, and other unaligned Muslim nations.

From 2007 in the Washington Post, here’s Paul talking about America’s defenses:

“There’s nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today…I mean, we could defend this country with a few good submarines. If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours. And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we’re acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapon.”

Not only does his rhetoric shadow that of Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s “wiping off the map” threats, it unforgivably ignores the fact that a domestic passenger flight from Boston to Los Angeles is at the root of the tragic events of 9/11.  Try as I might, I fail to see how a submarine can penetrate terrorism.  I regard his statement as ludicrous fantasy.

Finally, there is a piece I found at American Thinker dated November 17, 2007 which sheds light on Paul’s apparent unwillingness to reject extremist groups’ public participation in his campaign and financial support.

In a word, I find Ron Paul to be reckless.

Read more at No Sheeples Here.