Saturday, April 7, 2012

Paulites Unhappy with Ron Paul Campaign Manager?

Indications that Ron Paul may want to cut some kind of a deal with Mitt Romney appear to be coming from Ron Paul campaign manager Jesse Benton, or that's what some Ron Paul supporters believe.

Some supporters are against any such deal and are making their views known by launching an attack on Benton:

As far as I am concerned, there is nothing wrong with cutting a deal, if such deal leads to a significant advancement toward liberty. I am talking BIG (which is not likely to happen), such as Ron Paul getting the Treasury post, Romney being forced to take Lew Rockwell as chief-of-staff, etc.

A few paragraphs in a party platform that few will read and all will forget, does not impress me. So my question is "If Benton is indeed talking to the Romney people, what kind of deal is he trying to cut?"


  1. Scott Horton (Antiwar radio) has been pretty scathing on the subject. His critiques have been two. The first, and more important, is to object to the pointlessness of the attack ads on the non-entities in this primary. Why not use all our money we contributed to show Ron Paul being right on war an the economy since the late nineties by showing short excerpts from one floor speech after another warning of the folly of Clinton/Bush/Obama policies? Instead, we have flash animation poiting out that a bunch of intellectual and moral nullities are intellectual and moral nullities. Who cares?

    Second is the rumored dealmongering. Horton seems to believe, and others like Raimondo do as well, that Benton is making a separate peace to ensure his future as a political consultant. That is the source of most of the bitterness, I think

  2. These Scott Horton comments should be included. Though I do agree with Wenzel, that making a deal is not a bad thing, as long as the deal nets some serious advances on liberty, repealing and rolling back laws.

  3. bruce fein identified as the rumormonger

  4. Benton is married to Ron's grand daughter, so he's not some outsider political hack. If anything he was a nobody who has established some weight through Ron and Rand's senate race.

    I think it's smart of them to bring up the possibility of a deal occasionally because if they just say "of course we'll never make a deal" the entire Republican Party establishment will freeze out Ron. Their goal is to slowly capture the establishment and move it in Ron's direction.

  5. I could make a case that the head of Treasury is more powerful than the President.

    I'd consider voting for Romney if they put Paul is such a position.

    Complete control of the Fed would quickly show everyone who the "real" boss is...

  6. I don't think there is any deal that could conceivably be offered that would suit me or most other Ron Paul supporters. If Ron Paul got Treasury, he would not have the latitude to operate and take the radical steps necessary to establish a sound fiscal system. Mitt's personal fortune is derived from and based in the fiat, fractional reserve system. There is no way Mitt is going to threaten his personal fortune by putting Ron Paul in Treasury with real and substantial authority. Ron Paul ought to run as a third party candidate. This would give people a real choice in the race and hopefully forever sink the Republican Party elitists' love affair with pseudo conservatives and moderates.

  7. What has to be mentioned are the very important problems with the campaign that we all know but have been recently mentioned together by Adam Kokesh on his podcast.

    1) the campaign is being poorly organized.efforts to win states where possible (like Virginia, Puerto Rico, Alaska, Nevada). State campaign staff were generally always non-paid so they couldn't dedicate themselves to their local efforts as they should have.
    2) finances and leadership roles are being dangerously mismanaged. there is a scandal brewing that Jesse Benton had access to a campaign credit card and charged $200K. However, there is no clear role Jesse seems to be playing. If he is busy managing the campaign then why do we see so much of him to tv making misstatements and generally not providing a front man for the campaign. Money bombs have made the campaign lazy and there is little effort outside then for fundraising.
    3) there is a serious breakdown between the campaign and volunteers. Besides myself, there have been many people who wanting to throw fundraisers for $200K+ for Ron Paul cannot get through to the campaign to make it happen. This leads to suspicions that the campaign is ”handling” Ron Paul and do nor want new people to influence campaign activity. This also means that the campaign is not open to criticisms.
    4) Last and for me the most important is the complete surrender of the campaign from challenging election fraud, even obvious examples of it. Why? So as to make friends and not rock the boat.

    The reality is that the campaign is run by a professional staff making sure they are taken care of first. They treat Ron Paul as their cash cow. Volunteers and independent groups supporting Ron are a danger to the campaign's control. No doubt there is a planned alliance between the Paul and Romney campaigns because that is where they expect the next paycheck to come from. This happened in 2008 with not only the departure on that campaign's chair to McCain but he took the entire supporter and donor database with him!

    Remember, this election was always Paul's to lose. He has had the grassroots army, money, technology and time with the chief issue being his best Message - The economy!

  8. No deals, no compromises, no way! I will never vote for anyone except Ron Paul and ONLY if he is on the top of the ticket - of any party. No VP, No Cabinet, No Secretary, No Czar, No way. Screw the GOP, we owe them nothing. Take that Benton and anyone else who can't stay the course. If you give in, you give vote and those of the true Ron Paul supporters. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, you cowards!

  9. I am a huge Ron Paul fan, and would love to see him as our 45th President. That being said, let me propose a question: would you be willing to accept a "Rom-Ron alliance" if it means President Obama is defeated?

    I don't really want to see Ron Paul do that, but I really don't want to see President Obama be elected for a second term.

    1. That's one method by which those who control the system, perpetuate it - - the false 'left' vs 'right' paradigm. There is no material difference between the policies of Obama and Romney. RomneyCare was the model for ObamaCare. - - - There were many reasons why many people said they voted for Obama. He has reneged on all his promises, and is far worse than Bush in attacking Liberty. Most of the Obama supporters (who actually are aware of what has happened over the last 4 years) say nothing about this or the expansion of wars overseas. Afterall, 'their guy' is in office - instead of 'the other guy'. I don't think Romney can beat Obama, but if he does he will carry out the same agenda. Its likely that those who voted for him will also ignore what he does if elected. They already ignore his record and past flip flop positions. He's 'their guy'.

  10. There is no deal that the R branch of the DemoRepublicrat combined corporate fascist party will offer to Ron Paul that has any meaning at all. Paul's ideas directly threaten their wealth and their power - - and they will never give that up willingly. Does the vote fraud surprise anyone ? Is anything that these criminals do, surprising to anyone ? I appreciate what Dr. Paul has done for so many decades to educate people on the ideas of Liberty. He has set brushfires in the minds of many people, including young people who will create the future. But many of us are coming to see that true transformation of this tyrannical system is not possible through the system.

  11. I trust Ron Paul, and will take his positions, presence and advocacy any way I can -- and if they are somehow in Washington via some political position or appointment for Dr. Paul, do be it. Ideas are bulletproof, and truth is unchanging -- of course, Romney and the other GOP candidates are utterly alien compromisers, not even conservative really, but I trust Ron Paul to be who he is and work for us. So I don't worry about the drama -- just standing by to see what happens next!

  12. Dr Paul can still be an educator and voice for Liberty after the end of the campaign. He can encourage action at the grassroots local, state, and individual levels. He is an example for many in the Liberty movement and any apparent compromise of these principles would only be harmful in my opinion. After the economy really crashes, many voices supporting Liberty will be needed to be heard. Those are the times when despots come to power and the people go along with it. - - I've never heard Ron Paul himself agree or even hint at any of these suggestions said to come from some in his campaign.

  13. Benton is responsible for several bungling several publicity and media engagements, most notably by agreeing to Sasha Baron-Cohen's "Bruno" ambush interview wherein the actor attempted to "make a sex tape" with Dr. Paul.

    However real the relationship with Dr. Paul's granddaughter, Benton, like most of the central movers-and-shakers who signed on during Ron Paul '08, is a political climber. The positive momentum achieved by the campaign has happened largely in spite of, not because of these individuals. When Dr. Paul eventually retires from public life, these folks, Benton included, will continue to work in politics and will doubtless modify their values to what is most expedient for their careers.

    Benton's is a textbook maneuver for a political operative, by making ovations (and whatever concessions he is permitted) to the purported "front runner" in order to appear "reasonable" and therefore employable within the GOP.

  14. Ron Paul may be a third party (that is non Demo-Republicrat) candidate, whether he officially goes that route or not. Many of his followers will either write him in, or vote NO MORE BEING SCAMMED by not voting at all.