Friday, January 31, 2014

Please Say It Won't Be So, Ron

Ron Paul’s leftover campaign million could end up supporting a Rand Paul 2016 presidential race.

Roll Call reports:

A former presidential candidate is sitting on almost a million dollars that could help his son in a 2016 presidential race.

The Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee of former Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, reported it has $972,450 cash on hand as of December 31st.  During the fourth quarter of 2013, the committee raised $10 and spent $33,464, including $24,220 paid to Arent Fox LLP and LeClair Ryan for legal consulting.

Although a federal candidate may not use left over funds for personal use, and the campaign committee could only contribute $2,000 to another candidate per election, there may be nothing to prohibit a candidate from contributing all the left over funds to a super PAC. The super PAC could then make independent expenditures supporting or opposing a federal candidate. The PAC might even make independent expenditures encouraging a candidate to run, such as Ron Paul’s son, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulations relating to excess funds do not specifically prohibit left over funds going to a super PAC, but the FEC often handles issues relating to excess funds on a case by case basis.

21 comments:

  1. Have no fear Wenzel.
    .
    Ron wouldn't do that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hahaha.......of course a father would never help a son become President of the United States. Ron is all about the message.

      Delete
  2. Ron Paul's biggest failing has always been having too much faith in people around him. It stands to reason that he would be especially vulnerable in this area in regards to his son.

    Sad, but true.

    ReplyDelete
  3. JT out of Barrow.... I'd like to believe you are right...and it's not that I don't trust Ron to always do the 'right' thing.... but I'd be interested to find out what ELSE is he allowed to do with that accumulated money. Start a library?

    ReplyDelete
  4. He might as well give the money to Hillary since helping Rand is equivalent to helping Hillary. If Rand got the nomination, the electoral map will look like 1964.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hillary won't even be the nominee. Keep dreaming, troll.

      Delete
  5. I don't see anything from this excerpt that is suggesting that's his plan.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Would that be so bad?

    If Rand was President, I guarentee you we could buy fully function light bulbs and flush toilets of a decent size. I would also wager our civil liberties and foreign policy would improve by AT LEAST 3.2 percent.

    So yeah...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I would also wager our civil liberties and foreign policy would improve by AT LEAST 3.2 percent."

      Funny weren't liberals saying that exact same thing when Obama bust onto the presidential race? I see Rand as no different from the rest of the statists in the con field.

      Delete
    2. He's clearly much better than Obama to anyone who's serious.

      Delete
  7. An acquaintance of mine in Ron Paul's inner circle told me that in the meetings he had with Ron Paul and his inner circle during the 2012 campaign, Ron would repeatedly use this phrase to explain his actions, "I say what I believe and the rest is politics". Gee, Ron like telling your supporters to be respectful of the Republican party when they would not announce your vote totals from the stage, or allowing Republican thugs to silence your supporters on the floor of the Republican National Convention in 2012.

    But what really galled me was the fact that Ron Paul's campaign staff (Jesse Benton) shut down the 2012 campaign right before the late primaries, and made bizarre statements about a campaign that millions were pushing so hard to see succeed. Many of Ron Paul most fervent supporters are still stuck in a kind of permanent funk about the twisted and utterly tragic deflation of the Ron Paul 2012 campaign as it was rammed to earth by forces that are still at work today.

    I have been suspicious of the unseen deals that Ron Paul cut with the Republican party for over 5 years, and I resolved to quit working on Ron Paul's behalf in August 2012 because of my deep concern over the actions and choices of Ron Paul and his son Rand. The very idea that Ron Paul would even consider donating his remaining campaign funds to a super PAC to finance his ne'er-do-well son is revolting.

    Little Rand's believers are shoving their way onto libertarian sites in rising numbers and in many cases have crowded out real liberty-minded voices for this cartoon of a Southern politician. Rand's clueless backers and supporters are ignorant of the fact that fundamentalist Christian voters as a percentage of the voting populace is declining rapidly with each generation. Rand is a moron who is betting on the wrong horse to carry him to victory, but he is a man who solely exists because of ignorant Ron Paul supporters conflating the two.

    It has been my opinion that Ron Paul needs to disappear for the next 4 years so the uneducated members of the voting populace stop confusing conservative Republican statism with libertarian philosophy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You trusted a politician. Why are you surprised?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog

      Delete
    2. This is why people like me or someone with the stature of Lew Rockwell never votes. Politics and politicians need to become an anachronism. It's a superstition. A criminal enterprise. A farce.

      Delete
    3. I have not trusted any politician in over 50 years, and I have not voted for anyone in over 9 years. I woke up politically in December 1964 when the Free Speech movement was being eviscerated by the the California Board of Regents, the FBI, and harangued by the likes of Ronald Reagan.

      The federal government harassed the leader of the Free Speech movement, Mario Savio for years, and he died a broken man in 1996. Mario's crime was stating.

      "Well, I ask you to consider: If this is a firm, and if the board of regents are the board of directors; and if President Kerr in fact is the manager; then I'll tell you something. The faculty are a bunch of employees, and we're the raw material! But we're a bunch of raw materials that don't mean to be—have any process upon us. Don't mean to be made into any product. Don't mean… Don't mean to end up being bought by some clients of the University, be they the government, be they industry, be they organized labor, be they anyone! We're human beings!
      There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part! You can't even passively take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels…upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all"!

      I was eleven years old when this fight for free speech took place in 1964, and I will never forget the meaning of state sponsored, flag waving fascism.

      By the way, I divorced myself from Ron Paul's campaign in August of 2011.

      Delete
    4. "I have not trusted any politician in over 50 years, and I have not voted for anyone in over 9 years."

      So you haven't trusted them in a half century yet you continued to vote for them until just 9 years ago? Let me guess. You voted for "the lesser of the two evils" right? Why the fuck do people do this? Why? Evil is STILL evil! Whatever the reason I don't understand why you would vote for 40 years AFTER you didn't trust them. Makes no sense to me. At least you finally learned your lesson though.

      I have NEVER voted for anyone PERIOD. Ever. These fucking leaches don't fool me. They can all go to hell for all I care!

      Delete
  8. Being absolutely ignorant of campaign finance laws, any reason why the funds couldn't go the Mises Institute?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Your hatred of Rand Paul seems pathological.

    ReplyDelete
  10. That money is obviously going to Rand. All of you who claim otherwise are a bunch of lunatics.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Soooo what? Besides, what other piker is coming down the road that even has a breadth of a chance to successfully run, let alone one with more libertarian ideals as Rand? And in the Republican party? NONE! NONE! NONE! Or the Libertarian party? Don't make me laugh!

    I would rather pin my hopes that Rand is the ANTI-manchurian Liibertarian-manchurian candidate than some other 'openly' strict libertarian idealist who will NEVER get elected anyway. This was, unfortunately, Ron's lesson to those of us with ambition to change the system politically.

    We all know the two-party system is totally corrupt and in COMPLETE power. Elections will never change this.....as they never have! Subterfuge, in the name of truth and liberty (cliches or not) to get into office is the only way of having any modicum of hope of changing things politically outside of, and alongside of, nullification, secession, and mass individual non-cooperation with government. Otherwise, we all will just have to keep bending over and taking it with a smile on our face if one expects to 'survive' under the thumb of the State.

    ReplyDelete