Mike Renzulli

More About: Politics: Republican Campaigns

A Culture of Denial

The magnitude of support for Ron Paul is impressive. He is poised to do very well in Iowa and it looks like the campaign to support the libertarian movement's favorite Texas member of Congress has more enthusiasm behind it than Paul's 2008 campaign.
What is fascinating is how gullible libertarians are regarding Paul's excuses, the way he panders to them too and the double standard libertarians take toward him. One has to wonder if they are such simpletons as to not see not only the obvious un-libertarian positions Paul takes on a number of issues, but also the blatant lie he tells too.
For example, the newsletters published in Paul's name that were printed for almost five years while he was in and out of office as well as while he ran for President on the Libertarian ticket in 1988. When the issue of the newsletters came up the second time he ran for Congress Paul took full credit for them but went on to point out he was being taken out of context. Then in 2008 when he ran for President he denied knowing anything about them. The content of the newsletters is really awful. I find it hard to believe that Paul knew nothing about them since his wife and daughter were also on the newsletter company's staff along with Paul's long time chum Lew Rockwell. At some point his family or Rockwell would have talked about the newsletters to him. I am certain that a topic of conversation over dinner in the Paul household would have been that in one year the newsletters garnered almost $1 million in income.
Then there is the question of foreign policy. I speak as the son of someone who lived under a dictatorship. My family lived in Italy when Benito Mussolini was dictator. Ayn Rand rightly points out free countries have a right (though not an duty) to attack and take dictatorships out which includes preventing them from acquiring certain weapons or technologies.
Ms Rand goes on to state that dictatorships are outlaw countries and, consequently, are not legitimate forms of government. This is not only due to the immorality and illegitimacy of such such regimes due to their attempt to totally dominate the lives of the people that live under them but dictatorships will support violent and non-violent efforts outside their borders to extend their sphere of influence usually in an attempt to spread the ideology totalitarian states are founded on. For the USSR it was communism. For Iran, it is the sect of Shi'ite Islam the regime subscribes to and is the official religion of the country.
No matter what Ron Paul says he does not support Israel. Like some libertarians, Paul remains blissfully ignorant of the threat that Islamist regimes, like Iran, pose to the U.S. and Westernized countries. For example, he stated in a recent debate that he had no problem with Iran acquiring nuclear technology. However, if Iran is allowed to acquire nuclear technology during a Paul Administration the country's regime can use the waste from nuclear power reactors in the construction of dirty bombs. Upon doing so the Iranian regime will give dirty bombs to terrorist groups they support such as Hamas and Hezbollah. This being the case, which country do you think is going to be the first to be wiped off the map?
When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Texas's sodomy laws, instead of joining in the cheers for the court's recognition of minimizing government power and maximizing individual rights Paul decried Lawrence vs. Texas stating as a result of the decision:
Texas had no right to establish its own standards for private sexual conduct, because gay sodomy is somehow protect under the 14th amendment 'right to privacy'.
Paul even went so far as to introduce bills in Congress that would re-enact Washington D.C.'s anti-sodomy statutes that the District's Council had repealed. When asked why he did Paul answered that the sodomy laws were necessary to reduce rapes in the District.
After Texas Governor Rick Perry announced he was running for President, the Libertarian Party scolded Perry for his HPV immunization program. However, what they and his fellow GOP competitors failed to mention was Perry's allowing parents to opt-out of having their kids immunized. Former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr supported the Defense of Marriage Act (a.k.a. DOMA) when serving in the U.S. House of Representatives but later repudiated it along with his opposition to medical marijuana when he ran for President as a Libertarian in 2008. Ron Paul also supported DOMA too yet Ron Paul's supporters are not distancing themselves from him, or scold Paul for his past support of anti-liberty legislation. To the best of my knowledge, he has not even issued a statement repudiating his past support of liberty-infringing legislation.
If Sara Palin had written the newsletters Paul claims he knew nothing about libertarians would jump all over her like they did with Rick Perry with the HPV immunizations. But when Ron Paul says he did not know about the newsletters (despite stark evidence proving otherwise), his supporters take his word on faith.
Despite the above mentioned points, objectivity or moral judgement among libertarians goes out the window when it comes to their favorite Congresscritter from Texas. They still naively think Ron Paul is better than the other choices and some even go so far to state that Paul hasn't done anything wrong despite overwhelming evidence demonstrating that he is no better than the politicians he claims to revile. Paul's silence on the newsletters, his participation with them and what he has said and done on other issues is telling to say the least.
I know many of you may write off my essay as being nothing more than complaining drivel. However, if they have any sense of justice left it's high time for libertarians to jump off the Ron Paul Cult of Personality and no longer play the role of useful idiots by refusing to give any kind of credence or sanction to people like him, Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods, and Alex Jones.
The double talk, pandering and (dare I say) outright lies coming from Ron Paul should be an embarrassment to any lover of liberty. People like Ron Paul, Tom Woods and Lew Rockwell have introduced a paranoid-laden, outright vile poison into the libertarian movement grounded in conspiracy theories interlaced with the irrational, anti-immigrant, anti-gay views of the far Right using the floating abstraction of anarcho-capitalism as it's basis.
It's time to send Ron Paul and his associates packing including removing support of Paul's campaign for President (unless they want to give Obama a second term). Paul and company's underlying values are incompatible with a movement geared toward freedom and liberty that rejects the collectivism of racism as well as determinism which is what conspiracy theories are all about.

17 Comments in Response to

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Finally, you are getting the point.

Why doesn't Government file slander suits? In part, because freedom of speech is guaranteed by the 1st Amendment. To win such suits in a right and legal, Government would have to twist and turn so extremely much that they would be exposed for what they are. And they still might not win.

This is exactly what the freedom movement is all about. The trampling of rights of the people by Government. So, what about the 4th Amendment? Where was the court judgement that said Guerena was guilty so that he no longer had 4th Amendment and 2nd Amendment rights?

Wasn't the judgement made "Judge Dredd" style, thereby trampling Guerena's rights regarding 2nd and 4th Amendments, and his right to a trial by a jury of his peers? Show us the judgement. Until such judgement can be shown, or until firm evidence of violent action by Guerena before Government denied him his rights can be shown, Government erred Constitutionally. And they are continuing to err in this way by covering the whole thing up.

Unfortunately for the people, the border line between denying people their rights, and between protecting the public, is very fine, very vague at times. The freedom, libertarian movement is attempting to clarify the boundaries. Such clarification comes about when the general public is made aware of how far Goverment has encroached upon their freedoms and rights, like in the Guerena incident.

So, it isn't slander against government or government agents at all. Rather, it is informing the people about how to protect their rights against those who would deny them their rights.

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

Demand the movie The Courageous from Redbox, Blockbuster and Netflix!  Do your part.  Supposed to be an excellent account of police questioning their faith in these difficult times where their feet are held to the fire of morality...  I went to see it Sunday at Mesa Superstition AMC and the movie was removed... I can't even find it.   Kim Dyer

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

Kimn Dyer here:  @Puretrust:  reserach "duplicity" and maritime law... you will see that while the Corporate gov. regime wants you to buy the lie that we have a constitution, we don't...  We are under the jurisdiction of the Queen, and have been for some time.  So do not be fooled, maritime/marshall/admiralty law:  laws of the sea prevail- as in oil rig law... in a state of emergency or war, which could be legally interpreted to go back as far as when Lincoln was assassinated. 

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

Kim Dyer here:  And thank you Officer Moreno of Tempe (a good cop) for giving me a warning rather than throwing the book at me today (pretty sure he witnessed when Tempe's Lt. lawyer James Click was rigging my being called on my cell from my home phone number on my birthday in 2009 right before my father murdered-so I would think a perpetrator was in my  house)... pretty sure he remembers that report and how they omitted certain details from that report on my birthday over a year ago.  God bless you Officer Moreno.  There are good cops out there.   My  mother said that the movie The Courageous is awesome (about police being torn today-questioning their faith)...  I am having a hell of a time finding it anywhere though, Sunday morning, although sick, I went to Mesa Superstition, and it mysteriously disappeared from their theater as well although a 1010 am showing was advertised... can't find it.  But demand it people, it will show up.  xoxo  Kim Dyer Mass demand it at  Blockbuster, Redfles and Netflix.  This stuff creates social change~~~~

 God Bless our good men in military and police.  You are our true soldiers, you are the ones whose feet are held the the fire in these difficult times.  People, carry this attitude in your hearts.  Thank you for indulging me. 

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

@ Kilantiaw:  You seem well read in legal verse...  are you trying to get us to buy into the fact that the SWAT team is not part of the dog and pony show fact THAT OUR OWN GOVERNMENT TRAFFICS THE DRUGS?  (Research Iran contras, 'CIA and drugs').... This is sooooo not published, but soooo true.  And I think you know it.  And many versed in law know this, and some are paid to blog and hide from us the fact that this marine might have been set up, was probably a good guy, probably about to talk, otherwise he would have been protected.  I mean give us a f-cking break.  They killed my father (talking) and Bill Cooper as well, and they all lived pretty close together in John McCain's marital community businesses (alcohol/bootlegging history/oil company allied) Tucson-outskirts.   Go screw yourself.  Your people murdered my father and my Grandmother you asshole.  The military is trafficking drugs.  And for those of you who don't know this, google the crap out of it, lots of ex-CIA agents (CIA 1947 precursor to 1948 zioNAZI-yes AshkeNAZI jews are KINGS MEN- counterfeit jews of Rev. 2:9 and 3:9... protections through 'laws of the land' in Israel, 'laws of the land' being legal terminology that all mormons recognize and need to research further to see the long history of Mormon/Vatican/Crown allied RICO) and others, if you are thorough enough tied Clinton and Bush to these Royal family counterfeit Zionist thugs to the global drug trade, amnesty bought for the right price in Israel... And Israel's borders need expand as more and more, Americans are being bought and brought in and protected for RICO by the Patriot Act.... Racketeering seems to have been precluded - making moot Kennedy's 1961 RICO protections.  Take that to the Bankster you creep.

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

Kim Dyer here:  Joseph Vanderville, we are not so stupid to buy your half truth about media lies being "an [isolated] abomination" as if it is anything new!  And as for your trying to make policing enterprise noble, yes, I agree, a lot of good people are caught up in policing and given a bad name.  But you peddle a lot of Neo-con GARBAGE wearing a Neo-con mask.  You are no lawyer, as your counter-masked "players" try to get people to assume as an edumacated 'authority' [sic].  Get a new mask, I think your cover is blown. 

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

@ JV (and Ufactdirt):  ONLY RACKETEERING NEOCONS pull out the ugly "nutjob" card.  So I guess Kennedy was a not-job too.... RICO conspiracies don't exist, like the Fed.  I think our readership is smarter than that.  Your arrogance reveals phony mask. 

Why is it always the same GANG-STALKERS on here wearing masks?  "I checked your "legal background" and you are a [credible] lawyer.... bla bla bla.   Give us a break.  We don't trust lawyers on this site.  We know they serve the Queen...  Those of us versed in law.   

 Kim Dyer

Comment by Bernard Earlington
Entered on:

Government does not file a slander suit or file a libel case against you a private citizen if you "defame" it through its law enforcements agents [the SWAT Team] even if your nose grew a foot long by lying about what they did. What the Government agents will do is arrest you if you incite others to commit a wrong or incite others to an act of violence that’s seditious, by lying publicly, which is what you are doing. If agents of the law find out that your lying prompted others to violate the law, those agents become those invited guests in your home where you are hiding. They don’t go to Court to collect damages from you. They just collect you and put you in jail.

Please don’t bother me again with this ignorance. I do not mean to offend you, but I have no time to educate you. Study law if you want to discuss this matter with me. If you have that sufficient knowledge to discuss this matter with me, then I will thank you for not wasting my time.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Furthermore, in this little game of "speech tag" that we play with each other, where we critique each other and criticize each others' points of view, talk about me all you want. We have freedom of speech and freedom of the press in America. It's even guaranteed by the 1st Amendment. But when we start critiquing each other to the point that it becomes slanderous accusations, isn't it time for defamation of character law suits?

In the same way, if someone has slandered the SWAT team members in the Guerena incident, isn't it the right and duty of the SWAT team to bring one or more defamation of character law suits? Wouldn't we be able to get at the truth of the Guerena murder if such suits were brought?

However, when someone attempts to deny someone else the right to free speech, or the right to freedom of the press, that is an entirely different thing. Now we are getting into the realm of defying the foundational laws of the land - the Constitution and the Amendments - which directly and formally allow freedom of speech and freedom of the press to all. Anyone who would use his or her freedom of speech/press to deny the same to anyone else, is moving into anarchy.

Let everyone have their freedom of speech, since it is guaranteed by the 1st Amendment anyway. And bring a slander suit to collect damages when appropriate, right?

Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

Lying in the Media is an abomination. When a publisher or editor self-denies the truth inimical to his own self-interest, it is not only self-destructive but it also harms the public


I have cited an example. This headline “This Week’s Corrupt Cops Stories http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/101045-2011-12-09-this-weeks-corrupt-cops-stories.htm


 is a form of Media thuggery. The lying poisons the public. There is no doubt about it. Isolated stories of  “misbehaving” cops have been collected and presented to the public to libel all cops as “corrupt”. Media thugs have a holiday in presenting to the public this kind of falsified report -- abuse of peace officers they wanted to shoot on sight if they could, if not with a gun, with a pen.



Comment by Bernard Earlington
Entered on:

See what I mean? The culture of self-denial is pervasive it had become a damaging CULTURE that leads one to self-destruction.

For example, you pee in your pants, but you deny it happened. You don’t want people to know that you have a problem. You try to explain that you perspire a lot, and lie that it was perspiration not urine that wet your pants!. You become a liar. Soon you are committed to an Asylum or brought to the home of the retarded, and most likely rot there the rest of your life as a self-destructive pathological liar.

Can you see how self-denial destroys the lying self? The comment below is a classic example of such self-destructive self-deceit. The commenter is like that guy who pee in his pants. He knew very well that on record, the ex-Marine, an active member of a drug-trafficking gang, was shot dead by SWAT operatives when he confronted them WITH A RIFLE in his hands during a raid that was authorized by a legally issued warrant. This pee-guy now lies that the police shot dead an "American hero". What was shot dead was in fact A DRUG-TRAFFICKING HOODLUM. This pee-guy spiced his lie with anti-Government rhetoric, a lot of irrelevant or disconnected blah blah, blah, etc. to make his self-denial sounds convincing as the truth is bastardized.

Attempts to hold the raiding team criminally liable for killing an "American hero" have been filed in Court. Those pee-suits found their way to the urinal and flushed down sewer system. No court of law throughout the land would entertain such trash.

Read the record of this case and you will be shocked to learn how the truth is bastardized to serve the subversive purpose of radical activism.

Once again, I recommend a public-reading of Part I: 'SWAT' Killed A Rogue Ex-Marine .... not an "American hero" written by an award-winning journalist Edwin Sumcad read in Google.com by millions of worldwide viewers.

You will be equally enlightened, Ceteris Paribus [same thing].

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Everybody dies, sooner or later. This is a given.

The Guerena injustice is only about a dead ex-marine in the second issue. The first issue is 4th Amendment.

In the privacy of his own home, without doing any more violence than possibly, snoring in his sleep, Guerena was gunned down by a bunch of hoodlums who would rather uphold some lying affidavit rather than their oath to uphold the Constitution.

That's the major point of the whole thing. It is the breaking down of foundational law by those who are supposed to uphold it the most. In this case, the foundational law of the 4th Amendment was broken.

Because of this premise being set by Government people - acts against non-violent Americans in their own homes, Guerena isn't the only one - Government is gaining, step by step, the "legal permission" to enter YOUR home, anytime they feel like, and gun YOU down for any or no reason at all, totally against the 4th Amendment.

The only reason that we all have the freedoms that we do today is because, in the past, although it is breaking down rapidly, Government people have been made to stick to the rule of the foundational law above all else. If you claim that you don't want to uphold foundational law, no matter who you are, then you are an advocate of tyranny and anarchy, no matter who you are.

Was Guerena guilty of any crime? Hearsay might say "yes." But we will never really know, because he was executed before he had the chance to stand trial in a court of law, the only place where anyone can be judged guilty.

Comment by Bernard Earlington
Entered on:

The culture of denying the truth in the Media becomes dangerous when practiced by rogue publishers.

In this eye-catching Guerena case, it is the Alternative Media, run by "rogue" publishers owning websites treated as private properties that was corrupted, not the cops.

You can see it here: Part I: 'SWAT' Killed A Rogue Ex-Marine .... not an "American hero" written by an award-winning journalist Edwin Sumcad read in Google.com by millions of worldwide viewers.


Comment by Richard Harding
Entered on:

I went over the record. How can Ufactdirt be so right in recommending that Bill Ayers, the former Weather Underground Bomber should be President Ron Paul’s Vice President, surprised me.

Philosophically, Ron Paul on record, cuddles terrorists. He saved them from public rage by declaring in public that 911 shouldn’t be blamed on Al Qaeda – it should be blamed on the American people who went to the Middle East and stirred a hornet’s nest.

Likewise, Bill Ayers blamed the American people for his acts of terrorism. Together, Ayers and Paul fit like a glove – President and Vice President whose regime will give Americans the thrill of the lives, which may be aptly described as the "Apocalypse of 2012".

Comment by Mike Renzulli
Entered on:

 I would hardly call Paul's newsletters a "mistake" when they were published in his name for five years and members of his family made up the publishing organization's staff.

At best, the candidate in the Republican race that best represented a libertarian was Gary Johnson but libertarians jumped on Paul's bandwagon rather than support the candidate that best reflected their views.

Paul is on a book publishing tour and not a Presidential run. As long as supporters like yourself still continue to drink the Kool Aid he, Rockwell and Woods dish out you all live in denial of his making money off of your support and sanction his cultural conservatism which is not libertarian.

Comment by Courtney Jalospanis
Entered on:

 Ah, I love to relish on this one. I TRUST PureTrust. He is not talking dirt. Let’s elect Ron Paul not as president of the Nuthouse Association as his foolish debt-tractors – I mean detractors -- suggested, but as the only President of the United States who would amend the Law of Supply and Demand!

As you can see, his Austrian street economics is better than that of his arch enemy – Dr. Bernanke, Professor of Economics and Chairman of the Federal Reserves with a Ph.D. on Economics! Bernanke won’t in a million years ever think of going to Congress and say, "Ladies & Gentlemen, let’s amend this stupid Law of Supply and Demand!"

I would even venture to say that the Congressman presidential candidate from Texas will be the only President that would abolish not faultless but fault-full America as he envisions it today, and create a new United States of Libertarian Americans [USOLA] for the people, with all Federal Government Departments abolished. Congress, the Judiciary and all the people reside in him, the New President of even a Newer USOLA. That would be fun Americans will enjoy only once in their lifetime!

He is the only President who can abolish death – I mean debt that would make every living American happy. Having said that, what more can I say?

The only problem is who should be his VP … Some people even play with dirt. Some jokers recommended Bill Ayers, the former Weather Underground Bomber turned CO [Community-Organizer], Obama’s former off-and-on adviser.

To betray Obama, it was pointed out that RP should offer the retired Underground Bomber turned Community Organizer the vice-presidency. RP should reverse the Story of Eden: This time Eve offering the Apple to the Snake. It was predicted Ayers won’t refuse to bite the apple, snakes don’t.

Presidents are elected by the people not only based on PureTrust and what he said, but also on pulling PURSE-STRINGS here and there PURELY for FOOLING the enemy.

Like PureTrust that can be TRUSTED, Mr. Tan is also right why Ron Paul insists on running for president when his chance of winning according to him is only "when the crow turns white". Well it was said it’s all a show for raising millions of dollars! Television ads and the cost of the campaign is not just highly prohibitive but a nightmare [!] But I assure you that a considerable part of it goes home and parks on somebody’s pocket-garage before he drives whistling on his way to the bank.

These may look like dirt and may sound dirty, but all healthy PUREFOODS for thought!

C’mon, let’s say Ron Paul for 2012!! If he will not win, it’s because you and all Americans are ignorant of Freedom, get it? Wake up America!

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

The whole question about Ron Paul is the same as every other question about every other politician. The question revolves around PURE TRUST.

Because of the nature of Government, and the natures of people in general (especially politicians), we continually trust other people, based on our experience with them.

If Ron Paul has made mistakes in the honesty regarding his political endeavors, they are far, far fewer than the mistakes of virtually every other politician.

Take a look at the pre-election platforms of every president for the past 50 years. You will find loads, and loads of promises - many straight forward while others by implication. How many of these promises were kept by any president?

Consider Obama's stated pre-election promise that he would get us out of Iraq. When will we be out??? Is it slated for his next term? Consider his implied (and possibly stated) promise that he would keep us out of the rest of the wars. So when is he really going to start fulfilling those promises?

When he was elected, based on those promises and others, how did anybody know for sure that he would fulfill the promises? They didn't!!! EVERY ELECTED POLITICIAN HAS BEEN ELECTED BASED ON PURE TRUST !!!

In the future, would anybody elect Obama based on trusting his promises? Absolutely not! If he gets re-elected, and if it is not done because he has better voting machine hackers or something similar, he will be re-elected for one reason only... that the people can't find anyone they trust more. They might re-elect Obama, but if they do, they will do it grudgingly. And this would be the same scenario for all the presidents of recent past.

There is only one - ONE - major reason that Ron Paul would not be elected. It's because the people do not understand freedom. They are scared of freedom, like they are scared of anything they do not know about. Listen to Jack Nicholson in the movie "Easy Rider."

Whoever gets elect, will be elected based on PURE TRUST. Why? Because nobody ever knows for sure what anybody else will do or attempt to do in the future. But... experience DOES give us a clearer picture.

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network:

Attorney For Freedom