Blinded by the Left: How Marxists Wrote Ron Paul’s Defense Cuts Plan

By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal

While many conservatives admire Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul’s principled economic and constitutional views, they are often bamboozled, even appalled, by the Texan’s defense and foreign policy ideas.

Ron Paul

It seems, that when it comes to defense, Ron Paul is stuck in 1776. He seems not to realize that America’s enemies, real or potential, Russia and China, and Iran chief among them, have a very long reach. The continental US is only partially protected by the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The enemy can now attack the American homeland with ICBMs, biological weapons, cyber warfare, dirty bombs smuggled across the Mexican border – any number of deadly methods of mass destruction.

Just as frontier forts had outposts to warn of Indian attack, the US needs people all over the world to protect not just her friends and allies, but the American homeland itself.

Why then does Ron Paul, a man so rational in many areas, have such a blind spot when it comes to US national security?

In my opinion, Ron Paul’s justified distrust of the growth of government power in many unconstitutional areas has irrationally succumbed to an antipathy towards federal government activity in one of its few legitimate areas – national defense.

Further, Ron Paul’s libertarian suspicion of big government defense spending, has been deliberately fostered and encouraged by the most anti-libertarian elements in the land – the US hard left.

Ron Paul and many Libertarians think they can work with Marxists to achieve libertarian ends.

The hard bitten Leninists and disciplined Marxists of the left know they can use naive Libertarians to achieve their ends – particularly to gut America’s defenses, to the benefit of their foreign masters.

In short, the US left is using Ron Paul and other Libertarians, to do what their armies and intelligence services have long dreamed of – destroy America’s military superiority and with it, US national sovereignty.

By promoting the left’s defense policies, Ron Paul, a man of patriotism beyond question, could be unknowingly betraying his own country to its enemies.

The degree to which Ron Paul buys into leftist anti-defense views was well illustrated in 2010.

That year, The Sustainable Defense Task Force was formed in response to a request from far left Massachusetts Democratic Representative Barney Frank, Ron Paul and Oregon Democratic Senator Ron Wyden, to “explore possible defense budget contributions to deficit reduction efforts that would not compromise the essential security of the United States.”

What did the much heralded report recommend?

The Task Force’s proposals included cutting nuclear deterrence, reducing the fleet by 57 ships, including two carriers, canceling the Joint Strike Fighter, “severely curtail[ing] missile defense” (a direct quote from the report), retiring four Marine battalions, reducing the military by 200,000 personnel, cutting defense research spending by 50 billion over ten years and increasing health care fees for military personnel.

Daniel Greenfield of the excellent Sultan Knish blog, points out that many of the groups contributing to the report were funded by the notorious leftist billionaire, George Soros.

But Soros was not the only sinister influence here. Several report contributors had direct ties to the Marxists of Democratic Socialists of America and indirect ties to the Communist Party USA . Members of both organizations have been convicted of spying for hostile foreign powers. Both have ties to radical regimes such as Cuba and Venezuela. Both want to overturn US capitalism and replace it with Marxist socialism.

Other contributors have ties to the ultra-leftist Institute for Policy Studies, once described by British analyst Brian Crozier, as the “perfect intellectual front for Soviet activities which would be resisted if they were to originate openly from the KGB.”

Another associated with the Council for a Livable World – America’s oldest and best funded ‘peace” Political Action Committee. The Council was founded in 1962 by Hungarian expatriate Leo Szilard, a former Manhattan Project physicist, a Marxist and a reported Soviet spy. Council for a Livable World has helped finance hundreds of pro-“peace” leftists into office, including Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and Sustainable Defense Task Force initiators Barney Frank and Ron Wyden.

Barack Obama in 1994, with Council for a Livable World chairman, and Democratic Socialists of America affiliate , Jerome Grossman

On February 4, 2010, the Council for a Livable World announced that David Bonior would become the next chair of PeacePAC, the organization’s arm that endorses candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives. At the time, Bonior commented:

“I am honored to be selected as the next chairman of PeacePAC. I look forward to working with the experts on the committee’s Board of Directors to endorse and help elect strong, progressive candidates in the 2010 elections.

A former Democratic Party Whip, Bonior has, since 2007, been an open member of Democratic Socialists of America.

The Project on Defense Alternatives coordinated the work of the Task Force. Carl Conetta drafted the main body of the Task Force report in ongoing consultation with Task Force members who “developed or digested proposals from the diverse sources cited in the report.” A sub-committee of the Task Force reviewed the final draft before publication. Conetta was assisted in overseeing the report by his Project on Defense Alternatives co-director and fellow Task Force member Charles Knight – a long time member of Democratic Socialists of America.

D.S.A. member, and report author Charles Knight

Knight wrote an article for Boston Democratic Socialists of America’s The Yankee Radical of October 2001, entitled “Defense Budget Blues”:

It is important to note that George Bush has now fully joined the ranks of wartime Keynesians. He has a majority coalition with Democrats to spend the country out of the recession it is now entering. In the short term the left in this country cannot hope to advance a better option. We must instead focus on deepening our analysis and story of this time in history so that when our country tires of vengeful war and its repercussions we have done the groundwork to lead the country in a different direction.

Part of that story should be that 90+% of military investments have nothing to do with countering terrorism or with defending our homeland and that if we desire not to be a target of terrorist hate in the future we need to change our country’s stance in the world.

The economic self-interest of contractors is an important fact of the political economy, but the central impetus for high military budgets comes from the utility of military power to US elites in their efforts to enhance their position of dominance across the globe. We are seeing that power in action now.

Nevertheless, I believe that the majority of Americans do not share that interest in dominance with conservative elites. We must learn to provide a viable security option for this majority of Americans.

Connetta and Knight’s organization is the lead project of the Boston based Commonwealth Institute.

Interestingly, four of the Institute’s seven board members have been identified members of Democratic Socialists of America – Charles Knight, Richard Healey, Guy Molyneux and Cynthia Ward. A fifth, S. M. Miller, has at least been a long time D.S.A. affiliate. Richard Healey is the son of the famous, late California communist Dorothy Healey and is a former staffer with the Institute for Policy Studies. Healey also serves on the board of the Rosenberg Fund for Children, which is run by the sons of executed Soviet “atom bomb spies,” Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.

One notable former board member of the Project on Defense Alternatives was Dr. Philip Morrison, Professor, Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who died in April 2005. Morrison had been a Communist Party member, a Manhattan Project scientist and was suspected of being a Soviet spy – code names: “Relay” or “Serb.”

Other Taskforce members also had known radical associations:

William D. Hartung: Director of the Arms and Security Initiative at the New America Foundation, a leftist “think tank” headed by Steve Coll, a former Occidental College contemporary of Barack Obama’s. Hartung also serves on the Advisory Committee , of Foreign Policy in Focus, a project of the Institute for Policy Studies.

Christopher Hellman: National Priorities Project, which is a partner organization of the Institute for Policy Studies. The N.P.P. “analyzes and clarifies federal data” so that people can understand and influence how their tax dollars are spent. Board members include Jen Kern, of the D.S.A. front American Rights at Work, who previously worked in the ACORN national office, “providing research support for local ACORN organizers nationwide on issues from insurance and banking discrimination to jobs, education and minimum wage,” two Task Force members – Paul Kawika Martin and Miriam Pemberton, an Albany New York academic Lawrence Wittner, a member of Democratic Socialists of America and Connecticut academic Vijay Prashad, a long time affiliate of the Communist Party USA.

Heather Hulburt: National Security Network and a senior adviser with leftist New York “think tank” Demos, also a partner organization of the Institute for Policy Studies. Incidentally, both Barack Obama and his former communist “Green Jobs Czar” Van Jones, are former Demos Trustees, while Demos CEO Miles Rapoport has a long history with D.S.A.

Judith LeBlanc with Palestinian terrorist leader Yasser Arafat, 2002

Paul Kawika Martin: Political & Communications Director with Peace Action, the US’ largest “peace” umbrella group. Peace Action was formerly known as the National Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy, a well documented communist front. Mr. Martin “uses his expertise on nuclear weapons, international relations and US foreign policy to mobilize Peace Action’s 100,000 members and lobby Congress for social change.” His recent travels include trips to Cuba and Iran. Martin also works very closely with Judith LeBlanc, who is Peace Action’s national field organizer. LeBlanc is a vice-chair of the Communist Party USA and chairs it’s Peace and Solidarity Commission, the body charged with directing the US “peace movement” and liaising with foreign communist and terrorist organizations. Most recently, LeBlanc was organizing Peace Action activist to lobby the Senate “Committee of 12” to institute massive defense spending cuts.

Laicie Olson: Senior policy analyst Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation and board member of Council for a Livable World.

Miriam Pemberton: Institute for Policy Studies and the peace and security editor for Foreign Policy in Focus. Pemberton leads a group that produces the annual “Unified Security Budget for the United States.” Other recent publications include, “The Budgets Compared: Military vs. Climate Security.” She has authored two reports comparing the budgets for military and climate security in FY2009 and FY2010 and with William Hartung published “Lessons From Iraq: Avoiding the Next War.”

Prasannan Parathasarathi: Founder of the 25% Solution, which is “building a citizen movement for cuts in the Pentagon budget.” Parathasarathi is married to fellow Boston College academic and long time Democratic Socialists of America member, Juliet Schor. Incidentally Schor was one of several D.S.A. and Institute for Policy Studies leaders who set up the radical New Party in the early 1990s. One of their most well known and successful members was Barack Obama. The Coalition for Peace Action‘s 32nd Annual Conference for Peace was held on November 13, 2011 at Princeton University. The Conference was entitled “Smart Security: Reducing Military Spending to Fund Urgent Needs at Home.” The event featured talks from Dr. Prasannan Parthasarathi and Judith LeBlanc of the Communist Party, who “encouraged the audience to be hopeful about our political progress and to be involved with the current Occupy movements around the country.”

Prasannan Parthasarathi , left, Judith Leblanc, center

Clearly Ron Paul and Barney Frank’s Sustainable Defense Task Force was totally dominated by the hard left – people with an interest in transforming America through socialist revolution.

How did Ron Paul get sucked into this leftist scam? Did he not care who wrote his country’s defense policies? Did he not do “due diligence” on the people he entrusted with such a huge responsibility?

Either Ron Paul was extremely negligent in checking the bona fides of those he entrusted with such a vital responsibility or he just didn’t care that anti-American Marxists were involved.

I think Ron Paul was probably negligent. He was so blinded by his own prejudices, that he was willing to do a deal with the devil to get publicity for his cause.

That a serious contender for the presidency of the United States could be so careless over such a vital issue speaks volumes about his judgment.

Ron Paul may have been blinded by the left, but he is guilty of at least partially closing his eyes of his own accord. Candidate Paul should publicly admit his error and vow never to repeat it, or he should leave the presidential race and return to Congress.

Ron Paul is the best there is on financial and economic matters. That is the field where he can best serve his country and the cause of liberty.

Unfortunately, he clearly doesn’t have the understanding of defense issues required of a man who aspires to the highest office in the free world.

5 thoughts on “Blinded by the Left: How Marxists Wrote Ron Paul’s Defense Cuts Plan

  1. Here’s the deal, I’m not going to bother to read this entire article. I don’t need but to read the headline and the first few paragraphs to understand where this author comes from. Lets start with an idea. Lets say that you have someone that you don’t always agree with. Lets say Republicans and Democrats. Or any other political party. Isn’t it true that human nature will have something to offer to rivals that they can agree on? I discovered only tonight that there is a small part of the OWS group that actually know, understands and believes in the US Constitution. I couldn’t believe what I was hearing on the radio so I looked up the website. Sure enough, it was true. Anyways, who cares who help who with what. As long as the procedure and outcome is correct what difference does it make if it was a socialist, communist or who ever with any given conservative or constitutionalist. Just so long as the outcome is correct!

    Now as for this nonsense about its a new age, modern day, technology and the world is smaller and everyone is more vulnerable with all the missiles. It’s a BS argument to keep the fear in the people. Oh I’m sure the author of this piece buys into it hook line and sinker! And so that’s why maybe he shouldn’t be writing opinion pieces. Maybe no one should be writing opinion pieces. Maybe everyone should stick to facts and true knowledge.

    Which brings me to the next subject that I have already hinted to. The Constitution. The Constitution was written on the basis of how man thinks. How he thinks about others and how he interacts. In other words “Human Nature”. Oh yes, I agree that we live in a time when missiles can fly for thousands of miles at break neck speeds and in 27 minutes make it from Moscow to Washington. But man has not changed. Man will always love, hate, fight wars, make peace be greedy and be giving. Man will always be cold in the winter and warm in the summer. Fear strikes him and calmness as well.

    The Tea Party and other “so called conservatives” claim that they want to get back to the Constitution. They accuse the Left “Progressives” to use want they want from it and disregard the rest. Well the Neo-con’s are doing the very same thing when it comes to the subject of war and the safety of our country. They mis-construed the stand that Ron Paul makes when he speaks of defense and engagement of our enemies. More people should listen to what the man says rather than to go on hear say or some short bit or clip on a video. Or when he speaks in a debate and gets cut short for time restraints. But then, if you knew and understood your Constitution, maybe you wouldn’t need to pay such close attention to Ron Paul or any other candidate for that matter. You would almost instantly know the true Conservative thinking. The true Constitutionalist. You would know that our Founders were actually Libertarians and you would learn that that’s not such a bad thing. You would know that Ron Paul doesn’t think all drugs should be legalized because you would have a better understanding of the 10th Amendment of our Constitution. You would know what he is talking about when he speaks of War Powers, You would know what he speaks about when it comes to the Commerce Clause or the Supreme Clause.

    Before Obama was elected “falsely” as President, I had faith in the American people to know and do the right thing. One of the biggest disappointments of my life was to find that I share a country so filled with blinded idiots. Yes I called them idiots. Now, even as the American people witness the inside over throw of our government and it’s constitution, not nearly enough have taken the time to study it and find out what’s really in it. I am once again very very disappointed in many Americans for their laziness and failure to learn how to correct the wrongs that we have done.

    You can not pick out the parts of the constitution that you like and throw away the areas that don’t agree with you. There is a reason for all of it. It is a fine tunes machine that at times may fall out of tune, but there are ways to make it play a perfect tune with simply a small adjustment to it from time to time. But it in it’s original form was as near perfect as man could have ever done.

  2. I don’t normally respond to semi-coherent ramblings, but even I have my weak moments.

    Here’s the deal, I’m not going to bother to read this entire article. I don’t need but to read the headline and the first few paragraphs to understand where this author comes from. Lets start with an idea.

    Then why bother to respond at all? If you have not the diligence to pursue the truth, why pretend to be interested in it?

    Trevor has been a fan of Ron Paul for years. Trevor has also been a fan of the truth for years. And, more than that, Trevor is faithful to first principles, not fandom.

    When you’re a fan of a principle and a fan of a man, and you find that the man fails in the principle, then you cleave to the principle.

    Let’s say that you have someone that you don’t always agree with. Let’s say Republicans and Democrats. Or any other political party. Isn’t it true that human nature will have something to offer to rivals that they can agree on? [ . . . ] Anyways, who cares who help who with what. As long as the procedure and outcome is correct what difference does it make if it was a socialist, communist or who ever with any given conservative or constitutionalist. Just so long as the outcome is correct!

    How staggeringly naive!

    You don’t enlist the help of someone dedicated to destroying our system of government in the process of framing the duties of our government and expect to get a usable and “correct” result. And you don’t enlist the fox to guard the henhouse.

    [ … (rambling irrelevence redacted) … ] Maybe everyone should stick to facts and true knowledge.

    A suggestion I heartily endorse. So stop braying your talking points and go do the research. We did. We hate what we found, but we won’t deny that we found it.

    Which brings me to the next subject that I have already hinted to. The Constitution. The Constitution was written on the basis of how man thinks. [ . . . ] But man has not changed. [ blah, blah, blah ]

    No, the Constitution was written to constrain government. It’s not a treatise on human behavior or a deep philosophical discussion of man’s evolution. It’s not a vague and handwaving “suggestion” of good ideas. It’s concise, it’s focused, and it serves to frame a republic. Adjust your sextant, dude. You’re drifting badly.

    The Tea Party and other “so called conservatives” claim that they want to get back to the Constitution. They accuse the Left “Progressives” to use want they want from it and disregard the rest.

    Okay, stop right there, moron.

    If we’re going to work with the truth, you might want to at least acquaint yourself with it.

    Don’t even bother pretending you understand the Tea Party or what it stands for. Your commitment to the talking points gives lie to that.

    You’re not responding to the article, you’re posting a Ron Paul Uber Alles puff piece. Nice. Way to make his base look bad.

    Those of us who have supported Ron Paul for years, only now discovering his lapses, are having the same crisis of conscience that anyone has when he discovers his idol has feet of clay.

    Ron Paul is a principled man who is demonstrating startlingly bad judgment in his selection of advisors.

    And, as much as I admire the man and his principles, I can’t endorse his bad judgment. Accepting the advice of subversives who mouth similar-sounding “concerns” to your own is a fatal mistake. And a president who conducts his affairs like that can do untold damage to our nation and its culture.

    Well the Neo-con’s are doing the very same thing when it comes to the subject of war and the safety of our country. [ … (irrelevant talking points redacted) … ]

    Talking points. That’s all you’ve got? Talking points?

    Jesus, man, wake the hell up.

    Before Obama was elected “falsely” as President, [ … (obligatory anti-Obama, blame-the-electorate rant redacted) … ]

    Yeah, we know.

    The stupid voters. More friggin’ talking points.

    Dude. Give it a rest.

    You can not pick out the parts of the constitution that you like and throw away the areas that don’t agree with you. There is a reason for all of it. It is a fine tunes machine that at times may fall out of tune, but there are ways to make it play a perfect tune with simply a small adjustment to it from time to time. But it in its original form was as near perfect as man could have ever done.

    Yeah. We all know that. More talking points.

    Don’t lecture us, you sanctimonious fool.

    Peel the glaze from your eyes.

    If you support the principles of liberty, then scrutinize carefully the actions of whoever claims faith to those principles.

    Have the courage to notice when his feet, indeed, are found to be clay.

    Ron Paul, as much as I like him, and as much as I had hoped he was The One, has been consulting with people who mean us — our nation, our culture — dire harm.

    Me? I’m preferring the principle.

    You can prefer the man.

    ~~ AG

  3. Pingback: All Eyes On New Hampshire… Another GOP Debate – Updated | askmarion

  4. First, Ron Paul is a Republican and says he’s a libertatian with a small ‘L’.
    After that, I feel that this article is clutching at straws and know the ‘Sustainable Defense Task Force’ part was taken from something first written by Horowitz who absolutely hates Ron Paul.
    Also, I didn’t read where it showed Ron Paul specifically CHOSE Soros people for the study he was involved in. It’s all inuendos and guess work. Honestly, I read it like I read every other Ron Paul hit piece. But this time one written by a foreigner who wants to see America crumble from within. Why no one understands we can’t afford this kind of spending anymore is beyond me.
    It also leaves out the fact that back in November, Eric Cantor circulated a letter from the Americans for Tax Reform to the entire GOP caucus that called for the Pentagon’s budget to be put on the chopping block. “We write to urge you to institute principled spending reform that rejects the notion that spending cuts can be avoided in certain parts of the federal budget,” said the letter he sent to Senator Mitch McConnell and incoming House Speaker John Boehner. “Department of Defense spending, in particular, has been provided protected status that has isolated it from serious scrutiny.” The letter was signed by twenty-three people, including Norquist, David Keene of the American Conservative Union, Cato’s Christopher Preble, Richard Viguerie, Al Regnery of The American Spectator and many others. Also signing were Lisa Miller of Tea Party WDC and Matt Kibbe of FreedomWorks, the pro–Tea Party organization led by former House majority leader Dick Armey.
    It doesn’t even mention the Cato study or the well attended Capitol Hill meeting where Norquist and Preble laid out the conservative case for slashing military spending. Preble, with Ben Friedman of Cato, outlined a series of cuts identifying more than $1.2 trillion in cuts over the next decade—about a fifth of overall Pentagon spending.
    “When the Soviet Union disappeared,” said Norquist wryly, “a lot of people on the right failed to notice.” Referring to George W. Bush’s support for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and for greater military spending, Norquist said too many Republicans support feeding the Pentagon’s appetite “just because Fearless Leader said it’s a good idea.”
    I’d link to Cato’s military spending cut paper but it’s a pdf and I don’t know if this site accepts pdfs but you can look it up yourself.

    The fact remains that Ron Paul’s economic plan is the best offered by any candidate as it cuts $1trillion its first year. It’s bold, and may be difficult to execute, but you know exactly what he wants to do.
    I really don’t think the US needs to spend $800,000,000 a year on defense. That 4x more than what Reagan brought it up to and it swallows every other nation’s spending.
    If Congress declares war, Ron Paul goes in, fights like nobody’s business and wins, then gets out without nation building. That certain people have a problem with that strategy is beyond me.
    I think the fear/warmongering propaganda has to stop. We attack Iran, China joins them. Do people reading this really want WW3? Because that is exactly what is going to happen if you put in any of the RINO/progressives that are running.
    Oh yeah, go ahead, elect Newt or Romney or Santorum – all pro NDAA people. So happy to see NoisyRoom has no objection to our 5th, 6th and 8th Amendment rights stripped from us. Bush’s war machine has done more damage to our Constitution and loss of liberty than any terrorist. Actually, the terrorists have won. Everything America once stood for is gone. Newt even wants to alter the 1st Amendment because the terrorist have free speech, too. And of course, the free groping by the TSA is always a pleasure.
    I’ll wait for an update stating exactly which people Ron Paul specifically chose to be on the task force. Until then I’ll listen to the crickets.

Comments are closed.

Donate to
NoisyRoom.net

Support American Values...