He said much more than “guns and gold” although he did say that; from what I remember that is almost a direct quote. He hit all of the normal Ron Paul points, the fed, excessive credit, welfare and self-esteem, wars are bad, reject the use of force, political parties lie to you, etc. He even mentioned “the planners” and PNAC. It was a decent speech. (I’ve noticed when asked about CFR or Bilderberg, Ron refers to them as “the planners” rather than TPTB, illuminati, masons, etc. His references to that end keep me thinking that he is genuine. His kid has to know and doesn’t bother with the fine tuned rhetoric to still talk about them in public forums. You either get laughed at (Alex Jones) or arrested (“Don’t taze me, bro!”) except in Paul’s case. Linguistic precision is require and Ron Paul has that.
The setting was laughable as was the sign behind him.
Even Rand said good things (keeping the topic of light bulbs to a minimum) he spoke negatively of the war machine in a few of its aspects. Mewonders if Rand will get more tough on the rhetoric now that he is, for sure, totally of no influence in a Romney adminstration. Maybe that’s what he and Ron were waiting for all along? To see whether or not the GOP would actually let them in. Now that we, and they, know the answer is an emphatic elephant trunked, “NO!” they will move forward with more biting vocabulary in order to bring the ‘fringe’ back into the element.
Judging by Peter Schiff’s conversation with one of the organizers of “Paulfest” [and his response to what had happened (he figured it out mid conversation and you can tell)], Jesse Benton lumped Rockwell, Woods, Gary Johnson, Peter Schiff, and Adam Kokesh into the same “fringe” (quote from Benton) element. (Once Peter realized that he was in the event Jesse describes he immediately changes demeanor so as to not say anything further on the topic.) I wonder if Benton isn’t trying to maximize his events and organization, at the expense of the other similarly-themed events, by throwing the die hards under the bus for the Establishment.
It would make sense if Ron is retiring, and Rand is much more loose on his ethics, that Benton will no longer have to worry about “ideologically challenged” public figures to help campaign for and that, when becoming a bigger person’s problem, one can stand to make serious monied demands in order to politically maneuver bodies of people together like he has had to do.
To refer back to this question I asked
Maybe that’s what he and Ron were waiting for all along? To see whether or not the GOP would actually let them in
Anyone here is probably familiar with Ron Paul’s 1982 Gold Commission sitting. Now, there are rumors that the GOP party platform includes this very thing: another Gold Commission Inquiry. Is this is concession that the campaign went for? Something that the GOP conceded, literally, 30 years ago?
We can just give them the report from 1982! “Here, it’s worse now. Ask Bernanke for graphs.”
This is a tiny bone and almost shows that the GOP is stumped for “ideas from Paul that they can back rhetorically, but not in practice.” Because, I promise you, that is all Romney and his people were trying to find.
Ron and Rand must know behind their eyes that this is a slap in the face. The attempted mimicry of the Reagan administration’s Gold Commission? What about a simple Senate level “Debt Reduction Inquiry”? The Paul Commission? Rand could be on that (he did mention cutting military money in his speech).
But, my guess is that Ron and Rand will step up the rhetoric in the future to try to save face in the movement itself. Unless Romney courts Rand into some special deal during his administration it looks like the GOP beat the Paul’s at the leverage game of politics.