David Horowitz: "Ron Paul...is a Disgrace"

A sign, if of nothing else, of some of the trouble Ron Paul can expect as a GOP primary candidate in 2008's presidential cycle: Right-wing fighter against campus lefties David Horowitz (author, in a previous ideological life, of a huge book excoriating U.S. cold war foreign policy from a leftist perspective, The Free World Colossus ) says in a Frontpagemag interview:

Some of my best friends are libertarians and the greatest intellectual influence on me was Hayek. However, in practical political matters, libertarians tend to live in alternate universe, without regard for the real world consequences of their actions. Ron Paul – the only Libertarian in Congress – is a disgrace. He has waged a war against America’s war on terror, in lockstep with the left, and against the state of Israel, the frontline democracy in this war.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Ron Paul - the only Libertarian in Congress - is a disgrace.

    David Horowitz


    That has to be the best endorsement he's gotten since he announced his candidacy.

  • ||

    He has waged a war against America's war on terror, in lockstep with the left, and against the state of Israel, the frontline democracy in this war.

    My memory must be getting poor, have I forgotten seeing footing of Ron Paul in fatigues in the West Bank? Unless Horowitz is using the "Nay vote of something I endorse, even when it passes anyway" as his standard for "waging a war".

  • ||

    As if I needed another reason to vote for Dr. Paul! See its not just the shrieking Irish (Hannity, O'Reilly) talking heads who are cowards. The former campus radicals once bravely striding the ramparts turned out to be cringing chickeshits too!

  • ||

    EDIT: footage of Ron Paul

  • Grotius||

    What have been the "real world" consequences of the war in Iraq again?

    Taking our eye off the situation Afghanistan has got to be one of them.

  • ||

    Anybody who ever thought any government could effectively fight a War on Terror is a disgrace.

    War?
    What is it good far?

    "cringing crikeshit" I love that.

  • ||

    Before this thread degenerates into the usual Iraq fest, one question; what if anything has Ron Paul ever said about Israel that would cause Horowitz to say that? I really don't know what Paul has to say about Israel and wonder if anyone else does?

  • ||

    what if anything has Ron Paul ever said about Israel that would cause Horowitz to say that?

    If you're not with HR921, you're against us.

  • megs||

    Another example of how those vaguely libertarian are dismissed by people on the right or left - by calling them close to the left or the right.

    Maybe it's because they know that criticizing Paul for not actually doing anything will make him more appealing to the average voter? Most of us don't want a president to actually do all that much, hence the love of opposing parties controlling the branches. Bi-partisan stuff stinks.

    The comment about real world consequences is hilarious in context with being against the war on terror.

  • ||

    "But I also object to the unreasonable accusations that the Government of Lebanon has not done enough, when we realize that Israel occupied southern Lebanon for 18 years and was not able to neutralize Hezbollah."

    Hezbollah indescriminately bombing civilians and Ron Paul has a problem with it. Fuck him and the horse he road in on. It is too bad that the Libertarian Party can't do better for itself.

    Thanks for the link MP.

  • ||

    That should be Ron Paul has a problem with Israel defending themselves.

  • Thomas Paine\'s Goiter||

    So right wing jewish guy freaks out that someone doesn't want to spend money on farce of a war or defense of Israel.

    In other news: sun comes up.

  • ||

    He also said this:

    http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=3987

  • ||

    John,

    You realize that Paul is a Republican, right? Besides, his point is that it's unfair for Israel to expect the Lebanese Government to be able to neutralize Hezbollah when they were unable to do so while they controlled the region.

  • ||

    waiv,

    That one is more of a rant against foreign aide than anything against Israel. The money quote seems to be

    "The interventionist approach that has dominated American foreign policy since World War I has produced an unmitigated series of disasters. From Korea to Vietnam to Kosovo to the Middle East, American military and economic meddling has made numerous conflicts worse, not better."

    That is just typical know nothing Pat Buchanan type bullshit. Oh yeah, Korea was a real disaster. Things would be so much better if we had let the North Koreans overrun the South and turn into a prison state rather than the free and highly productive South Korea we have today.

  • ||

    John,
    Here's his opening lines from his weekly column from Jan 22

    Former President Carter's new book about the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine has raised the ire of Americans on two sides of the debate. I say "two sides" rather than "both sides," because there is another perspective that is never discussed in American politics. That perspective is the perspective of our founding fathers, namely that America should not intervene in the internal affairs of other nations.


    So according to Horowitz, not supporting Israel is the same as, waging war against Israel.

  • ||

    But it is bullshit for Ron Paul to object to Israel defending itself. If you can't control the people within your borders and those people attack another country, that country has a right to self defense. Paul seems to be denying that for Israel. In Ron Paul world, Israel is suppose to just sit around and take it because the Lebonese are trying. That is what I object to.

    I know Ron Paul is a Republican, but that doesn't mean I have to like the guy. Trent Lott is a Republican two and I wouldn't give you a bucket a piss for him.

  • ||

    Warren,

    I would have to see that paragraph in conext. Frankly, I am not sure what the views of the founders have to do with Jimmy Carter lying about Israel in his book.

  • ||

    John, as my father used to say "You went off half-cocked"

    Reread that paragraph in question. Paul is saying its unfair to criticize Lebanon for failing to contain Hezbollah when Israel couldnt do it after 18 years.

    There is no critique of Israel in that statement, but perhaps you want to subscribe to Frontpage anyway.

  • ||

    Is John the biggest tard in blog comment history?

    He just wrote, "It is too bad that the Libertarian Party can't do better for itself." Eight minutes later, he writes, "I know Ron Paul is a Republican..."

    And I believe waiv cited the antiwar.com article as a rebuttal to John's claim that Paul is anti-Israel. That, too, went over John's head.

  • ||

    But it is bullshit for Ron Paul to object to Israel defending itself.

    Nowhere has Ron Paul ever objected to Israel defending itself. That's just bullshit. There's a difference between failing to support, and actively opposing.

  • ||

    There's a difference between failing to support, and actively opposing.

    Not for David Horowitz, there isn't.

  • ||

    However, in practical political matters, libertarians tend to live in alternate universe, without regard for the real world consequences of their actions.

    Unlike the neocons, who are sober realists...

  • ||

    Here's the whole thing:
    http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst012207.htm

    Basically it says "The US Defense Forces should only be used to defend to defend the US. Trying to mold the world to our liking is folly and a bad idea to begin with". That's the kind of rhetoric a libertarian longs to hear. If you can't get behind that, then fuck you and your horse.

  • ||

    John: "Trent Lott is a Republican two"

    Try "Trent Lott is a Republican too"

  • ||

    Anon,
    Your goig too try two corretc John's spellig?
    Gud luk! Its an uphil battel.

  • Philly Dave||

    Uh Oh ! Either Horowitz fortgot hiomself or the warmongers are switching gears and no longer are going to ignore Paul but will attack him.

    This is a good thing.

  • ||

    That perspective is the perspective of our founding fathers, namely that America should not intervene in the internal affairs of other nations.

    Out of curiosity, where does this perspective come from? Who is it attributed to?

  • ||

    Trent Lott is a Republican two

    I think he's rated a little higher than that. I'd say he's a Republican three. He was somewhat important to the party for a while.

  • ||

    Place yer bets... place yer bets... How long until Single Issue Voter swoops down to again proclaim it's statism in America is entirely the fault of "progressives" and continue to imply that libertarians should continue to bend over and support fucks like Horowitz, Coulter, Romney, et al.

    (Of course, despite his stand on the war, I'm not voting for Paul because he's got it in his head that fetus-fetishism and nativism are libertarian positions.)

    Sorry, I'd rather vote for the CP-USA than for any Republican or "conservative" right now.

  • ||

    He has waged a war against America's war on terror...

    So it seems that Paul is waging a War on Error...I think most of America can get down wit dat Mr Horrorwitz!

  • ||

    Edit: ...proclaim that statism in America...

  • T||

    No, Lott's the Minority Whip this go round, which makes him Republican two after Mitch McConnell's Rebublican one.

  • T||

    Rebublican

    Yeah, that too. Whatever the hell that is...

  • VM||

    High:

    Yooo da man!

    Between the NASCAR and this thread, it looks like you win at teh Intertubez today!

  • Edward||

    Just how does a destabilized Middle East help Israel?

  • ||

    Out of curiosity, where does this perspective come from? Who is it attributed to?

    George Washington

  • ||

    "what if anything has Ron Paul ever said about Israel that would cause Horowitz to say that?"

    Ron Paul believes we should be neutral in regards to Israel. He was only one of three Republicans in the House that voted against the vote of support for Israel in Israel's recent war last summer against the Hezbollah

  • ||

    Wow, VM. Thanks!
    My life is complete. I am going to write 666 on my shaved head, proclaim myself the Antichrist, then hang myself.

    K-Fed, come back.

  • ||

    I like Paul more and more.

    Still can't figure out what John is complaining about.

  • VM||

    High#:

    nah- it's been done. Most recently by Mr. Crane. "What A" Dienstag blogged about it. :)

    (Kfed was on Q101 this morning. It sounded like a bad parody)

    rdkraus - if you figure it out, please tell! Maybe he's actually supporting Dr. Paul; it's just that his spelling is so bad that it looks like he's complaining?

  • ||

    The former campus radicals once bravely striding the ramparts turned out to be cringing chickeshits too!

    At least, the ones who turned traitor.

  • clone12||

    The phrase "some of my best friends are..." is a sure sign that the speaker is about to rip into some of his/her "best friends"

  • ||

    Does this mean that it's time for me to rehabilitate the prolifically violent and wildly successful terrorist group Jews for Ron Paul? Cuz I'll do it. And this time, I'm declaring myself President-For-Life and doubling the proportion of ninjas on staff.

    Seriously, all Jews should support Ron Paul. It should be a requirement for becoming Bar Mitzvah and furthermore large pictures of Ron Paul should preside solemnly over every bris. As President-for-Life, I have decreed it thus.

  • ||

    I'm confused, is this the same John, because it's a different email.

    What gives? Does the Army not like you to shill for AIPAC on their dime or what?

  • ||

    Vincente,
    Peleus != John.Kluge.

  • ||

    Can I be Vice President, HHIC? At least one of the ninjas. Can there be Jewish ninjas?

    Oh yeah. I'm a Jewish libertarian, and Horowitz is an idiot. Not like the latter part isn't obvious or anything.

  • chucklehead||

    John | March 5, 2007, 2:57pm | #
    But it is bullshit for Ron Paul to object to Israel defending itself. If you can't control the people within your borders and those people attack another country, that country has a right to self defense. Paul seems to be denying that for Israel. In Ron Paul world, Israel is suppose to just sit around and take it because the Lebonese are trying. That is what I object to.


    Wow, in just 5 posts, he goes from knowing very little about Paul's position to actually reading his mind!

  • LarryA||

    However, in practical political matters, libertarians tend to live in alternate universe, without regard for the real world consequences of their actions.

    As opposed to Republicans and Democrats, who completely disregard the real-world consequences of their actions, and the laws they pass?

    Pot-->Kettle-->Black

  • ||

    I'm so bored with Israel,
    But what can I do?

  • ||

    henry,

    Israeli detectives are always on the TV
    Cos killers in the Levant work seven days a week (except Shabbos)

  • ||

    Do "Lebanese Civil War" next.

  • ||

    or
    "Haifa's Burning."

  • ||

    or
    "(Jewish Man) In Al-Aqsa Mosque"

  • ||

    Just listen to Micah Jones' song about the IDF's performance in Lebanon, Train in Vain.

  • ||

    or My Safe Mediterranean Home

  • ||

    But it is bullshit for Ron Paul to object to Israel defending itself. If you can't control the people within your borders and those people attack another country, that country has a right to self defense. Paul seems to be denying that for Israel. In Ron Paul world, Israel is suppose to just sit around and take it because the Lebonese are trying. That is what I object to.

    For the record (not that you care about facts, John), Hezbollah attacked Israeli soldiers and Israel responded by bombing Lebanese civilians. So, John, fuck you and the horse you rode on.

  • ||

    Herb - that's a plus for Dr Paul in my book. What does Israel do for us? I understand that they are fairly democratic, and I've got no problems with the "man on the street" in Israel, but I often have a lot of problems with the attitude and actions of the Israeli government at times.

  • ||

    Horowitz thinks Paul is a Libertarian. Talk about "distortion"! (although I wouldn't call it "character assassination").

    Paul used to be a Libertarian, in the same sense that Horowitz used to be commie pinko scum (with the difference that many Libertarian principles are wonderful, and commie pinko scum are bad).

  • ||

    (with the further difference that Dr. Paul has kept his principles while pragmatically working throught the Republican Party)

  • Cesar||

    Lowdog-

    I too get sick of the attitude among many Israeli politicians (especially Benjamin Netanyahu et. al) that the United States somehow owes them something.

    For the record, I feel the same way about other wealthy industrialized countries (South Korea, Japan, Germany) that still want us to pick up the tab for their defense budgets.

  • ||

    You know what? People who howled for the Iraq War to begin, like Horowitz did, don't get to accuse people who called bullshit, like Ron Paul did, of not paying due regard to the consequences of their actions.

    Hey, Horowitz, who was it that urged Israel to launch that war against Hizbollah - was that Ron Paul, or was that you?

  • ||

    "highnumber | March 5, 2007, 3:16pm | #

    Trent Lott is a Republican two

    I think he's rated a little higher than that. I'd say he's a Republican three."

    OK, here we have a guy called "highnumber," who tells us that being rated three is higher than two.

    Now consider this: thanks to John, that is not even in the top five dumbest comments on the thread.

  • ||

    Hey, I was rating the man on a scale of 1-10. Overall, as a Republican, I'd say he's about a three.
    joe,
    As a liberal, I'd say you are about 6. ;)

  • ||

    But...but...but...you can dance to me!

  • ||

    Basically it says "The US Defense Forces should only be used to defend to defend the US. Trying to mold the world to our liking is folly and a bad idea to begin with". That's the kind of rhetoric a libertarian longs to hear.

    I do long to hear it, but it's wrong. To believe that the need for defense stops at your border is unjustified by history, and to act on that belief is suicide.

    If you can't get behind that, then fuck you and your horse.

    My horse, ironically, likes it doggy style.

  • Asharak||

    I think Paul has some nutty views, but where does a statist and total fraud like Horowitz get off lecturing to libertarians, let alone about the "real world?"

    And Max, you're absolutely right about Horowitz's commie pinko past, but he still hasn't stopped thinking like a commie pinko.

  • Asharak||

    And regardless of how one feels about Paul's opinions about Middle East policy, Horowitz certainly has no right to be making his usual accusations of anti-Semitism and terrorist sympathizing when he associates with the likes of Paul "Christ was crucified by the Jews" Weyrich and gives FPM column space to Stephen Scwhartz, who supports the al Qaeda-connected KLA.

  • ||

    Heh. Anyone who pisses David Horowitz off can't be all that bad.

    Horowitz--"drink-sodden ex-Trotskyite popinjay"

    And you know what? Even when he turns himself around totally 180 degrees, he's still a silly statist.

  • Asharak||

    I think "drink-sodden ex-Trotskyite popinjay" was used to describe Christopher Hitchens, actually, but you're right about everything else.

  • goldhorder||

    I didn't realize there were Israeli shills who claimed to be libertarian. You should be kinder to Ron Paul John. He didn't bother bringing up that Hezzbolah didn't even exist before Israel's invasion of Lebanon to flush out the PLO. The Shite population was happy to be rid of the poor PLO beggars in the refugee camps at first...until they got the checkpoint, curfew, untermenschen treatment fromt the IDF. Screw Israel. Some of the worst bunch of beggars leaching off US taxpayers that exist. Ron Paul and myself are in favor of not giving them another dime and having them fend for themselves. Let them solve their own conflicts.

  • Goldhorder||

    Yes...just look at what happened to Switzerland. Over 200 years of peace even being smack in the middle of two world wars...but seriously...who is a parasatic military industrial complex supposed to operate in an environment like that?
    "To believe that the need for defense stops at your border is unjustified by history, and to act on that belief is suicide."

  • ||

    Hey goldhorder, tell us how you really feel. Please share the sad stories of "untermenschen treatment" that grip your sensitivities. Illuminate us with your brilliant insight into how the nasty IDF went after the "poor PLO beggars" with no justification. How did those conniving Israelis force Hizbollah to stupidly attack even after the UN got all of Lebanon's land reclaimed?

    "Fend for themselves"? "Let them solve their own conflicts"? Do you realize how silly you sound? Ever Google any story of US soldiers defending Israel from assaults by its vastly larger neighbors? BTW, ever see any UN troops defending this legitimate nation state under illegal attack from other UN members? Fail to recall how the Arab armies were supported by Soviet Union arms during the Cold War? Ever consider that the war on terror is actually necessary because the Islamist enemy is a real enemy and it is not just some propaganda or flippant conspiracy theory? Their own conflicts? Hardly.

    The biggest problem with your "solution" is that Israel's enemies and America's enemies are the same people (going back to the Barbary Coast). Most Americans understand this basic survival equation at a core level and therefore the inability of the pro-PLO / anti-Israel lobby to make a dent in the overwhelming American public opinion that supports Israel and does not trust the PLO. Until the Islamist's stop rejoicing in ritual human sacrifice, Israel will continue to be seen as the only beacon of humanity in a sea of repression - even the Israeli Arabs don't want to be a part of any potential PLO state. Your rants, twists, and manipulations may fool some of the people all of the time…

  • ||

    "I do long to hear it, but it's wrong. To believe that the need for defense stops at your border is unjustified by history, and to act on that belief is suicide."

    Sweden has committed suicide? Why doesn't anyone tell me these things?

    But seriously, not only is this stance obviously not suicidal, it is actually beneficial to the countries who practice it. Of course, there are other alternatives as well between the highly interventionistic policy we have now and the Sweden/Swiss model.

    American soldiers, as well as advisors, could join, or contract out to, foreign legions whose causes they support. American defense contractors could sell weapons of mass destruction to friendly liberal democracies. Along with that American technical experts could work for those liberal democracies. Just for starters.

  • Asharak||

    I was thinking that someone should also explain to Horowitz that are libertarians (including a couple of Reason columnists) who did support the war in Iraq, but I guess he wouldn't like them either because they also don't want to jail all the "traitors" who disagree with them.

    And aside from Paul and a few paleo-libs, I haven't seen any real anti-Israel hostility coming from most libertarians, big-L, small-l, or otherwise. Perhaps it's the libertarian opposition to public foreign aid that rubs Horowitz the wrong way.

  • ||

    Stop implying that Americans who put America above Israel are "anti-semitic." It's soooo cliche. Ron Paul condemned the attacks personally, but he consistently explains that's it not within the scope of Congress to be writing silly "resolutions" and making lofty speeches when the whole world clearly knows that the U.S. won't be supporting Hezbollah anytime soon. That's like Congress declaring "WE OPPOSE OSAMA!" and wasting time and money to stage a ceremony. He does not want to see the U.S. bogged down in another conflict the way it is now...
    As far as being weak on terror, I bet his border policies and some cracking down on the corrupt FBI would probably do more for the war on terror than meddling in international affairs (I can't imagine Giuliani, McCain, Gingrich doing much better than Bush...)
    Americans are strong, and need not depend on Israel to take on radical Islam. To say otherwise insults me as an American!
    Ron Paul, a disgrace? He's the only true American patriot running in 2008, I think..

  • dan22||

    Believe it or not, a lot of Israeli's support Ron Paul
    http://israelfinancialexpert.b...../label/Ron Paul

  • ||

    David Horowitz is no conservative. He was part of the black radical terrorists of the 1960s who threatened European Americans and he only left the democratic party when they found out he was nothing more than a radical Jewish Nationalist who is only interested in using the blood and money of non-Jews to fight wars for Israel.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement