Needs Attention: Glenn Beck Video: CATO, Soros and Tom Woods

[ord33]

So I am just briefly reading through the report. Glenn Beck in his video said that Ron Paul wanted to cut $1 Trillion out of the defense budget and made it sound like it could be dangerous. Well, if you look at the report, it says $960 Billion from 2011 to 2020. So about $100 billion per year. Not nearly as drastic as the way Glenn Beck portrays it. I am not going to take the time to read the entire report, but I wonder if is overall pretty good. So don't even attack the report itself and its strategies. Just attack three or four degrees of separation to Soros. Ron Paul - task force members - belong to think tank/foundations - who are funded by Soros. So now we don't take the individual merit of one's ideas?

Here is the report: http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/1006SDTFreport.pdf

 

[Mini-Me]

So I went to the report: http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/1006SDTFreport.pdf

And it says this clear as day about the individuals that Glenn Beck mentions have ties to foundations/think tanks that are tied to Soros:



So they are working as individuals and not representative of the foundations/think tanks. Yet Glenn Beck makes it out like these foundations (funded by Soros) are part of it when they aren't.

I would simply tell your dad,
a.) Frank is the head honcho here, so Ron Paul most likely didn't pick these people in the first place. Would Beck ever work with Frank? Sure, he wouldn't, but Paul wants to cut the military budget, and there aren't exactly too many people in Congress who want to do that, whom Beck WOULD work with. Plus, I think he'd prefer having a say in things rather than leaving it all to Frank.
b.) Even if he did pick the task force, exactly where was he supposed to find people for the experts panel, who were actually willing to suggest spending cuts? Frank would have undoubtedly vetoed anyone from the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and most other NGO's are bought and paid for by overt globalists or covert globalists (e.g. the PNAC). The conservative ones would block any proposed cut, so you're left with Beltway libertarian and progressive think tanks...and the latter road at the very least leads to George Soros.

In short: You're unlikely to find many "policy experts" on the right who would cooperate with a panel like this, and Soros has his hands in practically EVERYTHING on the left. Then, there's Cato, whose experts are pretty well-represented on the task force, and who have also been snuggling with Soros lately. Nobody from the LvM is there, possibly because their sole suggestion would be "cut everything," or possibly because Ron Paul probably had little to no say in who got on the panel anyway.

 

[Kevin Smyth]

Glenn Beck believes in the leftist globalist agenda of Global Warming:

http://www.usaweekend.com/article/20100219/ENTERTAINMENT01/100218001/Don-t-judge-Beck-by-his-cover

He believes in global warming

“You’d be an idiot not to notice the temperature change,” he says. He also says there’s a legit case that global warming has, at least in part, been caused by mankind. He has tried to do his part by buying a home with a “green” design and using energy-saving products. “I’m willing to do anything but use the CFLs,” he says of compact fluorescent light bulbs. “I put them in once and couldn’t stand the way they lit up the room.”

 

[romacox]

http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/6390-defense-department-builddown-coming

That article is great, and it is important to cut defense. But does not answer the documented accusation that Ron Paul had a large number of George Soros representatives on his panel for defense cuts, making it appear that he is either deliberately or unknowingly aligning himself with organizations that openly state they are for a one world governance and the destruction of American Freedoms (which I know Ron does not favor).


The video: CATO Institute invited George Soros to talk at their Institute. They (CATO and Soros) completed twisted the Hayek message as Tom Woods pointed out. That one I can easily answer as follows:

The Heritage Foundation which is a Conservative organization that the First Coast Tea Party recommends we study says the following in their book The Road to Serfdom (Special Abridged Edition)

___

From the grave, one of the most honored economists of the 20th century warns America — and all of Western civilization — to be wary of the mirage-like temptations offered by so-called "democratic socialism." While many regimes have fallen for socialism's false promises, Friedrich A. Hayek lived to see the likes of President Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher specifically credit his ideas for much of their own governances respecting the worth of the individual.

The Heritage Foundation has distilled Hayek's 67-year-old classic "The Road to Serfdom" into an "abridged" version that reads as if it had been written in 2011. His concerns of another era bear a remarkable resemblance to those of many Americans that their current president is taking them down a path that will ultimately lead to tyranny.

An excess of governmental planning, the Nobel prize-winning scholar writes, leads to dictatorship "because dictatorship is the most effective instrument of coercion and as such, is essential if [public-sector] central planning on a large scale is to be possible." For that reason, he prefers private-sector economic planning with a minimum of government interference.

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/vernon/111121

So Reagan, Ron Paul and the Heritage Foundation align themselves with Hayek. However George Soros and the CATO institute are twisting that message to mean something entirely different than what Hayek preached.

That being said, it does not explain why Ron Paul would allow so many Progressives on his defense committee.

 

[Mini-Me]

That being said, it does not explain why Ron Paul would allow so many Progressives on his defense committee.

The "his" part might be the operative misunderstanding though.

 

[ord33]

I have a feeling Ron Paul needs to get knowledgeable about the contents of the report - what gets cut, etc. Because I have a strong feeling it will be asked to him in a question at the debate this weekend. They could ask questions about "curtailing National missile defense efforts" etc. and it would be a legitimate question. I really hope he prepares well for the debate especially regarding National Security/Foreign Policy.

 

[Kevin Smyth]

I have a feeling Ron Paul needs to get knowledgeable about the contents of the report - what gets cut, etc. Because I have a strong feeling it will be asked to him in a question at the debate this weekend. They could ask questions about "curtailing National missile defense efforts" etc. and it would be a legitimate question. I really hope he prepares well for the debate especially regarding National Security/Foreign Policy.

If any of the other candidates picks up on Beck's charges and uses it in the next debate Paul is in serious trouble.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Glenn Beck is afraid to close his eyes at night; afraid George Soros is hiding under his bed.

 

[Mini-Me]

If any of the other candidates picks up on Beck's charges and uses it in the next debate Paul is in serious trouble.

Not really. The vast majority of Americans don't even have a clue how sinister George Soros is anyway, and Ron Paul will easily be able to set the record straight about his involvement (or lack thereof) in picking the task force, and the options they had to pick from. Of course, it's another story if he says, "I didn't know," but we'll see.

 

[romacox]

I have a feeling Ron Paul needs to get knowledgeable about the contents of the report - what gets cut, etc. Because I have a strong feeling it will be asked to him in a question at the debate this weekend. They could ask questions about "curtailing National missile defense efforts" etc. and it would be a legitimate question. I really hope he prepares well for the debate especially regarding National Security/Foreign Policy.

Ditto

 

[The New Deal Sucked]

It is going to come down to Us v. Mittens. All of these Neocons are going to have a lot of explaining to do if they decide to back Mittens instead of the Good Doctor. Beck, Jim Robinson, Rush/Hannity/Levin, etc... have nailed Paul a couple times, but they've really gone after Romney as a moderate/liberal from MA for a long time now. They lose their credibility if they back him over Paul.

 

[romacox]

Not really. The vast majority of Americans don't even have a clue how sinister George Soros is anyway, and Ron Paul will easily be able to set the record straight about his involvement (or lack thereof) in picking the task force, and the options they had to pick from. Of course, it's another story if he says, "I didn't know," but we'll see.

There are many people who know about Soros and his connections. Yes, I agree that it is important that Ron knows about this, so he will have answers. Otherwise it could cost the election

 

[Carpenter1966]

^^^^ Yeah, me too, I don't have two hours to blow. Give it to me in nutshell. Why was Paul in the same room as Frank on this? And who did do the picking of the council? Being in with Bawney is near indefensible, and I'll hold up for RP through just about any issue.

The stuff I'm getting hit with is "How can we trust Paul if he's in with the Soro's backed budgeteers?"

 

[vechorik]

Could this be addressed by the statement I heard Dr. Paul make:

Get Democrats together, see where to cut,
Get Republicans together, see where to cut
and then decide?

I admire Dr. Paul for working with Democrats -- the opposition uses it as a VILE attack.

 

[ord33]

I would simply tell your dad,
a.) Frank is the head honcho here, so Ron Paul most likely didn't pick these people in the first place. Would Beck ever work with Frank? Sure, he wouldn't, but Paul wants to cut the military budget, and there aren't exactly too many people in Congress who want to do that, whom Beck WOULD work with. Plus, I think he'd prefer having a say in things rather than leaving it all to Frank.
b.) Even if he did pick the task force, exactly where was he supposed to find people for the experts panel, who were actually willing to suggest spending cuts? Frank would have undoubtedly vetoed anyone from the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and most other NGO's are bought and paid for by overt globalists or covert globalists (e.g. the PNAC). The conservative ones would block any proposed cut, so you're left with Beltway libertarian and progressive think tanks...and the latter road at the very least leads to George Soros.

In short: You're unlikely to find many "policy experts" on the right who would cooperate with a panel like this, and Soros has his hands in practically EVERYTHING on the left. Then, there's Cato, whose experts are pretty well-represented on the task force, and who have also been snuggling with Soros lately. Nobody from the LvM is there, possibly because their sole suggestion would be "cut everything," or possibly because Ron Paul probably had little to no say in who got on the panel anyway.

I think that is a pretty good explanation about not being able to obtain anybody from the "right" that is even willing to consider cutting Defense/Military spending. And its obvious that Soros funds a large portion of the left's objectives. This report does make clear that these individuals aren't acting on behalf of the think tanks/groups that Soros is (or has) funding though. I actually ran it by my dad a little while ago and tried to explain everything to him and asked him why didn't Beck attack him on something within the report if it was so bad? He didn't really like that Paul was so close to Barney Frank on this, nor did he like the association with Soros. But he wasn't as upset after talking to him. He's pretty darn solid in the corner of Ron Paul, this just shook him. He listens to Beck a lot. He was kind of upset with Beck stating that "he (Beck) always blindly supports Israel and doesn't give Ron Paul a fair shake on defense." This association that Beck points out will definitely effect a fence sitter that is considering Ron Paul. There needs to be a good response.

 

[rolle]

I wish the Judge would call Glenn and tell him to pull his head out of his ass.

 

[Publicani]

I am tired of fighting for Glenn Beck on this forum. Ok, fine, he is an idiot. Forget Beck.

Regardless. Ron's campaign should take these accusations very seriously and get out with plausible explanations very quickly. All explanations that I read here are not good. They are all true, but they will not work for the general public. What I am really afraid though, is that the campaign will not react and then at the next debate or interview Ron will be unprepared and it'll start a new news cycle.

There is a more general problem here. Does the campaign have a quick response unit? These attacks will be coming. The campaign should develop a business structure for a quick and thorough reaction. We can't do it - we don't have all the information, we don't know the motivation, and we don't know with which response Ron will be more comfortable for whatever reasons.

IF the campaign does that, it'll be easier to get on major TV, by the way. Ron can't be invited to talk about his trillion dollar cut. BUt he can will be invited to address such sexy accusation - Soros, Beck, Frank - it's a dream for a TV interviewer. Once there, he can talk about his cuts.

I understand that there's a risk that non-story will get legs after Ron addresses it. But it all depends how to address it. It's always better for the campaign to attack than to wait passively. And also, this to me seems a very weak attack, so it's better to spend airwaves on this than on whatever else will be thrown Ron's way.

 

[COpatriot]

Beck has had this borderline homosexual obsession with Soros for quite a while now. I doubt he'll stop bashing Paul over this.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

No, Paul is not tied to Soros.

Soros is a self-described advocate of the New World Order, he helped the Nazi's, and he is a socialist

 

[eff]

Didn't Paul cosponsor that marijuana bill with frank?
Did anyone have problem with that?