Skip to comments.S.F. billionaire quietly funds Ron Paul super PAC
Posted on 02/26/2012 12:39:38 PM PST by SmithL
Ron Paul revels in the fact that he is the presidential candidate of America's small donors, receiving more contributions under $200 than any other Republican seeking the White House in 2012.
But, like every other GOP presidential contender, he also has a mega-millionaire "sugar daddy" helping to fund a super PAC that is promoting Paul's candidacy.
Yet while Newt Gingrich underwriter Sheldon Adelson and Rick Santorum super-supporter Foster Friess have shared the campaign stage - and the national political spotlight - with their candidates, Paul's benefactor, San Francisco entrepreneur Peter Thiel, has never met the Texas congressman he's aiding.
Who is this mystery man who has donated $2.6 million to Endorse Liberty, the pro-Paul super PAC that has produced several viral videos and sponsored sharp attack ads against Santorum, Gingrich and Texas Gov. Rick Perry?
Thiel, 44, is a low-profile libertarian with a background as quirky as the candidate he supports.
Born in Germany, he's a self-made billionaire who became a chess master as a child, majored in philosophy at Stanford University, and founded the conservative-libertarian Stanford Review to "present alternate views" on a campus he felt was dominated by liberals.
He's a lawyer who co-founded PayPal, invested early in Facebook (he was portrayed by actor Wallace Langham in the Academy Award-winning "The Social Network"), dabbled in Hollywood (as executive producer of the libertarian satire "Thank You for Smoking"), ran a venture capital firm that saw the potential in startups such as LinkedIn and Yelp, and now serves as president of a global hedge fund, Clarion Capital.
He is a conservative Christian, a strong supporter of unfettered capitalism, an aggressive critic of "political correctness" and a generous donor to Republican candidates, including Paul, his son Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, and California Republican Reps. Dan Lungren, Dana Rohrabacher and Ed Royce.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
“Wonder how far enlistment will drop on that one.”
Why don’t we ask these troops?
The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
COLLUSION ADMITTED Ron Paul Fingered, Attacking Gingrich & Santorum for Romney
*Romney is the U.N. Agenda 21 candidate favored by the bankster/globalist manipulators; a very alarming, perhaps treasonous alliance
*Romney has a track record of strong ties to the homosexual agenda
*The global governance (para-Marxist) movement is about sexual as well as socioeconomic revolution
*Ron Paul has numerous problematic liaisons that call his conservative persona into question
For more on Thiel, see Follow Ron Pauls Money too: Peter Thiel, Globalist, Bilderberger, GOProud Activist. For more on the candidate in question, see the Gulag Bound tag, Ron Paul.
If you’re talking about them as basic concepts you could maybe make that connection, but I’m talking about them as the movements are defined today. Libertarianism is a lot closer to the left-wing than it is to the right-wing. It combines Dennis Kucinich’s views on the military with La Raza’s views on immigration, the radical feminist movement and the radical homosexual movement. The dismantling of government that libertarians want goes far beyond what conservatives would want, mainly because it goes far beyond what would even be necessary for a society to function and for America to remain a credible power on the world stage.
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals." If we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is. Now, I can't say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don't each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path".
You must not have even read the article. It is provided from a nationally syndicated newspaper and has pictures and stories of the veterans that marched on the whitehouse. Apparently they all don’t agree that our current foreign policy is in the best interest of our country.
Your use of the word imperial is curious. Did you intend to instead type empirical, or was it some kind of freudian slip related to an empire building obsession?
the basis of conservatism is Judeo/Christian morality
something Libertarianism lacks
lower the age of consent for homo sex between men and boys
just what part of that is the basis of Conservatism??
that is nothing more than anarchist Democrats, posing as supply side economists
Actually, he stood INSIDE their chow hall and video taped himself calling on the troops to desert in Ansbach Germany
smart phone predictive spelling
Of course there are military that support Paul as they do BHO.
I am saying this “overwhelming” support is BS.
He’s not a natural born citizen.
A man wants to cut off the looting of the American economy by the globalists and he’s dangerous?
You don’t think what has happened to this country and it’s citizens is dangerous?
You clearly prefer Hillary Clinton getting her picture taken with the G20 ‘family’, which is driving the politics in this country, over self determination.
What do you think of NATO allowing Afghanistan to prosecute the troops who burned the Korans?
What do you think of Germany writing the rules of engagement for Afghanistan through NATO?
What do you say to the families of the officers and troops who have been killed by the afghani police officers trained by our military and American policemen?
Why do you think, when the headline says NATO troops killed, its always Americans and no one from any other ‘NATO’ country?