0 votes

UPDATE: Palin 'proud' to endorse Paul

Updated 2/1 5:30 PM: Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said Monday that she is “proud” to back Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul, clearing up any doubts raised about the endorsement by Paul’s opponents.

“I’m proud to support great grassroots candidates like Dr. Paul,” Palin said in a statement to POLITICO. “While there are issues we disagree on, he and I are both in agreement that it’s time to shake up the status quo in Washington and stand up for common sense ideas.”



David Adams, Rand Paul's campaign manager has confirmed this morning that SarahPAC has sent them financial support and authorized the release of that information as an endorsement of Rand Paul for the GOP candidate to replace retiring baseball hall of fame pitcher and two term incumbent Jim Bunning.

"This is a huge boost to the Paul campaign and will open the way for more endorsements to follow", said one local GOP insider.

Official link:

Since the announcement, Sen. Dan Seum (R-Louisville) just called to announce his support. “I’m withdrawing my previous endorsement for Trey Grayson,” Sen. Seum said. “I support Rand Paul.”



Take a look at what IU YAL does in Bloomington - our latest video:

Check out our video report from the event--including an interview with
Carol Paul regarding if he will run in 2012!

"Rand Paul" Revolution song for both Dr. Pauls!

You can catch the full audio of the event here:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Skeptical or not I'm happy

Skeptical or not I'm happy that Rand is getting positive attention in the media. The more who hear of him, the merrier. It's sorta like Glenn Beck: do we agree with all his words? NO!! But, anyone who gets on public TV and quotes Jefferson and Paine makes me believe that SOME of the viewers will start to think for themselves.

Silence isn't always golden....sometimes it's yellow.

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." - Patrick Henry

Is anyone else skeptical

Is anyone else skeptical about this? I don't know how good of a thing it is that Palin is endorsing Rand. Does this mean that Rand is more similar to the likes of Palin than we though?

Michael Nystrom's picture

Trey Grayson:

Kentucky's Martha Coakley.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

well . . .

I have quite a few friends who are not yet 'awake' philosophically/politically, who really adore Sarah Palin.

I think she might be a nice person to meet buying tomatoes at a farmer's market--

My youngest libertarian family member believes that Sarah needs to work on her family relationships before trying to tackle the country--

I can see how the endorsement would be a big deal to those who are teetering on the edge of the political line--

from my perspective, having many friends with neo-conservative leanings--

and to say "neo-conservative" (even Ron Paul uses "neo-con") is not a slur; Levi Strauss was happy to be called a "neo-conservative"--

"paleo-conservative" isn't used as much, but it's also a legitimate "label".

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--


One of Rand's opponents is trying to flood a poll on this, please show your support for Rand here:


To quote one of his opponent's supporters, "This poll will allow you to vote more than once. So please remember to VOTE EARLY AND OFTEN!!"

The Bill Johnson

Idiots over there are just cracking me up. He's probably whipping all 3 of his supporters to try and get donations to get back all the money he loaned his campaign, haha

Eric Hoffer

Did Gingrich pull the big switch to split the Tea Party?

Palin's strings have been carefully pulled for some time. It is easy to endorse a winner, especially if the likely winner asks for such and most especially if endorsing a Paul will equate psychologically to a Paul endorsement of a NeoCon! Case in point, which illustrates the strategy employed by the RNC and DNC...

Prior to "endorsing" the most likely "winner" in KY's Senate race, Rand Paul, Palin had just stomped on the liberty candidate in Texas, where a much closer and critical battle to defeat the GOP and Democratic Neocons now hangs in the balance. Medina relates well with liberty patriots, and is the by far only sound candidate for governor of Texas... but the GOP and DNC do not agree and the globalists need a Neo con in Texas!

Logically and strategically there is no better way to split the passions of the less knowledgeable patriots and Tea Party members, who may be following the wiles and ways of Palin, than having Palin endorse the opponent of liberty good candidates, and then turn around and endorse a liberty candidate who is already winning.

The fact that the unsupported Deborah Medina is in the most critical race for liberty of the two, escapes the grassroots, and the fact that Rand Paul was long supported with outstanding donations by the grassroots, so much so that he passed his opponents in the pools, long before Palin entered the picture, also escapes the average voter.

What does not escape them is that Palin is elevated to God-like status, is promoted in the media and by the parties as the leader of all things conservative, pretends to be the new ruler and leader of the Tea Parties, thanks to Beck, et al, AND now has condescended to "bless" the Rand Paul campaign with her endorsement... but, on the other hand, has cursed the Medina campaign with her endorsement of her NeoCon opponent.

The average grassroots, unless well educated by Paul and refined in the fires of party cheating the last election, will not notice the globalist tendencies of Palin and total contradiction of her endorsement of Paul, but will assume that the 'gods' have spoken, that Medina is a wacko after all, and that they should vote Perry in Texas!

This is as clear a strategy as e4 in chess!

For the Rand Paul campaign to fail to see the ramifications of accepting an endorsement from a person who Ron Paul would never endorse, it's irrelevance to his own winning strategy and principles, and more so, it's detrimental effect upon true liberty candidates who Palin chooses to curse with non-endorsements in the future, is inexplicable! It is short sighted, and at the very least tarnishes the Paul principled image, creating a foggy bottom surrounding his campaign.

Accepting endorsement from un-principled pseudo NeoCons sullies ones own stand. But much more deadly is the fact that it is coveted by the endorser as a great ploy for donning a deceitful mantle of liberty principle, unearned, and destined for destructive measures calculated to defeat liberty candidates themselves!

What a perfidious strategy! We ignore it at our peril, for it directly threatens our freedom!


I can't let this go, you made the chess cliche, and you made it horribly badly.

E4 isn't a clear move at all. Especially if you're saying 1. e4. Starting with pawn to e4 actually has the MOST opening variations booked from a starting position, so accordingly to all accepted theory, 1. e4 is actually the most uncertain move to play. 1. d4 has some very standard lines, with just about everyone playing differing lines of the Queen's gambit, and maybe 2 Trompowsky players out there. There are maybe 2-3 current IMs playing 1. f4, and an larger number of players (yet smaller than d4 and e4, obviously) playing c4.

To reiterate in caps because I think it'll help explain the point:


Second, to the salient point you're trying so hard to make:

"Accepting support from someone implies that you agree with their views."

This is a fallacy. It's the same argument that they attempted to make when Stormfront made a donation to Dr. Paul's campaign and he wouldn't return it on principle.

When I say, "I support Michael Nystrom" it does not mean "Michael Nystrom supports EricHoffer." You cannot STOP someone from endorsing you, you can only attempt to rebuff it and distance yourself. It's obviously a stupid move, and yet you've built this absurd house of cards based on this one logical fallacy.

Stop looking so far into this one endorsement. Debra Medina is a smart girl and can obviously handle herself fine. Personally I think the Rand race is more important, but that's just me. I don't really think Palin is as important to all of this as you're making her out to be.

Eric Hoffer

Thank-you for your reply... but you did not read carefully!

First, the reference to "e4" was made very accurately, notwithstanding your splashing about of a few chess terms, etc. I did not say '1.e4...', but 'e4', therefore I did not necessarily imply the first move. It makes more sense of course when you take note of this as a chess player, and also more sense to those who do not understand deep chess, when I refer simply to a move generically, whether or not it be opening, poisened pawn, or other!

Further, if you wish to get into it, '1.e4...' also makes sense, as in "Best by test..." (Bobby Fischer), versus "1.f4..." the Bird's opening, found generally deficient, nearly always played by LESS than NM's, let alone IM's and GM's, since Fischer's barely eking out a win once. He won with '1.f4...' once and defeated it four times, BTW, which in comparison makes his e4 more significant as a portion of strategy.

The rest of your chess references are a bit irrelevant and presumptive really, since my point was focused on the use of strategy by the political animal called the RNC and DNC. (Yes, I know Schaken wel... 10 USOpen's) However I am glad the subject piqued interest:)

You inaccurately said I stated the following... "Accepting support from someone implies that you agree with their views." I did not make that statement!

The only two uses of the word "accepting" are in these two sentences:

1) Paragraph 8 - "For the Rand Paul campaign to fail to see the ramifications of accepting an endorsement from a person who Ron Paul would never endorse, it's irrelevance to his own winning strategy and principles, and more so, it's detrimental effect upon true liberty candidates who Palin chooses to curse with non-endorsements in the future, is inexplicable!

That is a far cry from your inaccurate quote, and I reiterate the concern again!

2) Paragraph 9 - "Accepting endorsement from un-principled pseudo NeoCons sullies ones own stand. But much more deadly is the fact that it is coveted by the endorser as a great ploy for donning a deceitful mantle of liberty principle, unearned, and destined for destructive measures calculated to defeat liberty candidates themselves!"

Again this is a far cry from your misquote, and I reiterate the point here. I might have added "...can sully ones own stand.", to emphasize and place more of the intended focus upon the latter part of the paragraph, but that does not change the fact that you missed the point.

The point is simple... both parties have it in their best interests to perpetuate the NWO and globalist thinking, to the detriment of liberty here and abroad.

To that end they use the political mechanism as Quigley explained in his book in the 1960's, "Tragedy and Hope". Keeping the ship of state moving towards this goal is paramount, and defeating any liberty candidate in the most efficient manner, ESPECIALLY the governorship of a State which might become strong on the 10th amendment, is of extreme importance!

As such, the strategy of using the Paul name to sway voters in Texas towards NeoCon Perry, by endorsing a Paul after he has already proven himself a winner, is a great 'party' strategy.

For two reasons it is bad for liberty:

1)Paul lowers himself to the level of a McCain lover by considering her endorsement as a high ideal;
2)secondly, the Tea Party and 912 people who still are enamored by Palin, will follow her to Perry, effectively defeating the liberty efforts for freedom in Texas.

The latter is a far far greater goal for the NWO and CFR at this time, than one Senate race in KY; partly because Rand has a good hold on the election, and partly that, one Senator is far less strategic than a Governor who threatens break from politically correct mold from which most governors of the last several decades have been fashioned!

Such a governor would be a great boon to liberty, given the threat of 10th amendment standing against and nullifying any unconstitutional act of Congress or the President. They know that the battle lines are drawing closer to the legislatures of the states rather than in the halls of Congress, and such a strong defense inspired by changes in heads of states, forms a formidable bulwark against central government tyranny!

Keep up the Chess:)

Chess first

Again, I would then state the same:

This is as clear a strategy as e4 in chess!

Is completely unclear, due to the huge number of variations stemming from the opening.

Fischer's narcissism aside, there are numerous Grandmasters playing 1. f4, including Berescu, Danielsen, and IM Taylor, not to mention Larsen, if we're going to talk retired players. If I implied that 1. f4 is a superior opening to 1. e4 I apologize, but I believe it's CERTAINLY less complicated in terms of book options. 1.e4 has far more variations to it, ECO should carry that argument just fine.

If we're going to argue about whether or not you implied it being the first move, I'd have to say that your judgment of a "clear" strategy would certainly depend on the board, and in this case there are obviously serious objections.

Accepting endorsement from un-principled pseudo NeoCons sullies ones own stand. But much more deadly is the fact that it is coveted by the endorser as a great ploy for donning a deceitful mantle of liberty principle

That's the part I'm summarizing.

Give me an hour though, have a quick meeting with the salespeople, and I'll see you at the World Open in Philly, Chicago Open too?

Eric Hoffer

this is what I see.. I am

this is what I see.. I am the same age as Sarah Palin.
growing up all of us are brainwashed to be either democrats or republicans. The establishment does not care where you fall. You are controlled in both camps.
After all those years, we all need to be "rewired" and learn that we have been lied to. Seeing this endorsement tells me that Sarah Palin maybe receiving that rewiring. It is the same situation with Buck in Colorado. The man answers 19 out of 20 questions correctly. I know he had to be educated and changed his mind on a few issues. He is being educated.. These deveopments are actaully wonderful.. People are starting to come around.. to think.. Now hopefully Sarah will endorse Medina and a few others!

“Defiance of God’s Law will eventually bring havoc to a society.” - Dr. Ron Paul

It's all good

Even if we don't like the idea of being in the same room...or sentence...with Sarah Palin, we should be glad that Rand has an influential supporter. She will bring him votes that he could never get on his own.

Remember: you can choose who you support, but you can't choose your supporters. As far as I can tell, Rand has not changed positions to get her support.

When Ron was asked why he didn't disown the right wing racists who supported him, he merely said that he didn't agree with them, but he would accept their votes and their money. Why not? The issue was not the beliefs of his supporters, but the ideas he espoused.

It's in her self interests

I think if Grayson was leading, her endorsement may have gone to him.

By endorsing Rand, she gives the impression that she's "one of us."

I was very concerned, personally, about Palin coming out a couple weeks before the primary, or sooner, and endorsing Grayson. I think this would have been a big blow to Rand.

And I think it would have proved her true colors. After all, she did choose to run with McCain, an intrinsically evil man and permament, long-time fixture in the Establishment. So her judgment and/or motives were exposed to be lacking.

However, she IS a politician. Perhaps she's "playing" the Establishment. To be honest, I haven't figured her out completely, but from a purely self interest standpoint, then is very smart of her to associate herself with the Tea Party crowd, of which we are very much a part. She should also endorse Shiff (has she?). If not, I wonder why not?!

She apparently doesn't have the education, or intelligence to be an effective leader, but she has the persona to get elected.

In the case of Rand's campaign, this is HUGE. For one reason, if she had endorsed the neo-con, then I think that could have really bolstered a withering and quick-fading Grayson campaign.

I wouldn't be surprised if Grayson pulled out before the election, given how things are starting to snowball AGAINST him.

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

Hell yeah!! I can't stand

Hell yeah!! I can't stand Palin but how is this ever going to be anything but good for Rand? I'd take Oprah's endorsement too. Anything that's fair for a win is thumb's up in my book!

very disappointed by this.

very disappointed by this. Compare this to an Adam Kokesh-- who hasn't given up his principles. I'll take Adam anyday.

All she did was endorse him.

That doesn't mean she will have any influence on him once he's elected. And if it pulls a few fence sitting wannabe neocons our way... So what? Isn't that a good thing?

Besides, the hardcore neocons that only like Palin because they think she's "hot" aren't going to vote for Rand no matter what. I think you can stop worrying about a coming invasion of "warmongering interventionist nation builders" into this movement... ain't gonna happen.

This can only help his cause imho.

Yes, she did.

I can't stand Palin, but everybody knows that she has a huge amount of followers and even if some of them would start to think differently about Rand and Ron Paul and the Liberty Movement in general, because of their moronic hero is endorsing Rand. So the possibility is that Palin's sheep will become more and more open minded to ideas of non-intervention, civil liberties, etc. This is a possibility; only time will tell.
I only hope that Rand hasn't made any promises to endorse in return to Palin's future projects. This is the danger.

"Air is the very substance of our freedom, the substance of superhuman joy....aerial joy is freedom."--Gaston Bachelard--

Big Woop

a war supporter at all costs ... endorsement
Go Rand ... just hope these types don't infiltrate and wear down and break down the non intervention foreign policy to a cheap compromise (paranoid - you bet)

I'm not a Palin fan but I

I'm not a Palin fan but I say: Bring it.

I don't see how this could hurt Rand with Kentucky voters, and that's really the main thing, isn't it?

This makes me proud

We sure have really moved mountains with our efforts. Pat yourself on the back, it is because of you and me that we are taking back this country. I have chills going up my spine right now. We are a movement, we are making a difference, doesn't it feel good!!!!!

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must. like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.-Thomas Paine

The R3volution requires action, not observation!!!!


...or it didn't happen


Thanks but no thanks!

She's a media whore looking for the next big thing to latch on to. If this movement ever embraced her it would lose its legitimacy and be the beginning of our end.

If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one.

Would love to take her endorsement at face value....

and it may prove to be the nailer that's good for Rand Paul, but I just can't get the picture of her consulting with Henry Kissinger and all that he stands for out of my consciousness....

You just CAN'T serve two masters!

"Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom." Patrick Henry

Sarah Palin is clueless

I would not call an endorsement by Sarah Palin of Ron Paul a boon to the campaign. Come on! Not when she will be stumping for Rick Perry here in Texas. Biggest RINO and neocon who has sold Texas down the river. I wouldn't trust anything she says.

Darla 4 RON PAUL

What are the "issues the

What are the "issues they disagree on"?

tarp bailouts.

tarp bailouts.

Foreign Policy

Foreign Policy

What do they have in common?

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"...and that's about it.

You see...

it would be one thing if Sarah came out of nowhere and endorsed Rand. That's not the case. Rand sought her endorsement!!! Rand's credibility is in the toilet...

Republican - Democrat: two wings of a vulture

"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain

"Let the dead bury their dead"


Dunno what rock you popped out from under cupcake, but this is politics.

If nobody is pure enough to carry your water then carry it yourself.

Until then, if we are going to be engaged in politics we have to be IN the game.

I'm quite fine with what he did... he probably just won his campaign with this endorsement.

As opposed to being the guy who gets 8%. ALWAYS. And never compromises. EVER.

And never wins the game because he/she never played it in the first place.

~Live life to its fullest, with an open heart, open arms and most important... an open mind~