41 votes

Time to tell which Paul supporters are intelligent enough to read between the lines...

Time to tell which Paul supporters are intelligent enough to read between the lines and which will allow their knee-jerk reaction be to abandon Rand Paul and call him a traitor to the cause of liberty.

So, tonight Rand Paul endorsed Romney for president. I think it was a good move on Rand's part seeing as party loyalty runs deep for the sheeple of our country. Deep down, however, I'm sure he knows it will garner exactly zero votes for Romney from the Liberty movement... in fact, with that in mind, I see no danger in the move at all.

After Romney loses in a landslide to Obama, Rand can run in 2016 without being blamed for contributing to the margin that caused Republicans to lose in 2012. I'm sure the faint of heart will abandon Rand, will cry foul play, will call him names, but that's ok. So far, he's given me no real reason to mistrust him. Besides, it's not like he says he agrees with his philosophy (as if he Romney has one) - just that they have similar family values and agree on like 4 policies (none of which Romney will actually do anything about).

In the grand scheme of things, it makes absolutely no difference at this point. No one is going to say "OH! Rand supports Romney?, he must be a true conservative, then" This is obvious Republican politics, and can only benefit the liberty movement at this point. I don't necessarily think it is a VP move, I think it's more far-sighted than that. I'm thinking 2016. Politicians think in terms of 4 and 8 years... constituents think in terms of months... MAYBE years at best... so it becomes hard to keep everything in perspective sometimes.

Let's take a moment and imagine it is 2016. Romney is as McCainesque, not-distant-enough memory and we have an open election for the White House. Rand Paul is nominated to run for the GOP nomination. Formerly a tea-party favorite and a champion for fiscal conservatism in the Republican party, Rand lost much of his support when he went against the party's nominee and supported writing in Ron Paul or even worse, voting third party for president in 2012! How could this man, who carried so much sway in tea party movement betray the GOP? This traitor to the party cost the GOP the 2012 election, and is the reason Obama got another 4 years. No one could ever elect this man. Paul Ryan it is! We must gather around and elect Rick Santorum, and with no incumbent in the white house, the GOP will win and put Marco Rubio in the oval office for 8 years! This is what all the hot heads want, right? Rand to be a perfectly conforming non-conformist in the liberty movement? To be "JUST LIKE HIS DAD?"

What I can't understand is how anyone in the liberty movement can not see how obvious this is. You'd have to be numb to reality to not read between the lines on this one. I for one, will be using this opportunity to separate my intelligent, Ron Paul supporting friends from my irrational, overly-emotional, non-conformist for the sake of non-conformity supporters of paul just because he is anti-establishment friends. I swear, if Ron became president half of these people wouldn't like him any more just because he would, by definition be the "establishment." It truly saddens me to see the lack of trust, and the lack of loyalty so many have.

Trey Stinnett
Co-Founder
RonPaulSwag.com

---UPDATE---

It is not my intention to say that anyone who thinks that whatever Rands plan is won't work, or anyone who thinks that playing politics won't work, or anyone who says that purist ideology is the BEST way to grow the movement, or anyone who says that the two party system is bunk, or that the only way to restore our liberties is revolution is, in any way, unintelligent. What I AM saying is this: if you are the over-reactors who are posting images of Rand with a for sale sign, calling him a sell out, or a traitor, or "Benedict Rand" you aren't seeing clearly.

We are at war. This war for liberty isn't a game of checkers, it is a game of chess - infinitely more complicated than any of us can know. There are patriots, two of whom I believe to be the Pauls, who are employing vastly different strategies in an effort to effect positive change toward liberty.

The way that Ron gained his popularity was by being ideologically pure, not making bunk endorsements, and not playing party politics. Ron is the ultimate advocate for liberty- a role model for anyone who wants to be a liberty EVANGELIST. However, evangelism isn't the only weapon we have at our disposal.

There are many in the movement, I dare say most, who believe the complete removal of our government is the only way to restore our liberties. There are those who exercise civil disobedience - ignoring unconstitutional laws and being thrown in jail. Those who advocate 911 truth while publicly supporting Dr. Paul despite the negative effects of their association. There are expats, off-gridders, protestors, gulchhers, seasteaders, and finally there are politicians.

Rand Paul is a politician. Just because he doesn't move in diagonal lines like a bishop or side to side like a rook does not make him a traitor to liberty! Recognize that we each feel called to employ a different strategy and that in-fighting, name calling, and jumping to conclusions for the sake of your own self-gratification as your own form of "purist" is completely counterproductive and can only benefit the statists.

I am glad to see so many comments by people who can tell there is more to play here. What saddens me I how quickly some are willing to throw one of our own under the bus - especially of something as insignificant as endorsing the GOP nominee over Obama.

I can't stress this enough: We need people fighting for our liberties on all fronts. If you don't think that playing politics is the best way, or even proper (and you're probably right), that's ok. But labeling someone a traitor because they are trying to fight according to the rules, is short-sighted and counter productive. There is a whole sector of this movement who believe that there is only one way to advance liberty and the moment that someone tries a different tactic they aim to tear down all that we have worked for. Don't be that person, please. Be above it. Be smart. Disagree with Rand's strategy all you want, but don't believe him a traitor to our cause.

As always, Jack Hunter says it better than I: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/06/08/ron-paul-is-becoming-s...

Comment viewing options

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

Maybe it's because I'm older that . . .

I don't see Rand as a traitor.

Ron Paul knows something *we* don't know--

We weren't at the breakfast with Bernanke. Romney, purportedly, was at Bilderberg.

Rand didn't spend 18 years in his father's home without learning about the nature of the evil corporate banksters that are trying to control the world.

The economy is dissolving; there will be no elections in 2016 is my guess--

Prepare and hold the banner of freedom high in your hearts--

it is important to keep that spark of liberty alive as times become much worse than they are now.

Anger, violence, blaming individuals who aren't God--won't help.

Dr. Paul was a GOP candidate for one reason, *I* believe--

to help wake Americans up. The more Americans who are awakened NOW the sooner this nation will be able to rebuild after the "waste particles" hit the fan--

No point in blaming Rand. *We* don't know what his agenda is. But that is just the point; *we* don't know. Whether or not he is a traitor to the cause of liberty is known only to him.

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

This bares repeating:

Dr. Paul is our LAST, our only, chance for a political solution. Unless he wins the oval office it will not matter one iota what strategy the GOP adopts, what Mitt promised Rand; etc.

These united States has one more chance, and one only, to resurrect the republic. There will not be national, general elections in 2016 if Dr. Paul doesn't win it all in 2012.

We will dissolve, as a nation, into something resembling the USSR, circa 1989, with several states seceding and with an armed citizenry, it will get ugly fast.

If Dr. Paul doesn't win, and with his traitor for a son's endorsement of Romney now it appears likely, I can see him going home to Texas to lead a secessionist movement after his retirement from congress.

We had better pray that NESARA is real and that it's announced prior to November or we are all screwed.

http://pathwaytoascension.wordpress.com/2011/08/17/history-o...

"The problem is not those in power, the problem is right between your ears." ~Larken Rose

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5FNDRgPOLs&list=FL4wdZ0dK3HG...

I would love to secede with Ron Paul in Texas!

Now THATS a plan!

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy
www.tattoosbypaul.com
www.bijoustudio-atx.com

Pragmatism

Nothing could be worse for the liberty movement this year than being held accountable for an Obama 2012 win. Rand knows the die-hard Paul supporters won't vote for Romney, and that could be many votes, but he and Ron also know that the grassroots must be protected from the blow back of a Republican loss, which may very well be a foregone conclusion.

They are protecting the grassroots base. With the mathematical certainty that Ron will not win the nomination, nothing is more important right now after having won so many local party positions.

=======
RON PAUL 2012

Thanks

A Republican loss in the general election might still bring out the long knives. Judging from many of the posts and comments here on Daily Paul, it is obvious that Rand's endorsement will not be enough to keep the loser's scorched earth policy from extinguishing the grassroots. It will really come down to Ron Paul, and what he has planned for Tampa.

Rand may only be the straw man to open our eyes to the inevitable, and only Ron can seal the deal of keeping the grassroots safe through the 2012 election. There is a lot at stake, which I am sure they are aware.

Ron is a builder, not a destroyer (except when you want to destroy that which is destructive... the FED!). I think you can bet a good amount of fiat money that he will do everything in his power to protect what has been built in the name of liberty throughout this election cycle.

Because how many ex-libertarians or Ron Paul supporters do any of us know???

=======
RON PAUL 2012

Absolutely correct

Rand is the way that the libertarian base will continue growing in the party.... because they won't be able to blame an Obama win on US!
Rand keeps our foot in the DOOR and opens it wider and wider.... right under their noses!

Thomas Jefferson: “Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever."

Viva La Revolucion!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmaTNf4YhEs

Good call sleepdog

I think you are right. But it's too bad we don't have more time.

Too true, but when was time ever on our side?

???

=======
RON PAUL 2012

Bingo!

+100

"... Events, Dear Boy ..."

One thing the OP may well be overlooking in the 4 year sojourn into 2016. As Harold Macmillan (a British 1960's Prime Minister) once remarked, when asked what he was most afraid of - "Events, dear boy, .... events!".

"Events" now are moving very fast indeed - in overseas wars, in the economy and in an increasingly authoritiarian and militaristic style of bigger government. Something must give. I'll give it 4 months sooner than 4 years! That "something" may well cause a political maelstrom that very quickly will propel Ron Paul and his supporters into positions of America's natural leaders.

Another 1960's British Prime Minister (Harold Wilson) also said "A week is a long time in politics". So true!

the problem

with the liberty movement is that we are fickle. someone irritates us and we jump ship and go to someone else to support, they do something to irritate us and we find someone else. i won't vote for johnson cause i see him as no different than any other polititian, i have reservations about the judge. the whole idea of this movement is to change what we have now, it's not going to be done in a day. it will be hard and frustrating work, but if we want freedom we need to stay organized.we have 4 years to make the changes needed so we can choose our candidate for president. rand has the right to make any endorsement he wants, and if we are freedom lovers, we may not like it, but it is his right. i imagine he feels he is doing the best for the country. just because we give people money, doesn't mean that we own them. think a lot of followers have some very unrealistic expectations about how to make changes in this world. magic wands don't work. dedication does.

ducky

Exactly!

I don't like it, but he loses nothing by endorsing Romney.

The liberty movement only gains from this. Which is annoying, but true.

Pottawattamie County Iowa

"Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism." -Dr. Ron Paul

public and private

“He who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and it time depraves all its good dispositions.” - Thomas Jefferson (1785)

“I never … believed there was one code of morality for a public and another for a private man.”- Thomas Jefferson
In a letter to Don Valentine de Feronda, 1809

Seek_Truth

Great post, really, but change "intelligent" to "farsighted."

I get your points. Well expressed, I agree with all of them, even trusting Rand because he has done nothing yet to abuse that trust. But, seriously, all of us have so much emotional energy wrapped up in this, you got to expect some of us to let off some steam. Intelligent people get "pissed off" and disillusioned just like the non-Mensa members of our large and inclusive liberty clan. Personally, I'm distraught because now my best hope for reeling in our senseless and destructive global military engagement is dying a slow death with the intrusion of political realities. That sense of hopelessness and anger does not make me unintelligent, just human. Eventually, we will see the "wisdom" in this (rather weak) endorsement.

Understanding the impact it

Understanding the impact it can have in a movement that is growing and looking to rally more people to support it is something I think you are missing ronpaulswag.

People love Ron Paul for many reasons, but one of which is his uncompromising priniciples. When you endorse someone you are agreeing with their message and their actions. Endorsements are never to be taken lightly and will affect how people look at you. Rand Paul lost a lot of respect from me when he endorsed Romney and I am not sure if he could ever get that back. By endorsing Mitt Romney he is basically saying he agrees with everything that Mitt Romney stands for, and I for one can not get behind a person like that.

If he did this to further his "chess game" campaign for next year then he may have very well lost a lot of liberty movement supporters. He may gain the sheeple, but he won't have the support of some of the most dedicated grassroots supporters that his father did. We've all seen how effective the sheeple Romney supporters have been in their caucuses. Without the GOP interference they were getting slayed by the dedicated, ferverent, liberty loving RP supporters.

Personally if I were Rand I would much rather have kept my priniciples and kept my liberty supporters who have shown to be dedicated to the cause and will fight tooth and nail. Rand would have had four years to gain leverage over the "sheeple" and wake more people up. He could have taken the mantle and helped the liberty movement flourish further. He would have maintained that grassroots support that his father has and would have had a great resource to tap. But with his support to Mitt Romney he may have lost a significant chunk of that support and it may hurt him come 2016 when he needs to prove to those "sheeple" that Liberty is a great thing.

All in all it was a gamble he took and he will have to live with the ramifications of his actions. If it works in his favor good, but I doubt it will.

wow...

WOW... This is like a re-write of the Washingtimes article (which twisted the truth)... But with even more political flame words and name calling...

Ron Paul and Rand Paul back Mitt Romney
http://c.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/tygrrrr-express/20...

Does this mean I'm stupid for asking if he lied to me or not?

Do we have confirmation from Rand on this subject?
If so... I guess I'm gonna go with the question...

"Are you lying now, or where you lying then?

Is this the same excuse we gave for Bush's lies? "Playing Politics"?
Come on... really do we speak and live truth or don't we?
What happened to Dr. NO? Does Jr. play the same way?

Time will tell.

Romney is in no way shape or form a constitutionalist or a Liberty Lover...
How could we go along with that?

Seek_Truth

Some good points

Your tone is a bit harsh along with the title. I'm amazed you have over 20+ lol. I think I agree with you--it's hard to think clearly about anything involving Romney!

Your thoughts are along the lines of Jack Hunter: http://iroots.org/ (I posted his video here)

Check out http://iroots.org/
"If you’re into political activism, at least for Ron Paul if not for anyone else, I strongly recommend spending some time with iroots.org." - Tom Woods

While

I am not an eloquent writer, but a life long fighter for liberty. I am sick about the endorsement from Rand. That being said and without listening to the Hannity you tube again (as his voice grates my nerves so much I can only listen to it once) I found that Rand's endorsement was an endorsement of Romney's family values not his polices. I could be wrong but I can't watch it again.

Your post is good. Your

Your post is good. Your title is asinine. Please change it.

Well

if you feel like voting you can vote for Gary Johnson for president since Romney is no better than Obama.

Good post

...and good thoughts behind it, BUT, it is par for the course that "we" always have to look to the "next" election to hope for brighter things. The game will never be won through elections via a two-party system. New parties need to be recognized on a national level. I think it should be everyone's priority to stop hoping for one of the existing parties (which everyone despises, anyway) to become "good" and start actively pushing for a real third party to make some real headway into the system. Other than that keeping the faith in the current two party system system is an exercise in futility and failure. DONT GET FOOLED AGAIN, this time, like you said you wouldn't the last time.

I agree with you, Trey

We can't change the Republican Party over night. There has to be a transitional period and we're going through that right now. If Rand keeps doing what he's doing in the Senate, we'll be OK. He will still be the voice of Liberty. In the end, it's up to us, those of us pissed off at the establishment, to keep fighting for the smaller fiscally conservative government liberty movement from the ground up. I'm a PC for my district and will do my best to work hard to get the Party more (or back) in line with Dr. Paul's beliefs. If it's to be, it's up to me, right?

I write it all the time that when I read the speech by Ulysses S. Grant on "Reasons to be a Republican" I thought, "What happened to THIS Party?" In a park kitty corner from my work there is a statue, and on it is written "Unselfish Public Service." That's what we need and that's what we Paul supporters must become at every level of government, local to Federal. It's our fault the Party is what it is and it's our duly appointed job to clean it up.

Of course, Rand isn't his Dad. Who can fill those shoes? It doesn't make him a "sell out" to endorse Romney. It's good political chess and he will still tell it like it is at the hearings he's in. You watch. He's still liberty minded and giving us a voice. By 2016, the nation will be ready for a Libertarian leaning Republican. Or a straight up Libertarian. Personally, I can't wait that long, so I'll still be voting for Ron, but, like child birth, the pain of the transition will be worth the joy that follows.

Kathleen Gee's picture

Bravo.

Very well said.

"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid." - Ronald Reagan

Public Relations Consulting

Compromising has led to the demise of the USA

It is playing politics and compromising that has led this once great nation to the present downward spiral. Romney is one of the Bilderberg and no one is going to influence this man to have sincere higher ideals. He says whatever works for the moment. The power brokers will control him if elected as president, just as they control Obama. You cannot play games with this kind of FOOL who has no true spiritual values of his own. His values flip flop by the day. No one will be able to control or influence this man to be a better man. He will NEVER be a RON PAUL.

WRITE IN RON PAUL ON THE BALLOT. DO NOT GIVE UP OR COMPROMISE.

It is not a knee jerk

It is not a knee jerk reaction. I was never with Rand to begin with.. A little to neo-con tea party for me

"and the truth shall make you free"
John 8:32

ITA

I agree. Rand always seemed like he has about 40% liberty and 60% neocon in him.

You can call me unintelligent if you want to for thinking he's a traitor, but I still think it. I don't much care how smart people think I am or how stupid they decide I might be.

I don't like the name calling. I don't care if Obama or Romney wins in 2012 because they are all the same...and I could care less what Rand does in 2016. He can go stuff himself for all I care. I am looking for the candidates that are a lot less neocon and a lot more fair minded of the liberty needs of ALL people, rich or poor.

yeah hes definitely playing politics

And many here are admirably too pure and focused on the ideals and principles to accept this. I get what he's doing, and its obvious that Rand is not willing to sit in the corner by himself like his father and inspire everyone by being a purist, but trying to get more done through compromise (which is how EVERYTHING in politics gets done).

But its a dangerous game and this may have been too premature in timing not to enrage the faithful and backfire.

Still if we who support the liberty movement never bring others with less pure or slightly different ideals to the table, any recognizable change is still many millions of swayed voters away.

So is it hold out and get everything you want at once in the distant future, or game the system's political games and win some of your battles sooner at risk of never achieving some of your ideals due to continued infiltration and corruption of the movement?

Anybody who thought the tea party was gonna accomplish something knows how easily focus can be lost...

http://www.dailypaul.com/238561/confused-betrayed-let-me-help

also this..

uncommon sense

Speaking of "intelligent",

here's the reason you don't make a deal with the devil:
The devil will let you keep your part of the bargain, and then f*ck you anyway.
And that is what the RNC is going to do.
They are going to take what they can make out of these endorsements, and screw us all up th a$$ sideways at the convention.

Not a chip off the old block

What sort of deals were made? Dr Paul wouldn't have made a deal. After seeing that side by side comparison sheet Of Romney and Paul on a recent post. I ask how could one endorse that record? Somethings fishy and to use Hannity to announce is really fishy. Rand may be, with the approval of his father, trying to save a promising career in DC.
Did he just make a deal with the devil?

Not a chip off the old block

What sort of deals were made? Dr Paul wouldn't have made a deal. After seeing that side by side comparison sheet Of Romney and Paul on a recent post. I ask how could one endorse that record? Somethings fishy and to use Hannity to announce is really fishy. Rand may be, with the approval of his father, trying to save a promising career in DC.
Did he just make a deal with the devil?