Jack Hunter Defended Rand Paul Today on The Jerry Doyle Show

"Playing politics" is what I hate about politicians. I do not believe that the end justifies the means. I also do not believe that there is a chance in hell that Rand will be Romney's VP choice. Rand is not a man with character and he have shown his true colors. He is not the man his father is.

I'm afraid all Rand has done is trade the powerful support of our movement in exchange for peanuts and candy. Heros for ghosts, hot ashes for trees, hot air for acool breeze, as pink floyd would put it. In his own mind, he may see it as "gaming the system" or "working from the inside." But that's a loosing strategy. Now that he has given away the support of movement's core, will he now gain the support of the neocons? Doubtful, as they can't trust him either. Maybe he really is Libertarian at heart. Why would the neocons risk it when they have reliable people, like Jeb Bush or really just about any republican (or democrat.)

I can see Rand offering tepid support to Romney just to keep the heat off. That would be a bare minimum endorsement like "I disagree with Romney on big issues like foreign policy, the Fed, etc., but he's better than Obama." But fulsome endorsements and offering to campaign for him? That's too much.

I still keep an open mind and if Rand's voting record is a good one, I may change my mind. But just because his last name is Paul doesn't mean much. Warren Buffet's dad was a congressman very much like Ron Paul. But his son is NWO to the max.

Rand Paul is seeking to game the GOP to bring about positive change by playing nice endorsing Rommney, and not coming off as "extremist" as his uncompromising father.

As sharp as Rand is, or think he is, he is naive to think that he can come off winning against the school GOP/DC good 'ol boys playing their game. I don't think Rand fully realizes what a dangerous risk he is taking. He is playing against hard-core pros who have no problem doing whatever it takes to win. The harder Rand fights them using their methods, the more likely he will go down the slippery slope of compromise.

I believe that's why Ron Paul was so uncompromising in his career in DC. He knew figuratively that if he wrestled with pigs trying to get them to behave as good conservatives should, he would only get dirty himself.

Rand thinks he is being clever, and believes he has the moral strength to hold fire to his chest and not be burned. But sad experience will soon disabuse him of his hubris, and he becomes like salt that loses its savor.

What happened to this guy! I used to love watching his Southern Avenger videos here at Daily Paul, they were some of the best. These recent videos and interviews since the Romney endorsement are utter crap.

1. 00:59 "Senator Paul has said for the longest time, and I guess a lot of people just either didn't pay attention or didn't want to hear it, that whoever the eventual nominee was that he would endorse."

There is no nominee and won't be for nearly three months. Endorsing the eventual nominee, when there's only a single choice left, is not the same as endorsing a candidate while your father, and claimed #1 choice, is still a candidate in the race. Maybe Jack has not paid attention or doesn't want to hear the difference between a presumptuous nominee and an "eventual nominee."

2. 1:33 "libertarian-leaning"

Jack, you should know better than to use the mainstream media's own derogatory terms for Republicans that support liberty.

3. 1:42 "It's certainly not a compromise of his principles."

Supporting someone that disagrees with your principles may not be a direct compromise of principles, but it will indirectly result in your principles being compromised when that person assumes office. Further, it is certainly a compromise of integrity to your principles to support someone that that disagrees with your principles.

4. 3:46 "If Mitt Romney becomes president, let's say. And is spending money like the last guy, as I personally think he will, I'm not supporting Mitt Romney. Who is going to be standing up to that kind of spending?"

If you think a candidate is going to do the same things as the last guy once in office, then you don't endorse him and support him getting elected only to try to stand up to him afterwards -- you don't endorse and support him in the first place!

5. 4:18 "He will not compromise his principles."

Supporting someone that violates your principles results in not only your principles being compromised, but your integrity to those principles lost.

I just can't listen to Jack Hunter go on his one man dialogues where he just rants...blah, blah, blah.
It's just too irritating to my ears.
He never really says anything of great substance and I can't get over the fact that Rand would sink the Liberty movement like he did when he endorsed Mitt Romney.
Doesn't Mitt Romney support "strengthening" the Patriot Act, something that Dr. Paul has campaigned against.
Didn't Rand Paul get harassed by the TSA goons at the Nashville airport a few months back.
Mitt Romney also supports NDAA...How can Rand support Mittens for President? Rand is the ultimate "flip flopper" and surely will be held accountable for doing this.
But, I suppose Rand is thinking there's more voters "outside" the Liberty movement than there are "inside" the Liberty campaign.
A hundred years ago those seeking LIBERTY on the Titanic were left hopeless when they hit an iceburg. Rand Paul has taken a lot of wind out of the Liberty movement and stabbed his father in the back at the same time. He surely has made the neocons happy.