30 votes

Jack Hunter: "Why Rand Was Right to Endorse Romney"

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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



Rand Paul

sorry, i don't care for Rand Paul's tactics as a politician. He should have come out and encouraged his father to run 3rd party. that is from behind my eyes. This whole episode has dimmed my idea of this country and this political process. The power hungry looks, the ego in the words spoken, the PRETENSE. Very disturbing. So close, yet so far away.

Ehhh, like it or not Rand

Ehhh, like it or not Rand Paul is in the Republican Party and is trying to change the party from within, just like most of are on the DP. Why would he encourage his father to run 3rd party? This would only isolate him further in the Senate. Do you want real change or not? Rand's doing what he feels is right. Sheesh, give him a break. None of us are in the hot seat like he is and we can't possibly know what he's going through. Personally, when I saw him give his endorsement for Romney, his body language and intonation read as "I hate that I'm doing this and wish it wasn't necessary."

Just b/c Rand doesn't have the strength of character

to stand up for what he believes in (like Ron does) it's no excuse for taking the easy way to the white house. What type of example does it set for the Liberty movement when your leader doesn't say what he really means and speaks in half truths just to advance his agenda...sounds like Obama or Bush to me.

What we love about Ron Paul is his blatant honesty. Sure the ignorant attack Ron b/c he SEEMS to give them plenty of ammo with the things he says & the endorsements he never gives.

But what Rand (and apparently Jack) don't get is that's what makes Ron so unique in politics. That kind of honesty in politics is what brought many supporters into this movement. Its that American, straight-forward tradition that we need right now to get the country educated and back on the right path.

Rand is his own man with his own political agenda, which is fine.

But if Rand\Jack think this approach will help strengthen the movement they have seriously miscalculated. It undermined the movement. They should reverse course and apologize instead of digging in their heals on this.

In some ways it might be good to abandon Rand since it makes it harder for this movement to be labeled a cult. Perhaps people will take our issues more seriously when they see how true we stick to our principles. Still Rand would have been a good asset to have and I'm sorry we will have to leave his wimppy ass behind.

Enough is Enough Already!!!! MOVE ON ALREADY!

Yeah,I'm angry!

WHY are we letting all these outside opinions influence us? WHY is this post even here? WHY are we wasting our precious time listening to this?

Tell me, did I miss something? Where is Ron Paul's official speech saying he conceded? Where is it in writing, in print, or on video from Ron Paul that his campaign is over? Where is the concession speech or statement?

Well then, since there is NO official concession speech coming from Ron Paul, I would say, lets go to work everyone. Those delegates are unbound. Go after them! There still is time.

Rand Paul IS NOT Ron Paul! We shouldn't care what Rand does. It does not matter! Rand is just another politician that happened to endorse Romney. So what? There were many that did. So, why is he so important? In reality, this does not change anything. UNLESS we go along with it.

I haven't come this far, worked this hard and gave up so much money (that I can't afford) to give up now! I am NOT settling for anything less. Not again! Been there, done that. NEVER again!

I will NOT concede! I will NOT vote for the lesser of two evils. In this case there is NO lesser.

If Romney gets to be president, the slow incremental death of the US will continue. The people will be lulled into believing that everything will be eventually alright, while slowly dying. We will still get WWIII, since Romney clearly stated that he would attack Iran.

If Obama stays in, it will just happen a little bit sooner.

So choose your poison. Romney and Obama are one in the same, just a different approach.

Instead... Imagine Ron Paul as President!

"The Price Of Freedom Is Eternal Vigilance."
Thomas Jefferson

Hunter blogged on the Ron Paul 2012 website

So I suppose that makes him an insider
The statement that if Romney wins, rand and the liberty movement is stronger is nonsense.
It becomes weaker and I wouldn't expect rand to rail against Romney

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

well here is my opinion

he didn't have to endorse anyone .... could have stayed silent. Only if he was asked - forced to endorse. Anyone who thinks endorsing the lesser of two evils is ok - expected - "had to" - is no friend of the liberty movement. This kind of "strategy" will just go on and on with no change ever to happen. I agree with Gerald Cilente - a third party should package the liberty movement - it was and never will be accepted in the GOP ... unless major issues are going to be left out and we all know that non-interventionist foreign policy will be the first to go. By endorsing Romney you have just said it is ok to kill innocent civilians and who cares about the troops. Supporting on going war and preemptive war. We are now seeing that the liberty philosophy of Ron Paul should have been done as a third party - not needing the blessing of the GOP. They GOP like the Democrats are all about money and power. You can not truly have the liberty movement philosophy without non-interventionism.
I disagree with Hunter. I will never support Romney or Rand Paul. I will either not vote or vote for someone in a third party / independent.

lets also remember something - Ron Paul was gaining Independent voters and Democrat voters ... with this kind of endorsement and thinking the liberty movement can be packaged as part of the establishment - you have just turned your back on all of those new supporters. Gone.

Jack you forgot something

If Mitt Romney does a bad job as President, then those against him (assuming he's running in 2016) will say...Rand, You endorsed Mitt Romney...who's the worse President we've ever had.
Look at how this reflects upon his judgement.
Additionally, You seem to forget that if Rand Paul decides to move away from Mitt's platform and go his own way, those "neocons" will ambush the crap out of him.
Who's in control of the media? We all know, and Rand Paul will be an unknown if he does not toe the traditional republican line.
Jack, You are full of it...
Rand, you are either with us or against us...another traditional republican view.
The only thing I want to hear from Rand at the conventin is a BIG APOLOGY to his father for not endorsing him, and to the supporters of LIBERTY...those he turned his back on.
We just might forgive and let him back into the fold, otherwise he has not chance to be President in 2016.

It Doesn't Add Up

Ron Paul did not have to take one for the team in order to become the last remaining challenger this year.

Dealing with the devil ALWAYS backfires (eventually). Satan will take the things that he wants and will not keep his part of the deal. I AM SAYING THIS FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE and a lifetime of observation.

Rand never told us the real reason for his endorsement - we just don't know. For the time being, I am giving Rand the benefit of the doubt, pending a reasonable explanation from him or Ron Paul.

Gene Louis
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.

Damage Control

What if Romney loses? Rand will have some splaining to do about his endorsement in the future.
In the off chance that Romney were to pick Rand for VP, Ron Paul would have to endorse Romney then, no? Would any of you vote for Romney?
Jack is right about how the system works but I think it's a bad idea to become part of it, Ron did pretty well by not being part of it and he can still look in the mirror and feel good about himself.
I'm still waiting for freedom to be the "idea whose time has come" and when it does it will be unstoppableand you won't have to endorse statists.

Rand: Our collectivist candidate is better than yours!


"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels

Rand ambition

Rand Paul's Ambition is to advance the cause of Liberty into a position of political power. Enough Rand Paul bashing already...

Miserable malcontents

Enough with your conspiracy theory negative bullshit. Grow up! Rand did what HE HAD TO DO, H A D T O DO, in order to advance OUR GOALS. So cut the guy some slack...

Yeah, you make a great pont there robrigo80!! They'll just be do

ing what they have to do, and they'll just follow orders too when they come and black bag and throw someones ass in their cells when they use the NDAA, so quite it with these stupid conspiracy theories!!

What "conspiracy theory?"

You goofballs think everything you don't like is a conspiracy theory.
Rand's personal ambition has nothing to do with OUR GOALS. Get a clue.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels

Let's name a few shall we

- rand endorsed Romney behind Ron's back
- Olsen manipulated Ron Paul into backing out of the race
- Benton manipulated Ron Paul, and sent the email out without Ron's consent

To name only a few I have read here in the past few days....

Conspiracy theory nonsense. The Pauls have never did us wrong before. Time to trust they know what tey are doing....

None of those are "conspiracy theories."

Get a dictionary. Anyway, the "how" and "why" has nothing to do with criticism of the actual event.

Rand is not Ron, sorry. This was a bad idea, from every conceivable angle.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels

They are

They are all conspiracies. And all theories. And f this was a bad idea from 'all angles' then why didn't you say something a YEAR AGO, when Rand made his intentions to endorse the nominee to us back then?

"Jack Hunter Improper Use of Media Influence"?

(I just saw this on Facebook and thought it had some valid points)

"Jack Hunter: I suggest you use your power of influence with more productive and creative means that DO NOT INCLUDE taking words out of context.

So, Jack Hunter, YOU are the reason people are thinking that Ron Paul has abandoned the goal of president through the misinterpretation of that email? What gives YOU such authority? Who made YOU an authority? I’ll tell you who. The viewer and ONLY the viewer. (You know full well how the power of influence works through YouTube and other forms of media so don't even bother playing dumb.)

Who determined that your view is the consensus of the average Ron Paul supporter? NOBODY!!!

So why does your view carry weight? IT DOESN'T! People only believe it does because you (to my knowledge) are the only person who's put a well articulated political perspective, of this newest issue, together and stuck it on YouTube. (With GREAT speed I might add, but I’ll be questioning that in a minute. Don’t you worry you well parted head.) Did the supporters even have time to form their own perspective BEFORE they saw your video? If so, I seriously doubt that their perspective came anywhere close to how twisted yours is.

I wanted to honestly and sincerely congratulate you Jack. Despite the positive overtone of your well intended message, you've not only managed to incorrectly influence thousands, but you just joined the ranks of millions of people, who came before you, in your ability to take words OUT OF CONTEXT!! (What an "elite" bunch of people you've joined) It's interesting that you chose to babble on and on about Pat Robertson (the TV evangelist) because you're doing exactly what I would expect HIM to do. Twist words to mean exactly what YOU INTEND them to mean in order to persuade public opinion for whatever reason you deem fitting. I can think of at least one more example that fits that description to the "T", without even mentioning religion. (no doubt you’ll make a great anchor someday doing exactly what you’re good at.)

Ron Paul stated at the beginning of this election year that he didn't want to be president. (can't say that I blame him) It’s a fact and that’s all well and good. However, Ron Paul also said that about his election for congress (which you failed to mention. I guess it wasn’t relevant to your video, huh?) decades ago and look where he is now.

So, JACK HUNTER, let’s not pretend that simply because Ron Paul “HAD” no intentions of being president that he "concedes" to a fictitious defeat now that he’s got the GOP pissing down both legs! See how much sense that makes? It just doesn’t sound right, does it? Whose side are you on again Jack?

Ron Paul ran for president in an additional attempt to reshape the GOP through a message which carries the very foundation with which this country was built on. He's has succeeded through the help of his supporters. (You got that much right) However, he had no idea that he would get the enormous amount of support he has this time around OR how far he would go. How was he supposed to know? However unaware he was, he made sure he was prepared for the best or the worst case scenario. (yeah, he sounds like a real quitter, doesn’t he Jack?)

Jack, does Ron Paul strike you as the type of man (impeccably positive reputation and record preceding him) who does a “half assed” job at anything? I fail to understand your reasoning for questioning his goals, at this late stage, given his history and job performance. Furthermore, who are you to judge Ron Paul’s goals (at all) given that your own character is questionable (imo) at this point? You may know politics JACK, but you know next to NOTHING about analyzing people and least of all analyzing written word. (Honestly Jack, are we to believe that Ron Paul is trying to tell his delegates “….we have great news! I’m quitting.”? smh)

Ron Paul wouldn't go out of his way to calculate how he plans to run a country (not mentioning superior campaign strategy) without giving CONSIDERABLE thought to the likely hood of his WINNING!!! HOW DARE YOU attempt to persuade people that Ron Paul isn't a man of his word by insinuating that he's giving up on his goal to see this election TO IT'S END with his title as president in tact!!!

If, and I MEAN IF, Ron Paul decides to bail out on the supporters that are viciously devoted and love him, as well as his message of liberty, HE will announce it, HIMSELF!!! It won't come from you, that I CAN BE SURE OF!!!

If the old man had enough respect for his supporters to come forward 3 weeks ago and announce he would no longer campaign, then he DAMN SURE has the balls to tell us ALL… IF …..he should ever decide to quit. No one, you hear me, NO ONE has the right to speak for Ron Paul. Ron Paul needs NO ONE to speak for him. He does a damn fine job of that all by himself.

Now JACK, go back to the drawing board and formulate a more positive minded perspective that reflects THE SAME goals as Dr. Paul and REMOVE this insidious (and yes I mean to use that word by definition) notion of "...Ron Paul conceding he won't be president...". Your total disregard for the hard work (that you so “passionately” pointed out for yourself), thoughts and emotions of Ron Paul supporters everywhere, through fabricating this LIE which drastically pales in comparison to the air from which it was created, DISGUSTS ME! Learn that you’re perspective is YOUR OWN! At the very least, learn how to use your influence PROPERLY!!!

In addition, no Ron Paul supporter has to be told that Ron Paul is more than just a president. We all know how awesome he truly is. In truth, we still believe in him. No thanks to you. It’s sad that the guy who chose to openly point out that fact, doesn’t, HIMSELF, believe in the total support of Ron Paul and what it’s capable of. I hate to point out the obvious to you JACK, but this isn’t over yet. It’s only going to get more exciting every day from this point.

I didn't put my faith in Ron Paul as President to give up on him (or my faith in him) and his ability to become, act and serve wholeheartedly AS president. Ron Paul DID NOT "concede" to anything but the optimistic view of his RNC delegate projections thus far. AND THAT IS ALLLLL!!!

By the way Jack, what was your intention behind telling the world that "Ron Paul concedes.."? Was it personal gain or just your eager mind finding the perfect time to publish that video? I believe it was both, no matter how good your intentions were. (The amount of positive intent a person possesses also has an equal amount of negative intent to match.)

I'm also curious about something else. How long did you think about this half baked idea before you wrote the script you were reading from (on your computer monitor, which takes time to write), made the video (I know, full well, takes time) and uploaded it (which, even compressed, takes even more time)? Couldn’t have been much time at all considering it was on my facebook feed before 3am this morning and it was published after midnight. (Indicated by the date stamp)

I only address this issue because you mentioned Rand’s, very new, announcement of supporting “the presumptive GOP nominee” in your video description (but said little about it in your, very well, written perspective) when that news was only HOURS OLD at the time YOUR video was published. I find that amazing Jack. You are indeed a very busy young man. (How convenient that you could easily claim that Rand was supporting Romney all along. It’ll just stand as “convenient” coincidence I guess.)

This begs another question I have for you. If you believe that Romney is “…the presumptive GOP nominee” (As it states in your video description. I’ll be sure to take screenshots :D), yet you also believe that, and I quote, “Ron Paul will not be President.”………then who’s the nominee again Jack? The only two people I see left standing are Romney and Paul so I’m a little confused about who you think is going to win. Ooooooh!! You were just repeating what the news tell us. I get it. Thanks. Yeah, we don’t hear enough from them these days, what with their ratings failing miserably and all.

(end letter)


This entire letter has been sent to Jack Hunter's YouTube inbox titled "Improper Use of Influence". While I completely understand the rights of individual's to speak their mind in a manner which they see fit, I DO NOT BELIEVE individuals, who have the responsibility of media influence, have the right to use that influence how they deem necessary. What Jack Hunter has done, in my eyes, is no different than the lies we try to avoid from the MSM.

I also urged Jack Hunter to consider this responsibility and attempt to reverse his misleading information in his next video. One can only hope he reads this letter and considers my recommendation.

If you believe he should, make this letter viral and urgent. If we can stop misinformation in it's tracts, at it's source, Then it's OUR responsibility to DO IT!!!"


"I have found that being rich is not about having the most but about needing the least"

The Southern Avenger in Charleston

I just want to put in a word bout Jack Hunter. I've lived in Charleston, SC, for well over ten years. During that time I've listened to Jack Hunter's political commentaries and comments on talk radio, and read his essays in local print media, many many times. He was the one who turned me on to Ron Paul.

I truly think you are misjudging Jack, his motives, his character, and his statements. While I have never met the man personally, having followed him over the years and known of his connection to the Paul family, particularly from the time he co-wrote Rand's book, I firmly believe that to accuse him of misleading or prevaricating is emotion speaking rather than reason and fair judgment.

Jack Is On Our Side

Jack is a very talented freedom lover. The fact that there are disagreements with him shows that he has the intelligence and guts to give his opinions. We should always invite well-meaning opinions, especially when they are diverse.

Gene Louis
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.

He's been a god send in the past and I've meet the guy and he se

ems like quite a good, guy same as Rand who I have also meet and talked with but I think they are both terribly wrong on this issue!! Everyone makes mistakes and this is the first one I've seen Jack make, but not the first one I've seen Rand make!

Rand's saying "vote for a warmongering, bailouting collectivist"

Uh, no thanks. This helps us how? Romney will be able to sweep away any lingering GOP reservations in Congress regarding the collectivist state, and implement greater regulation, more spending, and "improved" federal health care. Oh, and a widening of the Perpetual War and Total Surveillance state.

Yeah, I'm sure this is part of some "deeper strategy." Lol.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels


endorsing means you support the person's positions. If there were only a couple of issues that Romney was in favor of that were contrary to the "liberty movement" you may overlook those. I can only think of one thing that Romney "supposedly" lines up with us - that being auditing the Fed. And as Romney goes based on his record - that will change by November. Because Romney is pro war and for the patriot act and the NDAA etc... how in the world can anyone with a conscience endorse him. Playing politics is more important than standing up for principle? Really? Hasn't anyone learned anything from Ron Paul's voting record? Rand Paul's actions just further prove that his dad is truly one of a kind.


Rand isn't asking You to do anything. He is simply stating publicly what His intentions are. Where was your outrage a year ago when Rand told everyone he would support the nominee?

We are asking Rand to do something. The right thing.

Support your father Rand! Sorry, but a year ago I was outraged and I have said many times Rand is nothing like his father. He sold out plain and simple. Romney is not my nominee and never will be. No one but Ron. The rest are treasonous swine that do not represent one single thing I believe in. More war, more killing, more loss of privacy, more big government, more corruption, less health, more big pharma, more fraudulent banking. It all sucks. Rand fell too far from the tree and does not get it. Sorry, but the reason Dr. Paul is different is precisely why he is so popular. He NEVER compromises his philosophies and is the only politician I have ever trusted. The rest blow in the wind and are all part of the big club we are not invited.


Rand is doing the right thing

Ron Paul lost. He cannot be nominated, no matter what in Tampa. It cannot happen. Rand is doing what he has to do to advance our cause.

Yes he is. That's what

Yes he is. That's what "endorsement" means. Good grief.

My outrage? I'm not outraged now, let alone then. Rand Paul's ambition has NOTHING to do with the liberty movement. I'm just giving an opinion, as are you.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels


The folks thinking critically on this issue are being demonized as the 'sell outs'. We are not the 'sell outs', Rand, Benton, and possibly other members of the campaign are. I have been suspicious of the 'Wead's' icky, Bush/Amway-infected background for some time. He calls us 'Ronulans' so I have no problem calling him the 'Wead'. He also stated his disappointment that we are independent thinkers and not as easy to control as, say...'1930s-era Germans'(or something to that effect).

Rand did not need to endorse anyone, except his father. He could of sat back quietly and no one would have expected him to make this idiotic, disrespectful, anti-liberty, bold move.


That is not what an endorsement means. This isn't about Rands personal ambition. Jack makes that clear, and I believe him. It's about the movement