10 votes

Seriously guys, grow up and stop the personal attacks on Rand.

At least do me the courtesy of reading the whole thing before you vote down :)

I'm going to start by saying that, like many of you, as a liberty-minded voter I disagree with Rand's endorsement of Romney. Part of it is timing (technically, Romney hasn't won and won't win until after Tampa). Part of it is that Romney is no better than Obama on the vast majority of issues.

For example, I caught this today in the news:

...But foreign corporations operating within the U.S. would be permitted to appeal key American legal or regulatory rulings to an international tribunal. That international tribunal would be granted the power to overrule American law and impose trade sanctions on the United States for failing to abide by its rulings.

And I thought "Hey, maybe I should vote for Romney if he wins the nomination because we have to prevent this!"

And then I read this:

Trans-Pacific negotiations have been taking place throughout the Obama presidency. The deal is strongly supported by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the top lobbying group for American corporations. Obama's Republican opponent in the 2012 presidential elections, Mitt Romney, has urged the U.S. to finalize the deal as soon as possible.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/obama-trade-document-leak_n_1592593.html

Oh, okay. So Romney supports it too. Bummer.

And I get what Rand's doing -- making the endorsement now gives him leverage and a bargaining chip. From that standpoint it's probably the smart move. In the interview he said his detractors from within the movement need to stop the politics, but this is the politics. I won't say I felt outraged when I read the announcement, but it certainly made me wince.

And to be fair, I wasn't exactly a Santorum supporter but I felt when he threw his support behind Romney he did his followers a disservice, and same with Gingrich. I don't get this "I will back the Republican nominee even if I think he is no better than the Democratic incumbent whom I've also said is the worst president in recent history." So the -R after someone's name elevates someone when all other attributes are the same? Anyway.

But the point of this post is that I think the entire liberty movement is also being done a huge disservice by out of control posters who can't debate and/or express their thoughts like adults living in a polite society.

If you want to talk about political movements being marginalized in the minds of others, it happens when the movement does it to itself. You know, the OWS movement started out as a respectable protest against the reciprocal relationship between government and the recipients of government handouts who then use those taxpayer dollars to go back and lobby and contribute to political campaigns. OWS started out as a protest against corporate welfare, and most people can get on board with that. Somehow it morphed into a bunch of radicals defecating on police cars (seriously) and railing against the concept of property.

It does not do the liberty movement any good to be known as a bunch of internet tough-guys frothing at the mouth that post in all caps, sans punctuation, because a specific liberty-minded legislator compromised and made an endorsement that people in the movement generally disagree with.

Get. Over. It. You can question Rand's actions (I do!), but don't question the man's intent or integrity. Nobody here is a mind reader, and I'm assuming most people here aren't psychologists. There is no conspiracy theory. Rand did some political calculations and ended up with endorsing Romney as the result, and he came on the Daily Paul Radio to try and give some insight into that calculation.

Take a deep breath.

Rand Paul has not been "compromised"

Rand Paul is not a "traitor"

Rand Paul didn't "sell us/his father/liberty out"

Rand Paul didn't "betray" anybody.

Rand Paul did make a political move that he felt furthered his beliefs and agenda (which, quite frankly seem very liberty-minded). Disagree with the move. I do. I think a lot of people do.

But for the sake of the movement, please keep it civil on public forums. Save the fight for the convention floor. Lets get Ron Paul elected, and prove him wrong. I'm sure nothing would make Rand happier than having to sheepishly change his endorsement back to his father, after Romney doesn't get nominated on the first round of voting.




Like this article? Get DP delivered to your inbox daily. Subscribe here:

E-mail address:  

Comment viewing options

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

I lost all respect for Rand

I'm not out trolling Rand at every corner. In fact, this is the first time I'm writing anything on this subject.

Regardless of his reason for picking Romney, he betrayed the principles of liberty by endorsing a man who believes that corporations are people and supports the NDAA and PATRIOT acts. This is a man who is for big defense, big government and big spending. The difference between him and Obama is minor nuances. As we've seen, Romney can endorse something one minute and then turn it down the next.

Personally, I couldn't care less about his reasons or political strategies. He could have just as easily not endorsed any candidate. Whatever his motivations may be, I am a person of principles who will not betray my beliefs because I think of it as a betrayal of myself. Rand Paul is incompatible with this belief.

Troll him or not, actions have consequences. When you settle with crap, you consistently receive crap in return.

That's all I have to say.

reedr3v's picture

Your posts so far are all about I, I, I, Me, Me.

Can we get beyond you and work for Liberty?

I never said you couldn't and we wouldn't

I only stated my case contrary to the OP. This is just one single topic.

Yes, I can understand

how this entire 4 hours of effort you put in must have you devastated.

?

I'm not exactly sure as to what your referencing but, in my opinion, an endorsement for Romney is not something I can bring myself to do.

Most of what Romney stands for is contrary to the Constitution and Liberty. The key issues he supports have and will do more damage to this country than any terrorist could ever hope to accomplish. You may as well erect a statue of Bin Laden where the Twin Towers once stood. I see Romney just as I see Obama and the majority of politicians in Washington: Traitors to their country and enemies of liberty.

Get angry if that makes you happy.

He sold out!

Plain and simple- He Sold Out!
You just said "technically, Romney hasn't won and won't win until after Tampa" so why else would Rand intentionally go on the Hannity show at that time and give his endorsement for someone who is not his father? Why pick that day, that show, that endorsement and good words for Mittens, and saying in the follow up interviews that Mittens has the majority of delegates so there's no chance my father can win ???? Why else other than a sell out?
Sure Rand has done some good things.... that's why I donated to his campaign rather than the people that are actually in my own state.
You might as well give your endorsement to Obummer.
Compromising and towing the party line is the enemy of liberty.

Wher did the troll go?

I replied to him, as follows but return to find his message removed.

with one post, 5 comments, all negative and even some arguably slanderous against Dr. Paul.

I'll resist uttering the "T" word here.

Hmmmmmm.........

Edit he's gone. How do troll posts disappear? No sooner did I respond, his post is gone. How does that happen

As to why Rand went on

As to why Rand went on Hannity and gave an endorsement, as I said none of us are mind readers. So logically there was some calculation that went on his mind, and probably also with his inner council of whomever he trusts to discuss these things. This was the result.

But sell-out implies changing one's beliefs for some sort of gain. Sell-out does not imply compromising to get what you want, that's called politics.

Just because you disagree with Rand (and again, I disagree with Rand), doesn't mean you have to demonize him or call him a sell-out. I think that's quite childish.

I agree with Ron on about 99% of the issues, but because I disagree with Ron on that 1% I don't call him a sell-out either.

I also have to wonder what prompted you to join the DP. You've been a member for 12 hours, and have only posted against Rand. So I can see you are pretty worked up about this.

I'm not trying to demonize him.

I've listed my principles and I could never endorse a traitor. I took an oath, just as Rand did, just as Romney did, just as Obama did. I swore to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic and bear true faith and allegiance just the same.

You can dislike my posts and attack me just the same. I did not call Rand a sell-out. I said he betrayed principles of Liberty. My beliefs are not compatible with his on this issue. I, personally, lost all respect for him and that is a personal opinion.

12 hours of being a member of the DP and I have only posted against Rand. Remember, I've only been a member of DP for 12 hours, I have not been logged on here 12 hours straight. I joined to voice my opinion as opposed to simply reading as I have for the past several months.

that is

of course that this post is directed to me. If not... nevermind.