Seriously guys, grow up and stop the personal attacks on Rand.Submitted by lasati on Wed, 06/13/2012 - 13:57
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.
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.