Ben Swann's EXCLUSIVE Interview w/ Rand Paul on Fed Audit, NDAA, Drones, Interventionism, RP2012
Submitted by AnCapMercenary on Fri, 06/15/2012 - 10:34Published on Jun 14, 2012 by BenSwannRealityCheck
Ben Swann Reality Check talks one on one with Senator Rand Paul about his endorsement of Mitt Romney for President
Reality Check: One on One With Rand Paul On His Endorsement of Mitt Romney
Posted: Jun 14, 2012 6:31 PM Updated: Jun 14, 2012 6:31 PM
By Ben Swann
It was an endorsement that surprised many people.
Kentucky Senator Rand Paul endorsing Mitt Romney for President late last week.
That endorsement surprising many people, especially when you consider the strong stances Senator Paul has taken against the use of drones overseas and the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens.
These are of course, issues Governor Romney supports.
Ben talked with Senator Paul from Washington D.C. earlier today.
*******************************************************************
Ben is very wise; he posted the video on YouTube, before his own station WXIX FOX19 Cincinnati, OH's video went up.
- Login to post comments
Ron didn't mention his son in his latest talk on the Convention.
Parents will always love a son whether or not they consider him Prodigal, and we should respect that. Maybe we should adopt the approach used by Ron Paul and when it comes to discussion of the upcoming Convention and the Liberty Movement drop all mention of whats-his-name. Time to focus on Ron Paul getting nominated for President, and identify uncompromised Leaders for the R-evol-ution.
i don't agree with rand
on everything but i support him 100%.
“We have allowed our nation to be over taxed and over regulated and overrun by bureaucrats, the founders would be ashamed of us for what we're putting up with.” Ron Paul
Absolutely. He's the
Absolutely. He's the greatest Senator in U.S history.
More and more impressed with Swann
This guy is so good. Unbelievable. Way better than Stossel, and I love Stossel. He needs a bigger show with a bigger team.
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
I agree he needs a bigger
I agree he needs a bigger show with a bigger team for a bigger audience. The problem is, if he actually got picked up by the corporate media, he might not be able to report the news in this same way. It's the same thing that happened to Freedom Watch. When it was an internet show he only interviewed liberty candidates and activists. Once he got his TV show, he had to interview liberals and neocons to "balance" out the show.
Ben Swann should stay where he is, and have his fans push his show and segments so that he becomes viral.
liberty lover in Nor Cal!
Great job Mr. Swann
We need more reporters like him.
GET OVER IT ALREADY!!
Geez, this is getting annoying even for me. Yes the endorsement of Mitt was terrible. I myself lashed out on the DP for a couple days from it. But what's done is done. The fact remains Rand is still leaps and bounds better then anyone else in the senate. We just have to continue to keep Rand honest and call him out every time we feel he slips up, as respectfully as possible. He now knows how important to us it is for him draw that distinctive line between us the Rebloodblicans / democripts (a la Jesse Ventura). There are far worse politicians we should be directing our anger towards. That's what I did. To full fill my need to vent from the issue, I decided to send my state's idiot reps Nelson and warmonger rubio some more nasty grams. Made me feel much better. I think the rand haters need to switch gears and start trying to get rand to come back our way. The continued hatred towards him only pushes him closer to the dark side, or pushes him more to the lanisters and away from the starks. lol
Just a thought.... If Rand
Just a thought.... If Rand accepts the VP ticket and they win...there goes your hope for any change in the senate. I don't sense that a VP has much power to do anything....
I aGree, but I also feel this
I aGree, but I also feel this interview NEEDED to happen. Because now he has given us his honest answer thanks to Benn. And I have confidence he will stick to his guns and push forward the message of Liberty.
If this is true, Rand is a liar & here's why......
I can't remember the guys name, but on the Alex Jones show, a regular caller who has asked Rand Paul questions many times before the endorsement, and always received an answer, attempted no less than 3 times to ask Rand about his feelings regarding Mitt Romney attending the recent Bilderburg meetings in Chantilly, Virginia.
The first time Rand acted like he didn't hear him and rushed away. By the 3rd attempt Rand was literally running and hiding from this person asking the question. He wouldn't even say he doesn't know anything about it. He just ran in the opposite direction. Videos of this should be available soon on youtube says the person asking the questions.
Rand is up to no good....PERIOD!
You don't get into bed with the enemy, for any reason - EVER!
It's Liberty or Death! There is no in between and Rand of all people should know that!
Ron Paul, in 30+ years, never slept with the enemy....NEVER!
The Fed needs to be closed not audited! What good does it do endorsing the man who's donors get their money(BAILOUTS)from the fed?
Romney will never bite the hand that feeds him. He will NEVER audit or do anything else for that matter to the Federal Reserve BANKSTERS! AND RAND PAUL KNOWS THAT!
Either Rand is doing this to keep things quiet at the convention because Ron has some delegate and/or 3rd party plan up his sleeve, or Rand Paul is a complete sell out. I hope to God there is a plan and he's not a sell out!
In Liberty,
JP
Blah blah
Sorry. Double post
The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt
Blah blah
Rand's hardly getting into bed with anyone. He made a lukewarm endorsement that changes nothing in Romney's favor but might be good for getting Ron Paul's hard won delegate's seated and able to influence the GOP platform in Tampa.
And Ron Paul has endorsed Newt Gringich in the past when he had to. Sellout to liberty? Hardly. Just dumb, pointless token gestures you have to go through sometimes.
Get a grip, people. For 5 ears I've talked about how Ron Paul were the smartest group around. And overnight everyone's turned into a total moron. Sheez, people. It's so completely obvious why Rand did what he did. Was a good move? maybe, maybe not. Time will tell. But he's not an evil traitor or whatever. Man, everyone here turned hysterically irrational real fast. Get a grip.
The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt
This wasn't a lukewarm
This wasn't a lukewarm endorsement at all and you know it. And when did Ron Paul endorse Gingrich?
"Liberty, once lost, is lost forever" -John Adams
It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown
Did you see the endorsement?
Did you see the endorsement? Pretty lukewarm, if you ask me. And Ron endorsed Newt for Speaker when everyone was turning against him. Look it up. You have to do dumb gestures like this sometimes. Pointless stuff, but there it is. Calm down, people. Rand's votes and bills will be the thing that tells where he's at, and so far they look good. We shall see.
The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt
How does his TSA bill "look
How does his TSA bill "look good?" It will just reestablish the old system of "privatization" via exclusive government contracts. Nobody in the middle will find that appealing. They might, however, find Ron's alternative of letting the airlines handle their own security on their own dime through the free market to be appealing.
Yes, I saw it. It's not
Yes, I saw it. It's not lukewarm because anyone with two brain cells knows the "average" Paulite is not a jellyfish and will respond the way the real patriots have. If you are into compromise, Rand's your man!
"Liberty, once lost, is lost forever" -John Adams
It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown
It's hardly an "exclusive" interview...
Rand Paul was on Peter Schiff and DailyPaul concerning the same very topic.
Ben Swann is one and only..
... so this makes it exclusive.
Ron Paul ... forever.
ahhhhh why all the hate comments?
How many of you critizing rand, registered as a republican in order to vote in a closed primary or become a delegate? Did you feel like you betrayed the liberty movement or compromised your values in doing so? Probably not, but your still a registered member of a corrupt party with views contradicting yours. I thought we were trying to change the republican party from within. Nobody cried foul when Ron or rand ran as republicans... their views never changed.. they stood up against republican actions that they disagree with, they spoke up for our views whether or not the gop agreed. We basically have a two party system. Any voter that thinks for themselves will not agree entirely with either party, but chooses the one closer to their beliefs. Currently both parties are so far off from liberty and the views off many Americans that a third party makes sense. It would take years to overcome the media and perception that a third party is a wasted vote, but still worth the effort. But most of us have been voting in the republican party. Why? Because its the most realistic and fastest way to have influence.
But why come down so hard on rand for taking the quicker route and trying to work within the party. I don't like the timing, sense the nomination is not official and so many people have worked so hard to give us a shot. So criticism of that i think is fair. And if he actively campaigns for him, i would have problems. But he basically said he was trying to increase influence within the party (aka vote how you want, he didn't endorse Romney for his beliefs, but to find a route for ours to be heard).
Registering Republican is not an endorsement of Romney.
The logic is basic and simple: you cannot support/endorse Romney-Obama-Goldman Sachs et al - and claim to be part of the Liberty Movenment. To equate 1. voting for Sanctions 2. commitment to support who ever is the nominee of the Republican Party and 3 endorsing supporting Romney with joining the Republican Party to support a true Liberty candidate is utterly illogical. The issue is not hate the issue is Love of Liberty.
where i disagree
Registering as a republican is identifying yourself with the party.. most of Ron Paul supporters do it in order to cote for their canidate. They don't truly support the actions of the party or even consider themselves a republican necessarily. I've viewed the endorsement by Rand was not motivated by a hope that romney succeeds, but by i hope that he will be more broadly accepted, therefore being more successful in passing liberty legislation and getting our ideas heard. That's why i would feel the same as you do if i thought the endorsement was full-hearted or he compromised his views to fit Romneys. We all as individuals should not compromise our beliefs... but maybe we should look as this as rand pursuing a strategy we may or may not agree with... and if he ever compromises his values for more selfish reasons, bring on the hate... for now, i have seen his actions and votes, he is the BEST SENATOR WE GOT, so do we really want to decreases support for the only senator representing us ( or at least the majority of your views). Its not constructive or helpful. Don't vote for Romoney, be disappointed in Rand's method, but don't disown him unless he votes for or publicly supports an atrocious bill. If he ever endorses or supports an idea that i can't compromise on, then id be done. But if he made the endorsement for different motives, i don't see much of a stretch in someone criticizing you for being a registered republican. The republicans supported the ndaa, war everywhere, how could a liberty promoter be a registered republican???
You introduced a new term . .
You introduced a new term . . . identify with . . . and then associated it with the current discussion. Bad practice.
There is nothing wrong with working with Romney to audit the FED even though this would have you "identify with" Romney. Endorsement of a person to take office that will addressing issues counter to the way you would, is totally different than just "indentifying with" someone.
Some people made criticism of Ron Paul for working with that democrat sleaze on some issues because they didn't like Ron to "identify with" him, but most of us have now problem with that. Ron never endorsed Barney, but he did work with him.
Those that registered with the Republican party to only vote for Ron Paul or for taking over the party, don't endorse the Republican party in any way what-so-ever, even though they can technically be "identified with" the party now.
...
Identify or associate? Not sure i see a huge difference. I think where we disagree is that i don't think Rand genuinely endorsed Romney. I think he explained his motivations. He can't come out and say ' i didn't mean it' .. but by explaining his motivations we should understand that he is not actually trying to help Romney. Based on his body language and post interviews, I'm assuming he's not a big Romney supporter. So all I'm trying to say is.... maybe Rand did it to have more influence, maybe he will vote for Gary Johnson, maybe he expects us to think for ourselves and his endorsement won't sway us or what we believe. I'm assuming, he endorsed Romney, not to help him, but to help us. And that if he really supports Rodney he will go out and aggressively support him, rather than explain anterior motives on several other interviews). I agree that Romney is so far off that a vote for him would be wrong. I also think a true endorsement(meaning.. actually really getting fully behind Rodney) is atrocious.. but i think rand made a half-a$$ endorsement for other reasons... i might not like it... but I'm not going to rip him or try and diminish his support for it. And for the registering republican comparison.. did you complain when Ron Paul supporters would pretend to be Romney supporters to get elected? Maybe some disagreed with that method, but i don't think those supporters would be as hated. So maybe that's a better comparison? I'm assuming the endorsement is not genuine.
Identify with or associate with for a specific purpose is
fundamentally different from support/endorse for President. Also in the State of Hawaii the Republican Party Platform is quite Libertarian in its wording. The problem is the Candidates who ignore Principle which takes us back to Romney who is anti-Liberty, Pro-war. If he wants to work with us to audit the FED - of course his hands will be tied by Goldman Sachs - that would be Coalition Building for a specific purpose. To support/endorse Romney for President is to endorse someone who as President would advance the cause of Empire and represent the anti-Liberty Interests that bankroll him. Ron Paul himself has explained the difference between non-compromise of Principle and Coalition building. It is not that difficult to discern the difference. I went as a Delegate to the Seattle Convention in 1987 to nominate Ron Paul as the Presidential Candidate in the 1988 election. I am going to Tampa to nominate Ron Paul as the Republican Candidate for President in 2012. And it is Ron Paul or no one. Peace of Soul comes with Integrity.
ahhhhhhh
What i need to hear is ... whether you think rand was genuine in his endorsement. I agree with you otherwise... but i don't think he meant it. I don't think he will actively campaign for Romney, Sooooo what I'm saying is ... the endorsement should be open for debate and criticism, but to go further and personally attack rand is premature. And again i welcome debate, but please specify whether you think the endorsement was genuine? There are legitimate cases either way, but they are vastly different. Are you arguing rand is supporting Romney's beliefs ... or that compromising to make a half-a$$ endorsement is wrong. Both arguments are legitimate, and have potential to sway my opinion, but i feel my analogy is being attacked more than the issue.
Rand's words of self defense, to Glenn Beck
from the transcription on Beck's web site:
"PAUL: Well, you know, the thing about the Internet is the people who are the most unhappy are often the really smallest amount of your supporters. When we look at our supporters overall, my supporters, my dad’s supporters, you know, libertarian conservatives, in general, the vast majority are not, you know, these angry folks, you know, preaching, you know, violence to me and my family because we’ve endorsed Governor Romney. So, I think really sometimes the extremists on the Internet get more credit than really the entire movement and they shouldn’t represent the entire movement."
We appreciate it Rand, but
We appreciate it Rand, but the truth is you just can't bargain with evil.
The establishment is not
The establishment is not going to give a single thing to the liberty movement. They hate us more than they hate liberals. What good is a speech at the convention? What could it possibly do? Does it have the force of law? Does it obligate anyone in any way? No.
Case in point:
2010 Tea Party hands the GOP control of the purse strings. Prior to that, the Dems could do whatever they wanted. The GOP didn't have any power whatsoever.
So how did the GOP repay the Tea Party? Did they trim any spending? Even just a little bit? Did they enforce the rule that they promised: "Every piece of legislation with be required to show specifically where in the Constitution it is authorized." Nope! They disregarded that about a week later.
In closing:
I think Rand Paul still believes in the philosophy of his father today. He is going to be "the one" who makes it happen. I am going to give HIM the benefit of the doubt. But I already know that the GOP is going to screw us as hard as they can.
Rand Paul is going to come back to us in a couple of years talking about how the GOP wont even keep its word. (As if we don't know that today.)
The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. - Heinlein
Join the lawsuit to free the delegates!
Here's a radio discussion on the lawsuit:
http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=1...
Rand Paul and the Fine Art of Trying to Serving Two Masters.
"No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." - Jesus
"Liberty like Life comes from God." - Ron Paul
Mammon = Money/Worldly Power = Special Interest Corporate Elite.
Liberty is from God.
Ipso ergo, Rand Paul has walked into the trap of trying to serve two masters.