33 votes

Rand Paul SLAMS Mitt Romney for pushing unconstitutional war!

Rand Paul SLAMS Mitt Romney for pushing unconstitutional war!!!

Read Rand's op-ed against Mitt Romney in the NRO here:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/303298/opposing-unconst...




Comment viewing options

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

instead of wasting your energy here armchairing

why don't you do what some of real liberty believers are already doing, arguing with some of the neo-cons commenting on this journal? while you're busy here telling everybody else equal if not more superb than you when it comes to liberty intellects what and whom to trust. armchairs always remain an eyesore whether they remain in LP or here.

Rand bashers...

Is anyone else standing up for us like this?

Screw the Mittens endorsement. Keep your eye on the goal. We are lucky to have him.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Was it a slam

Was it a *SLAM* when he endorsed romney? Hypocrisy at its best i believe.

i still cant see how rand can disagree with willard so much, but have the testie's to endorse him. It really makes me sick.

A slam's a slam

Ron & Rand both did what they were told to do by the RNC. Failure to do so would have resulted in them being completely alienated from the party and no chance of progress for at least another 4 years. Any upset in Tampa can't be blamed on Ron or Rand as they have shown to toe the line with the RNC. Any upset now would have to look like the Liberty movement has won, not Ron Paul specifically. Game on

Preparation through education is less costly than learning through tragedy

I would not call that a SLAM

If anything it shows a naivety. Suggesting that Mittens would be against Obamacare is laughable. Suggesting that Mittnes would be against anything of Obama is laughable. If anything this make the endorsement more disappointing. But Rand is right to defend his own record, it is the best in the senate.

Now he did what he promised; he endorsed the nominee. But he never said he would not withdraw the endorsement. So now is a great time! Withdraw the endorsement! What a media firestorm that would be!

Agreed. Rand, redeem yourself...renounce your

endorsement...stand by your father and support him against all enemies, foreign and domestic...stand with him and us and we can move the world.

Am I dreaming?

An explanation of why the Iraq War was unconstitutional

The legislative branch (Congress) is the only branch of government that has the power to declare war (Article I of the US Constitution).

Instead of Congress declaring war, they gave authority to the executive branch to engage in military enforcement of UN resolutions.

By doing that (unconstitutional), they gave the power to declare war (or create a war by invading a sovereign country) over to the executive branch. Congress (the legislative branch of government) only has the authority to create laws within their powers under Article I of the constitution. They are not able to create a law (resolution) that "enables" a separate branch of the government to engage in an act that only they have the authority to engage in (this case the act of war).

This "authority" given by one branch to another is totally unconstitutional. It would be like the president declaring that Pelosi is the "Commander in Chief" of the armed forces.

One branch of government cannot hand over separate powers specifically defined in the constitution to another branch for this very reason.

Each branch have been given specific authorities as they handle different things.

The legislative branch is thought to be the branch that speaks out the most for the people (many members, created to eliminate haphazard abuses of power, like declarations of war or illegally invading sovereign lands). The executive branch is given powers to execute decisions by congress (allows for more streamline decision making of what "supposedly" the people wanted). So congress is the only one that can declare war and then the executive's job is to decisively win that war. If the legislature (the people) feel that the resources given to that war are no longer worth it, they have the power to cut the purse strings (cut funding of black holes of finances).

So far, congress never declared war (This has been done with Korea, Vietnam, and Gulf War I. WWII was the last war that was constitutional. With Panama GHWB, just invaded with no authority whatsoever.)

So the war is illegal because there was never a declaration of war by congress.

Withdraw your endorsement

Withdraw your endorsement Rand. This is the perfect excuse to do so.

I think the question is.....

what did he expect?

I understand and sincerely believe that Rand THINKS that by staying "on the inside" he can affect policy in the Republican party. He is very inexperienced in the snake pit of Washington DC, and although he BELIEVES this, I have my doubts that it will work. I DO NOT believe that he has "Sold Out", "Betrayed the cause" or was "Bought out". I think he made a "rooky" mistake in his TIMING on the endorsement, and by chosing the Hannity show to do it on.

My discomfort comes from this very issue of PRE EMPTIVE WAR and OCCUPATION on a moral level. This is not a SECONDARY issue to me.
To "endorse" someone for President, but then follow it with this type of letter makes no sense. One cannot "endorse" a candidate who is for a moral evil, and then address that "one issue" as if it is a FOOTNOTE or an AFTERTHOUGHT. If someone believes in KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE in order to secure STUFF and POWER, then one simply cannot look at that belief as a "side issue". It is THE test of their character.
(..."Ted Bundy was a snappy dresser, worked for the Young Republicans, was well-spoken, did lots of charitable work, and was incredibly intelligent...... now I'll admit he had rather inappropriate ideas on SERIAL KILLING, and I'could never support him on those issues, but OTHER THAN THAT, he would have made a fine leader.")

Ironically, the REASON that Rand goes down better with "regular conservatives" than Ron does is that he has been rather VAGUE on the foreign policy and civil liberties issues in the past. By STAYING VAGUE he has been able to garner the support of people in my family, who see him as "not as whacky" as his father. Endorsing Romney, and doing it on the Hannity show, only solidified this perception of Rand being "with the program" to "protect OUR OIL" and "protect us from those crazy Muslims" for those unthinking conservatives like those in my family.

Therefore, chosing to defend his positions on war and civil liberties to OUR group, but doing so in a neocon rag, such as National Review has now "blown his cover" with the NORMAL conservatives, who, I will wager never knew he held some of these positions. (see the comments after the article)

The poor guy just keeps blowing off more of his toes with every shot he takes at justifying his rookie mistake.

I think the only cure for inexperience is hard knocks, and I think that Rand is getting some and will get more, as he tries to find a way to make a moral bargain with the devil. I feel MUCH sorrier for Rand than I do for us. SURE the endorsement was a shocker.... but in the end KNOWING and HAVING a moral compass helps to AVOID such dreadful errors of judgement.

I believe Rand is a GOOD GUY. I think he has simply made an ENORMOUS error of judgement here, and one that cannot be reconciled with, what seems to be (per this letter) his moral stance. He will be rejected by BOTH sides of the issue now, and my only hope is that he can LIVE with that and go on pursuing goodness and truth in some other capacity.... because I think his life in politics is pretty much done.

He comes from good stock, he has a loving family, and a successful profession as an eye surgeon. He will live through this tragedy... but that is what this whole fiasco is going to be since he cannot find the SOLID ground that he needs to find in making decisions.

Thomas Jefferson: “Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever."

Viva La Revolucion!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmaTNf4YhEs

No, Rand will prevail over these temporary polit challenges

Guys, stop bashing Rand or anyone in the Liberty movement who supposedly makes a "mistake". We are all on the same team, and should show more respect to each other. As Ron Paul said, we're fighting to educate voters, to get more visibility for the Liberty movement and our ideas - this is bigger than this 2012 potus election.

Rand doesn't want Liberty people to vote for Romney - this is just a "trojan horse" ploy to get our ideas more spotlight. It is very moral and fearless of Rand to do whatever it takes to get our ideas more exposed to the general public by getting more spotlight. Many still don't even know what Ron is really all about or heard about his ideas.
Many don't even follow the potus elections until October-November.

While both Romney and Obama are "evil", the people need to be educated on the right economics and foreign policy, first and foremost. Rand is doing some of that in his article. I wish he urged people to read von Mises, etc also. But something is better than nothing. The comments after the article are totally schooling the neo-cons - so the job is well done there. Any "new mind" reading this would side with Rand/Ron.

Our ideas will win, as soon as the Keynesian world order collapses in a number of years, and Ron, Rand will be vindicated, as they have predicted this. The whole world's polit system will have to be rebuilt after massive social unrests in most countries. We just need to prep the people for this moment - so people choose to pursue the true free markets system, Dr Paul's foreign policy, limited government, and not Socialism.

This is the big picture. Rand's political future is bright just like any other Liberty candidate's.

Whether Ron himself ends up endorsing Romney is a small issue - Ron and Rand will not give up on the ideas, that's what matters. Therefore, any such endorsements are a political "trojan horse" ploy, and we should not be sidetracked by that, but continue spreading the ideas, and electing Liberty candidates at every level.

Rand could have said

We have a big family, so does Mitt, I love my wife and kids and it seems Mitt does also...For these things I have a certain amount of respect for Mitt. As for his ability to act within the confines of law as the President of the US, well Mitt's own words (flip flops)
concerning lawful principles preclude and as such disqualify the endorsement of any law abiding American..myself included...

Just one last kick in the nuts, then a final deathblow

Cannot believe

You guys are falling for this. Seems to me Rand is finally beginning to understand what Daddy meant when he talked about Blow Back.

Of course I beleive Rand.

Of course I beleive Rand. He's a Paul and the most liberty-minded Senator we have. Care to prove me otherwise?

sharkhearted's picture

Bumpity bump!

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

Bravo Rand! What I found appalling was Romney even before

being nominated has the temerity to subvert the Constitution. Man, he sure as hell is taking a lot for granted. God, I would give my right arm to, er, left arm, to see Ron Paul turn the tables on the entire RNC in Tampa; but that's like asking for the moon. A more realistic scenario is we get really worked up and stand our ground to clear unadulterated cheating, then we get arrested and beat up by cops, a most humiliating ending.
Now, if we plan beforehand to surround the building with 500 or so rifle marksmen, who camped in camaflauge gear for two days prior, we may get an even shake. Whatdaya say gang, ya with me on this? I'm lockin' an' loadin'.

"surround the building with 500 or so rifle marksmen"

Lmfao

SteveMT's picture

What is a bigger issue than the economy? In fact,...

what the biggest issue of all the issues in this country? War is the biggest issue, and undeclared wars that number about ten right now and perhaps two more soon are the overriding issues of our time. Wars are the reason for such a poor economy. Wars overshadows the economy. Wars are either destroying or sucking the life out of many families here and they are creating more and more enemies abroad. The economy takes a back seat to wars. One cannot overlook the biggest point of stark disagreement and be content with a smaller point of near agreement when the larger one has no resolution, just more of the same.

"Slams" looks to me more

like "raised his hand to ask for permission to speak". Apparently the "supporting the nominee" deal includes phrases like "can't afford fore more years of Obama", which is pretty much the uniting principle behind the Romney supporters (I personally doubt there is such animal).

The "anyone-but....

...-Obama-or-Ron-Paul" argument doesn't cut it for me. I prefer the Ron Paul approach: "NO WAY!" That said, Rand is clearly having second thoughts about his endorsement and trying to make amends. Keep going, Rand, and don't stop until you get to "NO WAY!".

Plano TX

Looks like Rand has met his match in Romney. Both change

their minds a lot. Both follow Ron Paul's lead in everything, and as Rand stated, they both come from big families. I bet they both like chocolate chip cookies but they both probably would only eat one.

SequoiaTrees4RonPaul

Damn, I was hopin' for a news

Damn, I was hopin' for a news clip of Rand body slamming Romney. Ah. well....

poor choice of headline

but good read.

Ok ok

I am getting down voted on this comment I bet, I personally will not vote for Romney or anyone but Paul However.......I would rather take Romney over Obama despite them being in the same party aka the "Republicrats" for one and only one reason. With Romney getting in There will be a bunch of new people watching him and criticizing him right now Obama does what ever the hell he wants and it seems like no one says a damn thing. So the very least we would have more people watching.

Wow. Happened alot sooner

Wow. Happened alot sooner than I thought. My previous comment below is officially vindicated.

http://www.dailypaul.com/240739/rand-paul-throwing-out-bills...

:-D

That's a keeper, Greasy-

I like that approach. And Sen. Paul posting this in NRO is almost--almost--good as going on Hannity.

"If you want something you've never had before, you have to do something you've never done before." Debra Medina

I, I, I, ME, ME ME

don't forget about the message rand.

What a fool

hey idiot..if you wanted to say something about Romney's position on war you should have said it when you gave him the endorsement "happily" on national TV. Though I bet you a million dollars if you were to go back on the Hannity show, you would forget to mention how you disagree vehemently with his position on war.

Let's stay away from such insults

Ron Paul never used a word "idiot" to describe anyone. This is counter-productive.
The occupiers, for example, throw the word idiot on anyone who doesn't think like them... and chant obscenities. This makes them less attractive to the general populace. Let's not be so "unattractive" like that.

sharkhearted's picture

Bump bump bump bump...

BUMP.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.