-19 votes

Robert Wenzel's Open Letter To Libertarians: "Don't Be Fooled By Rand Paul"

Interested in everyone's thoughts on this.

Dear Libertarians,

"There is a big difference between Ron Paul and Rand Paul that appears to be missed by many. Ron Paul was not hungry to be president of the United States. If he would have been hungry, he would have booted his grandson in-law and that entire gang out early on in the primaries when it was clear they were positioning themselves not to advance Ron Paul and liberty, but to advance their own careers. Ron Paul just wasn't that hungry to do that and be president. He was satisfied getting the libertarian message out.

Rand Paul is different. It appears that he wants to be president. Wanting to be president changes a man, wherever they start off from.

This was Rand at the start of his political career, on the Federal Reserve and Bilderberg.

After Rand settled in, this is what Rand did when questioned about Bilderberg.

Rand also enthusiastically endorsed elitist loser Mitt Romney. Remember this?

If you want to become president, you have one thing in mind, you need to get to 50.1% If you hold libertarian views and run on those views you are not going to be president. I dare anyone to run on completely libertarian principles and believe they are going to win. Go ahead. Tell voters you are in favor of legalizing heroin and LSD. Tell them that the U.S. government should default on its debt and relieve taxpayers of the burden. Tell them you want to end welfare and food stamps. Tell them you want to end the DEA, TSA, FDA, DOE, FAA, SEC, CFTC and the rest of the government alphabet soup agencies."

Tell them you want to end medicare. Tell them you don't want to fight Muslims, or anyone else, anymore. Go ahead, see how far you are going to get. As I have stated before, there is nothing wrong with running, as long as you stick to principles and lose. It can be a method of spreading libertarian views. Winning, given the current voter climate, is when you become suspect.

Rand Paul is about winning.

Every time I point out Rand moves that are away from liberty, I get emails and comments telling me I am too harsh on Rand. I received many again today because of this post (Scroll down to the comments).

Continue Reading

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Ron Paul

was never a flip-flopper of sorts. Why should Rand be? Ron stood his ground and never wavered and almost became president. Rand has flip-flopped and planted the seed of doubt in his trusted followers. I can't defend him just because his father is Ron Paul. It broke my heart to see him announce his endorsement of Rombombya and on HANNITY of all places. I know we all need someone to put our hopes in. I just can't understand why if Rand is so great how could he bend politically? RON NEVER DID! I am dis-illusioned by Rand. Thumb me down if it makes you feel better.


Shouldn't be on the front page.

This Wenzel guy bashes the hell out of Rand on a daily basis, probably just to draw some extra hits to his website. I wouldn't give him the front page traffic or put any Rand bashing there for that matter, unless Rand does something really bad to disappoint us. This guy has had a beef with Rand for a long time and this is just more rehashing of it, nothing new to see here.

Debbie's picture

Rand Paul 2016!

Rand Paul 2016!


I predict...

...that this will be the most down-voted thread to ever grace the front page of the DP. Why it was placed on the front page to begin with, well, that's a question you should be asking yourself right about now.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

this is just a hit piece to divide us....



has my full support. Ive said it a number of times.. Ron Paul lacked the fire he had in 07. I believe this was more to position Rand for 16.

Rand will be head and shoulders better than any other GOP turd forced on us. I believe he would be the best leader we can get..

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

This is going to be a long 4 years


As if the last twelve weren't

As if the last twelve weren't long enough, right? Sigh.

Oh brother - yeah, lets just

Oh brother - yeah, lets just keep waiting for that perfect libertarian and faultless human being. Or we could get a pretty great sitting politician of the people, with scruples and principles, who has a shot at the presidency. I am judging Rand by what he does in Congress and how he votes. The other stuff is PR and can be twisted any which way by either side.

Our political problems aren't the makings of, or the potential future mistakes of Rand Paul; our political problems are because we don't have enough honest people like Rand and others with our philosophy in positions to counter the evil in DC and beyond.

Rand Paul wants to try to win? Thank god.

Thank goodness Rand Paul will try to win. Finally someone good who'll try to win. I'm not donating to any more loser campaigns.


Right on man, me neither

Now is not the time to stand down

The United States will NEVER have a libertarian president

EVER! So, if you're not willing to support a libertarian-leaning Conservative like Rand Paul, keep peddling losers like Gary Johnson who pander to peaceniks with the hope that those young, EPA-supporting idealists won't look too closely at libertarian economic policy.

I supported Johnson in '12 & will support Rand in '16

if he runs. I don't care which 'wing' of the liberty movement you're down with as long as you're down with it in general.

so now being a peacenik is a bad thing?

I can see why you dig Rand

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus

Not in and of itself, but, the reason the LP loses

so many peaceniks to the Democratic Party is because the LP doesn't seem to ralize you can't win over utopians running on a rational economic platform without de-utopianizing them first. It's funny how these same LP supporters then criticize libertarians for trying to appeal to Republican voters without converting those Republicans to every facet of libertarianism first.

Ron Paul taught so Rand

Ron Paul taught so Rand Paul(or another future liberty candidate) can win. Libertarians who have followed these two guys closely know they can trust the entire Paul family. Rand has campaigned many times for Ron and probably never missed a thanksgiving dinner with him. Their ideaologies are very, very close. I only hope that libertarians can recognize that Rand is playing to win, and understand the stakes.

And furthermore, it is offensive to Ron Paul and to those of us who donated to his campaign to say that Ron Paul wasn't trying to win. Sure, after it became evident in April that Romney had the numbers the campaign started to back off. However, go back and watch the interviews Ron Paul was doing in late December when he first topped the polls in Iowa. He was in it to win it! Unfortunately, fox, CNN, etc started accusing him of writing racist newsletters which slowed the momentum just enough for Santorum to surge late in the polls as the media turned off the Ron Paul spicket and started shouting Santorum surge. And by the way, do you remember how upset Rand was standing on stage next to his father as Ron gave his third place speech? He knew that that defeat cost us the overall nomination because of the missed bump. Perhaps he knew that night that it would be up to him to play this game four years later and that was why he was so emotional. I believe that night he felt the pressure of restoring our country being placed on his shoulders because of the shenanigans played by the media and the GOP. Rand Paul 2016.

"Where liberty is, there is my country." -Benjamin Franklin

Agreed, well said


"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Gee Wenzel, thanks for the warning...

Seeing how I am such a gullible ignoramus, thank goodness I have YOU to tell me who the true patriots are. And thank goodness we have the Daily Paul to put you on the front page to protect all of the other gullible ignoramuses that might be tempted to support a libertarian who could actually win the presidency.

The Virtual Conspiracy

...spoken like a "gullible

...spoken like a "gullible ignoramus" after all. I believe those are your words, not the author's. The lack of tolerance for a differing point of view which slips into personal insults for expressing that point of view reflects poorly on all Ron Paul followers. The intelligenzia has left this site. I am not a Rand Paul supporter and in no way feel disloyal to Ron Paul for criticizing Rand's portrayal as a politician.

sure, why having Rand in 2016

sure, why having Rand in 2016 instead Jeb Bush or Hillary, I mean look what Rand has done, he doesn't want to speak about Bilderberg all the time! That's it, I'm done with this Rand traitor!

sorry, just don't get it.

Jeb Bush, son of G H Bush, part owner and controller of the terrorist organisation known as the CIA, architect of 9/11, murderer of 3000 citizens, and war profiteer.
Hillary, NWO stooge, evil woman, power hungry hag, willing to sell out the US for personal gain, wife of a lecherous, lying war mongering ex president
Rand Paul, eye surgeon, son of Dr Paul, the most switched on, honest politician to sit in congress.
Umm who is the traitor?


I think you may have missed it.

Eric Hoffer

Clearly Rand Is The Lesser Of Evils In That Scenario

However, I think Wenzel raises some good caution flags. The worst thing that could happen in 2016 would be for Rand to get elected and then act completely neocon. Because he would have had to have won the trust of the Ron Paul people in order to do that. If he turns his back on us then we're really in trouble.

Having said that, I'd still absolutely vote for Rand if he runs in 2016. And I'd also still be a big fan of Bob Wenzel as well.

Rand is not a libertarian

by his own admission

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus

He didn't "admit" it he "claimed" it

To "admit" something is to state that a damning fact about you is true. He's doing the opposite.

The term "libertarian" is still a poll-tested negative to the majority of voters, so he's attempting to dodge that label.

If Hitler claimed he was not a Nazi, would you say "See! he admits it!"

Big picture, big picture, big

Big picture, big picture, big picture. Look at it. He ran in Kentucky in 2010, Kentucky. If he says to everyone i'm libertarian and I want to legalize LSD and heroin than he is still a Doctor in Bowling Green. It's called tact. That being said, I don't want to discourage you from supporting another liberty candidate in the GOP or a third party candidate in the LP. But just keep an open mind with Rand. I'm pretty sure he had a good upbringing.

"Where liberty is, there is my country." -Benjamin Franklin

Bilderberg is political

Bilderberg is political suicide for someone trying to appeal to mainstream. Sometimes, to achieve your objectives... you have to play things smart. Smart means picking your battles.

I have no doubt that if Rand Paul had enough evidence about Bilderberg to present a convincing case to the public he would run with it. But he doesnt. There is nothing to gain by fighting a losing public battle. There is everything to gain, in fighting things that are tangible and provable to John Q Public. Like TSA harassment, sending taxpayer money to people who hate us, unjustly imprisoning people for ridiculous non crimes like weed possession .

Rand Paul is not a perfect human. But I honestly do not think that if he became Prez that we would continue to see encroachment of the police state in this country. He may not be perfect, but he would be a better Prez than any we have had in a long long time.


There is nothing to gain by fighting a losing public battle. There is everything to gain, in fighting things that are tangible and provable to John Q Public. Like TSA harassment, sending taxpayer money to people who hate us, unjustly imprisoning people for ridiculous non crimes like weed possession.

Likewise, in this recent interview, Rand is discussing where spending could be cut, and does like many politicians and cites small (few million dollars) programs with really nutty goals...this makes me cringe or roll my eyes, as I'm sure it does many of us, because we know this is peanuts in comparison to the welfare and warfare spending. But, it's smart politics, because it seems most people have the attention span of a goldfish and they don't want a dry lecture on serious topics, but talk about robotic squirrels and meth-addicted chimps catches their interest. If it gets vote for someone like Rand, who will tackle the real problems once in office, well then that's fine by me.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Yeah it's not like he defended such things...

Or pretended that he wasn't aware of them. He just refused to answer the question, why did he do that?

What's changed? his principles? His position on such things no. It's his influence and his place under the media scrutiny has.

It was because some network could put up a clip call him a loon a conspiracy nut and that's real great for the liberty movement, right?...


Are the Libertarians feeling threatened by the son of a TRUE libertarian?
Rand Paul 2016.