19 votes

Ben Swann Exclusive: Did Rand Paul Endorse Establishment Republican To Block “Liberty Democrat”?

Exclusive: Did Rand Paul Endorse Establishment Republican To Block “Liberty Democrat”?

In fact, if he were truly looking to endorse a candidate who aligns with his stated beliefs on indefinite detention of U.S. citizens, drone strikes, NSA spying, whistleblower protection, and no more bailouts, Sen. Paul arguably should have endorsed the Democratic candidate.

Read more: http://benswann.com/did-rand-paul-endorse-establishment-repu...
Follow us: @BenSwann_ on Twitter

Comment viewing options

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

Don't get why your comment

Don't get why your comment was down voted, so upped it lol


maybe that poster will come back and explain why.

I expect to hold

the hands of the uninformed as I spread the message of Liberty in my area, but I didn't expect to have to hold the hands of the folks on this site, lol.

Good post, Thimbleberry :-)

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

Endorsements mean nothing

in a moral society. This is the problem that we are faced with. If/when people begin to vote the record and not the rhetoric, perhaps we can accomplish our objective.

Rand may endorse another, but he can not vote in Maine. I will not speak for Rand, but I believe that he would hope that the people in that state will vote their conscience and based upon record as he works to position himself for 2016.

Concerning "Liberty", repub vs dem, it is economics that drives most everything.

Rand maintaining 100% in 2012, 2013 and 2014. I will vote the record, and my conscience.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

He endorsed a neo-con crap-bag to block a socialist

Bellows' website flaunts her union and progressive endorsements and touts "paycheck fairness".

It's a hard call to pick between a socialist and a neo-con. They both threaten America. Rand probably could have stood aside, saying you're both crazy ladies, where's a libertarian woman when you need one.

He's a fool to try to drum up "mainstream" Republican support by endorsing douches like McConnell and Collins. He rolls around in filth for nothing. They are going to crush him come 2016 no matter who he endorses. Counter-revolutionary basterd Repubs have already kicked out the Ron Paul supporters from the Iowa GOP leadership.

Take back the GOP and Restore America Now.

wiki page sounds libertarian leaning/coalition builder

"In fact, if he (Rand) were truly looking to endorse a candidate who aligns with his stated beliefs on indefinite detention of U.S. citizens, drone strikes, NSA spying, whistleblower protection, and no more bailouts, Sen. Paul arguably should have endorsed the Democratic candidate."
-Ben Swann

People, don't be surprised about Rand Paul!

He is a Neocon. He sold his soul to the devil the day he betrayed his own father. Why do you think Ron Paul and his wife left the convention before he spoke? I daresay Ron did that because he had a sick feeling in the pit of his stomach and he just couldn't bear to stay.

"The day he betrayed his own

"The day he betrayed his own father" seriously dude cry me a river! Y'all are way to dramatic and emotional to be in politics. What do you think this is...Days of Our Lives or something? Go on the corner and sign wave....that's what you do best...we'll handle the rest.


so condescending! But you do make my point. I'm not "in politics", or more to the point, I'm not into politics. Politics is like gambling at the Casino... the house always wins. Even if you win a round, if you stick around you will lose in the end. Some people just have to learn this the hard way.

I actually didn't mean to be

I actually didn't mean to be so much as condescending as It was meant to be funny. I'm glad you at least loled at it.

Will tyranny grow larger and faster if no one keeps it in check?


kind people rock

I understand your point...

However, how to "keep it in check" is the issue of disagreement. I personally hold the position that participating in its election games is a form of consent to be governed by a regime. Furthermore, I'm not sure it will be better to delay the inevitable than to let history run it's course so we can rebuild. I don't see Rand making the radical changes that are necessary to reverse course, as he is a political animal.

I realize not everyone sees things this way, and that is fine. People will vote, and what happens happens. We don't all have to agree.

The question does not have to be about Rand, it is a general

question about keeping tyranny in check. Some say you can do this with politics, others considering it participating in the problem. The question I ask is, if no one keeps tyranny in check, will it grow larger and quicker? All good however, although I think we need to think more about the answer to this question. This is another way to ask it, will tyrannical legislation stop itself if there is no liberty minded representatives arguing against the devastating results it would have? Do things have to get so bad that it is only then we will see the downfall of our government, or will it be the people's liberties??????????????

kind people rock

That's depressing

I understand the "playing the game" argument that's often used about Rand's actions, but ONLY when there's not really a good legitimate alternative. In this case, he's snubbing what appears to be a liberty candidate with a legitimate shot. If it's endorsing Mitch McConnell and all the other candidates suck as well, then whatever, but in this case there is a good candidate he should have endorsed. I REALLY would like to see someone ask him about what specifically he sees in Collins that's better than Bellows?

chances are

you would not get a straight answer, he would brush it off. would he admit that he was just following orders? Ha ha, Nope.

It seems that almost daily now

Rand does something that confirms the superiority of my logical brain to my emotional brain. Despite my initial excitement and hopes for Rand, almost from the beginning my logical side told me that his actions do not match his rhetoric (think Romney endorsement).

Why lie?

I've never seen you make a pro Rand comment on this site. Why lie? Why veil yourself as a former pro Rand person who is just now "seeing the light" that he isn't what you thought he was?

Here's a comment from two months ago saying you'd never vote for him: http://www.dailypaul.com/312095/the-same-people-who-supporte...

Here's a comment in February of 2013 wanting Ron to run again:

Cointel pro?

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record


Ive never been accused of being cointelpro haha. That's certainly a new one for me. Anyways, I certainly did want Ron to run again. Also, as I stated, I have been skeptical of Rand almost from the beginning when I watched his speeches running for Kentucky Senate.

That being said, I never suggested I was a "pro-Rand" person. I did sincerely hope that he would carry the liberty torch that his father brought to the table, and my previous comment was my way of saying I no longer expect that to happen. My initial skepticism is proving to be right.

But yea, I'm probably cointelpro, so best not to listen to me no matter what I say... that accusation certainly makes things easier for the Rand camp, who are expected to justify their willful blindness.


Now that's doing the digging...
Def appreciate it...

: )

Love Liberty, be Vigilant

"Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (2 Corinthians 3:17)

Faith in God will prevail all things!


did you check his "digging" or are you just a cheerleader?

Isn't Collins running

Isn't Collins running unopposed? So I wonder what would happen if he showed up at the Main convention and endorsed the Democrat.

There is no such thing as a "liberty democrat".

I'm sorry, but the last time someone came anywhere near being a pro-liberty candidate who was also a Democrat was Mike Gravel, and he had some problems when it came to issues like health care and abortion. Most of these so-called people are Kucinich-styled socialists who might pay lip-service to civil liberties and are nominally anti-war, but still caucus with anti-libertarians like Diane Feinstein, Harry Raid and several others in the democratic leadership. Rand Paul may as well endorse Bernie Sanders if he's going to endorse this potential fraud running in Maine.

Ben Swann is really starting to get on my nerves with these anti-Rand articles.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

And we're tired of you blind

And we're tired of you blind Rand worshipers. He ain't the fucking Messiah, if he's fucking WRONG you have to call his ass out on it, and he's WRONG here.

After giving his "wholehearted" endorsement, he went on to say he didn't even know what her fucking position was on NSA. Bull shit he doesn't know she's PRO-NSA, are you fucking kidding me? And Swann is getting on your nerves? Come on man, you can't be serious.

Blah blah blah blah...

Can you make a response without sounding like a profanity spewing thug from North Philly? Probably not. Anyway, it doesn't matter what Collins' position is on the NSA, what matters is what her party is, this is how politics works. If you don't like it, join the secessionist movement (I might end up joining myself, albeit for different reasons).

If there is one thing I've learned about Rand's detractors, it is that they are neither knowledgeable nor rational regarding what they are talking about. Most of you are likely former Democrats who still can't figure out what liberty is apart from smoking a joint and killing a fetus. You can be tired of me to your heart's content Revere1776, it won't come anywhere near how tired I am of hearing this sanctimonious nonsense out of you guys.

And for the record, I am DEAD SERIOUS. I watched Ron Paul get taken apart 2 times for not being savvy and picking his battles, and I watched a strong contingent of his supporters get roped in by all these wacky conspiracy theories to explain why the country is going down the tubes. I have zero time for people who have no sense of practical outcomes and cleave to their own arbitrary principles as it they were holy writ.

Rand Paul endorses a single democrat and he is out of it, period. Endorsing Collins is a matter of political survival, not a matter of betraying principles, though frankly if I was him, I'd be betraying the trust of the 0.5% of the electorate who think that he owes his allegiance to them on every single issue. You need to get it through your heads that you are not in the majority in this country, not even close. Your time would be better spent either supporting liberty candidates for local elections, running for office yourself, or at least engaging anti-libertarians in debate, rather than whining about Rand Paul all day.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton



Rand was a damn keynote

Rand was a damn keynote speaker at the Main convention and you want him to endorse a democrat? Seriously people...get with the program.

"Speaking" at an event

and "endorsing" a neocon are 2 different things! Seriously, what do you not get about that?

I'm NOT suggesting that he endorse the other person. I'm suggesting he shouldn't have endorsed Collins, and told everyone she was great for the country when she supports the NDAA, NSA, etc. When Ron Paul speaks for the black caucus he does not get up there and say "and I think the black community should get all kinds of special privileges." He diplomatically explained his position... not told them what he thought he was expected to say.

Because that event was a

Because that event was a nominating convention and guess who is their candidate and guess who was their keynote speaker? Guess who's delegates got tossed out with the last election? Guess who is trying to secure his delegates in 2016?

What about SC

So what if he was the keynote speaker in SC or AZ? You don't have to endorse the Democrat, you could just not endorse anyone. Unless he's just endorsing Collins in her primary, running unopposed lol