Comment: the naive

(See in situ)

the naive

... or maybe mostly just DemoPublican trolls ... actually seem to think that Rand did his "endorsement" without his father's implicit support.

We, rightfully, admire Ron Paul for his integrity and intelligence. But Ron Paul will be the first to admit -- as he does in his farewell speech and followup interviews -- that while he has galvanized a minority outside of government he has actually accomplished "very little" in government. And yet he is optimistic things are going to change dramatically within government within "ten years" -- because whereas there were, in the past, perhaps only one or two who supported the Constitution their are now perhaps "a dozen". Gosh. Are we to think Ron is naive or does he have a plan?

Because of Ron Paul's work AND Rand Paul's actions to date, Rand Paul is NOW in a position to do something in 2016 his father wasn't in a position to do in 2012 or 2008 or 2004 or 2000 or .... Rand Paul is in a STRONG position to win the Republican nomination -- and the Presidency -- the next time around. The average Republican -- with no more intelligence nor integrity than the average Democrat if we are going to be truthful -- would likely support Rand Paul when they wouldn't support Ron Paul.

Would we rather win or would we rather sulk? There is an incredible selfishness and self-centeredness -- or maybe just lack of intelligence and experience -- imo, in people who can't or won't join Rand in manning the front line of battle in Washington D.C. but who want to lay additional constraints on him as to how, specifically, he is supposed to do that. Isn't that sort of like the hypocrisy of chickenhawks who are always rooting for war but never volunteering to enter the trenches with a bayonet themselves? It is UGLY in the trenches, guys. And you want the guy who has volunteered to do the fighting for you to carry a bayonet and ALSO act like Jesus?

Bill of Rights /Amendment X: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Do you need a politician or judge to "interpret" those 28