Has evolved to the point institutionally, where it has become in general violation of its constitutional mandate. It's tentacles, through finance, regulation, education and so forth, control so much that reform will not be possible through federal elections.
Only assertive local self-government, through ideas such as nullification for starters, can restore liberty.
While a cool Rand presidency can 'do so much more' for liberty than Chris Christie, the fact is that if Rand is to become President, he will have to sell out.
While that might seem 'worth it' to have 'just a little more libertarian influence' in the White House consider the effect:
All the time, energy, and money of an already stretched and limited liberty movement sucked up into a waste of time.
PLUS, there's the fact that Rand Paul will never be able to reform the federal government to the point where problems are fixed. So, as the federal government drags down the economy and society through its terrible policies, it will be 'liberty' that takes the blame.
Ron Paul was worth it because his platform was obviously indifferent to whether or not he could play the game to win. Sure, winning would have been cool, but a Ron Paul win would have been a major blow to federal power, and Ron Paul knew that his campaign would rally and educate so he focused on the message of liberty not 'winning'.
You're right about Rand being exciting.
BUT THIS DESIRE TO 'WIN' AND TAKE POWER AT A CENTRAL LEVEL TO CRAFT SOCIETY THROUGH THE INSTRUMENTS OF STATE TO OUR IDEALS IS A TOTALITARIAN AND TYRANNICAL IMPULSE. THE LIBERTY COMMUNITY HAS TO WIN BY EDUCATING PEOPLE AND THEN STANDING AGAINST GOVERNMENT BY THE EXERCISE OF NOTHING MORE THAN OUR NATURAL RIGHTS. THIS IS THE ANTI-RAND ARGUMENT.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Pa