Comment: Q. What do you expect him to

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: well... (see in situ)

Q. What do you expect him to

Q. What do you expect him to do?
A. Court mainstream Republicans who listen to Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter et al., while minimizing the libertarian view of the state. This is unhealthy to growing the liberty movement because it is partisan in nature. Is the strategy to co-opt the Republican party by becoming president? If so, it's DOA. The oligarchs will not allow Libertarians to effectively shut down 1/3 of their power (the executive branch). But should it be a position of libertarians to be satisfied by effecting minimal change in a system which disregards the philosophical underpinnings of American republicanism (i.e., the sovereignty of the individual, the rule of law, and radical decentralism)?

Q. What would you do different?
A. Not run for Senate and instead promote libertarianism, not the republican party as Ron did during his entire career. What drew me to Dr. Paul was his willingness to speak out against the system without concern for how he will be perceived by the party punditry. In a country our size it's amazing how anyone can conceive that they can actually be represented by 435 reps, 100 senators, 9 judges, and 1 president.

Q. Is Rand an asset or a liability in your eyes to our ultimate goals?
A. I don't know what the goals are for libertarian minded folks other than the reduction of state power. The American system is dysfunctional because it is highly centralized. Rand is a Senator and plays a role within the system, but for libertarians the goal, IMO should not be to legitimize the National government (it's not a federal form of government). It should be our sworn enemy and we should want to dismantle it. He's definitely a liability to libertarians but an asset to the Republican party faithful.

I'm just sick of it all. It's insanity to expect a different outcome when you always get the same results. Garbage in, garbage out.

Thanks