When Ron Paul was running for president, there were countless posts on how poorly he phrased things in some debate, or how he should have said this or that during some interview. Yes, Rand's 10 second statement was phrased poorly and he failed to specifically define this hypothetical crime scene, but he clearly framed his point of view on drone use during his 1/2 day filibuster.
If you disagree with something Rand says, great. Please say so. Most DP members are probably eager to challenge and refine their stances, but it never goes like that. Instead it's "he's a traitor" or "he's a Mitt lover" or "he's an establishment hack" or "he's showing his true neo-con beliefs." Ron Paul has been able to reach those who were looking. Now, Rand is taking part in the difficult task of reaching those who aren't. I'm sorry, but in case you haven't gotten the message, he can't do that by being his father.
Campaign for Liberty, Young Americans for Liberty, Institute for Peace and Prosperity, National Association for Gun Rights. These are organizations through which Ron Paul continues his work and more effectively connects with people of different backgrounds and interests. Likewise, Ron Paul's work continues through the people he has influenced in the Congress, including his son.
Why give the people who want to silence us more ammunition to do it? The tide is turning. Attitudes are changing. People who will forever refuse to support Ron Paul are now backing Ron Paul's message, his organizations and even his son. The argument can almost be made that there's more support for Ron Paul "out there" than you can find right here. I don't get it.