It's downhill for Campaign for Liberty. Must have been some serious blackmail.
"God bless us, every one!"
I hope the deal is off if any RP supporters at the convention get assaulted or threatened in any way.
Shut up with the martyr complex.
Ummm, I didn't detect an actual endorsement here, the work "endorse" was never used, it was all in the context of Biden's slam of Romney's background at Bain Capital, to which Rand gave the same answer I would.
this isn't new really. He told woods he would support romney if he is nominated
There is no plausible deal that he could cut that would get me (or you) to vote for Romney.
Didn't see the "hot" endorsement there.
Shame on you, Bob. That was NOT an endorsement. He said a couple good words about Romney. Now it's all over the Internet, "Rand Paul endorses Romney" and it's all your fault. Retract the title, please.
So you think Senator Paul is going to come out against Romney? Shame on you Agorist for promoting a Rand Paul we can only dream of. Thanks to RW for keeping us informed on what is really going on.
Nice try, RW.
This video is dated back from earlier this year isn't it? I would have a very hard time accepting that Rand Paul could ever endorse Romney.
Duh, the video is from Friday and they are talking about recent developments.
I really hope that this is not the direction we are going in. An endorsement of Gary Johnson might work, but NEVER Romney.
How has Rand Paul managed to glean so little from his father over the years that he falls prey to the classic fallacy that "government is a business."Please, Rand, enlighten me: what is the product government produces? In what way is it held accountable by profit and loss? Who are its voluntary customers, without which it ceases to exist?
This is what I was thinking, while reading this. There are several great essays about why the skills needed for successfully running a government are almost the exact opposite of those for successfully running a business.I forget where the one I'm thinking of is; "Bureaucracy"? or something by HH Hoppe, perhaps.On the other hand Romney's experience with "business" was as a crony capitalist with a government-controlled company that he couldn't get fired from, so maybe Rand has something there. That kind of "business" experience might be helpful to a President.
Rand knows the government is a band of thieves writ large and not a business, but I would say the same thing if I knew my Dad was about to shock the establishment with a brokered convention. You'll get more neo con bees to flip with a bit of honey.
This isn't an endorsement. He'll definitely support and perhaps even endorse him once his father is out, but right now he surely will not do that.
OK, I read the title and was so beside myself, I couldn't watch the video. I thought it was an official endorsement and I flipped out. Especially after their 30 minute meeting.... I called my mom and got her all upset too. Not cool. Now I have to go have a drink just to calm down. Thanks, Bob.
maybe next time you'll actually WATCH the video
Rand wants the best of both worlds. On one hand he's sly and enjoys the political theater more so than his father, but he doesn't want to betray his father's cause and hasn't done so yet in the Senate.Btw he was damning Romney with faint praise in that clip. He needs to tamper down the enthusiasm though. Here's how you fake an endorsement you don't really believe in.http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/03/jon-stewart-lampoons-tepid-endorsements-of-romney/
Hasn't done so in the Senate? He voted to confirm Panetta. Ron can stand alone 434-1 but Rand can't even muster the nominal courage to vote "present". As to the Stewart clip and the idea of "damn him with faint praise"... I'm not buying it. Something like... "I think Mitt has great hair and will learn to use the teleprompter better than Obama presently does so I am voting for him"... well that would qualify as a "tepid endorsement" in my eyes. Rand was less reserved than anyone Stewart showed in his clip. And yes, it was not technically an "endorcement" but it was more assertive than McCain, H W Bush, Patatki, Paul Ryan who did overtly endorse Romney.But thanks for the Stewart clip... I learned a new term... "Romnefeller"... I think I will use it often.It should be noted that Rand recited his pro-Willard talking points AFTER his 30 pieces of silver, er, 30 minute private sit down with Willard. Maybe he was shown the “JFK assassination film from another angle” that Bill Hicks speaks of or maybe some footage of his college days has been unearthed. No matter what, Rand certainly is NOT heir to the R3VOLution’s love of principle. To be fair though, and it may even be more damning, Rand did say early on that he would support WHOEVER the Republican nominee would be way back in January in an interview with the loathsome Hannity. So the most charitable thing that can be said on Rand's behalf may turn out to be the most damning. Uggh.
Actulaay the more I think about it, if I wanted to give a "tepid endorsement" I would say "So and so has brought people to the Repuiblican Party" and If I wanted to give a strong endorsement I would say "So and so has economic solutions to our country's problems"... So I am even more disgusted.I am not going to get into the nuances of whether this was an actual endorsement or not. I will just say that the mountain of praise was for Romnefeller and the molehill of praise was for Ron Paul. I wonder what Carol thinks about Rand's words.
The entire segment is a response to Joe Biden's anti-capitalist comment that running Bain Capital is as useless as being a plumber in regards to being qualified for President.Rand Paul rightly explains why that is false, and why a successful businessman would have skills that are beneficial to being a good President.Various people then typed "omg he endorses Romney" as the title of this segment. That doesn't make it true, though...
I actually disagree with that, I'm not sure if it was Mises or Rothbard (or perhaps both) who stated how government is nothing like a business because of the lack of prices and overall knowledge.(Of course, the progressives that are claiming Romney's business experience wouldn't help him as president probably are not using the same argument)
Either way, it is a far cry from the misleading "endorsement" it is being sold as...
I will never vote for Romney, and I will never support Rand either now. Time to admit that Lew Rockwell was right all along: liberty will not come from politics.
I stopped supporting Rand Paul after he voted for the sanctions on Iran. There was someone here who said Rand Hasn't betrayed principle in the Senate yet. Nonsense. Utter nonsense. Nonsense on stilts, I say! Not only did he vote to confirm Panetta, as someone here also said, but he voted to put sanctions (really, further sanctions) on Iran. Those who say that Rand "really" believes all the same things as his father but is only doing what he's doing to score brownie points with the Establishment and then dismantle it from the inside don't win Rand any points by saying that. Even if this is true, all it does is make me even MORE disgusted with Rand. Precisely what I liked so much about Ron Paul, precisely the main reason why I began supporting him in the first place, is that he did NOT play political games. Frankly, I don't care what Rand "really" believes. His way of supposedly achieving the ends of the cause of liberty is disgusting. And even if his "compromising" is just an elaborate strategy, I must say, it's not a good one. If that's his plan, it will backfire on him. People will accuse him of flip-flopping in the future. Because of his sterling record, Ron Paul is forever safe from that indictment. Ron Paul has his principles and his a whore for nobody. Regrettably, that laudable trait seems not to have been carried on into the next generation in the Paul family.http://www.dailypaul.com/216460/sen-rand-paul-explain-his-vote-in-favor-of-sanctions-on-iran
Put me down as another Ron Paulian who wouldn't vote for Romney unless Ron Paul endorsed him, and maybe not even then!
I don't care who endorses that criminal. I absolutely will NOT vote for that crumb (Romney)!
I always knew Rand Paul was a chump. Too many Libertarians were hoping for the best instead of seeing his past failings and extrapolating the likely future events.Obviously I can't say I'm surprised.I feel badly for his father though.
Politics isn't the answer, not even Rand Paul. At least Ron Paul offers a message and the record to back up that message.
This is why I cancelled my EPJ Daily Alert.
I just signed up for the EPJ Daily Alert to support Wenzel. He's the only one that is telling it straight about what is going on with Rand and Ron Paul.Rand's cozying up to Romney is not a good thing.Keep the flashlight on it RW!!
Whether or not this is an endorsement is immaterial. Rand had shown an incredible willingness to flirt with the Bill Cristols of the right while (I guess) pursuing a more mainstream reputation in his campaign.This is beyond belief, though. If Rand's angling for any office, if he's a true champion of liberty, what does he think he will accomplish in a Romney Administration? With Mitt's love affair with Israel and all of the Bush retreads that he has lined up for cabinet positions, what will he be able to do against all those voices? That is EVEN IF he is a champion of liberty...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3thrZYxIrVI&feature=youtu.be
The Ronchurian Candidate strikes again.
This "HOT" news is sure to bring on some site traffic. The "endorsement" is vague at best. It will bring forward those already predisposed with an opinion against Rand.
..Anyone thinking Ran Paul could be Romney's vice president..? The easiest way to get Ron Pauls delegates to go for Romney..!!
I happen to agree with Rand in a narrower context. I see the FDA as a failed business...along with every other government agency. Clearly, what they need is the right person from the pseudo-private sector at the helm. Not price signals and competition.
People appear to be missing something: Rmoney is LOOKING for our approval. He knows he's hosed without it.Rather than be annoyed at realpolitik, be glad that our efforts of these past years is starting to pay off.
Not surprising, Rand has long been a neocon, pro-war, pro-Guantanamo, pro-torture, the complete opposite of his father.It seems every time he does something remotely good (his stance on the Fed, FDA & the NDAA bill) he does something even worse, Rand is desperately trying to fit in with the D.C. establishment and is betraying everything his father would have thought him to do so... tu be cede malis? Rand?
I have often thought, "I wish Rand would have asked his father's opinion on [whatever], I know it would be the opposite."
I have no problem with consultants/buyers that truly turn around businesses(or try).In the case of Romney I wonder if the business/consulting model was more like: Acquire a business, deeply leverage it, pay yourself "consulting fees", and then file bankruptcy.Only in a fiat money system could this work...aside from the issue that fraud isn't usually explored that greatly in most bankruptcy cases.When examined closely this notion of Romney's Bain experience being a "plus" for the country falls short...unless of course he's going to saddle the country with more debt before filing national bankruptcy. Something tells me he'd collect fees via payoffs/favors going that route too...lol
Reading these comments makes me worried for the liberty movement: are we so blind that we can't see a long-game? It took the progressives 100 years to build the apparatus--Wilson didn't erect it overnight by himself. There's no doubt they're playing the long game. This is what we're up against.You're all ready to turn on Rand for the slightest hint--the slightest suspicion--that he _might_ hold a view that's contrary to liberty.Guys: we have to get the liberty message out there! Rand Paul is articulate, educated, solidly-grounded in libertarian principles, has a REAL understanding of how things are done and he knows that the liberty movement is about more than troll commenting on the net. The movement is about more than one man... none-the-less, Rand Paul is OUR man! The fact that he's entertaining, enlightening and converting the neocons is a plus.Get some perspective people!
Yeah but what good is he if he's a sellout? Not saying he is (yet).
Innocent until proven guilty. He's not a sellout and he hasn't given us any indication that he might be. We have to change people's hearts and minds. The change that's happened over the last 4 years is awe-inspiring. We have to keep this going!Let's be pragmatic and philosophical about this, not so close-minded and ready to pull our support at the first misunderstanding. Here's an RW post from a couple month's back discussing the fact that RON PAUL himself would consider the veep position:http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/03/ron-paul-as-vice-president.htmlPlease consider the philosophical, open-minded tone of this article.
Pretty disappointing on multiple levels.First and foremost, if Rand thinks that all Ron is doing is growing the party... really?!? He's not that clueless, right? Or is he really just another politophile? Does he really believe that the Paul people will just be lock-step Repubs?Then the whole idea that government can be run like a business... That's one of the stupidest ideas ever. That just because someone can be successful in business (and I'm not sure Romney qualifies), he can turn the sh!tpile we call government into a silk purse. That's either delusional or dishonest... The gov is not a business and cannot be run like a business... no way, no how.And to hear him sound like just another party hack... I guess the apple has fallen pretty far from the tree after all.
Strange robot comment at the end by Rand to the question about his dad. I never thought anyone would describe what Ron Paul is doing as "bringing young people into the *Republican* fold", but there you have it.
I realize that wasn't a "hard endorsement" but it certain WAS an endorsement. He thinks the country can be run like a business? WRONG!Rand Paul is a sell out and if we continue to see this kind of stuff from Rand libertarians will NOT be voting for him next time around.He's really got me pissed off now.
Out of context, misrepresentation by Fox and you RW. Why did you need to blow this out of proportion? Let the gutter press do what they do - you don't have to join them.Disappointed!
I can not fathom why everyone is taking up arms against Rand, especially you Wenzel! It took 30 years for Ron Paul to gain a following large enough for those in Washington to take him seriously. Even then he was sneered at by the mainstream media. Rand Paul carries the same beliefs. But he carries them in a package that the politicians and pundits can understand. Would you rather he had agreed with the interviewer that capitalism is evil and useless? Unless Ron Paul can pull off a longevity at the convention, Rand will soon be the torchbearer for liberty in DC. Will you all stand with him, or will you sink back down into obscurity and not have your voices heard?
A senator is to the torch of liberty as a drunk is to the torch of sobriety.
Sober yourselves people! Rand Paul is one of us.
you are sadly mistaken john, rand has never been one of us, i've been beside myself wondering why people have even been thinking such things.....he's proven time and time again that his daddy must have been the milk man....but mark my words, you can't win someone else's game by playing it with them...you have to start your own game.....that's what ron paul was doing and couldn't swing it because the people he is up against aren't dummies like the rest of us, their game has been playing for many centuries and they are the masters of it.....
Yeah... if figured this out over the course of this thread (please view my more recent post below). Very disappointed. In watching his latest video endorsement (on Hannity) he practically shows disdain for internet commentators (i.e. Ron Paul supporters).Anyhow, I'm still open-minded about all this. On the one-hand I regret that he's selling-out as the momentum gained behind Ron Paul requires uncompromising integrity (which Rand sadly seems to lack) and people won't get behind Rand the way they did for his father.On the other hand, I'm very scared for this country. I'm not a fan of Bush but he couldn't get away with half the damage Obama seems to be getting away with. Deficits, bread, circuses, handouts, undeclared wars, killings to another level! Take a country far enough down this path and there's no turning back--ever! Nobody will vote for the Free Market when they're ALL receiving handouts (e.g. Europe). Starting your own game will be very hard when you have a boot on your neck and the people on their side. Perhaps Rand knows this and thinks he's acting in the best interest of the country... I don't know. It's a depressing vein of thought.Or maybe it's more simple than this: as Doug Casey quipped, perhaps they've shown the Pauls the Kennedy assassination from a different angle?
If Lew reported that rand endorsed Rom, I'm inclined to believe this is an actual endorsement. Lew's known Rand since he was a kid. Those of you concerned about the liberty movement: don't be. Realize that politics was never going to be the avenue for change, it was ever a channel to market for ideas. It's simply a very efficient channel. But ultimately you can't stop an idea whose time has come. The plan is not get your guy elected and he's going to sweep away 100 years of government waste and fraud and people will get on board with you as you take away their goodies and tell them to be self-reliant. Even Ron Paul has said as much. You have to change the attitude and faith people place in government. That doesn't happen with an election. The exact opposite happens in an election.
Well said, it is also noteworthy that Lew highlights Rand's comment about what his father achieved, namely expanding the GOP base. Phew, is that what he sees as RP's contribution? How about a focus on freedom?
I agree, and I would also add that you should judge Rand by his actions not his words. Trying to force a debate in the Senate on the Patriot Act, the constitutionality of Libya, the TSA, etc shows where his true loyalties lay.
"I agree, and I would also add that you should judge Rand by his actions not his words. Trying to force a debate in the Senate on the Patriot Act, the constitutionality of Libya, the TSA, etc shows where his true loyalties lay."- Thank you!Of course the change will come through grassroots action, but politics have been a VERY effective platform for spreading the liberty message.Let's not be so fickle. A few less than fortunate soundbites aren't going to stop my cheering for Rand Paul.What do you say to the idea that Ron Paul himself has stated he'd consider the VP position? Is Ron Paul a turncoat traitor to liberty? As RW reports:http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/03/ron-paul-as-vice-president.htmlLet's not be so quick to turn on our friends.
Government is not a "failed business." The individuals employed by government are merely acting as one might expect. http://mises.org/daily/2396 "The Business of Government" - Rothbard
Though Rand Paul never says the words "I endorse Mitt Romney," the substance of what he says is a clear endorsement, not only of Mitt Romney the man, but of Mitt Romney the message, i.e. ideology, which is in essence Progressive--which is itself fascist. So far, Rand Paul has displayed himself far more as a Statist, than as a Rothbardian Libertarian (as opposed to a Beltway libertarian). That said, any idea that he may step into his father's shoes as the front-man of the liberty movement is fast being dissipated, not by Wenzel's "misleading" (as some commentators have suggested) claims, but by his own actions. The truth is, though, that the next "Ron Paul" will simply be found by the people. Dr. Paul was not anointed, he was discovered. Who knows, the more people become aware of the true nature of politics, anarcho-capitalism may become the leading ideology. Then we won't need to worry about political leaders altogether.
It is an overstatement to say Rand endorsed Romney. In the clip, he is merely defending Romney from charges against Bain Capital--something his father himself did on numerous occasions months ago. A formal endorsement though I am sure is coming soon. The primaries in the coming week probably will lock up the nomination for Romney. I understand the grassroots disenchantment with Romney, but people need to look at things from the perspective of the Pauls. Both Pauls see the future of the libertarian movement as being in the Republican party, and they are both playing an inside game (though more so Rand) to increase libertarian influence in the party. Rand himself is a very serious contender for the nomination in 2016 if Romney doesn't win in November against Obama. I am talking frontrunner status not less than Romney enjoyed this election cycle. Now, ask yourself how much of a complication it would be for Rand running the primaries in 2016 (not to mention in other contexts) if he doesn't support Romney in 2012 against Obama? Keep in mind there is a good chance Ron Paul doesn't endorse Romney. We can get all gushy and idealistic, and complain about how bad Romney is till we are blue in the face, but if you want to work through a party to advance your agenda, party loyalty factors in. That's politics for better or worse.
Tony, thank you for your sober words.When Rand Paul is running for President in 2016, many people will have to more seriously consider Rand's commitment to liberty, as well as their own. I suspect that hasty pronouncements in places like this will have to be eaten.For all interested, here's fascinating LRC podcast detailing the history of the third parties:http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewrockwell-show/2012/01/04/245-the-real-history-of-third-parties/It's clear that the establishment has rigged things in their favor... at least until now. It's been one of the best things for the liberty movement to have discovered the rules of the game and to beat them at it (hah! using their antiquated and anti-liberty rules against them). Thank you Ron Paul. Sadly, this means we're limited to the Republican party--at least for now.
The headline to this article was overstated. I did not hear a clear and ringing endorsement of Romney.
Nice thread RW. You have the pseudo libertarians buzzing. What a laugh to read the B.S..Good luck dummies, you've been had again. Scratch all you want, you all won't ease the itch.
Ron Paul’s Mega Crowds & No Media Coverage![LOOK AT THESE PHOTOS!] [Q: WHAT DO YOU SEE? That you have NEVER seen, at ANY "Rally", for Obama-Romney? A: PEOPLE! LOTS ~ OF PEOPLE!]CLICK FOR THE PHOTOS HERE:http://mycatbirdseat.com/2012/05/ron-pauls-mega-crowds-no-media-coverage/comment-page-1/#comment-81793ASK NOT, FOR WHOM THE [LIBERTY] BELL TOLLS - IT TOLLS FOR THEE!
I really hope to God Rand isn't this monumentally STUPID.Well, I - like many of you, I'm sure - have a laundry list of issues with Rand. He DOES NOT have my automatic support if/when he should run. He has alot of sins to atone for....But I maintain just the smidgen of hope that his constant acting like an asshat on FOX and Hannity and Levin is something that's been well-orchestrated by him and his father.Otherwise, what a freaking moron that he could grow up with that great man and not be as set in his convictions as are we who have been woken up by Dr. Paul.(sorry if I mangled some grammar up there, I'm just steaming again.)
To those saying this wasn't an endorsement, what part of: "Mitt Romney is precisely the kind of person who is best able to turn this country around" (or words very close to that) did you not understand?I HOPE TO GOD Rand's ongoing ass-hattery has been a well-orchestrated ploy by him and his father.Otherwise, what a monumental buffoon that he could grow up with that great man and still not be of the same mind as are we who have been woken up by Dr. Paul.
I'm disappointed in Rand Paul. I've given him the benefit of the doubt, but it turns out I was ill-informed. I've learned from the comments above that Rand Paul voted the sanctions and apparently even voted to confirm Panetta (I haven't personally confirmed the latter). He's done some good as well, but why compromise?! I hope he'll "come around", but I'm not holding my breath. Disappointed.
OMG you people are lunatics. Rand Paul is what.... the second most free market person between the House and Senate? Ron Paul and Rothbard and Lew Rockwell are great but they're not Jesus Christ. Someone just complained about beltway libertarian vs Rothbard libertarian. Lets worry about getting people to understand some libertarian principles before we worry about getting Rothbardians elected. What percentage of people have even heard of Rothbard? 5% 10%? And of those how many have actually read something from him? Like .5%? You fukcers are ingrates. Ron Paul has never had a chance of gaining mass appeal. Rand Paul actually has the ability to be a game changer for the capitalist movement by winning a national elections. I do not get it at all. I even see people whining about how Gary Johnson isn't good enough.
That was no endorsement. What a lie.
Relax everyone; Rand Paul knows how to play the game. He'll compromise and say positive things about the GOP until his father wins a brokered convention in August. Then we'll see Rand giving his full support.