Friday, June 8, 2012

It's Official: Rand Paul Has Endorsed Mitt Romney

"My first choice had always been my father. ... He's still my first pick," said Paul, who had previously backed his father, Ron Paul. "Now that the nominating process is over, tonight, I'm happy to announce that I'm going to be supporting Governor Romney."

Paul told Hannity he recently met with Romney for 30 minutes in Washington. They had a "free-ranging discussion" about issues of importance to the senator, his father, and to many of his father's followers, including auditing the Federal Reserve System, the Internet piracy SOPA legislation and the REINS Act that would increase congressional authority over regulatory agencies, Paul said.

But the Kentucky senator placed special emphasis on the 'kinship' he and Romney share over family values and the "importance of the family unit".

The video is here.

33 comments:

  1. He sold out....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm going to give him the benefit of not having "sold out", I just think he was never "Libertarian" enough to begin with.

      People were hoping despite looking closely @ his voting and statements....

      Delete
    2. Anonymous,

      I agree with your "I just think he was never Libertarian enough" comment. I believe Rand may even be on record as stating that he is not a Libertarian so his endorsement of Romney, in my mind, is not a shock.

      It certainly looks like Rand will not be the Libertarian standard bearer many thought he would be.

      How should Libertarians/Ron Paul supporters respond? We have to continue to carry the Libertarian torch by enlightening the minds of Americans in the hopes that they will see the government for what it is: A plague upon the Freedom & Liberty of U.S citizens.

      Delete
  2. And thus, their fate was sealed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's like The Faulty Towers episode, don't mention the war.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ::shakes head::

    Rand Paul seems to have two distinct problems:

    1. His fervent need for acceptance amongst the GOP machine. Does he truly believe that "going along to get along" is a good strategy?

    2. His ignorance to the fact that as a politician your words and public actions never go away. Those in the movement his father created and nurtured will not forget this.

    Unfortunate, very unfortunate.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bourne was a big disappointment so I hope Rand's Operation DontTreadOnMeStone behavior modification programming works this time. It must.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rand wants to be Henry Clay: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vFo3ZieXZ0

    I do not support Romney. Now, I do not support Rand.

    ReplyDelete
  7. All of the fighting he has done for liberty while in the Senate for such a short time, and now he supports this d-bag?

    Romney will continue and expand the wars, support SOPA, expand the TSA, support the banks and their gambling habit, do nothing about the debt and deficits,etc, etc,etc.

    "Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit......."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v46plhmxXU4

    Craig

    ReplyDelete
  8. Unless something comes out that BIG concessions were made, I will still be writing in Ron Paul. I think it's important that Rand come out and give details of just why he is supporting Romney.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well we now have one Ron Paul supporter who endorses Romney. I wonder if the number will eventually get up to two or three?

    ReplyDelete
  10. The apple has certainly fallen FAR from the tree. While this doesn't negate his work (against the TSA and our black-op government) as of now, there will be serious credibility issues for Rand by the Ron Paul/Liberty constituent.

    I'm perplexed (and disappointed) with his endorsement.

    ReplyDelete
  11. And, what are you, dear fanatics, going to do when Ron Paul does the same, which he, inevitably, will, because, unlike you, his "supporters", he's an intelligent person able to recognize that politics involves compromises, and that striking some kind of deal with Romney good for the people who support more economic liberalization and more personal freedom is realistically the best that can be done within the political system of this country at the moment? :))) Declare him a traitor to the cause, and try Noam Chomsky or some other commie, they're much closer to you by the underlying mentality of frustrated losers full of hatred than Rand, Ron, or anybody else in a reasonable, pragmatic, pro-business and pro-market political party like the GOP? :))

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Um, I don't see RP endorsing Romney. He pointedly did NOT endorse McCain.

      He MAY mumble something like "He's not the absolute evilist guy" or something. But not an endorsement.

      Delete
    2. "pro-market political party like the GOP"

      wat

      Delete
    3. "And, what are you, dear fanatics, going to do when Ron Paul does the same, which he, inevitably, will,"

      Go f*** yourself punk. You are a complete idiot if you think Ron Paul is going to endorse Romney or that we would want a left-moron like Chomsky.

      "pro-market political party like the GOP?"

      ROTFLMAO! What planet have you been living on the last 100 years? As for losers? Look in the mirror pal.

      Delete
    4. I'm sorry, I can't hear you with Romney's cock in your mouth.

      Delete
    5. Andrew MackenzieJune 8, 2012 at 11:46 AM

      "reasonable, pragmatic, pro-business and pro-market political party like the GOP"

      Agree with Anon @ 10:08. Speaker, you must be kidding here. The GOP is none of these things. Rather, it is pro-corporatism, anti-market, pro-war, anti-civil liberties, gang of sell-outs. Feel free to vote for Romney, but you'll get the same trash for 4 more years.

      Delete
    6. Speaker is vying for resident troll.

      Of course, he could actually believe what he says. That would make him the resident idiot.

      Then again, it always possible that he is both.

      Delete
  12. I would rather judge Sen. Paul on what he does with his votes and the bills he sponsors. He is still a liberty candidate in my eyes, but I wouldn't turn on my dad.

    ReplyDelete
  13. the apple falls pretty far from the tree, in this case...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Just about down the line, those that enter DC's boundaries change, even if not immediately. It is a totally different world from where they come from, and they fall into the it is better(for them) to spend and expand government than not. There are rare exceptions, with Ron Paul being one(though he too has his political moments). Rand is more accomodative, and Washingtonitis seems to be afflicting him, as it does most all. Hate to say it, but nothing new here.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Re: "And, what are you, dear fanatics, going to do when Ron Paul does the same, which he, inevitably, will"

    Wrong. Ron Paul will not endorse Mitt Romney.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I'm hoping for a bait and switch that takes 4-6 years to payoff. I just don't see how a person could grow up in that household and not develop a principled core. Not holding my breath, but it would be satisfying to see someone use deceptive establishment tactics to eventually stick it back in their faces.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Here we go with this "family values" BS. I have gotten awfully sick of these "family values" morons who do absolutely NOTHING to shrink government. Rand, you need your head examined.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Politicians are notoriously known for saying one thing and doing a 180 once in office. At least give me Rand a chance to say whatever, get into a more powerful position, and then do opposite of what he campainged on- which would be more of a pro-liberty position.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Of course this was like punch in the stomach, but the more I think about it, the more it seems like the next step in the taking over of the Republican Party. He can say that he's endorsing Romney, and then wait around for Romney to lose big time like John McCain. Rand comes out looking like he tried, and becomes trusted by the neocons. Meanwhile, he continues his activities on the Senate floor, introducing Ron Paul-ish bills and amendments, and being a good example to the other Senators.

    I can say that I will from now on regard Rand Paul with suspicion, but, what do you know, I was looking at him with suspicion all along!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is really the best and most pragmatic view to take right now.

      Delete
  20. Justin Amash is the successor to Ron Paul, not Rand.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Despite his very successful delegate strategy, Ron Paul's chances of snagging the nomination are realistically slim to none. Let's keep in mind that Romney needs the votes of the Ron Paul movement in order to win. What if Romney, arguing that he will really, really, cross-my-heart-and-hope-to-die campaign as a small government Republican, offered Rand the VP slot in order to attract the Ron Paul movement vote, thus beating Obama.

    Romney clearly needs Rand more than Rand needs Romney. If Rand were the VP candidate, Romney would be forced to moderate his statist tendencies while campaigning, otherwise Rand could bolt the ticket handing the election to Obama. Once in office, Rand would be untouchable. Unlike a member of the cabinet, the VP, being an elected official, cannot be dismissed.

    Would a Rand Paul vice-presidency necessarily be the libertarian sell-out which many fear? Thomas Jefferson was the Vice-President under his political opponent, John Adams. Yet he worked to undermine Adams's police state Alien And Sedition Acts.

    Although officially without any power other than casting the tie breaking vote in the Senate, the VP is still a very visible elected official. Rand Paul can speak his mind, holding Romney's feet to the fire to honor his promises to reduce the size of government. If he has the courage to do so, VP Paul could attract much media attention for four years as a political freak criticizing his President's policies while actively promoting libertarian ideas. There is nothing that Romney could do to silence him. Rand could staff his office with articulate libertarians and use his position to sponsor libertarian functions. Handled properly, the vice- presidency can be Rand's high profile platform from which to continue to build his father's liberty movement as a springboard for his own run for the presidency in 2016. There would be much time for that since he would have very few official duties!

    If as expected, President Romney continues Bush's and Obama's policies of running the country into the ground, Rand Paul would be in a very strong I-told-you-so position come 2016. Also let us not forget that the VP is there to take over if, for whatever reason, the President is unable to continue in office.

    Let's face it, we are going to get four more years of tyranny whether the White House is occupied by Obama or Romney. Yet the freedom movement has taken root and is growing very strongly. What is wrong with having a vocal libertarian Trojan Horse in the Romney administration who could relentlessly beat the drum for liberty in the manner that Cheney was beating the drum for war? After 40 years how many people has the Libertarian Party put in office anywhere? How many libertarian dog catchers are out there? We should not turn our noses up at the opportunity to have a libertarian a heartbeat away from the presidency.

    ReplyDelete
  22. It didn't really surprise me that Ron Paul stuck his head in the sand. He has simply been in Washington too long and thinks like a Washington insider.

    What really surprises me is that so many young people have decided to stick their heads in the sand with him.

    Come on people. Pull your heads out and look around. There are two choices. Obama or Romney. Get real! There are huge differences between the two. Those of you who say they are the same simply haven't had your heads in the open air.

    Look around. Read, honest it won't hurt. Look at reality!

    Don't buy hype and platitudes. Look at what really is. Dig. Find real truth. Don't get your news from late night comedians.

    By the way RomneyCare and ObamaCare are very different. Saying they are the same thing is like looking at a bicycle and a Mercedes and saying they are the same thing.

    Wake up and look at the real world.

    ReplyDelete