Ron Paul, Rand Paul, and the Libertarian Party

Ron Paul has more courage and integrity than any other per­son I know of . He argued against the War on Drugs when it was at its height of pop­u­lar­ity. He chal­lenged the Fed long before it became pop­u­lar to do so; in fact, he almost sin­gle­hand­edly made it pop­u­lar to do so. He has fought against social secu­rity, the pre­scrip­tion drug sub­sidy, corn sub­si­dies, and count­less other pop­u­lar sta­tist boondoggles.

But, although he aggres­sively attacked Rick Perry and Newt Gin­grich, he never really attacked uber-statist Mitt Romney.

Ron Paul under­stood how prob­lem­atic the Fed was back when most of us thought it was essen­tial for eco­nomic sta­bil­ity. I doubt he sim­ply didn’t notice the sim­i­lar­i­ties between Rom­n­ey­care and Oba­macare, or Romney’s Key­ne­sian tax-and-spend poli­cies. Nor do I think that Ron Paul, who is about to retire any­way, would have been par­tic­u­larly afraid of any backlash.

I can’t pre­sume to know Ron Paul’s moti­va­tion. But I do know that there are cer­tain pres­sures that a man of integrity won’t ignore. He won’t ignore pres­sures on his moral­ity, his friends, or his family.

For months, the Repub­li­can estab­lish­ment has been openly threat­en­ing his son, Rand Paul. In Jan­u­ary, nation­ally syn­di­cated con­ser­v­a­tive talk show host Mark Levin said, “If Ron Paul decides that he is going to go third-party…I will do every­thing in my power to defeat his son in Ken­tucky. I will do every­thing in my power to defeat his son Rand Paul in Kentucky.”

If that’s what the Repub­li­can estab­lish­ment said on national radio, what were they say­ing behind closed doors?

I have no doubt that Rand Paul endorsed Mitt Rom­ney after a dis­cus­sion with his father, with his father’s encour­age­ment, and with great reluc­tance. His choice was to swal­low a dis­gust­ing pill and live to fight another day, or end his polit­i­cal career in the Repub­li­can Party.

That’s why we need a strong Lib­er­tar­ian Party. The notion of “work­ing within” the Repub­li­can Party is ludi­crous. If the Repub­li­can estab­lish­ment can pres­sure Ron Paul into for­go­ing attacks on a super-statist like Mitt Rom­ney, then what could they do to the rest of us?

Ron Paul ran as a Lib­er­tar­ian can­di­date for pres­i­dent in 1988. And if the LP was bet­ter funded and had more clout, he prob­a­bly would have joined them for future cam­paigns, includ­ing his many suc­cess­ful con­gres­sional cam­paigns. We need to make the Lib­er­tar­ian Party stronger, so that Amer­i­can states­men will never need to choose between their prin­ci­ples and get­ting elected.

For that, we all have to work together. You can join the LP at www.lp.org... Make sure to also join the LP face­book page at www.facebook.com...

And join your state party (there is a list here: www.lp.org...). We have great can­di­dates this year, includ­ing Gary John­son. Now let’s work together to get them elected.

Very disappointing, Maybe Ron knew that if the delegates took over the convention the media would spin and say thats why Obama won, because Ron Paul "stole" the nomination,even though Paul coulda beat Obama.. The bilderburg meeting that Romney attended had something to do with it. They probably said Romney could be president and Romney called Paul and said look, they decided Im going to be president, they arent thrilled with their last pick so they are gonna pay off the voting company to cheat. If Paul ends up ENDORSING Romney like his son, then they were threatened,,either that OR the old man IS crazy....

reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse


I couldn’t agree more! We need more than that….we need a TEA PARTY too. Why not have 5 or 6 parties? As long as it’s not 2 parties I’ll be happier. The reason the LP doesn’t have funding is because they truly don’t have much support!

I still support having multiple parties but don’t cry about it if these candidates don’t compete well due to lack of funding. People vote with their pocket books, so if they lack funding that should tell you something about their platform (and the lack of interest in it).

Rand and Ron Paul have done some good but these are not the droids you are looking for. Rand has already sold out in support of Romney and Ron will drop out of the race soon enough just like he did in 2008 after taking his supporters for a ride. Once the Tea Party types get tired of getting burned by Republicans they will suddenly come up with the idea of a third party as if no one else has thought of it before.

It's coming. The full fledged enorsement by Ron Paul himself to Mitt Romney.

I told you so long ago, as were many others.

It was inevitable and totally predictable.

Come on, he had breakfast with Bernanke, the one man on earth he supposedly is at the most odds with. He probably likes Mitt Romney.

reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse

Ma, I heard that! I took a call yesterday from the Republican Party, a little survey. I was asked if I would vote if the election were today, and who would I choose, Obama or Romney? I asked, where is Ron Paul here? They hung up on me.

The ESTABLISHMENT/MILITARY/INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX is plain scared to death of a Paul presidency. It would mean an end to fractional banking, money from debt, military policing of the world, CIA drug running and all of the little minions who make a living off the backs of Patriotic America Citizens.

Ron Paul is not a Libertarian. He is a Republican. He believes in the Republic. and Rand has pretty much always been a RINO douchebag. Just look at his voting record.

I like Ron Paul but most of his 'fans', from what I can tell, know little about the guy, his politics, or american politics beyond one or two pet issues like Marijuana or the war in Iraq.

reply to post by stanguilles7


What exactly do you mean by "He believes in the Republic"

Originally posted by FSBlueApocalypse
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

What exactly do you mean by "He believes in the Republic"

Not familiar with the idea of a Republic?

Heres a starting point:

In common parlance a republic is a state that does not practice direct democracy but rather has a government indirectly controlled by the people. This understanding of the term was originally developed by James Madison, and notably employed in Federalist Paper No. 10. This meaning was widely adopted early in the history of the United States, including in Noah Webster's dictionary of 1828. It was a novel meaning to the term; representative democracy was not an idea mentioned by Machiavelli and did not exist in the classical republics

en.wikipedia.org...

I have felt that OCCUPY was futile because I have felt it was controlled opposition.

I feel quite betrayed b/c I feel like the Ron Paul movement was maneuvered into that position as well.

I just have a lot of questions.
To what extent is the CIA dabbling in internal US politics? I'd really like to know that. Is it to keep America 'stable?'

Is keeping America as stable as possible in our best interest at this time?

What's going to happen to a generation of passionate young people who hit brick walls in every direction? Is this what we want for our kids?

Don't vote, screw the election it's a BIG joke... with Rand Paul bending over for a turd like Romney.... Ron Paul's son has failed... The whole thing is rigged with dirty $$$, your vote doesn't count anyway... Obummer vs the Turd is a joke!!!

Now is the time for the people to rise up and overthrow these losers, and the poster below me!!!

reply to post by imitator


Where do you people get the impression that Rand was some sort of carbon copy of his father? Look at his voting record. He has ALWAYS been a RINO.

Yours is just another example of how many Ron Paul 'fans' are incredibly clueless about US politics.

reply to post by stanguilles7


I'm familiar with the idea of a Republic, but the Republican=favors a Republic is lost on me.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Yours is just another example of how many Ron Paul 'fans' are incredibly clueless about US politics.

Nope, you don't get it....
Rand Paul should be embarrassed for supporting toilet floaters.... his whole family should be embarrassed!!!

Wonder how many truck loads of money it took to buy out rand paul

reply to post by imitator


Again, if you actually followed politics, you would know Rand's support for Romney is in no way a contradiction of Rand's political ideals. He has NEVER been a younger version of his father. He's a typical RINO, always has been.

Welcome to realty.

reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse


The term "Republican" has its etymological roots with the term "Republic". Once upon a time, the Republican Party represented the Republic. Paul clings to that antiquated notion. Thererfore, in that sense, he is an old-school Republican.

Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by imitator

 

Romney is in no way a contradiction of Rand's political ideals. He has NEVER been a younger version of his father. He's a typical RINO, always has been.

Welcome to realty.

You still don't get it.... if it was your son supporting foul stink and bends over on national TV, your whole family should be embarrassed by it!!!

reply to post by imitator


Are you Japanese? Sorry I don't mean to stereotype, but in the US we are individuals.

reply to post by MsAphrodite


It's no different than almost supporting Hitler.... BOOM!!! Bilderberg meeting!!!! Paul campaign jumps on Romney's bandwagon!!!! = STINK