United Liberty
Why Rand Paul had to endorse Romney
Fri, 06/08/2012 - 11:21am | posted by Brian Lehman
Last night on Hannity came a sign that the Ron Paul campaign may finally be at its end. The Congressman’s son and campaign surrogate, Senator Rand Paul, officially endorsed the presumptive Republican nominee, Mitt Romney. And predictably, countless tweets and blog posts were written declaring Rand a traitor to liberty.
But anyone who expected otherwise was severely deluded. Rand has never been the devout libertarian that his father is. He is certainly a libertarian-leaning Republican, and while he can often be a good ally to libertarians in the Senate, he is still first and foremost a Republican. And as a Senator he has much less latitude to diverge from the party line and needs other Senators to cooperate with him.
Because of this, the chances of him endorsing Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson were somewhere around one in one billion. While such an endorsement would make many libertarians happy, it would end his life as a Republican. It would mean that he would have no party support whatsoever come re-election time. It would alienate him from the party and mean he would get nothing accomplished in the Senate.
Similarly, all but the most quixotic supporters know that the Ron Paul campaign is over. Ron Paul himself has acknowledged he can’t win and Mitt Romney has secured the necessary delegates. The various party elements have begun coalescing around Romney and if Rand Paul wants a future in the party he needed to as well.
So while it may seem offensive that a liberty-minded person would endorse a candidate who supports such awful things as the PATRIOT Act and NDAA, it actually makes a lot of sense. I’d even go so far as to say it may be a price worth paying. If the endorsement solidifies Republican support and earns him points with the party establishment, it means he could have more freedom to chart his own course in the Senate.
The question on many minds is when the Paul campaign will “officially” end (it has certainly ended in any practical sense) and if the elder Paul will endorse Romney. While this would surely enrage many hardcore Paul devotees, it could be Dr. Paul’s intention to simply pass the torch to his son. Most certainly, he won’t be saying anything against Romney.
Will all of this sit well with some segments of the liberty movement? Of course not. But for anyone who thinks there is a chance of working within the GOP, this is all part of the price. Personally, I have very little faith in ever making a dent, and I am supporting Gary Johnson this election cycle. But if the GOP will be reformed, it will be by people like Rand Paul who play the game.
It may be true all is said in this article; but that does not change the meaning of the words “integrity” and “character”. Rand Paul does not show himself these personality traits, the same traits many respect in his father.
Reality: By endorsing Mitt Ronney, Rand Paul is contradicting all the things said and done by his father, Ron Paul.
I will need to leave this country that I so much love, and be an exiled again (a second time). I came to America because my native country was (and is) always at war. I learned to love this country because of its constitution, and gave it the best years of my life. But I don’t think I want to relive in my old age, what I already lived when I was little: tyranny.
I believe now that we have lost America.
If you don’t think that Rand talked to his dad about this endorsement and that they agree on it, you’re incredibly naive.
Ron would ever endorse the magic underwear candidate and no, he wouldn’t agree with his son though he would tell his son that it’s his choice.
It has to be orchestrated with his father. It’s quite sickening, actually. What a nonsensical title. “Why Rand Paul had to endorse Romney.” How about continuing to endorse his father? How about going after delegates? How about continuing to campaign like your trying to win? Saying he couldn’t endorse Gary Johnson because he’s first and foremost a Republican is a straw man. He didn’t have to endorse ANYBODY. He should have stayed a supporter of his Republican father until an official end to the campaign. After that, he should have simply expressed his “disappointment” and congratulated Romney and made comments like: “we will support his bid for the presidency and will continue to press Mr. Romney with some of the important Tea-Party/Libertarian issues.”
The Patriot Act is “awful” ‘eh.
So, I guess we can safely put you on the side of those who are in favor of Saudi Arabia students who have overstayed their Visas looking up plans on how to build dirty bombs, at taxpayer-subsidized public libraries, so that they can blow up downtown Houston, San Diego, or Chicago in the name of “Allah.”
I was going to reply to this, but all I can really say is #headdesk.
People like you will always believe in the boggy man. Grow some gonads!! Government can’t protect you. The government’s intervention in these countries such as Saudia Arabia (AKA Tyranny) is why people hate us idiot.
Since you seem to worship the state so much, why do you bother pretending to be a libertarian?
Dondero, an idiot as always.
I don’t really see what, if anything, Rand Paul had to gain by endorsing Romney. Romney is highly unlikely to appoint him to any cabinet post or look to him as a VP. And Romney has no influence on his career in the Senate.
To me, the entire purpose of the endorsement is to repudiate the Libertarian party and declare his fealty to the Republicans. Personally, I feel Rand Paul would have been far better served by not making an endorsement at all, rather than outright acknowledging that party was more important to him than policy.
There is definitely merit to that viewpoint. Clearly Rand made the calculation that he had more to gain by jumping aboard the GOP bandwagon, and I can’t really fault him. Right now the game is incredibly rigged to benefit the two-party system, after all.
Given that he’s already heavily involved on the GOP side as a Republican Senator, there wasn’t much to be gained there, unless Rand Paul actually considers a cabinet appointment or VP nod a possibility.
The endorsement is, to me at least, a very clear slap in the face to the liberty-minded crowd and a declaration of subservience to Romney and his abhorrent foreign policy, his retrograde social policies, and his allegiance to crony capitalism. Rand Paul has turned his back on the very people who got him elected, and for what? To become a second rate reincarnation of Jim Bunning? He would have been far, far better served staying out of the Presidential election.
Both Rand Paul and Ron Paul are very intelligent men and I believe both have integrity as well as common sense. Just as Bill Clinton knew that there would be no second term unless he campaigned much more to the center than the leftist he is, the time for the message of liberty has indeed come, but they both realize that the power is still behind the Republican party to deliver that message, not the Libertarian party or label. Ron Paul knew that and that’s why both then and now he ran as a Republican to win elections. And his message of liberty and lesser government has resonated for decades because of the opportunity to serve and send that message the Republican label has afforded. Ask all of the Socialists in congress who ran as Democrats in order to win elections and amass the power in both our government and their own party that they now have. That’s what works. Until the two party system changes, we can only work toward and hope that many more of the real small government and free market advocates, individual liberty and Constitutional adherence proponents are as successful at infiltrating the Republican party with a much needed injection of true conservative values they once had. But they must first be elected. The battlefield is strewn with right thinking Libertarian men of integrity who put everything on the line to protect or regain some of those rights and freedoms we have allowed to slip away, and they lost. While the power now rests in a shallow, empty, anti-American, socialist cheap suit intent on destroying our nation. We have robbed ourselves of the luxury of simply voting for whoever our conscience dictates until we have cleaned up this mess and removed these traitors from our leadership. As a Libertarian, for me that is a particularly bitter pill to swallow. Our house is burning and some are getting water while others are discussing what kind or security system to install.
Some of us are wondering whether the house is still worth saving, or whether it would be better to clear the ashes and rebuild.
It is very disheartening to see Rand Paul do this. I and many like me have spent so much time, money and energy fighting to bring the GOP back to its core values that such a betrayal of ideals by one of our own is like getting stabbed in the back with a knife. I pray that Rand Paul has a method to his madness that brings forth some real change in the GOP or this nation is doomed. I told myself in 2008 that I would never hold my nose and vote for another McCain but, Obama must go and Johnson does not have a chance so, it looks like I will hold my nose and vote for Obama Light.
“Rand has never been the devout libertarian that his father is. ”
I hate to tell you, but Ron Paul is anything but a “devout libertarian”.
At best, he’s a Constitutional conservative. At worst, he’s a rather dangerous religious nutjob.
Well, as the contributing writer of United Liberty that would probably qualify as the “Ron Paul guy,” I’ll throw in my 2 cents.
Lehman’s write-up is a good one and is pretty much right on the money. The younger Paul is obviously not a carbon-copy of his father’s political beliefs. He’s his own man, as well he should be. He’s definitely more in line with the establishment on many issues, most notably foreign policy.
The line about “playing the game” definitely seems to ring true. Many RP Republicans, myself included, are doing just that. Some people would classify that as selling out, but the fact of the matter is, to agree with “Shawny,” that the 2-party system is, always has been, and probably always will be the political system in America. 225 years in and that’s all we’ve ever had. And I say this as a card-carrying LP member. 3rd parties, and the LP in particular, are crucially important. They act as a safety valve and as an originator of opinion. Look at the Prohibition Party. The Socialist Party. The Reform Party. They all moved the debate into the direction they wanted, but they never governed except for that one time when they replaced one of the main parties.
And Doug, I’m sure they discussed it, but I doubt that Dr. Paul agrees with Rand’s endorsement.
The biggest thing not being addressed, in my opinion, is this—it’s not about Rand Paul, or even Ron Paul, anymore. It’s bigger than either one of them now. It’s a movement, all across America. I’ve seen it firsthand. It’s a truly grassroots, organic phenomenon. And unlike Occupy, it has a very firm idea of what it wants, and the means to achieve it.
As a long time Libertarian, well, Google Dick Randolph, the first Libertarian elected as a state representative in Alaska back in the 80’s, whose campaign I worked on, I can tell you that the populace is indeed gravitating much more in that direction. But here’s the deal. Dick Randolph won the election for State Representative and delivered on his promise to repeal the state income tax. But when he then ran for Governor (also as a Libertarian), he only gained 14% of the vote, just enough to hand the election to the Democrat candidate. So the Libertarian base, which is spreading like wildfire, absolutely must be strong enough to win a clear majority in order to run a candidate. I believe we’re getting there, but if Ron Paul does not believe he has the numbers for a clear win, he must not allow Obama a second term by running as a spoiler and he must support the Republican candidate. He knows his history and how disasterous that would be. I also support Gary Johnson but I hope he has done his homework as well. And just as a side note, one of the biggest reasons the Libertarian Party with its excellent message for America has not advanced any farther than it has can be laid at the feet of its own divided leadership.
Here, here, Shawny! Well said in regards to the LP leadership. We put the fun in dysfunctional, right? That’s part of the reason why I’ve only been a national LP dues-paying member twice during the 8 years I’ve been a LP Georgia dues-paying member. I think it’s just the nature of party. As you alluded to, I think it works much better on the state level.
But that’s exactly right—unless we have a “clear majority,” we’re just pissin’ in the wind. Unfortunately, I’m positive that we will never have that “clear majority,” and that’s part of the reason why the LP will ever only be a 3rd party. For the record, though, we will be THE 3rd party, and we will act as that safety valve and originator of opinion.
I remain convinced that working within the framework of the 2-party system, as well as supporting and staying active with state and local LP affiliates and activities, is the key.
I love Gary Johnson, and I will vote for him, but I’d give him even-odds of breaking 1980’s record of 1%. And if he does—that will be a huge victory!
I feel RON & RAND PAUL have screwed us! I had this feeling and did some research if this would happen a few months ago. I didn’t want to believe myself at the time, but I do now. RON & RAND PAUL are Frauds! The the BIGGEST & GREATEST weapon the Establishment to “WE THE PEOPLE” was “HOPE”… We fell for it really bad, really bad. The Establishment was testing us “WE THE PEOPLE” to see how smart we were and the numbers they would have to face if things hit the fan.
Your thoughts????
You said supporting a candidate who is for the NDAA/Patriot Act is “worth it”? I would say never! Not if you value the Constitution in any way. And the GOP cannot be reformed by the Rand Pauls and Mitt Romneys they have, they will continue to be the party obsessed with war, taking away civil liberties and adding onto the debt until the full collapse of the dollar.
“Playing the game” in this case equals selling out and having no ethics. There is no excuse for what Paul did especially after he complained about the TSA - he is a hypocrite!
Well, that sounds good but I’m betting you voted for the only candidate running against Obama in 2008 just like I did because he was the only viable candidate…..and John McCain was the author of the NDAA legislation. Now that’s what I call a huge betrayal of his oath of office to protect and defend the constitution. But we can’t just wait until an election to voice our outrage at this kind of betrayal. We need to have an organization which can apply enough pressure to candidates in any party who would vote against the rights of the people or propose unconstitutional legislation and stop it in its tracks or force them to repeal it if they wish to keep their jobs. Where is that ground swell, mass movement to repeal NDAA and the Patriot Act which should garner support from both sides of the aisle? Ron Paul focused on it and there was mass support for him on both sides because of it. The can shoot down a candidate but they cannot kill that ideal. We need to stop focusing so much on the candidate and start nailing the issues.
Rand Paul has killed himself politically. Dont even bother trying to defend him by saying he was always a traitor to the republic. Regardless of when he sold out, he betrayed every last supporter he had that put him in office. We ignored his shortcomings for so long… but now that he has declared he will commit treason against the constitution, we now know he is clearly an enemy of the republic.
I can only pray that Paul is just naive, and this betrayal wakes him up.
He never “had” to. He chose to betray the republic and his supporters. Stop making excuses for this statist bastard. You are no better than the fools that make excuses for Romney’s and Obama’s treason.
He never “had” to. He chose to betray the republic and his supporters. Stop making excuses for this statist bastard. You are no better than the fools that make excuses for Romney’s and Obama’s treason.
Rand Paul, quisling.
Traitorous rat.
It may be time that the Paulites consider slow and steady pressure on Washington D.C. and Americans at large as opposed to an all out, no bar-hold, no compromising assault.
Post new comment