Sunday, August 26, 2012

Congressman Ron Paul, a Man of Integrity...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

A man of principle and integrity. Representative Ron Paul in response to the rEpublican pArty offer of a speaking slot at the national rEpublican cOnvention.

POLITICO - Mr. Paul, in an interview, said convention planners had offered him an opportunity to speak under two conditions: that he deliver remarks vetted by the Romney campaign, and that he give a full-fledged endorsement of Mr. Romney. He declined.

“It wouldn’t be my speech,” Mr. Paul said. “That would undo everything I’ve done in the last 30 years. I don’t fully endorse him for president.”

It is a rare thing in the politics of the 21st century when a politician puts principal ahead of politics.

A son is not always "a chip off the old block."

Paul’s refusal to play ball stands in contrast to his son, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who at some personal political cost has endorsed Mitt Romney’s bid – and has a speaking slot.

The disparate approaches to the convention, and toward Romney, reflect the stylistic differences between father and son. And they reveal starkly different levels of ambition.

Uncompromising and perfectly willing to operate on the margins of mainstream politics for decades, Ron Paul proved unable to take his liberty message to a broader audience. Even this year, at the height of his national influence and popularity, the Texas congressman failed to win the popular vote in a single state and never seriously threatened to win the GOP nomination.

His son, however, has already accomplished something that Ron Paul never could – he won statewide office. And in less than two years in the Senate, Rand Paul has established himself as a formidable player in GOP politics and a presidential prospect.

How much further Rand Paul can advance the movement is unclear. But with his endorsement of Romney and his convention profile, it’s obvious that Rand Paul is aiming to take the libertarian message to the next level while his father will occupy the role of the movement’s conscience.

I find a glaring contradiction in it all. Ron Paul, by far the brighter of the Paul's IMO, was unable to gain national recognition and acceptance. Yet his son, who supposedly is a liberty movement advocate has risen to be a star of the movement. But is he sincere? Methinks not.

By pandering to the establishment wing of the rEpublican party he insures himself a speaking slot at the national convention. Need we require any further proof than his endorsement of Mittens Romney, the epitome of the establishment statist neo fascist rEpublican party?

Via: Memeorandum


  1. These conventions (on both sides) have gone from being exciting, contentious, and unpredictable (back in the 50s, 60s, and 70s) to being little more than glorifications of sameness. I really think that I'll pass on them this year.

    1. Agreed Will. I have zero interest in partaking of charades as well.

  2. Give e'm hell Ron!

    1. I'll say it for Congressman Paul... Shove it rEpublican neocon fascists.

  3. Ron Paul is one of the few and possibly the only politician who refuses to go against his principles.

    It's comes as no surprise that we are in the predicament we are in. The majority of the electorate are either sheeple who don't know or don't care that they are being lied with the rest more than happy to get the "free" stuff that Leviathan gives them.

    Unfortunately those of us that really care are the minority.

  4. I've heard Rand in interviews. Seriously, how hard is it to pronounce "social security"? He sounds like an 8th grade dropout. I was rather favorable about him until I heard him.

    1. I know what you mean. Certainly does not his father's intellect.

  5. Ron Paul wanted so badly to be taken seriously by the Republican Party, and he got what he wanted. He was a participant in the debates and did rather well. But apparently he will only participate on his own terms.

    I appreciate his positions on the economy, but he is off the deep end when it comes to foreign affairs.

    This is the time for the nation to decide who is the best choice between the two candidates we have available, given that we are a nation that operates under a two-party political system.

    Ron Paul needs to accept the fact that he is not the Republican nominee. Ron Paul needs to either support Romney since he (Paul) participated in the Republican primary, or step aside quietly and respectfully and keep it to himself.

    Or, he can go support Obama, since the way he is acting out like a child fits right in with Obama's modus operandi.

    1. Congressman Paul is spot on with foreign affairs. I don't see Paul supporting Neocon fascist Romney in any sense. If he does then I will begin to question what he truly stands for.

      The only worse choice the rEpublican pArty could have made would have been Perry or Santorum. Oh wait, lets not forget Gingrich.

      But like good neocons themselves they will fall into line behind Romney, who is going to get his ass beat in the general anyway.

      Perhaps in 2016 the Libertarian Party will get some traction, assuming of course the American people wake up after Obama, and we might see some real and meaningful change in domestic fiscal and foreign policy.

      But hey, what do I know, things were going so well under GWB and continue under BHO why change. It's always easier to follow the known course, even when one knows the pitfalls of such course. Right or wrong?

      Bring on Gary Johnson 2012. Liberty minded individuals can only hope the damn Commission on Presidential Debates responds favorably to Governor Johnson's request.

      Likely they won't. Why? Because in doing so it would be the RIGHT THING TO DO. Certainly not anything the two party advocates are known for.

  6. I just got done reading that Mr. Paul now wants to audit the Pentagon. Another quite capital idea, I say.

    1. OMG! Not the bastion of neocon ideology and saber rattling supporters of the MIC.

      Once again Congressman Paul proves he one of but a handful of real Republican politicians with integrity.

      Most of the neocon rEpublican politicians can be believed and trusted no further than one can believe or trust democrats and the ObamaBots.

    2. AND, he wants to audit the FED, too. Two for two, the fellow is.

    3. I don't think auditing should stop at the Fed and the Pentagon. Our entire government needs a complete audit.

      Those are my beliefs, yet I still support Romney because he is a million times better an option than Obama. If that makes me a fascist neocon, then so be it.

    4. Indeed Soloman the entire feral (federal) government should be audited annually, by independent auditors.

      I adamantly disagree on the million times better. That is more than just a gross exaggeration. He is a charlatan, a liar, and has no plan that will right the ship of state.
      Sio just what is the frigging difference between him and Obummer?

    5. Romney is a proven businessman who is able to go into a situation and fix problems. He is, on a very high-dollar scale, the same thing I am at my job today. I work in Quality Assurance and system management; my entire job revolves around making sure my workplace does what it says, says what it does, and operates within the system designed to maximize our efficiency. I did similar work 20 years ago, when I worked for a Little Caesars franchise. I went from store to store, analyzing the problems, changing staff as needed, building customer relations, and finding solutions to problems.

      That kind of experience, I believe, is what his "evil" Bain Capital experience brings that makes him uniquely qualified to take on the issues of our time. He is a fixer, a manager, and a leader. He has has proven time and time again (Salt Lake & Massachusetts are the prominent examples) that he is successful against overwhelming odds.

      Is he perfect? Heck no, but nobody is, including Johnson and Paul. And is my "million" an exaggeration? Okay, perhaps. But he actually can defeat Obama, which MUST be done.

      Romney is the kind of person who will build a team and get things done. He won't be on the golf course over 100 times, and his vacations will be fewer and much more low-key. He will be a man of honest Faith with integrity instead of holiday church-going for show, which speaks to his value system. Obama has none.

      He will present a decent and respectable image for American youth, which is something Obama has failed miserably. He won't be on ESPN talking about his basketball brackets; he will be in the Oval crunching the numbers and figuring out how to make America solvent again. He has as good a chance as anyone regarding foreign policy, and since he is a manager and team builder I suspect he will put good people in Sec. of State and Sec. of Defense posts - people who will help America regain some respect worldwide.

      And in response to your comment below - I understand the idea of voting on pure principle, and there is integrity there to be sure. I'm not sold that Romney is the second coming... but I believe he has an excellent opportunity to make positive changes - definitely more than, let's say, McCain... that man would have been a disaster. Palin would have been a better President than McCain, who was the perfect example of "next guy in line" party politics.

      I am voting for Romney not for party reasons. I am voting for Romney because when I look at his life and his values, I see a similar belief system to my own, and I'd rather vote for the guy who actually can beat Obama and to whom I relate, than for the guy who definitely can't beat Obama and might win if the vote is split.

      This is not the same as Perot splitting the vote and helping Clinton win, because Obama has proven that with him there is no "triangulation"... and this is Obama's chance at exactly what he wants - an unchecked four years during which he will absolutely destroy America.

    6. I hope you won't be disappointed. While I share your views to a degree I am convinced that Romney is no more the answer than Obama was.

      My disapproval of Obama's policies will not drive me to vote for a lesser evil. Sorry, I have heard the arguments, I have considered them, Gary Johnson gets my vote.

  7. But Paul pandered to the 911 troofers, Israel-haters and the OWS rabble, and that turned people off.

    His domestic and monetary policy is spot-on, but his foreign policy is naive and dangerous.

    1. Liberty minded individuals understand perfectly well what Ron Paul stands for. Adherence to the Constitution of the United States. He also understands first principles by far better than the neocon fascists that have dotted the rEpublican political landscape ever since Barry Goldwater retired.

      Just observe the neocon rEbublican party and you see clearly the definition of insanity.

    2. Your calling Paul supporters "liberty minded individuals" and dismissing others as "neocon fascists" is petty and cheap. It's a shame, because generally I believe the Libertarian cause is good, but you sound more like Obama's democrat party when you toss around personal attacks like these. It makes you more part of the problem than part of the solution.

    3. I call a spade a spade. Those who are indeed neocon fascists know who they are.

      Johnson supporters are liberty minded individuals as well, and there are others. I know you are one too, But stop and think just how many forgo first principles to support a party that is as corrupt and dishonest as the democrats just to beat Obama and then putting into place another statist minded dishonest corrupt charlatan.

      Soloman,I mean no disrespect to those individual who are indeed liberty minded but in my never humble opinion are just a bit misguided, willing to vote a man just to get rid of another while holding their nose. I have moved beyond that. I will vote first principles and I will work for candidates that understand what that means and have proven it.

      RomneySkull can go suck pond water for all I care right alongside Obama. It is long past time to stand for principle and put ones money squarely where there mouth is.

      Again, no disrespect meant. Like I said, I call a spade a spade, and I call en how I see em.

  8. I voted for Ron Paul for president.
    I am disappointed that he insisted on running as a Republican.
    Saving their asses from a serious split vote like Perot did.

    1. Imagine a Gary Johnson Ron Paul super charged Liberty ticket.

      Sigh, it's not to be. Unfortunately.

    2. You mean Paul for president and Johnson for VP, or the other way around?
      There is a cry for liberty from government, but the Republicans have not filled that role.
      Republicans seem to be the beneficiary of those seeking liberty from government, because Republicans have championed some of those concerns, but as politicians do, they were just pandering for votes, not presenting convictions for change.

    3. Actually Anon, at this point either would be fine by me. Of course having my druthers I'd like to see Ron Paul topping a ticket like that with Johnson second tier because Johnson has many more years, Paul not so many. But we both know that ain't gonna happen anyway.

  9. May the GOP rot in hell for its treachery and criminality.

    1. Indeed the new neo Fascist rEpublican party is as unethical as they come. Well, aside from the dEmocrats that is.


As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.