Nader on the Pauls...

Ralph Nader on Ron and Rand Paul

Sometimes, it's good to get a non-libertarians outsider's perspective. Here's Nader (Nader comments in bold):

The wars — that’s the big thing. This is why Ron Paul did not speak at the Republican Convention. His son did — who’s very craven by the way — but Ron Paul refused because they would only allow him to speak on the condition that they be able to vet his remarks.

And, total endorsement of Romney. He’s the only principled person — he said no. Unlike his son.

I attended his counter-convention there in Tampa, and I don’t know if you saw any of his speech — but I’ve seen a lot Ron Paul speeches, and this was remarkable. It was the most subversive speech of his I’ve ever heard. You should take the time, if you have an hour or so, to watch it. Because what stood out mostly to me — well, a lot stood out — but what really jarred me was when he defended by name, in the most strident possible terms, both Bradley Manning and Julian Assange.

Yeah, well he’s on the record as saying there should be more WikiLeaks.

He served in Air Force himself, and for him to defend the Army Private who is currently being tried by the U.S. Military with “aiding and abetting Al Qaeda” …?

No, he’s very good. He’s one of a kind. His son is not his father’s son, that’s for sure.

Actually, his son lied to my face, if you can believe it.

Yeah. I can.

I encountered him on the floor of the Tampa Convention. By the way, side-note: it was much easier for journalists to get on the floor of the Tampa Convention than the Charlotte Convention. I was not able to get on the floor at all in Charlotte....
There’s long been a theory circulating at the grassroots that I’ve found credible, which is that people within Ron Paul’s apparatus — maybe sabotage is a strong word — but they were not doing all they could to actually help him win.
Rand Paul restrained him. I don’t know how much was voluntary by Ron Paul. But he didn’t make a big fuss at the Convention because of Rand Paul. Rand Paul has ambition, you see? Ron Paul had no ambition. He had a message; he had a mission. Rand Paul has ambition. He is extremely arrogant. He will not return calls, for example. He will not answer letters.
I couldn’t believe how brazen a lie he uttered to me. I asked him, what did he make of the plight of the Ron Paul delegates at the Republican Convention, who were just arbitrarily not seated — for absolutely no good reason. He said he hadn’t heard anything about it.

Well, he’s a liar. You ought to make that point.

Source:
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/09/ralph-nader-on-ron-and-rand-paul.html