“America needs principles because compromised politics has got us to where we are today.”

Rand’s Romney Endorsement Focused Around 2016 Presidential Run

Ron Paul campaign responds to controversy

Paul Joseph Watson

After a weekend of rage amongst Ron Paul supporters over Rand Paul’s endorsement of Mitt Romney, the Ron Paul campaign has issued its first quasi-official response to the controversy in the form of a video blog by Jack Hunter which argues that the endorsement is a political move designed to position the Kentucky Senator for a presidential run in 2016.



Although Hunter makes it clear the ideas are his own, the fact that his video blog is featured as the top story on theofficial Ron Paul 2012 campaign website clearly suggests that the views expressed are a representation of the Ron Paul team, for whom Hunter is a frequent contributor.

Entitled Why Rand Was Right To Endorse Romney, Hunter points out that Rand Paul has always stated that he would endorse the Republican nominee and only did so when Ron Paul conceded.

Hunter explains that as the “liberty candidate with the highest probability of becoming president,” Rand Paul was mandated to endorse Romney because if he didn’t and Obama won re-election, Rand could be easily dismissed and derided by other Republican candidates during a hypothetical 2016 presidential campaign.

“If Rand had not endorsed Romney in 2012, every single Republican in that race would use his non-endorsement to bash Senator Paul relentlessly,” argues Hunter, adding that Paul would be blamed for Obama achieving a second term in office.

Should Rand Paul be victorious in securing the 2016 Republican nomination and go on to become president, “Will anyone care if Rand Paul endorsed Mitt Romney for president in 2012,” asks Hunter.

Similarly, Hunter argues that if Mitt Romney won, Rand would have more leverage to become a strong critic and a rallying point for other tea party lawmakers should Romney become a George W. Bush 2.0.

“There is no shame is compromising politically to advance principles, but we can never compromise our principles to simply advance politically,” states Hunter, noting that Senator Paul’s voting record is consistently pro-liberty.

However, judging by the heated reaction from thousands of Ron Paul supporters, the act of endorsing Romney alone, whose record clearly betrays him to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing, already signifies that Rand Paul has compromised his principles.

Radio host Alex Jones, whose listeners were responsible for the very first tea party groups which rallied around Ron Paul’s first presidential campaign back in 2007, said he understood the political argument behind the endorsement but feared the Pauls were making the wrong decision.

“Although I was initially very hurt and angry, I understand politically why this decision was taken. The source of my real anger and disgust is the corrupt political process itself,” said Jones.

“People love Ron Paul because he never compromised his principles – it’s about principles not politics.”

“America needs principles because compromised politics has got us to where we are today.”

Pointing out that it was “delusional” to think that Ron Paul was not involved in Rand’s decision, Jones believes the move is a miscalculation.

“The Pauls are an ally for liberty in government but their decision to ingratiate themselves with the Republican establishment will backfire in the long run,” warned the radio host.

Link:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/rands-romney-endorsement-focused-around-2016-presidential-run.html