Posted on 04/29/2014 1:25:30 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Among the liberty movement the Rand Paul debate rages on. Is he a political player or an opportunist sellout?
Senator Rand Paul stunned many libertarians in 2012 when he endorsed Mitt Romney for President. This was the same Romney who deployed campaign lawyers to the Republican National Convention and rigged the future nomination process.
Now Senator Paul has “wholeheartedly” endorsed Senator Susan Collins for re-election, telling the Portland Press Herald she is “doing a great job for Maine and for the country.” Enter another war between Senator Paul apologists and principle-driven libertarians.
It’s unsurprising to some degree. A year ago State Senate candidate Eric Brakey told the Maine Republican State Committee that he wanted to see Senator Collins re-elected. Brakey was the State Director of the Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign and will likely be involved in Senator Paul’s 2016 presidential campaign in some capacity.
This represents the strategy of integrating into the Republican Party in an attempt to hijack it. But is this strategy successful?
Mitt Romney stole the nomination and ironically put a stop on Senator Paul’s chances at the nomination in 2016. Senator Paul made an endorsement to a losing candidate who effectively worked against all future grassroots candidates. This was an issue covered in depth in a previous Undercover Porcupine article, “The Importance Of The Republican Nomination Rules Changes.”
Senator Collins has a proven record quite contrary to liberty. Here are some highlights:
*Voted for sending $17.9 billion to IMF in May 1998.
*Voted for authorizing military force against Iraq in October 2002.
*Voted for extending the PATRIOT Act’s wiretap provision in December 2005.
*Voted for reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act in March 2006.
*Voted for $60 billion stimulus package in September 2008.
*Voted for $825 billion economic recovery package in February 2009.
*Voted for $192 billion in anti-recession stimulus spending in July 2009.
*Voted for $2 billion more in Cash for Clunkers program in August 2009.
*Voted for confirmation of Sonia Sotomayer to the Supreme Court in August 2009.
*Voted for extending the PATRIOT Act’s roving wiretaps in February 2011.(SOURCE: OnTheIssues.org)
Endorsing this is advancing the principles of liberty?
If the answer is “yes”, then what exactly is it Republican libertarians are fighting for?
Party control seems to be the goal of Rand Paul apologists. But what’s the goal from there? They wasted years better spent advancing principles attempting to take over a minority party in America. In this time, the minority party is still advancing bad policies just like their opponents. The only difference is these libertarians are enabling the bad policies by lending them their numbers, support, and votes.
But again, the defense is endorsements are meaningless. Is this truly so? If it is, then all Rand Paul supporters should be joining their hero in endorsing Senator Collins, because such an endorsement would be meaningless.
This won’t happen.
Senator Paul’s supporters will instead react harshly to the idea of endorsing Senator Collins. But why won’t these people do it? Endorsements are meaningless, right?
Paul did not have to get involved with Susan Collins, this is just more of his establishing what his politics are.
Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, Sue Collins,.....that’s just too many endorsements to ignore.
Maybe Rand’s poll numbers are up because he is trying to restore our personal freedoms. He’s one of the few attempting to reign in the runaway police state of the NSA, TSA and NDAA.
Gay marriage and abortion are not the only two issues on the table.
Right now Collins doesn't have an opponent, and nobody who has a chance of winning the general election is on the horizon as a potential opponent.
A more proforma> endorsement might have sufficed. Something like, "I'm a Republican and I want to have a Republican Senate. So I'm for Senator Collins."
Two House members with similar libertarian/conservative views who don't have Presidential delusions.
Right now Collins doesn't have an opponent, and nobody who has a chance of winning the general election is on the horizon as a potential opponent.
A more pro forma endorsement might have sufficed. Something like, "I'm a Republican and I want to have a Republican Senate. So I'm for Senator Collins."
What exactly is this writer talking about?
There's a difference?
Certainly. If reporters asked Rand Paul in Washington, he might have said just that.
But he went to Maine for the state party convention. You don't take a trip like that to be half-hearted about the state's woman in Washington, who is in a sense your host.
It's a sign he's seriously running for president, and, like kissing babies, making nice with the party's elected officials -- not letting them down on their own turf -- is part of running for president.
I'm wondering if in party politics, "wholeheartedly endorsing" somebody isn't actually a "pro forma" -- that is half-hearted and insincere -- endorsement. It's is, after all, only words, and politicians are profligate in throwing words around.
I can see why you are vague, they seem a little vague too on things like gay marriage.
It’s against an ACLU liberal democrat. She has no primary opponent. She’s going to win by 40% here in the fall.
Anyone soft on those, is no conservative.
That's because most of them are stinking lawyers... NEVER send a lawyer to Washington.... It's an absolute conflict of interest..!
They'll rob you for the fun of it...
I think it was P. T. Barnum that said "never let a fool keep his money"...anyway, that's how most all lawyers operate... Never trust them to act in your behalf...they will ALWAYS check their pockets first...
That’s the problem. Principle vs practicality. Try to win control of the senate even with some RINOS or stand on principle and give Dingy Harry two more years at the helm.
Of course!!! LOLO
Well its getting the natives restless.
Myopic reasoning which utterly fails to take in all the factors.
Your brand of capitulation (and that is all your reasoning is youfail to comprehend its not mere pragmatism) is how the Romney and McCain wing became dominant.
No more. Your brand of thinking had its chance and failed spectacularly.
It is time for the adults to stand up.
Does Susan Collins have a primary opponent??
Oh yeh! :-)
Oh. I should've read your tagline. And not taken you seriously. My apologies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.