Posted under Constitution Party & Election 2012 & Mitt Romney & Rand Paul & Republican Party & Ron Paul
Editor’s Note: This is severeal days old, but I hastily posted it at IPR several days ago, and I have since been mostly without computer access due to a work related trip. I’m interested in what our readers think of it. ~ Red
by Darrell L. Castle
Constitution Party
Last Friday’s endorsement of Mitt Romney by Senator Rand Paul conjured up images of how George Washington must have felt when betrayed by his trusted general, Benedict Arnold. That’s way too harsh, you may say, because Washington was betrayed when his countrymen were fighting for their lives and the life of their nation against the greatest empire on earth at that time. Benedict Arnold traded his honor for position and power with the empire and as a result his name has been forever synonymous with treason and deceit. I can’t help but conclude that Rand’s endorsement of Romney falls into the same category of deceit. Those of us in the liberty movement are struggling to survive against an even more powerful empire than that which existed in Washington’s day. Rand has not only set the liberty movement back but perhaps has also destroyed his father’s legacy.
Why he would do it is the question that begs for an answer. Did he do it because he has been corrupted by the Washington power elite with promises of position and power? If so, then he is a deceiver and by definition a corrupt one. In addition his deception will not work because he has underestimated the rage his endorsement has provoked among his followers. Did he do it because he has always been a loyal subject of the Republican leadership and principles really don’t matter to him? If that is true the result is even worse because that makes him a lying hypocrite for pretending to be something that he is not. Did he do it because he wants to be a contender in 2016 or 2020 and needs to exhibit loyalty to the leadership of the Republican Party?
Whatever the reason that Rand Paul endorsed Romney, to many of us in the liberty movement, he just eliminated himself from contention as a Presidential candidate now or in the future. He not only endorsed Romney, he said he would be honored to be Romney’s running mate. He admitted, therefore, that he would be honored to serve with a man who stands opposed to virtually everything his father has represented for his 35 years in Washington. Reaction to the news has been so bad, and has come in such large numbers, that one cannot help but wonder if he did not miscalculate.
The fact remains that it is Ron the liberty movement has supported for 35 years, not his son. Is it possible that Ron did not approve his son’s decision in advance? It hardly seems likely but if so a brief statement to that effect would seem to be in order. The statement would need to be something similar to this—
Rand is my son and I love him but I do not support his decision to endorse
Mitt Romney. I completely disavow his decision and I have separated myself
from it. Should I fail to gain the Republican nomination, which now seems
likely, I will be giving my endorsement to the Constitution Party’s candidates,
Virgil Goode, and Jim Clymer.
That statement would go a long way toward preserving Ron’s legacy as the champion of liberty that he has always appeared to be.
What candidate will you support now that Ron Paul has admitted defeat in his bid for the Republican nomination and his son, Rand, has proven himself to be just another Republican loyalist? I urge you to consider the Constitution Party and its candidates—Virgil Goode for President and Jim Clymer for Vice President. When Ron Paul was eliminated from the Republican nomination in 2008, he endorsed the Constitution Party’s candidates.
The Constitution Party always has and always will lift high the torch of liberty. Go to http://www.constitutionparty.com and http://www.goodeforpresident2012.com for information about the Constitution Party and its candidates.
RedPhillips on 17 Jun 2012 at 7:06 pm #
I think it was a mistake for Rand to endorse Romney and I like Darrell Castle, but this strikes me as hyperbolic and overwrought. As conservatives, we should believe that family comes before politics. Asking Ron Paul to publicly and harshly repudiate his son is asking too much. Paul can express his disagreement and/or distance himself from the endorsement without dropping the rhetorical hammer on his son.
Feltan on 18 Jun 2012 at 4:22 am #
I just don’t think it is necessary to dwell too hard and too long on Rand Paul’s endorsement. He did it to ingraciate himself with the Republican leadership for whatever actual or perceived benefits he calculated he would get.
Rand did ride his father’s coat tails, but I never took him to be a carbon copy of the old man.
Furthermore, I would distance myself from Mr. Castle’s contention that Ron Paul is the heart, soul and living embodiment of the liberty movement. It is always dangerous for a political party to become the sole domain of an individual. A party should be a movement, and idea or ideas — and the while the best promoter will rise to the top, it is still the ideas that should remain paramount.
Heresy Alert: After the Republican convention, it wouldn’t surprise me to to see Ron Paul endorse Romney too. The old man might just do that to help his son along as he gets ready to consider his post political time.
Regards,
Feltan
RedPhillips on 18 Jun 2012 at 5:09 pm #
Feltan, if Ron Paul endorses Romney a lot of his supporters will have an existential crisis.
I don’t see it happening at all. If they had any thought of that, I think the reaction to Rand makes it even less likely. At the most, he might say something along the lines of there not being any perfect options this time around (given Johnson’s and Goode’s weakness on foreign policy), but that’s it.
Feltan on 18 Jun 2012 at 8:21 pm #
Red,
Not that I am guarenteeing such an endorsement — but I would not be surprised either. This comes from a sneaking suspicion that something is brewing underneath the layers that are visible to us.
Rand’s endorsement, and Ron’s silence, is by itself a rather peculiar set of facts — and I think it portends further suprises.
Regards,
Feltan
Hawthorne on 18 Jun 2012 at 11:50 pm #
Not a healthy concept for the CP to consider incubating–family loyalty should be understood in better prose. Were they really hoping for an endorsement from Rand Paul? Why would they care in light of Mr Goode?
roho on 19 Jun 2012 at 12:54 am #
Nothing new…….Two years from now when we conservatives are saying, “Oh my! Oh My! Oh My! How is it that Romney inherited “Dubya’s” neocon advisors,” I will get the shovel out so we can go ahead and bury American Conservatism.
It’s over.