This is what I see: The people MENTIONED in this video [below] are the people on my “list” of those who will sell out –including the speaker in the video. By selling out I MEAN “playing the game” to get in –which eventually leads to winning –not on principle but on compromise.
Hey, if this “compromise” thing works then I am wrong. But what is it about Ron Paul that we all love? Is it because he compromised? (and when he had to compromise and “play” Republican by having to endorse candidates we were totally opposed to like Lamar Smith –that really angered and turned off many to voting completely). No!, We love Ron Paul because he has stood on principle in the house for 30 years and fought the fight no one else had the guts to take on. THAT is what we love about Ron Paul.
And it is what we love about our Liberty Candidates running on a platform of LIBERTY and Principle and we believe that they will NOT COMPROMISE which is why we give them the torch of liberty to carry on in Ron Paul’s path…..
But this year we have watched Senator Mike Lee and Senator Rand Paul –two Liberty Candidates — turn around and endorse Romeny. And it saddens us because we believed these guys would stand on principle while in the house.
So is it the job itself that causes men to turn from principle? Is this what we can expect every time we get a man in office? That they will turn and start “playing a political game” in order to succeed?
Well how come Justin Amash, Glen Bradley, Jenn Coffey are not compromising?
Then lets start at the bottom folks. Lets start by supporting Liberty Candidates running for local and state office that will take on the establishment on PRINCIPLE.
Or do we have to have no principles in order to GET principle?
When are we all going to be brave and fight the fight without having to play the game?
I’ve always been totally against those that wanted to fight this fight with compromise. I call those people the sell-outs. I have my list and so far that list is on target. The people I believed to be all about compromise –the ones that bit the hand that fed them so they could appeal to the status quo; the ones who needed to get on the inside of the GOP no matter what they had to surrender in order to do that; the ones who, it appears, used the liberty movement to get further in their political careers…..
The bottom line is I’d rather die with my principles then be fake or phony or have to “play a game to get in”. There are organizations based on this. There are those who will only run through the GOP or the Democrat Party because they believe you have to go through one in order to win and they help to keep this Hegelian Dialectic alive and kicking……. even our biggest third party has played this game of ‘compromise’ in the last two election cycles.
This saddens me the most.
The only thing I can think of to do is have the Ron Paul supporters of principle (not the COMPROMISERS) go to the party of Liberty and take that back and bring it to the Party of the rEVOLution.
It’s already there for us –waiting. And the compromisers and sellouts…they can keep their GOP and their DEM party. I want no part of either one because it seems youALWAYS have to compromise and sell your soul to be in it. “Play the game to win”.
NOT DOING IT!
Gigi Bowman: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Clean Food 
Jack Hunter = Rand Paul 😦
Jack, when you big wigs think you are so much smarter and have to “explain it” to us simpletons is amazingly arrogant.
You, sir, are a politician skilled through and through.
“Trying to explain Rand’s endorsement to so many of my friends and allies in the Paul movement is like trying to explain blowback to regular Republicans”
This is the polite way of saying we are unintelligent and incapable of seeing the big picture that is the important picture.
BULL! We never stopped seeing the big picture; nor took our eyes off the prize.
You and RAND got distracted by a shiny trinket.
Who cares if RAND is President in 2016?
What happened to “this is bigger than Ron being President” and that Ron Paul NOT being President is actually in our best interest for the movement.
Now we know why!!!! You are politically positioning for Romney to be POTUS and Rand in the future.
That is not liberty; that is politics status quo!
Jack…you are done with me and those like minded.
I have been studying politics for most of my life. I have been registered as a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian and Independent.
Having been a student of history and really looked hard at Dr. Ron Paul’s political history, I am struck that he originally was a Republican turned Libertarian (because of Ronald Reagan’s misguided capitulation on a couple of issues). He ran for POTUS as a Libertarian the first time and saw how corrupt the system is and that for a 3rd party to win a Presidential Election was virtually an impossibility. As a result he went back to the Republican Party and rather than abandon a party that he didn’t agree with on ALL the issues he began trying to change it from the inside. Those changes have ONLY now begun to take root.
Obviously the current majority of the party is still misguided, however I think it would be a HUGE mistake for those that have started the dynamic shift in the party politics/platform to abandon the party. If they did the progress that Dr. Ron Paul would be lost and it would push the shift back years. Change will happen faster by creating an environment that persuades the majority of Party Members to take the steps needed to get Libertarian Ideals into the platform, then by fighting with them at EVERY TURN.
That leaves the questions to be answered, Can I vote for Romney? A difficult question for all of us that have supported Dr. Paul in his run for POTUS. I think a lot of it depends on what happens at the convention. What do we get as far as planks on the platform? How much influence do we have as to the policies and procedures of the party as a whole? What about a more libertarian running mate? What about a commitment to a Fed Audit and support for STOPPING the NDAA?
I believe that these are questions that each of us have to answer for ourselves. While I am disappointed that Dr. Paul is probably not going to be the GOP Nominee, by not supporting the Nominee of the party am I having a negative affect on progress toward a more Libertarian GOP that Dr. Paul has stood for these last 30 years. I don’t have the answer worked out yet in my head, but I do know that the r3VOLution is alive and well in GOP representatives like Dr. Rank Paul, Justin Amash and others
I whole-heartedly agree with Rand Paul’s decision, as well as the arguments that Jack put forth in this video. I think this promotion of sticking to our guns and voting for Ron Paul and NOBODY ELSE, is fatally flawed. The plain and simple fact is, ALL of the liberty candidates on this site who state that they will not support the eventual nominee of the party (unless they’re running as an independent of course) will lose, and they will never have an opportunity to affect real change on this country. They will not be able to affect platforms, pass any legislation, or have any effect on the direction of this great country.
On the flip-side, the liberty candidates which do claim that they will support the eventual nominee of the party, will not only do so without compromising their integrity, principles, and beliefs, but will gain legitimacy within the party, will have much greater influence within the party, will likely get elected in either this attempt or future attempts for office, and will go down in history as one of the pivotal members of the liberty caucus in our government which helped pull our country back to the constitution.
Which side do you want to be on? Do you want to affect change and be remembered, or do nothing and be forgotten? Do you want our liberty candidates to win, or to lose? I would rethink the idea that voting for Ron Paul over anyone else after the primaries is the “principled” or moral thing to do. The moral thing is to get our guys elected, and turn this country around!