G. Edward Griffin
By Jesse Walker
As Brian Doherty mentioned here on Hit & Run yesterday, Mitt Romney and Rand Paul had a half-hour meeting recently, fueling rumors that the GOP frontrunner might pick the Kentucky senator as his vice presidential candidate. Like Brian, I don’t think this marriage is likely to happen. But if it is a possibility, why would any libertarian want it to happen?
My problem here isn’t with Sen. Paul himself — I’ve certainly got my disagreements with the man, but I like him much better than anyone else whose name is being kicked around as a potential Romney running mate. The problem is the idea that it would be good to take
Why Rand Paul Shouldn’t Be Romney’s Running Mate [continued]
Ron Paul is 3 for 3 in his endorsements in the last two weeks. Paul endorsed Kurt Bills, and Bills is now the GOP nominee for the U.S. Senate race in Minnesota. Paul endorsed Thomas Massie, and Massie is now the GOP nominee in Kentucky’s 4th congressional district race. Paul endorsed Ted Cruz, and as of last night Cruz will now go head-to-head with Lt. Governor David Dewhurst in a Texas runoff for the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate.
Coincidence? Not according to Buzzfeed’s Rosie Gray who says Ron and Rand Paul are building a “machine:”
Ron Paul, still, if barely, a presidential candidate, suffered another landslide defeat in the Kentucky primary last week. But the Pauls won anyway: Their hand-picked candidate Thomas Massie, backed by Kentucky senator Rand Paul and funded by a wealthy 21-year-old Texan Paul acolyte with a super PAC, won his hotly-contested House primary by a decisive margin.
Quietly, from the remnants of two failed presidential campaigns and the formidable online Paul organizations, a political machine is being born. The Paul agenda of extremely limited government, suspicion of economic elites, and their true outsider street cred have broad appeal in their party’s politics… The Republican Senate nominees in Wisconsin and Minnesota this cycle owe their nomination in part to the Paul influence. A Paul acolyte, Ted Cruz, is on the cusp of an upset victory over the establishment favorite in Texas Republican Senate primary. And Paul’s son Rand, the junior senator from Kentucky, is now mentioned seriously as a prospect for the 2016 Republican nomination should Mitt Romney fall short in November.
This new attention to state races is, a Paul advisor said, a matter of strategy.
Jack Hunter: Paul’s Machine [continued]
By Brad Petrishen
MARLBOROUGH.- Dozens of Ron Paul backers showed up at a state Republican Party meeting last night to protest what they say is a manipulation of power aimed at decreasing their influence at the party’s national convention.
A 14-member GOP committee charged with allocating delegates to the convention held a closed meeting at the Holiday Inn to discuss whether three delegates and three alternates selected at the Fifth Congressional District caucus should be invalidated.
None of the Romney-backed delegates won any of the six seats for the district, which as a result of redistricting will include Framingham, Natick, Sudbury and Southborough in 2013. It presently is anchored by Lowell, Lawrence and Haverhill.
One of the unsuccessful members of the Romney slate challenged the results.
The complaint filed with the Massachusetts Republican Party alleges that those who attended the April 28 caucus at Nevins Hall in Framingham were not asked to sign a form under the pains of perjury certifying they were registered Republicans. As a result, the complaint contends, the results should be invalidated and new delegates chosen at the direction of the committee which selects delegates.
Brad Wyatt, a Paul backer and organizer for the Paul-allied Ronald Reagan Unity Liberty slate, said the complaint seeks to capitalize on a technical glitch that none of the delegates elected had anything to do with.
Ron Paul backers protest GOP hearing [continued]
This column by Ron Paul activist and delegate Craig Westover in Minnesota’s Star Tribune is a response to accusations that our movement is somehow “fringe” and meaningless. Anybody who truly believes this simply hasn’t been paying attention to American politics for the last four years. Westover makes interesting comparisons, to both religious conservatives and the gay rights movement, and finishes by explaining how we’re injecting genuine limited government principles into the Republican Party:
First, let’s understand what a “movement” or a “revolution” is. All movements — the Pat Robertson Republican coup in the 1980s, gay rights, women’s suffrage, civil rights and, yes, the Ron Paul movement — follow a common pattern.
Movements all begin at the margins with people who have little or nothing to lose. Unsuccessful movements never expand beyond the sloganeering fringe. Successful movements — those with an intellectual and moral basis — mature to attract a mainstream following.
The gay-rights movement is a great example. Shirtless hunks in leather tutus and motorcycling “Dykes on Bikes” are no longer the point of the gay-rights spear. It’s the gay lawyer/gay accountant, lesbian legislator/lesbian physician — same-sex couples with kids and fundamental concerns about faith, family and freedom — who are now the face of the movement.
Focusing commentary on the remnants of the gay-rights fringe is something the media would never do. But focusing on the fringe of the Ron Paul movement is exactly what the Strib and WaPo commentaries actually do.
Libertarians today are on that cusp between being all about the T-shirt and all about ideas. I was a libertarian before it was cool and a Republican when it wasn’t cool.
As a political force in the 1970s, libertarians had little to lose… Times have changed…
Jack Hunter: How Ron Paul Is Injecting Principle Into The GOP [continued]
By Lori Stacey
Several months ago, I had published a brief statement in the context of an article regarding the pro-life issue endorsing Ron Paul. Now, I would like to list some of my top reasons why I endorsed him for President of the United States. These are presented in no particular order and are all important to the future of our nation.
1. He is one of the most serious Pro-Life candidates to run for President in our lifetimes. Although sadly, many social conservatives have a complete misunderstanding of his stance, record and history on this subject. In his early political career, even before it was cool to be pro-life, he was among the first members of Congress to introduce the Human Life Amendment to our constitution which took place in his very first term in Congress, only 2 years after the Roe v. Wade decision.
The very first small book Dr. Paul wrote many years ago was called, “Abortion and Liberty
Many people may also not know that the “Jane Roe” of Roe v. Wade who has been working tirelessly to overturn her own case decision since becoming a Christian had endorsed Ron Paul back in his 2008 run for President on the 35th anniversary of Roe v Wade. She knows that Dr. Paul has not just talked the pro-life talk but has walked the walk in trying to bring forth solutions through authoring his own bills and sponsoring/co-sponsoring pro-life legislation over his entire career.
Top 7 reasons why I endorsed Ron Paul [continued]
