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.
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?