# Liberty Movement > Defenders of Liberty > Justin Amash Forum >  Gary Franchi claims Amash is going to endorse Romney [update: Amash says false]

## cajuncocoa

This was in an email I just received:






----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[mod edit] update from Justin Amash:




> The claims are false. I am not endorsing anyone other than Ron Paul. I will help the Republican nominee after the convention.


http://www.facebook.com/justinamash/...88824237916043

----------


## UtahApocalypse

If it happens I will be calling his campaign and asking to be removed from the volunteer list.

----------


## LibertyEagle

After the convention, Romney will be the nominee.  If a Republican, even our guys, don't want to destroy their future chances of getting Republican support on any legislation they offer, they will crown Romney.  I hate politics.  But, that is the way it is.

----------


## ronpaulfollower999

Thats funny. I remember reading on his FB that Ron Paul was the only person he was endorsing.

http://www.facebook.com/justinamash/...51095545868866




> I have endorsed Ron Paul for President, and I will not be making any other endorsements for President.

----------


## ronpaulfollower999

I have no idea who these people are. Looks like a Benton/Tate hate video. Also, his claim is completely unfounded.

----------


## moostraks

> After the convention, Romney will be the nominee.  If a Republican, even our guys, don't want to destroy their future chances of getting Republican support on any legislation they offer, they will crown Romney.  I hate politics.  But, that is the way it is.


And that is the problem with being effective at changing the system within theory. If we can't even remain silent on the subject then expect only minimal improvements while liberties are eroded at an enormous pace. (One step forward four steps back...)

----------


## erowe1

> Thats funny. I remember reading on his FB that Ron Paul was the only person he was endorsing.
> 
> http://www.facebook.com/justinamash/...51095545868866


My money is on Amash sticking by this.

----------


## NoOneButPaul

Again... whatever... this should be an expectation to everyone not the end of the world.

----------


## doremedia

If those guys want support from the RNC to be re elected they have to endorse Mitt Romney ... they have to sign a pledge .  Ron Paul has endorsed people we didn't really care for because of the pledge.  If we want these liberty guys to keep their seats and do our bidding,  they have to play the game.  That is the mature way to look at it.  There are not enough of us yet to make all the changes we want to make.  It will come, but not if you folks bail on the liberty guys because they have to comply.  SMH.

----------


## KingNothing

> If it happens I will be calling his campaign and asking to be removed from the volunteer list.


This is obscenely silly.

Who in the hell cares who Amash endorses?  These things don't matter.  He's just paying the lip service that the party demands of him.  This does not mean we all have to go out and pound the pavement for Mittens.  It means Amash is giving the idiots and power-hungry jerkwads in DC what they want, at no cost to any of us.

----------


## shoshanshopon

> This is obscenely silly.
> 
> Who in the hell cares who Amash endorses?  These things don't matter.  He's just paying the lip service that the party demands of him.  This does not mean we all have to go out and pound the pavement for Mittens.  It means Amash is giving the idiots and power-hungry jerkwads in DC what they want, at no cost to any of us.


If these endorsements do not matter then why does the RNC insist on the same?

----------


## KingNothing

> If these endorsements do not matter then why does the RNC insist on the same?


I have no idea.

Have you ever, EVER, met someone who said "well, I wasn't going to vote for this guy to be president because I really dislike everything he represents, but if that celebrity or this congressman says to do it, I'll certainly cast my vote!"

----------


## DerailingDaTrain

> After the convention, Romney will be the nominee.  If a Republican, even our guys, don't want to destroy their future chances of getting Republican support on any legislation they offer, they will crown Romney.  I hate politics.  But, that is the way it is.


Couldn't they just say nothing?

----------


## KingNothing

> Couldn't they just say nothing?


That is certainly optimal.  

My guess is that the party came to him and said "you need to make this endorsement, or we're going to primary you," or some such thing.

----------


## angelatc

> If it happens I will be calling his campaign and asking to be removed from the volunteer list.


That is so shortsighted.  Someone else here posted something in another thread  - I wish I cold remember who, but essentially he asked while we're very good at judging the other candidates on their records over their rhetoric, why do we insist on judging our candidates on rhetoric over record?

The guy could endorse Rosie O'Donnell and I'd think he was weird, but I'd still support him because he votes my way.

----------


## thehungarian

What does it matter? Like Amash has any clout anyways.

----------


## angelatc

> That is certainly optimal.  
> 
> My guess is that the party came to him and said "you need to make this endorsement, or we're going to primary you," or some such thing.


Primaries are over.  If it's true, my guess would be that PAC money is attached.

----------


## erowe1

> What does it matter? Like Amash has any clout anyways.


My guess is that starting with RP's retirement, Amash's clout will begin to increase dramatically.

----------


## DeMintConservative

Amash is a conservative and an intelligent man. 

Of course he prefers Romney over Obama. Most of the legislation he pushes has zero chances of being signed by Obama.

----------


## erowe1

> Amash is a conservative and an intelligent man. 
> 
> Of course he prefers Romney over Obama. Most of the legislation he pushes has zero chances of being signed by Obama.


As a conservative and an intelligent man, I'm not certain that he would prefer Romney over Obama. Granted, that doesn't mean he can't endorse Romney anyway. But when he's casting his secret ballot, I think I have a sense of where he's coming from, and I don't see casting a vote for Romney as especially likely.

----------


## maxoutco

We need more people like Tom Davis in office.  Someone who respects liberty and votes conscious.  Not someone playing the field.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> *If these endorsements do not matter then why does the RNC insist on the same?*


^^THIS.

----------


## 40oz

Ron Paul got me into politics because i thought he was trying to change them for the better. This seems like the same ol' bull$#@!.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Ron Paul got me into politics because i thought he was trying to change them for the better. *This seems like the same ol' bull$#@!.*


It seems that way because it is.

----------


## sailingaway

> This was in an email I just received:


I'll wait and see what happens.

----------


## DeMintConservative

> And that is the problem with being effective at changing the system within theory. If we can't even remain silent on the subject


If you want to remain silent on this subject, don't expect to get any more Amashes or Rand Pauls or Massies elected. 

It'd be totally non-acceptable to have Republican Congressmen or Senators not endorsing Romney. I belong to the GOP wing more likely to support Ron Paul type of candidates. I've donate to a few. 

If they and their supporters are in this for themselves and can't even endorse the candidates I like and, at a minimum the presidential ticket, then I'm not not going to support them any more. Next time there's a Ron Paul conservative vs. some RINO establishment type, I vote for the RINO. And if you lose people like me, people in the Mike Lee/Jeff Flake/Jim DeMint/Tom McClintock/Jason Chaffetz wing of the party, good luck trying to win anything worth of note. I don't agree with, eg., Amash on everything, but I'd still support him in a primary challenge coming from the establishment. But if Amash (or generic RP republican) supporters don't reciprocate, then I need to redefine my policy of alliances. At least I know the other guys aren't in the party selectively and have my back to some extent. 

If you aren't able to understand that political alliances are necessary and that compromising in terms of politics doesnt' imply any compromise of principles, then you need to get out of the party - sooner or later you'll be kicked out anyway. If you can only support candidates with whom you agree 100% or 99% or whatever, then don't expect me to support any of your candidates. I'd rather side with someone I agree only 50% but that I know will be behind my favourite candidates when it comes to that.

----------


## erowe1

> It'd be totally non-acceptable to have Republican Congressmen or Senators not endorsing Romney.


That's not true.

----------


## sailingaway

> If you want to remain silent on this subject, don't expect to get any more Amashes or Rand Pauls or Massies elected. 
> 
> It'd be totally non-acceptable to have Republican Congressmen or Senators not endorsing Romney. I belong to the GOP wing more likely to support Ron Paul type of candidates. I've donate to a few. 
> 
> If they and their supporters are in this for themselves and can't even endorse the candidates I like and, at a minimum the presidential ticket, then I'm not not going to support them any more. Next time there's a Ron Paul conservative vs. some RINO establishment type, I vote for the RINO. And if you lose people like me, people in the Mike Lee/Jeff Flake/Jim DeMint/Tom McClintock/Jason Chaffetz wing of the party, good luck trying to win anything worth of note. I don't agree with, eg., Amash on everything, but I'd still support him in a primary challenge coming from the establishment. But if Amash (or generic RP republican) supporters don't reciprocate, then I need to redefine my policy of alliances. At least I know the other guys aren't in the party selectively and have my back to some extent. 
> 
> If you aren't able to understand that political alliances are necessary and that compromising in terms of politics doesnt' imply any compromise of principles, then you need to get out of the party - sooner or later you'll be kicked out anyway. If you can only support candidates with whom you agree 100% or 99% or whatever, then don't expect me to support any of your candidates. I'd rather side with someone I agree only 50% but that I know will be behind my favourite candidates when it comes to that.


Did you support Ron Paul? Because if you didn't, it seems your support never was there when it really counts most.

----------


## sailingaway

> That's not true.


I agree.  A vague 'I support our nominee' from the more junior of them is considered baseline, though and they would have to have a justification to do otherwise, or a universally unpopular candidate, imho.  An 'endorsement' is a choice and always has been.

I strongly suspect Franchi is taking Amash's tweet that 'after nomination I will support the nominee but I won't endorse any presidential candidate but Ron Paul' as a proposed endorsement - rather than supporting the nominee. There is a big difference as I understand this.

----------


## erowe1

> I'd rather side with someone I agree only 50% but that I know will be behind my favourite candidates when it comes to that.


I can't begin to understand those priorities.

----------


## Brett85

> As a conservative and an intelligent man, I'm not certain that he would prefer Romney over Obama. Granted, that doesn't mean he can't endorse Romney anyway. But when he's casting his secret ballot, I think I have a sense of where he's coming from, *and I don't see casting a vote for Romney as especially likely.*


I think he probably well.  There are records that show that he donated money to McCain in 2008, and McCain was probably worse than Romney.

----------


## erowe1

> I think he probably well.  There are records that show that he donated money to McCain in 2008, and McCain was probably worse than Romney.


I didn't know about those donations. But I'd actually rate Romney as worse than McCain. McCain was at least something of a budget hawk, and he voted against Medicare Part D, which I can't imagine Romney having done.

----------


## sailingaway

> I think he probably well.  There are records that show that he donated money to McCain in 2008, and McCain was probably worse than Romney.


AFTER convention I wouldn't have had a huge problem with his 'playing the game' that way because it wouldn't be AGAINST Ron's candidacy, except that he promised not to.  Not to endorse, in any event.

----------


## erowe1

> AFTER convention I wouldn't have had a huge problem with his 'playing the game' that way because it wouldn't be AGAINST Ron's candidacy, except that he promised not to.  Not to endorse, in any event.


He hasn't endorsed yet. And it remains to be seen if he will. And if he does, it may well be after the convention. He did promise that, and that should count for something. But when someone puts out their thoughts on Facebook as freely and frequently as Amash, I think we have to understand that sometimes he'll say things he wouldn't if his communication were more thought-out, infrequent, and edited.

----------


## DeMintConservative

> Did you support Ron Paul? Because if you didn't, it seems your support never was there when it really counts most.


I actually voted for him  in the primary, but more as a protest vote. I'm not exactly a Ron Paul supporter. But that's exactly my point: I've donated money to Kerry Bentivolio and Thomas Massie this cycle; Rand Paul (quite a bit) and Keith Blandford in the last. Even though I certainly don't agree with them on, say, the currency issue. But I just liked them more than their opponents, in the primary and certainly in the general.

Now, if there is no retribution, why should I and people like me keep doing it? We're undermining ourselves.

----------


## sonofshamwow

This is pure propaganda. Amash has said that he endorsed Ron Paul and won't be endorsing anyone else for President. Everything else said in here are unfounded claims from people not affiliated with Amash directly whatsoever. Why wouldn't this fake "news report" mention that Amash recently emphatically and directly stated that he won't be endorsing anyone else for President?

https://www.facebook.com/justinamash...88824237916043

----------


## DeMintConservative

> I can't begin to understand those priorities.


It's very simple: if someone like DeMint or Mike Lee or Jeff Flake become a presidential candidate some day, I don't want to be spending time and money on people that, if that moment comes, will endorse the Demcorat or some 3rd party candidacy or stay neutral. 

It's impossible to implement positive policy changes without building political alliances. So I need to keep an eye on the later if I actually want to achieve something when it comes to the former. And I do, I'm not into politics to get some sort of perverted emotional self-satisfaction.

----------


## unklejman

From Amash:




> The claims are false. I am not endorsing anyone other than Ron Paul. I will help the Republican nominee after the convention.



Although I'm not sure what he means by help though.

----------


## Tiso0770

I've been reading these threads for some time now, but i've also noticed in the last couple days there has been an increase of 'he said, she said' type articles coming out. For once, just think positive instead of negative. 

If the Romney camp thinks they have won, then the Romney delegates will vote Romney. It's our task to convince the Romney delegates to think our way is better.

*#####HOLD THE LINE######*

----------


## qh4dotcom

Amash just said this on his FB page



> The claims are false. I am not endorsing anyone other than Ron Paul. I will help the Republican nominee after the convention.


http://www.facebook.com/justinamash/...88824237916043

----------


## erowe1

> I actually voted for him  in the primary, but more as a protest vote. I'm not exactly a Ron Paul supporter. But that's exactly my point: I've donated money to Kerry Bentivolio and Thomas Massie this cycle; Rand Paul (quite a bit) and Keith Blandford in the last. Even though I certainly don't agree with them on, say, the currency issue. But I just liked them more than their opponents, in the primary and certainly in the general.
> 
> Now, if there is no retribution, why should I and people like me keep doing it? We're undermining ourselves.


Our job is to win you and people like you over to the cause of freedom, or at least taking politicians' oaths to uphold the Constitution seriously. It's clear we haven't accomplished that yet. But undermining the tyranny you currently stand for is something that we have to do. Letting it go on unabated would be like failing to treat cancer. Education is definitely more of a present necessity for us than today's political battles are.

----------


## Brett85

"I am not endorsing anyone other than Ron Paul." 

"I will help the Republican nominee after the convention."

Those two statements seem contradictory.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Couldn't they just say nothing?


I agree.  That would be the best thing.

----------


## erowe1

> "I am not endorsing anyone other than Ron Paul." 
> 
> "I will help the Republican nominee after the convention."
> 
> Those two statements seem contradictory.


My guess is that he means pretty specific things by the second, and that he's talked to party people about what those are.

----------


## DeMintConservative

> Our job is to win you and people like you over to the cause of freedom, or at least taking politicians' oaths to uphold the Constitution seriously. It's clear we haven't accomplished that yet. But undermining the tyranny you currently stand for is something that we have to do. Letting it go on unabated would be like failing to treat cancer. Education is definitely more of a present necessity for us than today's political battles are.


Yeah, try to educate me from outside the party them. 

And good luck trying to exert successful political persuasion with that kind of approach.

----------


## Brett85

> Our job is to win you and people like you over to the cause of freedom, or at least taking politicians' oaths to uphold the Constitution seriously. It's clear we haven't accomplished that yet. But undermining the tyranny you currently stand for is something that we have to do. Letting it go on unabated would be like failing to treat cancer. Education is definitely more of a present necessity for us than today's political battles are.


I think it is possible to support Ron Paul in the Republican primary and support the GOP nominee in the general election.  That's what I did in 2008, and I don't think that made me any less of a Ron Paul supporter.  I've decided to vote 3rd party this year, partly because I'm concerned about Romney's stance on Iran, and partly because I live in a state where my vote doesn't matter anyway, so my protest vote won't hurt anything.  But, the fact that I donated money to Ron and gave a speech for him at my Republican caucus in Kansas demonstrates that I'm a legitimate Ron Paul supporter, more so than who I decide to vote for in the general election.

I realize that you never criticized me, but I'm just giving myself as an example.  It matters more what you do for Ron Paul in the GOP primary then who you end up supporting in the general election.

----------


## erowe1

> Yeah, try to educate me from outside the party them. 
> 
> And good luck trying to exert successful political persuasion with that kind of approach.


I'm inside the party. Ron Paul is, and long has been inside the party. Rand, Amash and Bentivolio are inside the party. Part of what they've accomplised is to draw a lot of people over to their views. We now make up a significant minority within the party. That seems obvious to me. I used to be a Limbaugh disciple before I encountered Ron Paul, and there are tons of others like me. We need those numbers to increase obviously. And different people have different roles in doing that. Amash definitely has a big role. So do other people who are working outside the party writing books and things.

----------


## DeMintConservative

> I'm inside the party. Ron Paul is, and long has been inside the party. Rand, Amash and Bentivolio are inside the party. Part of what they've accomplised is to draw a lot of people over to their views. That seems obvious to me. I used to be a Limbaugh disciple before I encountered Ron Paul, and there are tons of others like me. We need those numbers to increase obviously. And different people have different roles in doing that. Amash definitely has a big role. So do other people who are working outside the party writing books and things.


Well, I was never a Limbaugh fan. I became a conservative/libertarian reading Hayek, Nozick, Friedman, then Oakeshott, Burke, Scruton, Kekes. And I've read plenty of Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hope as well.

If you are within the party, great. If you are within the party but only support a handful of party candidates for office - those with whom you agree almost 100% - and you actually undermine the others, then I want  you out of the party and I'll work for it. 

You can't have it both ways. You can't claim one day "Bentivolio won the primary, you better support him now, party unity" and the other day "republicans are evil".

Again, I probably belong to the group of conservative republicans more likely to support Ron Paul's policies outside of hard-core Rothbardian libertarians, Mises Institute types, Ron Paul harcore supporters. If you can't make a political ally of someone like me, you won't be able to make a political ally of anyone. People are giving you guys the benefit of the doubt. Don't throw it away.

----------


## steph3n

I really wonder what motivates some of these people sometimes, (Franchi, Tate, Benton, Jones, Kokesh, etc) they seem to be intentionally trying to divide people FAR too often!

----------


## JK/SEA

> I really wonder what motivates some of these people sometimes, (Franchi, Tate, Benton, Jones, Kokesh, etc) they seem to be intentionally trying to divide people FAR too often!


A visit from a black SUV late at night. A few words concerning the health of family members...that sort of thing can put a chill on your bluster. Just my opinion worth about zilch.

----------


## steph3n

> A visit from a black SUV late at night. A few words concerning the health of family members...that sort of thing can put a chill on your bluster. Just my opinion worth about zilch.


So what, don't say stupid divisive things. If you are vying as many of them do for face time and acknowledgement, the risk of being a target is there, deal with the consequences without having jelly for a backbone!

----------


## steph3n

> A visit from a black SUV late at night. A few words concerning the health of family members...that sort of thing can put a chill on your bluster. Just my opinion worth about zilch.


So what, don't say stupid divisive things. If you are vying as many of them do for face time and acknowledgement, the risk of being a target is there, deal with the consequences without having jelly for a backbone!

----------


## unklejman

I asked Amash what he meant by helping the nominee:




> I am a Republican, and I will be working within the Republican Party to defeat Barack Obama in the fall. I will use whatever means I deem appropriate, but Ron Paul will be my only endorsement for President.

----------


## erowe1

> You can't have it both ways. You can't claim one day "Bentivolio won the primary, you better support him now, party unity" and the other day "republicans are evil".


But you do agree that Republicans are evil, don't you? I can't imagine how that much would be up for debate among conservatives.

----------


## DeMintConservative

> But you do agree that Republicans are evil, don't you? I can't imagine how that much would be up for debate among conservatives.


There are Republicans I agree more than with others.

I have no delusions about the world or politics. I don't believe in utopian projects. People are flawed, political people will be flawed, policies will always be flawed. I'm content to get as little evil as possible every time. I think those who think differently are actually Marxists at heart. 

So, pretty much every time I'll be happy to support the Republican over the Democrat. It's not even party loyalty: it's just that 99% of the time, the Republican candidate will do a better job, even if still a very flawed one.

----------


## erowe1

> So, pretty much every time I'll be happy to support the Republican over the Democrat. It's not even party loyalty: it's just that 99% of the time, the Republican candidate will do a better job, even if still a very flawed one.


 As a Republican, I just don't agree with this. Don't get me wrong, I pretty much never like the Democrat better than the Republican (although many high-ranking Republicans in good standing do quite often). But it's not uncommon for me, especially at the national level, to see serious enough problems with both that I am unable to say that either would clearly be worse than the other. I'm no utopian either. And I do vote for the lesser of two evils, when the lesser is clearly much the lesser. But we are dooming our children if we allow the regime to continue on the same trajectory both parties have had it on for the past century. And if the Republican party is to have any role in changing that trajectory, then that party needs to be reformed. And that reformation of the GOP is a higher priority to me than seeing more statists in office with R's after their names. It must be. Or it will never happen.

----------


## DeMintConservative

> As a Republican, I just don't agree with this. Don't get me wrong, I pretty much never like the Democrat better than the Republican (although many high-ranking Republicans in good standing do quite often). But it's not uncommon for me, especially at the national level, to see serious enough problems with both that I am unable to say that either would clearly be worse than the other. I'm no utopian either. And I do vote for the lesser of two evils, when the lesser is clearly much the lesser. But we are dooming our children if we allow the regime to continue on the same trajectory both parties have had it on for the past century. And if the Republican party is to have any role in changing that trajectory, then that party needs to be reformed. And that reformation of the GOP is a higher priority to me than seeing more statists in office with R's after their names.


I'm not sure how not voting for the GOP candidate when he's a bit less bad will change the trajectory of the regime or contribute to make change more probable or make a GOP reform more possible.

You think that electing Obama democrats over Romney republicans will accomplish any of these goals? Unless there's some kind of magical thinking involved, I don't see how.

If a RINO like Bush had won in 92 over a relatively centrist Democrat like Clinton, there's a good chance Obamacare wouldn't be the law of the land. 

The US is still a lot closer to a Constitutional Republic than Canada or Europe. Why is that? The more democrats are elected to office, the lesser are the chances you'll ever see any policy you support implemented.

----------


## erowe1

> You think that electing Obama democrats over Romney republicans will accomplish any of these goals?


Not necessarily. But I'm certain that rewarding the party for embracing statism is not an effective way to change its direction.

But also, I don't really see why I'm supposed to believe Romney is "a bit less bad." I can't know what either one will do. Both have the potential to start World War 3. Which is more likely to do that I can't say for sure, but I lean toward thinking Romney is.

----------


## KingNothing

> Primaries are over.  If it's true, my guess would be that PAC money is attached.


Right, but I'm sure Amash plans on running again next time around, and the time after that too.

----------


## ronpaulfollower999

If by helping he means trashing Obama, I'm all for it. But don't talk to me about how great a candidate Mitt Romney is.

----------


## DeMintConservative

I'm a bit more worried about entitlement reform, judges and spending than a WW3 that seems very unlikely to me in any scenary. And Romney seems way too much of a pragmatist to embrace military adventures. 

Dole and McCain lost. I suppose this year and in 2000 the party nominated an unbashed anti-statist, right? 

Again, unless the process involves some magic, I don't see how it works. Plus, I keep saying this: if you aren't willing to build political alliances, then don't expect to go to far inside a major party. In a 2-party system, parties are big tents. The FPS parties, the Federalist and the Democratic-Republican, were already big tents. Dont' support a large faction of your own party, and you can expect them to pay back the favour.

----------


## sailingaway

> I'm a bit more worried about entitlement reform, judges and spending than a WW3 that seems very unlikely to me in any scenary. And Romney seems way too much of a pragmatist to embrace military adventures. 
> 
> Dole and McCain lost. I suppose this year and in 2000 the party nominated an unbashed anti-statist, right? 
> 
> Again, unless the process involves some magic, I don't see how it works. Plus, I keep saying this: if you aren't willing to build political alliances, then don't expect to go to far inside a major party. In a 2-party system, parties are big tents. The FPS parties, the Federalist and the Democratic-Republican, were already big tents. Dont' support a large faction of your own party, and you can expect them to pay back the favour.


Again, if you don't even support Ron Paul, how much good does it do us?

----------


## DeMintConservative

> Again, if you don't even support Ron Paul, how much good does it do us?


I'm not sure how is that related to what I was saying, but I certainly would vote for Ron Paul if he was the Republican nominee (as I voted for him in the primary - albeit I probably wouldn't if the field wasn't so weak).

----------


## twomp

> I'm not sure how is that related to what I was saying, but I certainly would vote for Ron Paul if he was the Republican nominee (as I voted for him in the primary - albeit I probably wouldn't if the field wasn't so weak).


Voting for someone just because they have an (R) or a (D) behind their names is how our country got into this mess. Team Red or Team Blue, it doesn't really matter, the same crap keeps going on. You don't like Obamacare but you are willing to vote for someone who implemented Romneycare and you are willing to believe his BS even though you know he has been every side of the same issue. Why? Because he has an (R) behind his name. You and the people like you who vote for either (D) or (R) are the problem we have to deal with in this country. Why should we listen to what you have to say?

Just look at the so called "conservative" judge appointed by "conservative" George Bush who gave his stamp of approval on Obamacare as proof. Fk Team Blue and FK Team Red, they are the problems not the solution.

----------


## puppetmaster

> If those guys want support from the RNC to be re elected they have to endorse Mitt Romney ... they have to sign a pledge .  Ron Paul has endorsed people we didn't really care for because of the pledge.  If we want these liberty guys to keep their seats and do our bidding,  they have to play the game.  That is the mature way to look at it.  There are not enough of us yet to make all the changes we want to make.  It will come, but not if you folks bail on the liberty guys because they have to comply.  SMH.



ummmm no, we got them elected without the GOP establishment......

----------


## po14015

"Justin Amash Denies Reports That He’ll Be Endorsing Romney"
http://www.dailypaul.com/250636/just...omment-2685904


Who is Gary Franchi?

The person who made sure New Hampshire was NOT mailed any Super Brochures.  

And if I had not checked on the DVDs that were supposed to be included with the Super Brochures, I may not have known until after Thanksgiving.   This would have caused the Independents in IA not to get a Super Brochure.  I still remember the empty feeling of betrayal  when I realized that Gary and RevPac had just raised over $100,000 and didn't plan on doing the mailings.   

A traitor is the worst enemy of any group.  And I know that there are many in the Liberty movement.  A traitor will look active but get nothing done.  They will try to divide and cause drama.  Their weapon is doubt.  

And what you are seeing here is someone creating doubt about someone who is starting to be a name in the Liberty movement.  

After seeing this, I feel I need to post the story of what happened last November.  Especially since Gary is an MC at P.A.U.L Fest.  The truth needs to be out there.

In Liberty,

Curt Schultz
Owner of RonPaulProducts.com and the Ron Paul Super Brochure

----------


## DerailingDaTrain

inb4 SB bashing

----------


## RonPaulMall

> Right, but I'm sure Amash plans on running again next time around, and the time after that too.


Yeah, with all due respect, a lot of you seem a bit delusional with respect to how politics works.  Endorsing Romney is exactly the sort of empty, meaningless gesture to the GOP that we should _want_ our liberty candidates to making so they don't have to make concessions on that things that actually matter.  Amash is going to run for re-election.  He'll probably have a primary opponent.  Romney will either win or lose.  Do you want Amash's primary opponent to be able to run ads saying "Justin Amash refused to endorse the GOP Presidential candidate against Barrack Obama"?  Why would you want Amash to give a softball like that to his enemies?  And for what?  I want Amash to be a purist with his votes and his speeches articulating a liberty ideology.  I don't want him committing political suicide by refusing to offer a meaningless "Go Team" endorsement of the GOP nominee.

----------


## Crotale

> I really wonder what motivates some of these people sometimes, (Franchi, Tate, Benton, Jones, Kokesh, etc) they seem to be intentionally trying to divide people FAR too often!


Why are you lumping these people in the same category? They each have very different views, positions and audiences.

Also, I find it very hypocritical of you to claim some people involved in the liberty movement are trying to divide people, when such a  statement is nothing but divisive itself.

----------

