I just heard Peter Schiff’s interview with Rand Paul concerning Rand’s endorsement of Romney. Still no answer as to why Rand decided to endorse him now with Tampa still well over 2 months away.

Dr. Woods,

Why did you remove your “Appeal to Ron Paul” video?  It was one of the most inspiring videos I’ve seen in a long time.  Your appeal was the appeal of millions of Ron Paul supporters across the country.  Millions of folks who’ve had their hearts ripped out by what’s taken place in the last few weeks.  Some of us understand that what’s happened had to happen if the cause is to move forward (at least that’s what we’re telling ourselves).  But that doesn’t mean we have to like it.  Most of us sacrificed our time and money because we believed in the integrity, righteousness, and power of this movement.  Some of us sacrificed more than that.  We, the men and women of the greatest political movement of our lifetimes, deserve answers.  We demand answers.  We need to know exactly what’s happened, and why it’s happened, so we can be reassured that the cause is in good hands and will move forward.  If mistakes were made, we need to know what they were, and correct them, in order to regroup and continue.  This cause, my cause, your cause, Ron Paul’s cause, humanity’s greatest cause – liberty – must move forward, and this movement is its best chance to do so.  It may be its only chance.  Dr. Woods, you’re as much a hero to the people of this movement as Ron Paul.  You are a true leader.  And, for now, you appear to be the last man standing.  I can only hope you took the video down because you received some reassurance.  If that’s the case, I hope you’ll share it with us when and if you can.

We’re counting on you Doc.  Liberty is counting on you.  Thank you for your courage.

That’s good to hear, even though I never doubted Ron Paul for a second.

On the downside, my great comment quoting the final line from the Frank Capra movie, “Meet John Doe” is now lost. :(

Thank you.  Never doubted you sir.  And I will never doubt the man who has given so much of himself, for so long, only to ask and receive so little in  return.  All that matters now is ensuring he gets a return on the investment.  We owe him that much.

Understand I’ll never see the video again.  Not ashamed to say it choked me up a bit after viewing this morning.

 Why don’t you share with us your information? Why don’t you offer any further analysis? This isn’t looking good to me at all.

 Wait…Maybe Mitt is going to select Rand as his VP? Is that the new information you are talking about?

In case anyone hasn’t heard or seen this yet, Rand Paul went on the Peter Schiff show to explain himself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygwZHpTUmaI&feature=player_embedded

It’s basically what you could expect.  Rand has been pushing for many pro-freedom initiatives in the Senate, such as auditing the Fed; having that growing influence, as imperfect as it is, is a valuable asset for promoting liberty; and if he doesn’t endorse endorse Mitt Romney, he’ll essentially be throwing it away.  Make of that what you will.  It might not be the decision you think you’d make, but none of us are in the Senate.  Personally, I’m just grateful that I’m not in a position where I have to make those kinds of tough calls.

In any event, while the politicians make deals, we need to continue converting people to the ideals of liberty.  It’s like Ron Paul has said, no matter who is in office, the government will eventually reflect the beliefs of the people.

Agree on your Rothbard sentiments.  With the sole exception of his view on abortion, everything he’s ever written (that I have read so far) I’m in complete agreement with – even if it’s a topic I’ve never contemplated before! It’s like “YES” – immediately!  And he’s given me enough for me to read for, oh, a couple of decades!

This blog is exceptional, but even when I read more popular libertarian blogs, I encounter many people who are basically in a cult of personality or a tribe unified by a simple creed that happens to be nominally “libertarian”. These people would be as happy in another tribe unified by another personality or creed. The creed seems particularly irrelevant.

In his book Religion without Revelation, Julian Huxley divides humanity into two broad categories, “prophets” and “priests”. These categories are psychological rather than theological. A “prophet” is not someone with a direct channel to God. He’s an independent, creative thinker, someone like Tom Woods. A “priest” by contrast is a dependent thinker, someone who mostly follows the thinking of others. Most people are more priestly than prophetic.

So in our two party state, the parties hardly need coherent creeds, and they hardly have coherent creeds. In fact, consistent principles are a vice in this system. A principled person is an uncompromising fanatic who can’t get along with others.

Rand Paul doesn’t have a track record long enough to persuade me that he’s committed more to libertarian principles than to his father’s coat tails. Someday, I hope he’ll have this record

At this point, Rand’s endorsement of Romney interests me only because it signals the end of his father’s campaign. I can’t imagine Rand endorsing Romney without a clear signal from Ron that Ron’s campaign is over. I never much expected Ron to win the Republican nomination, but I hoped that he would find his way onto the ticket regardless of the nomination. I can’t imagine this outcome now.

We still have Gary Johnson this year, and he’s at least as attractive as Rand Paul.

Logical and well put. To help the ego of those who may be upset by this… Remember we all stand ok the shoulders of giants. Which giants shoulders we choose to stand on is the measure of our understanding and value added. Choose wisely. If you’re here you’re already off to a great start

Tom has been one of the strongest supporters of the liberty movement for many, many years, and his credentials, words, and actions have spoken for themselves.  He has more “insider” access than nearly all of us, and obviously has information that he can’t reveal at this time.  I hope people let it drop for now, and I have confidence that we’ll find out in due time what that information is.

 I have no doubt that you now have sufficient reason for retracting your appeal on behalf of those who have scrimped their family budgets, socially isolated themselves, and devoted full energy to this effort.  But they haven’t heard them, and, as is plain to anyone looking over the comments on the pages of the “Daily Paul,” there is great disaffection among them, and many are drifting away in bitter cynicism and despair. It goes without saying that recent, tenuous supporters brought away from the Democrats have decisively regretted their foolish conversions and gone back to Obama.  If Ron has a delicate negotiations in progress and dares not say what they are, he had better make a video, and say “There are good reasons why I conceded the nomination prematurely to Romney in paragraph 7 of an email, and why I am surrounded by people who seem to do nothing but make repeated concessions of the nomination, and this is why I am not addressing suspicions of staff venality and duplicity, and under such and such theory of human psychology I am expecting people to go on struggling for the nomination after it has been conceded” then he might slow the bleeding where it is now, but this had better have been done a week ago.  From having followed RP message boards and talking with my RP friends, I predict a disappointing percentage of the existing RP delegates will appear in Tampa, and strongly suspect that the 5-year struggle has now ended with a most ignoble whimper. At this point, I will be surprised if Ron addresses his dwindling number of supporters at all, ever. I say this not to persuade you that this is what will happen, but to persuade you that it is how it looks to a reasonable person with any experience in politics.

willie’s  still  old  school,  hand shake  or a man’s  word !

That means nothing. If he says: I have the new information that justifies the Rand’s endorsement, he should reveal what this new information if. If he would not, then I am sorry – I don’t believe him. And you should not, either. Ask for proofs, don’t believe to anybody, including Tom. Tom had an ample opportunity to check with his insider sources, if he had them, before publishing the video. Why did not he do that?

Just an after thought; have you noticed that on Lew Rockwell’s website there has not been a single commentary about Rand’s endorsement in the last seven days. Not a single word! Strange business, isn’t it?

Keep up the Romney bashing.  It is too late for new bashing now, but perhaps the message will get thru to Paul that his buddy is not liked one bit by most of his supporters – publicly that is. 

My concern is that if you have succeeded in getting Ron to back off on what was to be his formal endorsement of Romney, that he would do a watered down version of it ever.  Meaning, there are ways to endorse somene or help someone by not doing a formal endorsement, but help Romney out in more meaningful ways, which effectively still delivers his supporters to establishment in a more round about way. 

So, even if has the slighest bit of praise of Romney in anyway, like speaking of his corrupt business experience as good, then the liberty movement is still very tainted and very difficult to revive. 

Those around Paul must be smart and can find ways around a formal endorsement, such that everyone other than rp supporters can still say Paul conceded.

While you may feel overly entitled, you’re not going to get any definitive answers to your questions at this time. Something tells me you wouldn’t accept any answer that didn’t fit into your preconceived notions anyways, and you would still continue to see a conspiracy within a conspiracy. So just drop it and let it play out until the end, whatever that may be.

 Yes, because Dr. Woods works for the government and is trying to take our civil liberties away.

For those who would still like to see Tom’s video, here it is
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EaH4xGrEx4M

The reason I was insisting on this information was not to convince mr Woods to tell us (I dod not expect that), but to expose and challenge him, and to show to you, others, how hollow, BS and nonsensical his explanation for taking down the video was. I know and I knew that he had no new “information” whatsoever. He just made that up.

If you don’t believe me, read what the establishment thinks.
“long-term outlook is why Paul’s campaign manager took the unusual step
last week of condemning “isolated instances of grassroots activists
working toward an ostensible ‘hostile takeover’ of the GOP” in Idaho.”Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76297.html#ixzz1xvJma5jg

Ron Paul’s campaign manager condemned the attempt by the Ron Paul people to take over the republican GOP! Yes, you are not hallucinating: the Ron Paul campaign manager condemned the attempt by the Ron Paul people to takeover the Idaho GOP!!! They are selling their own people out openly and shamelessly for months. And you, poor souls, believe that Woods has some magic “new information” which would redeem your hero. Sorry, to disappoint you, but everything is just as it looks. And Woods does not have any new  information”.

I don’t know if you know this, but in a Q&A a few days ago (after this video was taken down), Dr. Woods said there was zero chance Dr. Paul would endorse Romney.

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/06/hot-woods-pulls-video-zero-chance-ron.html

As for your other concerns regarding Jesse Benton and Rand Paul and the establishment, etc., I think they are legitimate concerns but there’s no need to be upset at Dr. Woods for taking down his video discouraging a Ron Paul endorsement of Romney.

Why are you changing the topic? This discussion had to do with the video Dr. Woods took down regarding a possible Ron Paul endorsement of Romney. in speculating