“There are definitely things in between good and evil”

Source: Steve Watson

In an interview that will likely not convince many within the liberty movement, Rand Paul has attempted to explain his official endorsement of Mitt Romney last week by suggesting that he can only affect change by working from within the system.

Key points and quotes to come out of the interview, conducted by Peter Schiff, are as follows:

While he anticipated the backlash, Rand believes that supporting the party will enable him to get more done, and that many critics have been too quick to forget the good things he has managed to do so far from within the Senate.

“Supporting the nominee has been part of my ability to try to have influence… If Republicans see that you are not going to support the nominee, the doors close.”

The Senator believes that endorsing Romney will help earn his trust and make him more likely to listen to his policies. He agreed that it is better to have Romney as a friend than as an enemy.

“People say that ‘you’re selling your soul.’ No, I’m supporting the party that I belong to, in order to try to work within the party to get things I believe in.”

While he admitted that the announcement was co-ordinated with his father, Rand denied that he was under any pressure to get Ron Paul to endorse Romney, adding that the Congressman will make that decision on his own.

“We’ve had many discussions about this, including discussions right before they sent out their email, and their email acknowledged that they didn’t have the delegates for the nomination after California.”

Rand cited his father’s work with those in the so “black caucus.” The Senator said that Paul had worked with John Conyers and Bobby Scott on civil liberties matters, but noted that they do not agree on economic matters.

“An endorsement doesn’t change any of your philosophy…. There are areas of agreement and if we ignore those completely, I think people want to simplify things to characterize everybody as either being good or evil, and there are definitely things in between good and evil.”

Rand denied that the endorsement was part of a move to set himself up for a Senate leadership role, a VP role or a future presidential run.

“There are some people who still think that 1000 delegates are going to change their mind and not vote for Romney at the Convention, and I just don’t think that’s realistic, and those people are not going to be happy with me no matter what.”

“What I would like people to understand is that now that the nominating process is over, it doesn’t mean that we’re not going to show up as delegates. It doesn’t mean we’re not going to fight for things, but we aren’t going to win the nomination. That just is a fact,” he added.

“We can still go to Tampa and fight for the platform, we can fight for audit the Fed, we can fight to get rid of the department of education, we can fight for internet freedom, we can fight for ending the war in Afghanistan. All of those battles will happen, and we will have a bigger presence in Tampa than any liberty contingent has ever had. I just believe in being realistic about which fight we choose, and I’m for moving on to a fight that we can actually impact,” the Senator noted.

He also argued that not endorsing Romney would mean giving up control of States that Paul supporters now essentially control.

“We’ve won the chairmanship of several parties now. Iowa, Nevada and I think Maine.” Paul said. “We have a large control of the actual party. Many of the rules of the party are that you can’t be chairman and not endorse the nominee of the party. So do we want to give up those chairmanships?”

“If we give up those chairmanships and don’t stay part of the party then everything my dad has done, all of the thankless hours and days that he has traveled for 2007, 2008, 2011 and 2012, all of those hours will be for naught,” he added.

“We are actually in a position where we have significant power within the party, and the Romney campaign and everybody else realizes that we are going to be a force to be reckoned with… We have to direct that energy into something we can actually win, as opposed to directing it to something that really is over,” the Senator urged.

“When I ran for the Senate I made a promise that I would support the nominee. This was somewhat necessary because my father had not supported the nominee in 2008, and one of the campaign tactics they were using against me was ‘your dad didn’t support the nominee, and if you won’t we don’t want you in our party,’” he also stated.

Responding to critics, Rand stated: