(NaturalNews) In the aftermath of the shock and the overwhelming feeling of betrayal following Sen. Rand Paul's endorsement of Mitt Romney for president, most people are trying to understand WHY it happened. But to my knowledge no one has yet analyzed the linguistics, the intonation and the micro-expressions that Rand Paul delivered as part of his announcement, because they may provide even more information than his words.

Here, I offer a brief linguistic and micro-expressions analysis of Rand Paul's delivery of his announcement. What you'll see here is that even Rand Paul is disgusted with his own endorsement.

Watch his announcement here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c5odNzKVbk

Linguistics and intonation
If you watch Rand Paul deliver his announcement, pay particular attention to the part where he says:

But you know, now that the nominating process is over, tonight I'm uh happy to announce that I'm gonna be supporting Governor Romney.

During this entire sentence, his voice and intonation stay relatively high, in the "optimistic" range, including as he's talking about his father. But the minute he utters the words "Governor Romney," two things happen:

• The pitch of his voice drops sharply.
• The strength of his voice tapers off, almost as if the last part of "Romney" has no power behind it.

The overall feeling associated with this delivery is one of disgust. It's almost as if Rand Paul is describing someone he is disappointed with or despises.

He most certainly did not do the things you would expect to hear if he were excited about Romney:

• Raising the pitch of his voice.
• Increasing the strength of his voice. "Government ROMNEY!"
• Smiling.

That these telltale signs are completely absent, and that he instead dropped both the pitch and power of his voice, tells you that Rand Paul does not himself believe what he is saying!

He sounds disappointed in himself and very much uninspired about Romney. It is delivered as a surrender to disgust. This is hardly the tone we would expect to hear from someone who is excited about the endorsement.

Again, watch Rand Paul's announcement to follow what I'm explaining here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c5odNzKVbk

Talking about his father vs. talking about Romney
There is also a subtle but very real difference between the way Sen. Rand Paul talks about his father versus talking about Romney. Here are the overriding emotions as he speaks:

Happy, confident, expressive:

My first choice has always been my father, I campaigned for him when I was eleven years old, he's still my first pick...

Reserved, cautious, neutral:

..but you know now that the nominating process is over, tonight I'm happy to announce that I'm going to be supporting...

Depressed, disgusted:

Governor Romney.

Micro-expressions analysis
Immediately after Rand Paul utters "Governor Romney," his face freezes. His usual pattern of rapid blinking and eyebrow hikes grinds to a virtual halt. He goes "stone cold" for a few seconds.

He only smiles again when Sean Hannity mentions his father:

If you didn't support your father, by the way, I would really question...

Rand Paul SMILES (i.e. he likes his father)

The logic
From there, Sean Hannity asks Rand Paul why he decided to support Mitt Romney. The answers that Rand Paul gives make no sense.

He starts out by citing a completely irrelevant, distracting "similarity" which is that both himself and Romney have fathers who once ran for President. Huh?

 

This is entirely irrelevant to his politics, philosophies and beliefs. Saying you would endorse someone for President because their dad did something that your dad also did strikes of a fabricated, poorly-thought-out series of excuses scripted as talking points.

Then he goes on to say that Governor Romney comes from "a big family" which is just like his own big family. Huh?

 

Does Rand Paul really think the American people give a damn how big his family is? What they want to know is how these bureaucrats are going to restore liberty and freedom for ALL families. The "big family" comparison is yet another scripted talking point.

He then goes on to say something that finally makes sense, that Romney and he share "family values." That's a reasonable point of discussion.

 

After that, he goes into total spin mode, describing how he met and talked with Romney, and how Romney was "very supportive" of the idea of auditing the Fed, but that claim doesn't mean anything, especially when Romney is a banker globalist.