If
U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul were running as a Libertarian, I would
find at least a couple things to criticize in his message below. His
statement that "We have to keep our promises to seniors and keep our
country strong" sounds like an advance rationalization for failing to
seek large cuts in unsustainable entitlements and military spending, and
his defense of civil liberties lacks specificity.
Nevertheless
for a Republican this is terrific stuff! I like that he lays out a
number of concrete promises in plain, no-room-for-compromise language.
If Rand is elected, either he will have to keep these promises, or he
will be revealed as a politician who lacks integrity. I wish more
candidates similarly denied themselves wiggle room.
In
point of fact, and embarrassingly for the Libertarian Party, Rand
Paul's message sounds more libertarian than that of some high-profile
Libertarians I've heard. For example, he forgoes the use of the word
"socialist" in favor of the more libertarian term "statist", and attacks
"the Washington DC establishment" instead of acting like the problem
lies exclusively or mainly with Obama or the Democrats.
I'm
not necessarily supporting Rand Paul. I haven't looked to see whether
there is an LP candidate running for the seat in question whose views
are clearly more libertarian. If there is, that candidate should get our
backing. But there is much to commend here. Rand Paul has a good shot
at winning his race, and in such races the siren songs of those urging
compromise and concealment are typically heard with more urgency. If he
can resist them, we should certainly expect no less from Libertarians
running in less winnable contests under the label of a more pro-freedom
political party.
And
so if nothing else, this message offers a useful benchmark for
Libertarians seeking office -- any Libertarian candidate who sounds more
conservative or more statist than Rand Paul does here should be told to
go back to the drawing board and get it right before expecting
libertarian support. If we can't do better than this, we might as well
fold our party and join the Ron Paul Republicans.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
7 Comments in Response to If U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul were running as a Libertarian,...
Replace "2010" with "2012" in the previous post. Ernie - we really need the ability to edit posts!
No, ERIC NEW, I am correct. Wayne Root was recently elected chairman of the LNCC - the Libertarian National Congressional Committee, the federal PAC that was created by the LNC some years ago but is now an independent organization. It's very similar to the relationship between the RNC, RNSC and RNCC. Root is filling its board with his rich buddies, and I suspect they will be putting big money into Libertarian House and Senate races across the country, and into his Presidential run in 2010. (FWIW, Mark Hinkle is chairman of the LNC.)
You are incorrect, Don--WAR is not the Libertarian Party Chairman. Mark Hinkle was elected chairman at the last convention in St. Louis.
ERIC NEWstarchild writes "If we [the LP] can't do better than this, we might as well fold our party and join the Ron Paul Republicans."
Is there a time frame for making such a decision to disband the LP? Does Wayne Root being a major spokesman for the LP qualify as a triggering threshold to justify disbanding the LP? If yes, then starchild appears to be calling for disbanding the LP and joining the Ron/Rand Paul caucus of the GOP because it is a simple fact that Root's influence in the party continues to grow. Root is chairman and prime mover of the LNCC which will be a major financial benefactor for Libertarian candidates, and Root will probably be the 2012 Libertarian Presidential nominee.
I had heard they legalized medical marijuana in California.
The Kentucky Libertarian party isn't running anyone against Rand, FYI.
"I know 'en passe' and I WILL USE IT!"
Come over to the dark side, Starchild. It's warm, and we all love you.