4 votes

EPJ: Why So Hard on Rand?

"Because of this, and his high profile, and the likelihood that he will seek the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, it is important that it is made clear that Rand is not a libertarian. Otherwise many who are just learning about libertarianism may get the mistaken belief that the positions Rand holds are libertarian positions. When people search for the name, "Rand Paul" or search for "Rand Paul libertarian," I want them to have the chance to come across posts, as opposed to the ones above, that make clear when Rand is holding non-libertarian positions. No one would mistake positions of Senator Barbara Boxer as being regularly libertarian. That would be different for many with Rand."


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

i agree with Samuel Washington's comment listed beow

as well,

i think 'libertarianism' should be equated with common sense 'statuettes'or 'principles' any political party outside of a fascist or authoritarian group would naturally include in their platform.

Why settle for just one party? Why not influence all of them. How?
Possibly by not forming any specific block but instead establish principles associated with 'libertarianism' within all political blocks.

Got Reach?

: )


"I do see Iran as a threat to the stability of the Middle East... Recently, President Obama took nuclear weapons off the table in certain circumstances, and I think that's a mistake. I think it's reckless to take them out of the equation." –Rand Paul, 19 May 2010

“Clearly, language threatening to wipe a nation or a group of people off the map is to be condemned by all civilized people. And I do condemn any such language. But why does threatening Iran with a pre-emptive nuclear strike, as many here have done, not also deserve the same kind of condemnation? Does anyone believe that dropping nuclear weapons on Iran will not wipe a people off the map? When it is said that nothing, including a nuclear strike, is off the table on Iran, are those who say it not also threatening genocide?” –Ron Paul, 22 May 2007

To Neotheone: I hear you!

To Neotheone: I hear you!

It's important

It's important to realize that, while Rand is clearly the best Senator, and it's not even close, he is not infallible and often takes non-libertarian positions.

It's equally important to point this out and make clear what the true libertarian position should be on these issues. For those of us who wish to advance the ideas of liberty it is very important to clearly define what that means.

If people confuse Rand's non-libertarian positions with liberty and libertarianism, it can do harm to the advancement of true libertarian principles .

Ron Paul took a true libertarian position on nearly everything. This is why he was so effective at communicating the ideas - consistency.

It is not "hating" or "bashing" to point thus out. In fact it is the duty of libertarians to thoroughly vet and critique all leaders / politicians , ESPECIALLY those seen as "libertarian".

Wenzel is dead on.

*Advancing the Ideas of Liberty Daily*

Cyril's picture

BUMP. This makes for a large amount of sense

BUMP. This makes for a large amount of sense; a very helpful refresher, IMO. Even I can admit I was starting to lose sight of this.

Anyone who really cares about politics (I don't, or very very rarely - because I dislike the form of the political argument, essentially partisan soon or late), we ought to pay much more attention at what are the actual stakes:

is it finding consistency in Rand's statements as-is, given in the context of his political line, or is it for us to try defend truly libertarian views and hope to convert him (not sure how...)?

Even if we accept the idea he isn't "as libertarian as" his father, while we happen to prefer this option, it is then also our intellectual duty to point him out to our own (consistency) and demonstrate how more valuable it is than his (political line).

Because I believe ours is (better), on this end.

Anyway, that's the very least we ought to do, I suppose.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

I would give this 1000 votes up if I could.

I agree whole-heartedly.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

SteveMT's picture

Not mentioned, but the same limited Freedom issue: drones

Does obtaining a warrant make the use of surveillance drones acceptable? Could they be used to acceptably assassinate someone in the U.S. if the president first obtained a warrant? Drones are unconstitutional, with or without a warrant.

Sen. Paul Proposes Bill Requiring Warrants for Drone Use
6/13/2012 @ 12:27PM

Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has introduced a bill requiring the government to obtain a warrant prior to using an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV or drone). The bill, S.3287, also known as The Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act is a good start for the public debate about how to regulate drones.

The evidence just keeps stacking up...


Working with what we have become

You want a clean slate as in a NWO or civil war?

Rand Paul on Limited Freedom:

I liked this paragraph from that article:

"I also wonder if Rand completely appreciates the nuances of liberty. His call for a program where "A passenger who has been verified by the Transportation Security Administration as a low-risk or frequent traveler has the right to be screened through a process that is more expeditious and less intrusive than the standard screening process," is quite shocking. The more and more government knows about each and every one of us, the more dangerous that government becomes to all of us. TSA "verified" travelers are the last thing that anyone who understands liberty would want. The less government knows about us the better. This is especially true as the government becomes more totalitarian. Why can't Rand just call for security to be handled by each and every airline in any manner they see fit?"

Rand Paul compromises on Freedom for the ILLUSION of added Security.....we call those people NEO-CONS.



Is Cannabis Hemp a Libertarian position?

I think it is, and Rand is leading that good fight.

Matter of fact, my interests in the LP were based on cannabis, and even when I moved on, (adopted more issues) I still worked with Libertarians whose major issue was cannabis (Steve Kubby).

Cannabis has been the major issue of the Libertarian Party since it's creation, so since Rand is leading the fight for cannabis hemp, I'd say he is much like his father, who was not only a registered Republican, but an elected Republican.

I think it's time the LP grew up and took over the GOP rather than find a willing Republican to wear a LP pin and give speaches on cannabis. GJ's campaign was more about cannabis than anything else.

get traction

"not only a registered Republican, but an elected Republican.
I think it's time the LP grew up"

It is time we look at our own actions. How many of us are willing to go to monthly county GOP meetings and get involved? Rand has been getting involved in a huge way, and the arm chair quarterback libertarians pick at him while they sit on their sofas. Each of us should get involved locally and make the change we want to see.



I agree

I was an LP member for over a decade and got tired of the lack of successes in restoring liberty. Thx to Ron, we're now firmly entrenched in the growing liberty wing of the GOP and have been getting certain state and local parties back under our tutelage as well as electing many good libertarian-conservatives over the last few election cycles. We now have a great chance in a few weeks to potentially overturn the establishment's stranglehold over the MIGOP at our upcoming state convention. My district in Wayne co is now very friendly to Paul folk and from what I can tell by our recent newly added delegates that we'll get the chair as well as a few district committee members as well as send a few to the state central committee. Things are looking up


agree with both comments above and bumped you both.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016