I have often wondered just how Ron Paul gets away with calling himself a Libertarian. Many of his views conflict with the core libertarian principle that personal freedom is the highest priority. But just as important, Ron Paul’s campaign has been little more than a front for Multiple Mitt Romney, aka Rmoney.
Ron Paul’s donors should consider asking for a refund and making donations to Mitt Romney. Paul now has an extreme truth-in-advertising problem. Money donated to Paul is not promoting the cause Paul allegedly supports. It is promoting the Romney campaign. Ron Paul should stop the holier-than-thou libertarian shtick and tell the truth to his supporters about why he is doing everything he can to make Romney the nominee. I am calling out Ron Paul. His campaign looks increasingly phony.
Fact: When Rick Perry was the greatest threat to Romney, Paul launched personal attacks against Perry, which only helped Romney. Fact: When Newt Gingrich was the great threat to Romney, Paul launched personal attacks against Gingrich, which only helped Romney. Fact: Now that Rick Santorum is the great threat to Romney, Paul launches personal attacks against Santorum, which only helps Romney. Fact: Romney is the one other candidate Paul has spoken highly of, including, shamefully, endorsing Romney’s vulture layoffs, which even Perry had the integrity to criticize.
I never thought I would say this, but Perry looks like a far more authentic conservative while Paul looks increasingly like a phony libertarian. No legitimate libertarian would act like a shill for the Romney campaign. Even Ayn Rand must be turning in her grave at the serial hypocrisy of Paul’s help for Romney!… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <The Hill>
I have thought that perhaps Paul is sucking up for a VP nomination, but only a fool would support Paul for any office. Today it hit me. I think that Paul is kissing Romney’s butt in the hopes of getting a VP nomination for his son Rand.
But this is not the only way Ron Paul is an anti-libertarian. Lawrence O’Donnell had that story.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
It’s hardly libertarian to want government that is just invasive enough to shove between a woman’s legs. Ron Paul is just another GOP Hypocrite.
22 Responses to “Anti-Libertarian Ron Paul”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Wow, didn’t see that coming!
I don’t think many did, Lisa.
Let me start by saying, Rick Perry is NOT an authentic conservative. Please don’t make that mistake. He’s a Dominionist and part of the fundie movement, much like Santorum, Bachmann are, to turn this country into a theocracy with a very radical and harsh religious agenda. It wouldn’t be important if not for the fact that he’s already stated he’d probably be back running again in 2016. If it comes to that, I urge everyone to do their research on Perry. He’s got as much scary crap in his closet as the likes of Santorum and Bachmann.
Whatever’s going on with Ron Paul, yeah, my gut says it has something to do with his son also. I believe that’s the entire reason he even went on the republican ticket in the first place. Third party tickets are never successful, and he’s trying to legitimize Rand Paul’s election runs, etc. If I were a Ron Paul fan and had donated or spent my time campaigning, which millions have fervently done for him, I’d be SO pissed to find this out. It would be a betrayal of super magnitude.
Jo, that was in the embedded article, and is not my view. However, he said only that Perry was more authentic than Ron Paul. Joe Stalin was a more authentic conservative than Ron Paul.
I guess it as just another case of the pot calling the kettle black.
That’s True.
Agree with Lisa G – I didnt see this coming either! Makes a lot of sense tho-
Sadly it does.
Ron Paul has stated he may not agree with what you do with your time, but he does not believe he has the right to tell you what to do, as long as you are not hurting anyone… SO! he thinks there is immorality in the country,OK? That does not mean that he is going to turn around and make birth control illegal, or condemn those that have sex, that is just ignorant. Taking a sound bite out of context, is all that is, typical O’Donnell. Also, as for supporting Mitt, he has had quite a bit to say about Mitt’s record that is not so flattering. He is taking out the others so that he has fewer in his way. Hmmm he went after Perry and he dropped out, it is just a matter of time for the others. If it goes down to just two sooner then later, the votes will not be wildly divided, delegates will be gained faster and this will be over sooner, and not necessarily in Mitt’s favor.
Actually I don’t think you get it Lawrence O’Donnell. Ron Paul is not for government control of sex and abortion. His personal beliefs are what is protected by the Constitution. He recognizes the inability of our government to control the immorality of our society, and the fact that the Constitution does not give power to the federal government to mandate health care. And in case you forgot, Ron Paul is running on the Republican ticket. Ron Paul is not marginalized by any particular party – that is opne of the reasons why he has so many people willing to join the Revolution. I see right through this crap.
And Ron Paul has already come out saying he is not running with Romney on the same ticket. Your point is invalid and a fabrication.
The entire point that is being missed here is that Paul believes the fetus is a person which has all the rights that libertarians promote. Do I agree? No. He may have equated sex with immorality but the difference is that he would not legislate that like the other candidates would. I like Lawrence but he is missing the point. Paul’s personal views are one thing but he wouldn’t try to force them on you. He was asked a question and answered what he believes. Under the libertarian principle he is allowed to think however he wants. I am a Paul supporter but disagree with him on Abortion and that’s OK.
Just because Ron Paul is against abortion and birth control…remember is he an ob-gyn after all… he is willing to let you decide on your own what to do, He wants you to have the choice. Thats why he supports states rights in order for people in one state to say yes to it but if the people of another state don’t want it they have that choice.
If you stopped long enough to think about your “Facts”, you’d realize the strategy here. The GOP establishment has already determined that their man is Romney, although obviously he is not the choice of the people…….ie, if Romney loses Michigan, they might call in Jeb. Does it matter to them that Romney could lose to Gingrich or Santorum? Why would you call in another candidate to replace Romney when you have three others that could possibly beat him? Because the threat to Romney is not Newt or Santorum and they know it. It’s all by design. Newt and Santorum are still in the race for one reason and one reason only, to take votes away from Paul. Paul knows this too and so the strategy here is to diminish the amount of votes so that they don’t take the delegates with them and keep pounding away at them until they have to pull out. Paul has pointed out with all of his attacks on each of the flavors of the week that they are not the ‘anybody but Romney’ candidate because they are in fact, no different than Romney. That’s by design also, to establish the fact that all of them are Romney like candidates and when he’s done his job on Newt and Santorum and they fall by the wayside like Cain and Perry and Bachmann have done, surprise of all surprises, the anti Romney candidate will be revealed to those who aren’t paying attention now as who………yes that’s right, the one person who has always been the only anti Romney candidate…… Ron Paul. And that my friends is when it will be time to start the attacks against Romney. Brilliant strategy. Guess that’s why so many people just don’t get it.
We’ve talked before about Paul’s age — 78 I believe — and whether he could physically maintain the schedule and duties of the president. I believe the physical demands would be too much, but ultimately that is between he and his doctor. So assuming that age is a factor, what other reason could there be for him to run for the Republican presidential nomination, especially when he is seen as an outsider, or at least a maverick?
Perhaps he is a “divide and conquer” tactic himself and not a serious candidate. Is he being used by persons unknown to us to split the vote further until others drop out?
If his purpose is to raise the Paul name, specifically to promote his son’s interests perhaps to VP, why would anyone accept Rand Paul as VP when he has only one year in any legislative capacity?
One thing is clear to me, he is a racist and a bigot and not someone to be taken seriously on his own merits.
Well said, Lynn.
Now, to all the Ron Paul followers. You have learned your talking points and presented them well. However, you have done nothing to contraindicate the factual data supplied above, and on O’Donnell, the best you could do is to attack the messenger. You raise the point that Paul is against abortion and birth control. However, an authentic libertarian position is that such matters should be decided by the individual. However on these issues Paul wants to be nanny government, to borrow his term, and decide for all.
Finally, to the two people, whose comments were not included here. In the upper left hand corner we have a link to our blog rules which states that we treat people who comment and post here with courtesy and respect. John D, you commented and commented again saying that I suppressed your comment, because I can’t handle dissent. If that were true, none of your fellow Paul supporters’ comments would have been approved, especially since all were far more skillfully presented than yours. John you called me a traitor. That is neither courteous or respectful. Tim, your comment was not approved, because you called me a stooge. Gentlemen, if you cannot be civil, be elsewhere.
Yes he as an individual is against abortion and birth control, that is his personal feelings on the matter, this does not mean however he would force this on anyone. He wants to take it out of the federal governments hands, which is the first step in stopping it from being a political focal point. You would then need to go from a state to local level to see that it becomes an individual issue not policed by the government… He has stated a number of times he may not agree with your decision, but he does not have the right to tell you what to do, as long as you are not hurting anyone else.
Bull! He wants to take it out of the federal government’s hands to give state governments the opportunity to force it on their residents. He acts as though states’ rights superseded individual rights. They do not.
In response to your comment, I don’t see anywhere that you prove that Ron Paul wishes to be “nanny government, to borrow his term and decide for all.” He has stated on multiple occasions that his personal belief is that life begins at conception. I am pro-choice and will still vote for him because he has also stated multiple times that he will not use the power of the federal government to make a decision either way on this issue. In fact, his whole position is opposite of what you have accused him of asserting. There is also no factual data supporting the claims of Lynn Squance either. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate running for office that does not see people as groups, but rather as individuals, each with their own opinion and voice to be heard. Even Obama is playing the race card, as evidenced with his current “African Americans for Obama” campaign.
“Ron Paul is just another GOP Hypocrite.”
Ron Paul is a Fake…
If you don’t see it, you won’t, no matter how much evidence is presented.