Posted by Brad @ 6:12 pm on June 13th 2012

Two Paul Endorsements

The first, Rand Paul endorses Mitt Romney. This gets some obvious blowback in Paulian circles, which he addresses, but I don’t begrudge him it in the least. If one believes a liberty agenda has to be channeled through the two-party system in some way, may as well be the Republican party, and if so, you have to, well, politic. And frankly I think it’s a more natural home – libertarianism (and Ron Paul) has been treated badly in both parties, of course, but its core insights are, I feel, more naturally at home in conservatism than liberalism – and these days, it seems conservatives are more willing to accept diversions from orthodoxy where Paul makes them (non-interventionism, social liberalism), than liberals (all economic thinking, pro-life, etc.). As Brian Doherty says offhand:

As I wrote here at Reason last month, by most rights Paul should be sweeping the MSNBC vote, including Rachel Maddow, if the progressive vision of rights, liberty, respect for civil liberies, not killing people because the president says so or ruining people’s lives because of their personal choices, ending war and government propping up of plutocrats, actually means anything to them.

Mostly, I find, the “make government give people stuff” is the only part they care about, so sorry Ron Paul (and American lives and liberties).

He says that, incidentally, in reference to the second Paul endorsement, that of Ron Paul, from Joe Scarborough, who pens a piece for Politico called simply “Why I voted for Ron Paul”.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.