by Micah J. Fleck
In the wake of the recent news that Dr. Ron Paul does not endorse Gary Johnson, and even went so far as to say that Johnson is not a “true” libertarian, and that he preferred Jill Stein due to her foreign policy, we thought it would be a good occasion to revisit all of the non-“true” libertarians Dr. Paul has contradictorily endorsed in past years.
We await your hate mail.
5. Pat Buchanan
Buchanan, a Republican by any standard, notoriously paleoconservative on social issues (including anti-gay, pro-drug war, and anti-civil rights), and who at the very least has been accused of antisemitism, was endorsed by Ron Paul in Dr. Paul’s 1992 newsletters.
Now, of course, you could say that Dr. Paul probably didn’t write that endorsement because people ghostwrote his newsletter, but remember… Dr. Paul still chooses to protect said writers’ reputations by staying silent on who exactly they are. So as far as we should be concerned, until he says different. Dr. Paul stands by the news promulgated in his publication. Buchanan is certainly no libertarian, and Johnson is certainly far more libertarian than he is. Wonder what changed, Dr. Paul?
4. Kelli Ward
Kelli Ward was endorsed by Dr. Paul to replace John McCain in the senate just this year, even though her record is spotty at best so far, and what solid evidence of her positions we do have through her voting record suggests anti-LGBT, pro-big government funding views. Not exactly libertarian, either.
But no fear, ladies and gents – Ward is “better” than McCain, at least, right? Even though his voting record shows him being far more tolerant toward gay rights, at the very least, allowing the states to deal with marriage rights before the SCOTUS ruling, and even saying that an outright ban of gay marriage was “unRepublican.” He also voted NO on many issues regarding government stimulus. If we are going by even the most right-leaning of libertarian positions on the platform (social tolerance rather that outright social liberalism), McCain still seems to be, on paper, a far more tolerant representative of the people than Ward.
Interesting.
3. Chuck Baldwin
Got to hand it to Dr. Paul, here – in his endorsement of Chuck Baldwin for President in 2008, he did make a point of how differing views can come together for a common good – stopping the rigged process and making all American of all political affiliations more free. However, the moment one realizes that this sentiment completely contradicts and flies in the face of the sentiment Dr. Paul seems to hold now based on his comments about Johnson, the Baldwin endorsement is still worth pointing out as yet another example of Dr. Paul seemingly speaking from both sides of his mouth.
2. Ken Cuccinelli
Three years ago, Ken Cuccinelli ran for governor of Virginia against a Libertarian Party candidate, Robert Sarvis. Sarvis was a truly pro-liberty candidate, who championed rights for women and gays, while Cuccinelli was stridently anti-LGBT and anti-choice. So, what did Dr. Paul do? Why, released a statement endorsing Cuccinnelli and completely ignoring the very existence of Sarvis. In the endorsement, Dr. Paul called Cuccinelli “the most pro-liberty legislator” Virginia had ever had.
Well, yeah, maybe… Until Robert Sarvis, who could have taken that seat. Thanks for the blackout, Ron.
1. Ted Cruz
This is not just evidence of an endorsement, but also of an inexplicable flip-flop. When Ted Cruz first ran for U.S. Senate, Ron Paul was on stage with him giving him his full support and endorsement. And Paul’s followers ate it up with a spoon. It wasn’t until Cruz and Paul’s son, Rand, went head-to-head in the 2016 presidential race’s Republican Party primary that Dr. Paul suddenly changed his tune about Ted.
To be fair, Dr. Paul did “evolve” on his positions on Cruz, and regardless of what actually was behind the change, it was a good one that does seem more ideologically consistent than some of his other opinions of his fellow politicians listed here. And I want to make it very clear that I truly do adore the man (Ron, not Ted) – because of him, I got turned onto the liberty movement and libertarianism as a whole. And I will never be able to thank him enough to taking a principled, public stand agains the Washington D.C. machine. It was inspiring, and the country is better off today for having Dr. Paul’s service. But when I see inconsistencies or blind adherence to ideology, I’m going to point it out regardless of who is the perpetrator. And it seems to me, barring some really convincing contrary information, that Dr. Paul art the moment seems to be committing both when taking his endorsement record into account.
Watch Dr. Paul endorse Cruz below:
