Jillian Rayfield at Talking Points Memo:
The state chairman of the Libertarians of Kentucky has disavowed statements by the party’s vice chair, that suggest the group is considering running a real Libertarian candidate against Kentucky Republican Senate nominee Rand Paul.
Chairman Ken Moellman told TPM that those statements were “not an official communication or an official stance.” However, Moellman did insist that Paul’s views are not in line with those of Libertarians’.
The Associated Press reported today that Party Vice Chairman Joshua Koch “said the idea of fielding a candidate has been an ongoing discussion among Libertarian leaders in Kentucky and hasn’t been an issue of contention internally.”
“The reason why we would even consider running somebody in this race,” Koch said,
“is because we’re not going to let Rand determine what a Libertarian stands for. I’m here to say Rand does not have the Libertarian ideology.”
In a phone interview, Moellman said Koch’s statements were “not authorized or condoned by the entire executive committee.”
“We’ve had no one forward to be a candidate,” Moellman said.
The party’s website also points out some other problems with this supposed plan:
We’d need (a) someone to volunteer to run; (b) they’d have to be approved by our executive committee; (c) they’d have to collect over 5000 signatures in less than 3 months; (d) and they’d have to pay the $500 filing fee.
The aim of recent comments to the media, Moellman said, was to “point out that despite what the media and others have said, Rand Paul is not a libertarian.”
A statement on the website clarifies this, citing “a repeal of the PATRIOT Act, closure of Guantanamo Bay, and an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan” as Libertarian stances that are different from Paul’s. It continues:
Rand Paul is not a libertarian. There are clear differences between the Libertarian Party, including the philosophy upon which is it based, and the philosophy and campaign rhetoric of Rand Paul. While the Libertarian Party shares some stances traditionally associated with the Republican Party, the LP also shares common ground on positions traditionally associated with the Democratic Party, and not always for the same reasons. We are an alternative to the two party system, not constrained by the model that defines both major parties.
Moellman also emphasized that “the Libertarian Party of Kentucky in no way endorses either the campaign of Rand Paul or Jack Conway.”
“We’re kind of dealing with a mess here,” he added. This is “not the attention we’re used to receiving.”
Damn.
Do, pray tell, tell us what a Libertarian is? The more and more definitions that are defined by the Mary Ruwarts and the Zack Basses and the Chuck Geshliders, the better off the liberty Republicans and the YAL Republicans and the C4L Republicans and the Wayne Allyn Roots of the LP can breathe easier…
And therefore look more credible.
Joey,
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2010/05/rand_paul_faces_possible_challenge_staff_shake-up.php
Koch said Paul’s views on a variety of subjects differ from the Libertarian Party, including his promised support for any measures to ban abortion and his opposition to same-sex marriage.
“Trying to impose a national standard for that would throw the whole system out of balance, and that’s definitely not Libertarian,” Koch said.
Koch also said Paul is out of step with Libertarians in his unwillingness to call for U.S. troops to leave Iraq and Afghanistan.
“The reason why we would even consider running somebody in this race is because we’re not going to let Rand determine what a Libertarian stands for,” he said. “I’m here to say Rand does not have the Libertarian ideology.”
Koch said the idea of fielding a candidate has been an ongoing discussion among Libertarian leaders in Kentucky and hasn’t been an issue of contention internally.
Libertarians typically side with Democrats on social issues and Republicans on fiscal issues. Because of that, a Libertarian candidacy would likely draw equally from both Paul and Conway, said University of Kentucky political scientist Stephen Voss.
Pingback: KY Libertarians not happy with Rand Paul - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
This whole thing is odd. The initial LP attack on Paul was over his theoretical support of freedom of association and private property rights (in opposition to the unconstitutional federal power grab known as the CRA). Does the LP platform support the expansive definition of the so-called “commerce clause” that basically gives the Federal government unlimited power?
“Koch said Paul’s views on a variety of subjects differ from the Libertarian Party, including his promised support for any measures to ban abortion and his opposition to same-sex marriage.”
Abortion should be off the table in defining what a libertarian is.
I thought that Rand Paul’s position on gay marriage was that it should not be a federal issue.
Whatever the differences that these Libertarians have with Rand are, they are tiny when compared to their differences with most Republican candidates so I think that it would be foolish for them to run somebody against Rand.
Whether planned or not, the LPK has gotten a lot of publicity for themselves with this little two-step.
They should in fact run a couple of active candidates for Congress to highlight libertarian views on abortion, the War on Terror and legalizing hemp (industrial & recreational). And since they won’t be wasting resources in a futile Senate race, Libertarians nation-wide could in good conscience send money for the campaigns.
Is this LP Koch part of the Kochtopus? Or, no relation?
FYI –
Further clarification: http://www.lpky.org/node/245
Sorry for the mess, folks.
The LPK also has a release dated today @ http://www.lpky.org/node/243
Very well written and covers important issues.
At least they won’t support Rand.
Pingback: Libertarian Party of Kentucky: Rand Paul is not a Libertarian or a libertarian | Independent Political Report
Yupper, Libertarians generally side with Democrats on social issues, like:
Smoking Bans
Seat Belt Laws
Gun Restrictions
Opposing Sharia Law
Free Speech rights on College Campuses
Affirmative Action (Reverse Discrimination)
Trans fats bans in Restaurants
Oopsie! I forgot. It’s the Democrats who oppose freedom on all those civil liberties matters, and Republicans who generally side with the libertarian view.
Will wonders ever cease? I’m in complete agreement with Andy on this.
Yes, Rand’s position on Gay Marriage as has been outlined by his campaign on numerous occasions is that the government simply should not be involved.
Golly gee. I always thought that was the Libertarian Party position too?
As Andy says, the LPKY has tiny, tiny disagreements with Rand Paul. What a disaster to tell the Washington Post that “he’s really not a libertarian cause we disagree with him on two or three issues.”
I will leave Kentucky strategy to the Kentuckians, but will take this opportunity to remind people that I?m running against one of the LEAST libertarian U.S. Senators: John McCain. Spread the word!
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/05/libertarian-party-founder-david-nolan-running-for-us-senate-in-arizona-against-john-mccain/
Now certified online pharmacy for viagra https://groups.csail.mit.edu/cb/paircoil2/?pdf=mac-vs-pc-essay essay on television https://childrenofthecaribbean.org/plan/noam-chomsky-essay/05/ http://v-nep.org/classroom/sample-apa-report-paper/04/ an argumentative essay what to write about yourself on a dating app see url enter site how can i change my email password on my ipad apa formatting owl source site masters projects click here quel dose de viagra thesis template tu resume writing services san jose ca follow link go thesis writing services uk here http://welcomeicarea.org/cause-and-effect-essay-linking-words/ writers needed click https://creativephl.org/pills/cytotec-in-kenya/33/ problem solving using equationsВ source url enter site here objectives for research project enter site go site that deserves a reality show 🙂
Yeah, McCain is one of the “least libertarian Senators,” alright. I guess that’s why he’s got a lifetime ACU score of 82, and NTUs in the high 70s.
He ain’t perfect. But he’s 100 times better than any Democrat.
And he is a Veteran. He served his country for 10 years in the United States Navy, 6 of which were spent in a POW camp. And if you hadn’t noticed he was crippled for life, literally, as a result of that experience.
Yet David Nolan wants to severely criticize this wounded Veteran for being “insufficiently pro-freedom.”
Tell me Mr. Nolan, what sacrifices have you made for your country? For freedom?
Eric Dondero, United States Naval Veteran
(Hon.) 1981-85
USS Kittyhawk CV-63
USS Luce DDG-38
I think that David Nolan has done a lot more for the cause of freedom than John McCain has ever done. The Vietnam War had nothing to do with freedom and McCain’s record as an elected official is dreadful from a libertarian perspective.
Andy is of course correct.
The Vietnam War had everything to do with Freedom.
I guess you’re entirely okay with the fact that 1 million South Vietnamese were slaughtered by the North after our pull-out and another 2 million Cambodians were brutally murdered at the hands of the Communists as a direct result of our non-interventionist policy post-1975.
Tell me Andy, what Freedom did those 3 million who died have as a result of our foreign policy?
And yes, I do blame Gerald Ford, A REPUBLICAN, too for being partly to blame for the Fall of Saigon.
McCain is also freedom when it comes to freeing US POWs from Vietnam. According to the Amercican Conservative, he actively took up the pro-imprisonment position vis-a-vis these soldiers.
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2010/jul/01/00010/
Mr Eric D Rittberg, are you also for leaving US soldiers to rot in Communist concentration camps like your hero McCain?
However, even better than supporting Nolan, if you’re looking to annoy the hardcore anti-freedom McCain — vote for his GOP primary opponent. You can always back Nolan in November, but at least McCain would already be gone by then.
*also anti-freedom
Funny how in Dondero’s world “military service” = “pro-freedom.” Unfortunately, in the real world, there’s little correlation. Some people who were in the armed forces are pro-freedom; others are not. Likewise, people who never served in the military. And the phrase “served their country” really should be “served the U.S. government.” Chest-thumping of the type Dondero exhibits is no substitute for rational argument.