Ron Paul Institute Slams the Libertarian Ticket

Written by Reid Finchem

Sunday afternoon, The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity ran a piece harshly criticizing the Libertarian Party presidential ticket, based on statements made by writer Adam Dick, a senior fellow at the institute and a former congressional aide to Paul.

Untitled

The Ron Paul Institute writes that Bill Weld’s nomination to the vice presidency is particularly concerning, claiming “[Weld] is not a Libertarian.”

Weld’s past support for the reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act and for the Iraq war of 2003 are both cited as extremely problematic positions for a true philosophical Libertarian; while Weld’s current support for Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court and calls for legislation to limit firearm sales to suspects with no due process show “extreme disrespect for the liberty at the core of the libertarian message.”

Worse yet, Johnson has stated his intention to differ these issues to Weld in a bizarre “co-president” arrangement.

Dick and the Ron Paul Institute predict a poor performance by the Libertarian Party in the 2016 election because of Johnson’s “wishy-washy” leadership, which will fail to attract and inspire supporters who will actually mobilize for the campaign. Even a strong performance by the two would be a major loss for the root principles of Libertarianism, according to Dick, as “they’ve drug [Libertarianism] through the mud, and made it difficult for people to understand what [Libertarianism] even means.”

  • I realize this adds no value to the content, but please un-justify your articles.

  • Antodav

    Shots fired, I guess? Though I’m still much more interested in what Ron Paul himself thinks than what some fellows at his institute think.

    Also, I still have yet to find any legitimate reason why everyone hates Merrick Garland.

    • Heather James

      He’s anti-2A, for starters

  • TRAVELER25

    Constitutional Party, baby, woohoo!

  • Brian Albert

    The word “differ” should be “defer” in the second to last paragraph. Probably an autocorrect thing

  • John P. Slevin

    What does the Ron Paul Institute figure a “poor performance” would be? Would it be actually worse than the piss poor Ron Paul Libertarian presidential candidacy of 1988? No, it won’t be. It’s obvious that Johnson/Weld are miles and miles past that joke of a candidacy already.

    • Chris Adams

      Demographics have changed since then. A younger RP candidate would be on top in today’s political market.

      • John P. Slevin

        Rand surely isn’t on top.

  • gjdagis

    This year’s ticket is a sick joke! How these two have the NERVE to run on a ticket with the term “libertarian” on it is beyond me!

  • Thom Taylor

    It never ceases to amaze me how “Big-L” Libertarians are always so eager to cut off their nose, to spite their face. Mister Dick is obviously too constrained by high-minded ideology – and nit-picking details in lieu of the big picture – that he’s hurting the viability of the best possible candidates to come along in the Party’s history. As I like to say, “If Gary & Bill can unify a wacko party, imagine what they’ll be able to do in Washington.” It’s time for the likes of Mister Dick to get HIMSELF out of the mud & sew his nose back on. Mister Dick: I won’t even get into the generalizations and inaccuracies in your hack-job, but try being a “small-l” libertarian for a while, let Johnson & Weld present revolutionary ideas that are consistent with the Libertarian platform, and look forward to the change it will bring – even if it’s nothing more than getting Federal funding for the next go-round. This year IS the perfect storm, Mister Dick, so try feeling the Johnson for the next 65 days, then you can crawl back into your hole.

  • SMH2much

    I feel bad for the Libertarians, of which I, too, was one. I hope they can form a new party & be more diligent. As for me, it worked out for the best, because I found the Castle-Bradley ticket. True Constitutionists through & through.

    • The Punisher

      Hate to break it to you…

      “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” – Lysander Spooner

      • SMH2much

        Keep your marxist hoe to yourself. Not interested.

  • Brian Miller

    So a group named after an elderly statist Republican sellout who made money off peddling racist newsletters and dodgy gold schemes — yet never had national relevance nor success in the political arena — is going to lecture the most successful libertarian national candidacy ever on “true libertarianism.” Funny!

    (Let’s not even mention the whole Chuck Baldwin endorsement. That just adds hysterical laughter to the entire pathetic spectacle.)

    • Marshadar

      It’s hysterical that you think Gary “Nazi Cakes” Johnson is libertarian at all except on drugs or mountain climbing.

      • Brian Miller

        What is it with Paulites and wedding cakes?

        We have an insane war on drugs that is fracturing society with violence; crazy warmongering that threatens mass death; a collapsing centrally planned health system that needs to be decentralized; a wave of martial violence against civilians and a surveillance apparatus that is out of control.

        And all you yahoos waste time yammering about wedding cakes, driver’s licenses, and how much you hate gay people — trying to turn a broad-based movement into your own little private cult.

        Not gonna happen. You had your chance to prove your way of campaigning works, and failed miserably every time. Now go away and let the adults get on with winning. Come back when you can poll above 1% nationally.

        • chisao101

          You sir, have no fucking idea what libertarianism is, and neither does Gary Johnson. Calling Ron Paul a sellout is ridiculous, considering he preached the same message for more than 35 years, no matter what his party affiliation was. Gary Johnson has changed his message quite a few times in only the past year. Trying to connect Ron Paul to racism is blatant dishonesty, to say the very least, and gold is an actual currency, vs. the paper issued by the central bank. That stuff is virtually worthless and that’s what most people carry in their wallets. If Ron Paul made some money endorsing a company that helps people diversify their investments by adding ACTUAL currency to their portfolio, good for him.
          As for Chuck Baldwin, any real libertarian would be fine with the man’s endorsement. He stands for state’s rights, individual liberties, ending the Federal Reserve, and he’s a strong supporter of the 2nd amendment. He has his own personal beliefs about things, but Liberarianism allows for free thought and free speech.

          You seem to me to be angry at people who believe in true liberty. We “Paulites” have been paying attention for years and heard the same message from Ron Paul for the entire time. Ron Paul gained recognition for the Libertarian Party, even though he ran as a Republican during his last run for the presidency, because he carried Libertarian ideals. The only reason he ran as a Republican at all is because the Libertarian Party was getting nowhere.

          Gary Johnson has Ron Paul to thank for spreading the Libertarian ideology to the mainstream, and so do you, if you are an actual Libertarian. I’m kind of doubting it though, considering the anger in your comments while defending a half-Libertarian, half-progressive Democrat like Johnson.

          With all that said, Johnson is getting my vote because I can’t vote for any of the others with a clean conscience. I also believe that this year, even though the Libertarian candidates may not win, it could be a lot of exposure for the party. More people are coming in droves, thanks to the meltdowns in the two major parties. I do not support Gary Johnson. I support the Libertarian Party. And I will ALWAYS respect and give credit to the fact that Ron Paul brought that party into the mainstream, even when he had an (R) next to his name.

          • Brian Miller

            I love it how Paulites lecture people on Liberty while calling for closed borders, federalizing women’s reproductive health, government defining marriage, “states’ rights” statism, and all that other garbage.

            It would be immeasurably better for mainstream libertarians if the Paul cultists and their octogenarian cult leader go their own way. The proof is in how popular libertarianism has become when Paulites aren’t dragging us down with their constant racism and other lunatic fringe rhetoric.

          • chisao101

            Closed borders is the only policy that makes any sense at all, unless the entire world opens their borders. Open borders is also an anarchist ideology. Whoever added it to the libertarian party platform didn’t put much thought into it. Since the Libertarian Party is only a US party, it should be common sense that they should not be advocating JUST US to have open borders while the rest of the world still punishes illegal immigrants. Since there are very real threats in the world, and believe it or not, there are assholes that would love to come in here to detonate a bomb and blow a hole into Times Square, open borders is a stupid idea.
            Immigration is fine…open borders is an idiot’s pipe dream.

            Killing babies is NOT reproductive health, I don’t give a shit how you twist it. The amount of women whose life is threatened from a pregnancy is so low, it makes that argument null and void. I’m not advocating for making abortion illegal because abortions will happen anyway, and if it is underground, that can only cause problems. I will damn sure call abortion what it is, though…killing babies.

            Most libertarians want government OUT of the marriage conversation altogether. I don’t know a single libertarian who advocates any definition of marriage. You’re talking about republicans, there. Libertarians want the government out of your business. If you want to marry someone of the same sex, find someone willing to perform a ceremony, or don’t, and just call yourselves married. It doesn’t make one bit of difference to any libertarian I have ever known.

            State’s rights is a libertarian idea. Libertarianism is not anarchy. It is libertarianism.

            Wake up, dude.

          • Brian Miller

            Your response is a great example of why libertarian politics can’t get any traction as a movement.

            You’ve hashed out a bunch of hard-right-wing statist government policies, which unquestionably limit the freedoms of individuals, and then say “libertarianism isn’t anarchism” — as if that somehow is a rejoinder to all the hard-right policies you advocate, including:

            1) Borders as prisons that prevent free movement except with government permission slips;

            2) Bureaucracies dictating women’s health issues and making their reproductive organs into state property with force in order to compel the extreme view that “a fertilized egg is a baby”;

            3) “States’ rights,” which is an argument used primarily in history to justify regionalized tyranny — such as mandatory segregationism, slavery and other statist policies

        • Marshadar

          I guess you think government coercion is funny then statist bootlicker. Freedom of association is a huge part of the libertarian mindset/platform in general, and if you think it’s ok to ruin people’s lives because they won’t bake a freaking cake, then YOU are part of the problem and should stick to the republican party. Don’t infect the LP with your bullsh!t.

          Nice projecting there but I actually could not care less if people are gay, I just shouldn’t be held hostage if I choose not to serve them for whatever reason (I’m not even religious idiot). I guess you are referring to sovereign citizens with your driver’s license comment but I don’t know what else your tiny mind could be inferring with that. Nothing I said is indicative of being a supporter or member of that movement.

          Gary Johnson will never win. Perhaps you should get over the butthurt already with your Democrat in Disguise candidate and realize that you are looking at the real possibility of Hillary becoming president. Gary Johnson is the most un-libertarian candidate to ever run on this ticket, and it’s only because he came in dead last as a republican before. I don’t even need to say much about Weld because he is even worse and deep down, you should realize how stupid you are. It’s a vote between 2 democrats (one is satan btw) and a hybrid dem/rep. Have fun feeling the Johnson though.

          • Brian Miller

            You Paultards are such drama queens. Whining about cakes as government oppression, while demanding legal recategorizing of women’s uteruses as federal property.

    • kenvandoren

      Baldwin was far more libertarian than Barr. Barr was the last straw for me before I quit the LP.

      • Brian Miller

        That’s great. If your a Baldwinite, you were in the wrong place to begin with.

  • Callan Elliott

    Can’t help but wonder what would happen if we had John McAfee…

  • Thomas Baldwin

    I love Ron Paul, but if he didn’t like the libertarian ticket, why didn’t he run? He would have one the ticket’s nomination hands down and would have carried forward his Ron Paul revolution.

  • Marshadar

    Gary Johnson is chode

  • Marshadar

    Gary Johnson is chode

  • desert_dweller0211

    FINALLY! Ron should have called these frauds out months ago! They are not Libertarians by any stretch!

  • joesmoe

    The Libertarian Party is closer than ever at achieving real influence in American politics. If Johnson got into the debate, that would do more good for the Libertarian Party long term than any of his policy concessions could do in terms of damage. I think Ron Paul is kind of shooting the movement in the foot ATM.

  • Monteen McCord

    Closet Democratic shill for Hillary

  • Monteen McCord

    Johnson and Weld support TPP and gun control! No way HoeZAA

  • Ratchell Richter

    what on earth is that catastrophe? you have to be joking……I’m going Trump only to break the glass…..I will be going Rand 2020….

  • Bob Mitchell

    Paul is a puritan. I’m not. Being a libertarian isn’t a religion for me. Libertarians forget that the non-aggression principle also resides in the mind. Inform, influence, and collaborate is more my style of libertarianism.