Ron Paul/LP Wrap-up

Since the Libertarian National Committee announced their resolution which attempts to recruit Ron Paul to the LP presidential lineup, the blogs (and my phone and e-mail) have been pretty busy. I thought a news wrap-up might be in order.

To begin, I’ve got to disagree in part with co-blogger Seth Cohn. Ron Paul didn’t “snub” the LNC. In fact, he didn’t comment at all; his media spokesperson did. Despite the way several blogs and news stories headlined their articles, the same keyword was used in this answer that was used in the many times Paul has been asked the question by the mainstream media: Intention. Keep in mind that Hillary Clinton had “no intention” to run for president in 2008, either. While I consider it unlikely that Paul will run as an independent or third party candidate, if the campaign wished to absolutely rule out the possibility, they’d make an absolute statement, such as, “There is absolutely no way, under any circumstance, that Dr. Paul will run as anything other than a Republican candidate.”

Aside from this issue, the reports across the Internet and print media are varied and interesting.

Reason: The LP stated the obvious with a resolution passed (unanimously) this weekend: Ron Paul is the most successful Libertarian candidate ever and the party wants him to run on their ticket.

Digg link to Lew Rockwell posting: Interesting and wise move by the Libertarian National Committee. If Dr. Paul loses the Republican nomination, does this mean he will still appear on the general election ballots as a Libertarian candidate?

Washington Times: “I have no intention of running as an independent,” he said. However, the wording of his statement has prompted speculation that Paul could still run as part of an official third party and still make good on his word.

NY Daily News: But even though Paul is a member of the Libertarian Party, the GOP lawmaker’s campaign says thanks, but no thanks.“Ron has no intention of running as a third-party candidate,” campaign spokesman Jesse Benton told The Mouth. “We are seeking the GOP nomination until we win or are mathematically eliminated. … Ron Paul has staying power.”

Atlanta Journal-Constitution: The resolution, proposed by former congressman and ex-GOPer Bob Barr, isn’t so far fetched. Paul, a Texas congressman, was the Libertarian presidential nominee in 1988.

Daily Paul: The Libertarian Party gets it!

Peach Pundit: Dr. Paul has said on many occasions that he has no plans to run a third party or independent campaign and there is no reason to not accept his word, but you have to wonder.

George Phillies (c/o Crazy for Liberty): I am profoundly sorry to report that our National Committee has stabbed every single Libertarian Presidential campaign in the back. At the LNC meeting this weekend, they passed two resolutions on Presidential campaigns.

Daily Paul: Remember what I’ve been saying about Dr. Paul being a fusion candidate? Here’s another piece of the puzzle!

Liberty Yes, Anarchy No: The Libertarian National Committee- the leadership of the Libertarian Party- voted today to ask Ron Paul to seek the Libertarian Party nomination for President. The vote was unanimous- and if you’ve ever dealt with Libertarians, you know how improbable getting fifteen of them to agree on anything is.

Iowa Independent: Paul, a sitting Republican congressman, was the Libertarian nominee in 1988. Paul himself has not directly and absolutely ruled out a run. Last month, he avoided the question at an Iowa City rally.

Ian Schwartz title: Ron Paul Rejects Any Chance He Had At Presidency

Libertarian Peacenik: So the LNC recognizes that our current presidential candidates are, well, they’re not exactly Ron Paul, are they?

Freedom Democrats: Of course, I have made no secret my desire for Ron Paul to run on a 3rd party Libertarian Ticket. The GOP has long ago given up any valid claim as a proper vehicle for limited government, libertarian ideas(Paul, notwithstanding). An increasingly shrinking GOP has pushed out the Goldwater wing for Neocon war mongers, in your face, bible totting cultural warriors, and sappy big government “compassionate” spenders. Independents now outnumber the self-identified republicans. If the GOP follows through with their apparent suicidal pact with Mike Huckabee, the future relevance of the GOP will be only further mitigated. As Ron Paul has demonstrated, even the MSM is waking up from their redstate/bluestate stupor and are realizing that libertarians are woefully underrepresented in government. It’s time for our under-representing 2 party stranglehold to end. It is my hope that Ron Paul will do the right thing and make his 3rd party run as a Libertarian, in the process eviscerating the GOP, and serving as a wake-up call to the Democratic party that Clintonian triangulation of the GOP on social issues, war, the police state, and corporatism will have consequences. In participating on Ron Paul Forums, I’ve noticed quite a bit of formerly liberal democrats who are converting to libertarianism.

22 Responses to “Ron Paul/LP Wrap-up”

  1. Eric Dondero Says:

    ThirdPartyWatchers, is Stephen Gordon good or what?

    Last week he broke the story nationwide about Cynthia McKinney’s announcement of her candidacy for the US Presidency right here at TPW.

    Now today, the story has broken on political sites all over the web.

    It is now the top featured story at David Horowit’s Front Page - www.frontpagemag.com

    But it was Gordon who broke the story first.

    Just as he’s done with this Libertarian Party/Ron Paul deal.

    He’s an SOB, but he’s our SOB. Congrats Stephen!

  2. Gene Berkman Says:

    In commending Ron Paul’s campaign and extending an invitation to Paul to seek the Libertarian nomination, the LNC acted in line with the desires of most active Libertarians. His record in Congress shows a principled commitment to freedom and peace, even if all of us have some disagreements.

    It would be premature for Ron Paul to accept the invitation, since it is more than two months til Super Tuesday. But Ron Paul by his record in Congress and his many public speaking engagements, his writing, and his work for the Mises Institute and Antiwar.com has attracted the support of Libertarians across the country.

    The candidates seeking the Libertarian nomination mean well, but just don’t have the track record of advocacy for limited government that Ron Paul has. But they sure seem to have a sense of entitlement.

  3. Seth Cohn Says:

    “Ron Paul has staying power.”

    And with that line, Jesse Benton sets up the future endorsement for the little blue pills, ala Bob Dole.

  4. Eric Dondero Says:

    You know, I’m starting to wonder if Lew Rockwell may have set the LP up for a fall? We all know Rockwell has some cronies on the LNC. Did he maybe push them into taking this action, so that they could embarrass themselves? Lew has always hated the LP, with outright vitriol. You should read some of the stuff he used to say about Libertarians in the early 1990s in his Rothbard-Rockwell Report (RRR).

    And now this today on his Blog at LewRockwell.com:

    Like all organizations and publications of the right (and antiwar left), the Libertarian Party has been under pressure from its own people to support Ron Paul. Rather than simply endorsing his heroic run for the Republican nomination, the LP asked Ron to seek its nomination. Oh sure. It took about 30 seconds for the Doctor to say No. I am sure the LP national committee members did not intend to aide Ron’s MSM enemies, who are always dismissing him as a former LP candidate, but for a moment they did. All of Ron’s thoughtful supporters in the LP cannot be pleased.

  5. Stephen Gordon Says:

    “Rather than simply endorsing his heroic run for the Republican nomination, the LP asked Ron to seek its nomination. ”

    The LNC does not have that authority. It’s a matter of bylaws.

  6. Eric Dondero Says:

    One other comment on Rockwell’s piece. He implies that Ron Paul was just a “temporary Libertarian Party member,” that his race as a Libertarian in 1988 was just a fluke, in an otherwise longtime Republican Party career.

    Uh, uh, uh! No way Jose, (read No Way Lew Rockwell.)

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    Ron was a very vocal and active Libertarian Party member from late 1985 til about 1994/95.

    I tried like hell to get Ron to join the Republican Liberty Caucus. He wouldn’t budge.

    It was only in early 1995 that I convinced him to at least join Scott Kohlhaas and I on a lobbying trip to DC to end Selective Service. Ron, Scott and I walked the halls of Congress to lobby for a bill introduced by Cong. Mark Foley that would abolish the SS. It was only on that trip that Ron finally agreed to join the RLC Advisory Board, and agreed to allow me to announce that he was rejoining the Republican Party. That was 1995!

    So, what Rockwell implies was only a 1-year stint, was actually 10 years, 1985-1995.

  7. Seth Cohn Says:

    Dondero writes:
    So, what Rockwell implies was only a 1-year stint, was actually 10 years, 1985-1995.

    Which strangely enough, coincides with the weird gap in Ron’s About Page bio: http://www.ronpaul2008.com/about

    Quote:

    In 1984, he voluntarily relinquished his House seat and returned to his medical practice.

    Dr. Paul returned to Congress in 1997 to represent the 14th congressional district of Texas.

    Gee, nothing at all to mention between 1985 and 1996, he didn’t really do anything, right… oh wait, a little thing in 1988 (cough ran for President as LP nominee cough)... but never mind that…

    Have to agree with Dondero here, it’s a bit disingenuous that Ron’s Bio omits that entire time, like it was a bad dream.

  8. Jay Matthews Says:

    This post would have been just a little more entertaining w/comments from Dondero and Milnes calling RP a left winger and right winger respectively.

  9. Derrick Says:

    I would give anything to see campaign materials from Ron Paul’s 1988 run on the Libertarian Party ticket. I drove and walked all over my county passing out blue-and-white fliers. I went door-to-door and gave them out at gun shows. Most people who got the fliers had never even heard the word “libertarian” and came up with all sorts of crazy ways to pronounce it.

    I think he ended up getting 350 votes in my county, something I’m still bitter and jaded over. I guess that was version 0.1 beta of the Ron Paul Revolution. What a difference 20 years makes.

  10. disinter Says:

    The LP has once again proven that its goal is to be irrelevant and never grow beyond the miserable existence it is now.

    What a fucking joke. I will not ever send them another dime.

  11. ka1igu1a Says:

    The point I’m trying to make is that Independents now outnumber Republicans. At this stage, why let a minority party, The Party of Jesus be the final arbiter of this libertarian/independent revolt against our caste 2 party system.

    I would be extremly disappointed if Dr. Paul just walked away from this movement because he failed to win over a majority of Neocons and SocialCons in the GOP. All the disadvantages Paul refers to(in terms of a 3rd party/indep run) would not apply in his case. He would have organization, money, and media attention. He may not do it under the banner of the LP but I see him taking this movement all the way to next November. Just my 2 cents…

  12. Eric Dondero Says:

    Derrick, I still have some of those campaign materials from the 1988 Libertarian Party Presidential Campaign of Ron Paul.

    Seth, also note, I specifically remember Ron Paul being the keynote speaker at the 1992 Libertarian Party national convention to nominate Andre Marrou for President. He was even featured in a C-SPAN interview at the convention, and he talked glowingly of the “future of the Libertarian Party.”

    This was 1992.

    It’d be interesting if someone could get a hold of that video. Would prove quite embarrassing to Rockwell.

  13. Carl Says:

    Ron Paul had an exploratory committee for president as a Republican back in 1991. The committee included Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard. I still have a fundraising letter from that largely forgotten effort.

  14. Robert Milnes Says:

    I still have my suspicions the government is behing Ron Paul’s run this time. Manipulating behind the scenes. Specifically to throw a wrench into a potential progressive alliance movement.

  15. ka1igu1a Says:

    Robert Milnes just gave me a stark reminder exactly why Ron Paul would avoid the LP if he were to make a serious 3rd party run…jeez

  16. [email protected] Says:

    On television awhile back, Paul said (quote from memory, so more like a paraphrase)”—
    “I’m a Republican. I’ve always been a Republican. I took a year off to run for president on the Libertarian Party ticket, then came back.”

    I don’t find it especially odd that Rockwell would parrot Paul’s current ... um, portrait-in-hindsight ... of his partisan history. LRC considers “revisionism” a valid tool for historical research, so why not for campaigning as well? If Stalin had had Photoshop, it wouldn’t have been nearly as much of a drag to get Trotsky out of those damn photographs.

  17. Preston Says:

    Ok, stupid question. Why isn’t the MSM backing Ron Paul? Isn’t he the most pro-business candidate in the running? Don’t they stand to gain the most from his campaign?
    I realize there is probably an easy answer to this, but I can’t think of it right now…

  18. disinter Says:

    Preston - look into who owns the MSM and what other companies the same individuals and organizations own and you will have your answer.

    Smaller government is most definitely NOT in their interest.

  19. David Says:

    Paul couldn’t consider a 3rd party run at this time. Publicly saying so would undermine his GOP bid. But it does beg the question, if he looses his bid, where do all his voters go? We certainly won’t be voting for Guiliani, or any one else who supports more war and more government. That’s a lot of people who aren’t represented by either of the two major parties and are going to need a new home. Should we support the Constitution Party? Or the LP? Frankly, I’m confused between the difference. Why can’t the two of you work out your differences and form one strong/credible 3rd party? What’s up with that? Sorry if this is too “elementary” of a question for you. [email protected]

  20. Ryan Brennan (ThirdPartyNews.net) Says:

    I’m a staunch Libertarian & supporter of the Libertarian Party, being a dues-paying member since 2000. I’ve also been a dues-paying member of my state, Pennsylvania LP. I voted for Harry Browne in 2000, the first time I was able to vote for president, being 27 years old now, & also voted for Badnarik in ‘04.

    I want to applaud the LNC for their efforts in support of Ron Paul & applaud the LP for their support, including their recent announcement of the use of the Ballot Base program for making Ron Paul phone calls in the NH primary.

    I sincerely believe that the Ron Paul campaign is a great benefit to the LP. He has awakened many people to the message of liberty & freedom. This can possibly result in many people discovering & joining the LP & will undoubtedly help with LP vote totals across the board in the 2008 elections. Many people who never paid much attention to Libertarian candidates may now do so, when they realize that their message is the same as Ron Paul’s. I, of course, hope that if Paul fails to win the GOP nomination that he seeks the LP nomination; this would be an enormous benefit to the LP. The LP would receive the highest vote total ever for a Libertarian presidential candidate, it would bring in countless thousands to the LP, it would allow Paul to continue his campaign & deliver his message of freedom till the November election and it would keep the Ron Paul Revolution going for several more months in the event he loses the GOP nomination.

    In Freedom & Liberty,
    Ryan Brennan
    http://www.thirdpartynews.net

  21. Mr. X Says:

    “I want to applaud the LNC for their efforts in support of Ron Paul & applaud the LP for their support, including their recent announcement of the use of the Ballot Base program for making Ron Paul phone calls in the NH primary.”

    I’m pretty sure that spending Libertarian Party funds in direct support of a Republican candidate is a violation of the bylaws. The purpose of the party (Bylaws Article 3) is to elect Libertarian candidates, not Libertarian candidates and sometimes Republicans.

  22. J.R. Says:

    > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (This was sent out 11/30/07)
    >

    > An historic political event has recently taken place in
    Alaska. Lynette
    > Clark, Chairman of the Alaskan Independence Party; Jason Dowell,
    Chairman of
    > the Alaska Libertarian Party; and Thomas Senter, representing
    Alaska’s
    > registered Independent voters, along with several others, met and
    agreed to
    > forge a strategic alliance on behalf of the people of Alaska. The
    result
    > was the inception of, “I VOTE ALASKA 2008”. This is an acronym for,
    > “Independent Voters Organized to Empower Alaska.” This group will
    provide a
    > voice for all those Alaskans disenfranchised by the current
    political
    > environment. It will be a viable alternative for those disgusted
    by the
    > influence of special interests, and frustrated by the failure of
    entrenched
    > politicians to represent the people, according to our
    Constitutional Law.
    > Clark, Dowell, and Senter stated, “We welcome all who are
    disenchanted with
    > the corruption of politics as usual. It’s time for ordinary
    Alaskans to
    > lead.” They added, “This alliance will support those candidates
    who share
    > our common values and vision.”
    >

    >
    > For more information or interviews contact:
    >

    > Alaskan Independence Party: Lynette Clark at 907-457-1884, or
    > [email protected]
    >

    > Alaska Libertarian Party: Jason Dowell at [email protected]
    >

    > or Nick Braman at 907-744-2445, or [email protected]
    >

    >
    > Independent Voters: Tom Senter at 907-301-3018, or
    [email protected]
    >

Leave a Reply