Libertarian Party of KY: Rand Paul is not a Libertarian



The Libertarian Party of Kentucky again reiterated today that Rand Paul is not a Libertarian.

“I have heard Rand Paul speak at TEA Party events, and I can assure you that his positions are that of a Republican,” said LPKY Chairman Ken Moellman. “While the GOP is going through an identity crisis, the Libertarian Party has stood firm upon the same principles since its founding.”

“As head of the membership committee, I assure you that [Paul] has never been a Libertarian,” said Ronald Seiter, Louisville native and Libertarian Party of Kentucky Vice Chairman. “He has neither signed our statement of principles, nor contributed to the Party in any way.”

The Libertarian Party agrees with portions of both the Democratic and Republican Party platforms; though, not always for the same reasons. The ‘non-aggression principle’ guides the Libertarian Party. Signing an oath to adhere to that principle, along with annual dues, is a requirement for full membership in the Party or to run as one of its candidates.

The Libertarian Party of Kentucky will begin to announce its 2010 candidates for office around the state in the next few months. Kentucky law creates separate procedures for anyone not running as a Democrat or Republican. “That shouldn’t be a surprise. They wrote the rules to keep others out. But the political atmosphere has changed, people are tired of politics as usual,” Moellman said. “And I think we’re going to have some very good results in November.

The Libertarian Party of Kentucky is the official state affiliate for the Libertarian Party. Founded in 1971, the Libertarian Party believes in achieving liberty through economic freedom and social tolerance, and is the nation’s third-largest political party. More information is available at their respective websites: and

Compromising the Freedom Movement

I’d like to be able to get behind his son Rand with as much enthusiasm. I really would. But I find I can’t. Yes, he seems like a nice enough person and his intentions are good. I like his stance on repealing the Patriot Act. I like his stance on reading the bills. He has nice views on fiscal policies, wanting to audit the Fed and balance the budget. I just can’t get over that war thing. I can’t get over his support for empire. His stance on supporting the troops by buying them all the equipment we can’t afford rather than by bringing them home simply doesn’t make sense, either from a fiscal point of view or a freedom oriented point of view.


Yea, I’ve found myself in the “Screw Rand Paul” camp ever since he embraced his endorsement by Sarah Palin.  At first I thought some of his rhetoric in interviews was to gain support for the Republican nomination, and his views were really those of his father’s, but over time I’ve seen that this apple fell further from the tree than I can stomach.  Rand supports military interventionism and dumbed-down divisive politics of hard-line anti-abortion proponents and the Tea Parties.  The Tea Parties are now completely over-run by the worst elements of the Republican tribalists.  Rand’s anti-abortion stance seems to mimic his father’s circa 1980.  Even though Ron Paul is still against abortion, he states an understanding that it will never be outlawed again, and that if it was it would still not go away.  In 2007 he told the National Right to Life convention they needed to give up on the pursuit of outlawing abortion and focus on spreading a culture of life–one that requires anti-abortion folks to be anti-war and anti-death penalty as well.  Rand, on the other hand, is stuck in the old “Abortion is murder” camp, that even his father has realized does nothing to further his desire to see less abortions in America.

Screw Rand Paul.