Liberty MavenWhat? Ron Paul Plays GOP Party Politics Too?
May 9th, 2008 11:29 pm | by Marc Gallagher | Published in Amit Singh, Constitution, Election, Foreign Policy, Maven Commentary, Neo-con, Philosophy, Politics, Ron Paul, Ron Paul Republicans, Vern McKinley | 3 Comments
Readers of Liberty Maven know by now how much we adore Ron Paul and his message of freedom, prosperity, and peace. That does not mean we can’t be critical of him when circumstances call for it. Anyone who views the list of candidates Ron Paul has endorsed for office should notice something missing. He hasn’t endorsed a single candidate who is running against an incumbent Republican in a primary.
As a Ron Paul supporter of all the liberty minded candidates it greatly concerns me that Ron Paul has not endorsed some candidates who are close to 100% in line with his platform. A perfect example of this is the race in Virginia’s 10th District between Vern McKinley and incumbent Frank Wolf. Vern McKinley is about 90% aligned with Paul on the issues. Frank Wolf is an Iraq war supporter, who voted for both SCHIP and minimum wage increases along with the Democrats. Wolf voted against repealing the DC gun ban. Wolf voted for Bush’s prescription drug plan. Wolf just had a bill that he sponsored signed into law by President Bush that will make property rights advocates vomit.
Ron Paul has enthusiastically endorsed Amit Singh in Virginia’s 8th district. He appeared in a YouTube video with Singh endorsing him and helping him promote his money bomb on May 15: lunchbomb.com. Ron Paul is even going to appear at a fund raising event for Amit Singh on May 14th. I love Amit Singh as a candidate as much as I love McKinley. I encourage everyone to participate in his money bomb, but Amit Singh is not running against a GOP incumbent in the primary. McKinley is.
In 1998, Ron Paul cited Vern McKinley’s work in testimony on the Financial Freedom Act Of 1997. Yet he has yet to endorse McKinley for Congress?
Is Ron Paul playing party politics by not endorsing against Republican incumbents? I don’t know the answer to that, but the evidence suggests that he is. Vern McKinley is not the only GOP incumbent opponent without a Ron Paul endorsement. Brent Sanders, Greg Lewis, Joe Ferguson, Teresa Sheppard, Peter Vidrine, and Jason Thompson are all liberty minded Republican candidates running against neo-conservative GOP incumbents who have not received endorsements from Dr. Paul.
I’ve always admired Ron Paul because he seemed focused on the issues rather than playing political chess. This endorsement fiasco is exactly the type of thing I’d expect from other politicians, not Paul. Needless to say I’m disappointed. Hopefully, Ron Paul will end up endorsing some of these candidates. I would think he would make it a priority to endorse against GOP incumbents, not an exception.
After all, we can’t take the Republican Party back to the Constitution without unseating neo-conservatives with liberty minded Republican candidates.
May 10th, 2008 at 7:35 am (#)
I don’t necessarily disagree with what you say in the article, but for now, we need to trust Ron Paul’s judgment, regardless whether we know his reason why.
Maybe RP is choosing his battles, one at a time. Right now, Ron Paul is the most visible candidate we have who represents liberty and freedom that American voters can sink their teeth into. For the last year he’s been stepping heavily on some BIG toes at the top of the Republican food chain. Maybe he understands better than we do, where he will have the greatest impact. Maybe he’s better at surveying the political landscape than we are. Maybe he determined he will have a greater impact at the RC and it’s more important to secure a national presence at the Convention without stepping on more toes at the lower end of the Republican food chain. And, maybe those incumbent Republican candidates are closer than we realize to being converted to Ron Paul candidates. Who can say for sure?
You’re right…Ron Paul is a savvy politician. We need to remember what led us to him in the first place. I’ve trusted Ron Paul for last 6 years…and I will continue to do so.
We know the big differences between Ron Paul and the other presidential candidates. Liberty, freedom, protection of our national sovereignty and, most important, the value of our Constitution as a means of protecting us from those who would abuse their political power…This is what separates Ron Paul from the others. What other candidate at the top of the Democrat or Republican food chain can say the same…They can’t even summon a whisper…
For now, we need to trust in Ron Paul’s political experience.
May 10th, 2008 at 8:14 am (#)
There are consequences to endorsing against a Republican if you are in the Republican party. Did you know that?
I don’t know all of them, but when I was looking to be a delegate in California I did see that you were disqualified if you endorsed anyone to be a candidate against a running Republican. I suspect consequences may vary by state, but suspect that the Texas GOP, where RP is running for Congress, is not more liberal on this point than California.
I have seen him not endorse those running against Republicans, and assume it may have direct consequences if he does otherwise.
I’d love him to endorse candidates so we could find them, but not at the expense of his Republican nomination for his Congressional seat, if that is what it would mean.
I agree with the guy above. I see no reason not to trust Ron Paul, and he is the first politician I’ve followed who actually has earned our trust.
May 10th, 2008 at 8:40 am (#)
I agree with both comments above. As I’ve said I support Ron Paul completely in whatever he decides to do. I just find it worrisome that the GOP is in such a state as to require such “unwritten” rules. Once again it becomes more about supporting the name of the party than true discussion of the Republican platform of low taxes, low spending, and limited government.
I suppose there is a fine line between allowing for some dissent and supporting the party. It could be worse. At least Ron Paul didn’t endorse these neo-con incumbents against the challengers.
-Marc