Ron Paul: Ted Cruz is no libertarian [Edit: article title]

[Rothbardian Girl]

What to make of this, I wonder? Very disappointing words from Ron here IMO. At first glance I thought this was a baity headline, but it is a reasonable approximation of what Ron actually said.

Now that Rand Paul is out of the race for the White House his father Ron Paul, who ran in 2008 and 2012, isn't impressed by Ted Cruz's attempts to pick up the "free market" libertarian banner.

“You take a guy like Cruz, people are liking the Cruz — they think he’s for the free market, and [in reality] he’s owned by Goldman Sachs. I mean, he and Hillary have more in common than we would have with either Cruz or Trump or any of them so I just don’t think there is much picking,” Paul said of the Texas senator on Fox Business’ “Varney & Company" on Friday.

Surprisingly, the elder Paul seemed more attracted to the views of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is giving Hillary Clinton a run for her money in the Democratic primary.

“On occasion, Bernie comes up with libertarian views when he talks about taking away the cronyism on Wall Street, so in essence he’s right, and occasionally he voted against war,” the former Texas congressman said when asked if there was a candidate who was truly for the free market.

"It's hard to find anybody -- since Rand is out of it -- anybody that would take a libertarian position, hardcore libertarian position on privacy, on the war issue and on economic policy," Paul added.

“So I always say: You can search for a long time, but you’re not gonna find anybody in the Republican or Democratic primary that even comes slightly close to ever being able to claim themselves a libertarian,” he concluded.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...#ixzz3zsMZ2zM8

Here Ron seems to be using the media's definition of "libertarian views" instead of the idea that the free market is the highest "expression" of libertarianism, so to speak. In other words, I think he's being overly optimistic. Insofar as some of Bernie's ideas resemble libertarian ones, he got to them through a different path, and so I don't think it's correct to say he's truly for the free market. What do you guys think?

[William Tell]

It seems to me all Ron is saying is that Bernie often opposes crony capitalism. Everyone knows Bernie doesn't support the free market.

[Rothbardian Girl]

It seems to me all Ron is saying is that Bernie often opposes crony capitalism. Everyone knows Bernie doesn't support the free market.

In my humble opinion, Ron probably should have started with an unequivocal "no" instead of equating "libertarian views" (in the sense that the media uses the phrase) with any actual defense of the free market.

Reading it over, though, great selective editing/taking things out of context by Politico as usual.

[Isaac Bickerstaff]

I think Ron just skillfully backhanded everyone--especially Sanders.

[erowe1]

What to make of this, I wonder? Very disappointing words from Ron here IMO. At first glance I thought this was a baity headline, but it is a reasonable approximation of what Ron actually said.



Here Ron seems to be using the media's definition of "libertarian views" instead of the idea that the free market is the highest "expression" of libertarianism, so to speak. In other words, I think he's being overly optimistic. Insofar as some of Bernie's ideas resemble libertarian ones, he got to them through a different path, and so I don't think it's correct to say he's truly for the free market. What do you guys think?

Since the headline is an outright lie, what exactly did Ron say there that you found objectionable?

[The Gold Standard]

Here Ron seems to be using the media's definition of "libertarian views" instead of the idea that the free market is the highest "expression" of libertarianism, so to speak. In other words, I think he's being overly optimistic. Insofar as some of Bernie's ideas resemble libertarian ones, he got to them through a different path, and so I don't think it's correct to say he's truly for the free market. What do you guys think?

Actually it did sound like he was coming from the place that the free market is the "highest expression" of libertarianism. Anti-cronyism and anti-war are free market views, although Sanders is neither of those things, and Ron didn't say he was, just that he sometimes talks like he is. If he was using the media's definition he would have talked about legalizing marijuana or something. It sounds like they took bits and pieces of what Ron said to make the story say what they wanted.

[Rothbardian Girl]

Since the headline is an outright lie, what exactly did Ron say there that you found objectionable?

“On occasion, Bernie comes up with libertarian views when he talks about taking away the cronyism on Wall Street..."

That part is what I have an issue with. Simple opposition to/willingness to 'fight cronyism' isn't necessarily libertarian. That view could have just as easily been labeled populist (and that descriptor more accurately fits with the tone of this election IMO). I was kind of expecting Ron to drive home the point that the current discourse is as far removed from libertarian principles as one can get.

Actually it did sound like he was coming from the place that the free market is the "highest expression" of libertarianism. Anti-cronyism and anti-war are free market views, although Sanders is neither of those things...

Then how can Sanders' particular anti-cronyism and "opposition to war" be called free-market views, if he's clearly not a defender of the free market? He got to those ideas because he thinks the government should place higher priority on certain things, that's all.

[LittleLightShining]

Libertarian views on privacy, civil rights issues?

[The Gold Standard]

Then how can Sanders' particular anti-cronyism and "opposition to war" be called free-market views, if he's clearly not a defender of the free market?

Because by themselves they are free market views. It's not like he could point to another candidate and show their free market ideas, none of them have any. But that doesn't mean Sanders is a free market guy, and Ron never said he was. I would be willing to bet he even pointed that out to the interviewer, but they didn't feel the need to include that in the piece. Ron said if you are looking for libertarian solutions you aren't going to find them in either party.

[LibertyEagle]

The title is a smear of what Ron Paul actually said. Why bring it here to further it?

He said none of them were worth voting for.

[Rothbardian Girl]

The title is a smear of what Ron Paul actually said. Why bring it here to further it?

He said none of them were worth voting for.

Since Ron Paul is no longer running for office and Rand is not in the mix anymore, I hardly think it's a "smear" to discuss what Ron Paul may believe. I just wonder why Ron targets Cruz for being so anti-free market and "owned by Goldman Sachs" (which Cruz is; not denying that) while giving Bernie a comparatively more sympathetic view. I think if nothing else, it's clear that some serious animosity has built up between the Paul family and Cruz... which is interesting, because Rand and Ted used to be uneasy "allies" in the Senate.

As someone who doesn't have any particular attachment to the word "libertarian," I think a case can be made that Sanders is the most libertarian candidate running (what I think Ron meant to convey). But is he the most free-market candidate? I would argue no. Does completely nationalizing healthcare and education while ending corporate subsidies create a freer market? I think that's debatable.

Anyway, I suppose this is just more hair-splitting, but at the end of the day, I'm simply surprised that Ron didn't come out more strongly against Sanders. That is all.

[idiom]

Bernie is a stronger supporter of the Free Market than any of the remaining GOP candidates, and he hates it.

Does completely nationalizing healthcare and education while ending corporate subsidies create a freer market? I think that's debatable.

Nationalizing healthcare would reduce it from 20% of GDP to 4%. The current interventions keep healthcare at a 5x multiple of free market or nationalized costs.

That frees up 16% of the market from government enforced monopoly and extortion and would give the economy an insane boost.

Unfortunately Sanders isn't talking about a national healthcare service.

[Krugminator2]

Bernie is a stronger supporter of the Free Market than any of the remaining GOP candidates, and he hates it.

Nationalizing healthcare would reduce it from 20% of GDP to 4%. The current interventions keep healthcare at a 5x multiple of free market or nationalized costs.

That frees up 16% of the market from government enforced monopoly and extortion and would give the economy an insane boost.

Unfortunately Sanders isn't talking about a national healthcare service.

As a practical matter, I am for universal health over the current system. A system like Singapore's would be far more free market and efficient than what we have now. If you are referring to that, we are in agreement. But Bernie isn't a for a Singapore system that puts an emphasis on bringing costs down through competition, high deductibles and personal savings accounts. Bernie is for the terrible European and Canadian style systems that are inefficient and render low quality and zero innovation.

Bernie is the least free market candidate running. A guy who supports a transaction tax alone is too brain-dead to be allowed to be President. Not to mention the 90% top tax rate, his constant railing against investors, his support for minimum wage laws, etc.

[The Gold Standard]

Does completely nationalizing healthcare and education while ending corporate subsidies create a freer market? I think that's debatable.

Of course not. But no candidates are running on a free market in health care and education, while Bernie is running on ending cronyism (even though he has no intention of doing so) and pretending to be anti-war, which would be free market positions, so Ron used them as examples. He didn't endorse Sanders as some laissez faire freedom lover.

[Krugminator2]

Of course not. But no candidates are running on a free market in health care and education, while Bernie is running on ending cronyism (even though he has no intention of doing so) and pretending to be anti-war, which would be free market positions, so Ron used them as examples. He didn't endorse Sanders as some laissez faire freedom lover.

I watched the last Democratic debate. Bernie Sanders has no idea what Goldman Sachs does. And he isn't even running on ending cronyism. He supports green energy subsidies, supported the auto bailout. Free college is cronyism.

I would say Cruz is running on a free market in education. I am pretty sure he is for eliminating government subsidized student loans and he is for a voucher system with no national role in education.

[The Gold Standard]

I would say Cruz is running on a free market in education. I am pretty sure he is for eliminating government subsidized student loans and he is for a voucher system with no national role in education.

Voucher system != Free market in education.

[The Free Hornet]

As someone who doesn't have any particular attachment to the word "libertarian," I think a case can be made that Sanders is the most libertarian candidate running (what I think Ron meant to convey). But is he the most free-market candidate?

The free market arises from - largely - government INACTION not from some politician that supports it. Ergo, IF - and that is a big effing IF - there is a candidate that is more so opposed to crony capitalism (and war and the war on drugs and the war on our civil liberties) than all the other major, remaining candidates* then that is a major improvement over the so-called, in-name-only defenders of their TPP-regulated-faux-free market.


*I will ONLY support a nominal or actual libertarian or anarchist or Objectivist or a PAUL. This includes my primary and general vote and any monies donated or online polls.

[The Free Hornet]

I mean, seriously people, do the religious people who support candidates because MUH RELIGION, do they think that candidate G is going to bring God into existence*? Of course not, that would be a bat$#@! $#@!ing insane level of stupid.

The free market is little different. We don't need candidates to believe in it but to stay the $#@! out of its way. And a weak old man is pretty easy to run over if he doesn't know from what the $#@! to stay out of the way.

*It's like wanting a candidate that wants the Cubs to win the World Series. It's just wasting all of the honest efforts of the smart people.

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Bernie is a stronger supporter of the Free Market than any of the remaining GOP candidates, and he hates it.



Nationalizing healthcare would reduce it from 20% of GDP to 4%. The current interventions keep healthcare at a 5x multiple of free market or nationalized costs.

That frees up 16% of the market from government enforced monopoly and extortion and would give the economy an insane boost.

Unfortunately Sanders isn't talking about a national healthcare service.

Where is this data?

[Dianne]

What to make of this, I wonder? Very disappointing words from Ron here IMO. At first glance I thought this was a baity headline, but it is a reasonable approximation of what Ron actually said.



Here Ron seems to be using the media's definition of "libertarian views" instead of the idea that the free market is the highest "expression" of libertarianism, so to speak. In other words, I think he's being overly optimistic. Insofar as some of Bernie's ideas resemble libertarian ones, he got to them through a different path, and so I don't think it's correct to say he's truly for the free market. What do you guys think?

He's absolutely correct about Ted Cruz. All you have to do is google, which candidate has received the most Wall Street money. No. 1 Jeb Bush, No. 2 Hillary Clinton, and No. 3 Ted Cruz. The rest are trailing far behind.