Howard Dean: Meh, Rand Paul isn’t really a libertarian, ’cause he’s pro-life

posted at 9:31 am on August 1, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

So, I guess that means that Ron Paul isn’t a ‘real’ libertarian either? Huh. Who knew?

It’s fascinating to watch this. First of all, lesson number one, for Rand Paul, who is, by the way, not a libertarian. If you believe you ought to be able to tell women what to do with their reproductive rights you are not a libertarian. Lesson number one for Rand Paul, do not take on a guy from Jersey. Obviously this guy does not watch HBO, and, you know, you’re not going to win a fight like this with Chris Christie. That’s not the way it’s going to go.

First of all, no, I don’t know that we would classify Rand Paul as a full-blown, isolationist libertarian looking for a major retrenchment away from the world, and you could reasonably mention that point when the issue at hand is the recent foreign-policy tiff with Chris Christie in the neoconservative corner and Paul representing the recent libertarian-leaning shift. But, why on earth bring up abortion as a libertarian disqualifier in a conversation in which we’re discussing the two sides of the GOP’s national-security spectrum? A, how does it apply? And B, since when can libertarians not be pro-life? I’m pretty sure if Howard Dean thought about it for a moment, he could rationally conceive of why there’s still plenty of debate on abortion among the libertarian set — “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” no?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Arrrrhhhhhggggg!!!!

Bmore on August 1, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Or was it?

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAARGH”!

Bmore on August 1, 2013 at 1:23 PM

Tell me, do you believe in laws limiting abortions?

See any thread on abortion on HA. The answer is ‘YES!’

Just wondering, because, according to you, prohibitive laws don’t stop anybody from doing things like abusing drugs or driving drunk.

Read the F*CKING THREAD. I said above that I believe that, like the poor, abortion will always be with us.

Libertarians are all about inconsistency.

Riiiiight.

A political philosophy that allows for any POV whatsoever isn’t much of a philosophy. Libertarianism is all over the map, because it’s illogical at its roots. That’s not my fault. It’s the fault of the libertarians who think they can have everything every which-way, all at the same time.

The political philosophy, at least mine, is you can do whatever you want unless you hurt me or another innocent life; other than that, I DON’T CARE WHAT YOU DO.

It’s the fault of the libertarians who think they can have everything every which-way, all at the same time.

Riiight, cuz, like, um, ya know, Conservatives agree on everything.

Ignorance reigns supreme with you.

Resist We Much on August 1, 2013 at 1:26 PM

Should we ask The republicans’ Surrender Caucus what they think?

Let’s see Mr. Dean who should we ask?

Oh yeah, here are the current members:

Kelly Ayotte

Cornyn

Wicker

Kirk of Illinois

Rove

Corker of Tennessee

Coburn of Ok

Cole of Ok

Burr of NC

McConnell of KY

Huckabee

Romney

Paul Ryan

Rubio

Mike Enzi

Lindley Graham of SC

McCain his mentor

Pete King of NY

Boehner of Weepersville, Ohio

Orrin Hatch of Utah

and Byron York

Charles Krauthammer and it’s looking more and more like

Laura Ingraham can be added to that list.

……and I’m sure there are more Mr. Dean.

Ask them if they think Rand Paul is a libertarian.

PappyD61 on August 1, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Pretty sure laws against murder are cool with them crazy libertarians. I might be wrong though.

happytobehere on August 1, 2013 at 1:34 PM

Pretty sure laws against murder are cool with them crazy libertarians. I might be wrong though.

happytobehere on August 1, 2013 at 1:34 PM

No, you’re right although you will be told that you aren’t by those that are unable of discerning the difference in belonging to a political party and embracing particular political, economic, and societal philosophies.

Resist We Much on August 1, 2013 at 1:41 PM

JannyMae on August 1, 2013 at 1:18 PM

It’s a matter of emphasis. Conservatives are mainly concerned with protecting civilization. Libertarians are mainly concerned with limiting government coercion. This doesn’t mean that conservatives want lots of government coercion, it’s just that limiting it is not foremost in their concerns. It also doesn’t mean that libertarians want barbarism, it’s just that limiting it is not foremost in their minds.
Conservatives and libertarians both have excellent points that should be listened to by any thinking people.

The only people that have really stupid ideas with no intellectual grounding are the libs/leftist/democrats. They are obsessed with nonexistent Oppression and protecting the “oppressed” from this nonexistent fairyland threat.

happytobehere on August 1, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Verbaluce claimed:

[Reagan] was [pro-choice...and then became pro-life], as I’m aware.

Point remains he wouldn’t get through a GOP primary today.

verbaluce on August 1, 2013 at 10:41 AM

Resist We Much on August 1, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Just to clarify –
I was actually saying, in response to some comment directed at me, ‘yes, he was a conservative, as I’m aware’ – so wasn’t making any comment on his abortion stance or how that would or wouldn’t impact his hypothetical prospects in a current election.
But your point remains.

verbaluce on August 1, 2013 at 1:42 PM

First of all, lesson number one, for Rand Paul, who is, by the way, not a libertarian. If you believe you ought to be able to tell women what to do with their reproductive rights you are not a libertarian. Lesson number one for Rand Paul, do not take on a guy from Jersey.

I guess we’ve established Howard Dean can’t count.

Nutstuyu on August 1, 2013 at 1:51 PM

No, you’re right although you will be told that you aren’t by those that are unable INCAPABLE of discerning the difference in belonging to a political party and embracing particular political, economic, and societal philosophies.

FIFM

Resist We Much on August 1, 2013 at 1:52 PM

unclesmrgol on August 1, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Careful. Don’t point out RWM’s duplicity or you might get an arse full of fish & chips.

Nutstuyu on August 1, 2013 at 2:05 PM

For 87 years, our country thought that slavery was OK too.

Yes, but the Founders did not think slavery was OK. They agreed to a compromise position on slavery in order to get the country off the ground. That was a tactical necessity that did not reflect their clearly stated moral position on the issue.

I don’t think you can argue the same for abortion. There is no evidence that the Founders supported legalized abortion. That’s why I don’t accept the “since the founding there has always been tension between Right X and Right Y on the abortion issue” position. I was responding to the commenter – I think it was JohnGalt23 who I believed to be making that argument. However, I may have read his comment wrong.

Missy on August 1, 2013 at 2:16 PM

Careful. Don’t point out RWM’s duplicity or you might get an arse full of fish & chips.

Nutstuyu on August 1, 2013 at 2:05 PM

Wake me up on the day that either your or uncle succeeds in that effort.

Resist We Much on August 1, 2013 at 2:19 PM

your = you

Resist We Much on August 1, 2013 at 2:23 PM

Resist We Much on August 1, 2013 at 10:05 AM

.
Well once you start adding qualifiers…everyone’s a libertarian.
And I recall you not being in favor making abortion 100% illegal?

And…
is this an abortion thread now?
That didn’t take long.

verbaluce on August 1, 2013 at 10:13 AM

.
This is to everyone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Definitions of Liberal, Libertarian, and Conservative, as pertains to categorizing one’s political leanings are GENERAL only.
All political definitions are, and always will be, in the eyes of the individual beholder.
That will stop only when the “Second Coming” occurs, and not before.

listens2glenn on August 1, 2013 at 2:29 PM

Someone, Somewhere, Really Is Combing Through Your Google Search History

What happened was this: At about 9:00 am, my husband, who happened to be home yesterday, was sitting in the living room with our two dogs when he heard a couple of cars pull up outside. He looked out the window and saw three black SUVs in front of our house; two at the curb in front and one pulled up behind my husband’s Jeep in the driveway, as if to block him from leaving.

Six gentleman in casual clothes emerged from the vehicles and spread out as they walked toward the house, two toward the backyard on one side, two on the other side, two toward the front door.

A million things went through my husband’s head. None of which were right. He walked outside and the men greeted him by flashing badges. He could see they all had guns holstered in their waistbands.

“Are you [name redacted]?” one asked while glancing at a clipboard. He affirmed that was indeed him, and was asked if they could come in. Sure, he said.

They asked if they could search the house, though it turned out to be just a cursory search. They walked around the living room, studied the books on the shelf (nope, no bomb making books, no Anarchist Cookbook), looked at all our pictures, glanced into our bedroom, pet our dogs. They asked if they could go in my son’s bedroom but when my husband said my son was sleeping in there, they let it be.

Meanwhile, they were peppering my husband with questions. Where is he from? Where are his parents from? They asked about me, where was I, where do I work, where do my parents live. Do you have any bombs, they asked. Do you own a pressure cooker? My husband said no, but we have a rice cooker. Can you make a bomb with that? My husband said no, my wife uses it to make quinoa. What the hell is quinoa, they asked.

Quinoa is one of the healthiest foods ever, but that’s beside the point here.

That’s Michele Catalano, formerly of the blog A Small Victory, writing above. For what it’s worth, A Small Victory was an anti-terrorism blog, among other things.

So who were the men in the SUV, and why did they show up at her house? They were members of a “joint terrorism task force.” They showed up and peppered Catalano’s husband with questions and searched their house evidently because while Michele was in one part of the house Googling pressure cookers to figure out how to cook lentils a few weeks back, her husband was Googling backpacks on a computer in another part of the house, because he was looking to buy a backpack.

Googling pressure cookers and backpacks, after Boston, apparently earns an American citizen — on whom the NSA is forbidden by law to spy — a casually terrifying visit from armed government men driving around in SUVs. The men told Catalano’s husband that they conduct about 100 similar visits to American households per week.

Yet, the Tsarnaevs somehow flew under the radar.

How are government officials putting search histories together on people who haven’t broken any laws? Just how much information is the government collecting on all of us? If the information state is as pervasive as Catalano’s experience suggests it is, the potential for misuse and abuse is staggering. This isn’t a Republican thing or a Democrat thing or a Libertarian or libertarian thing — it’s an American thing.

Simply put, we’re not really free in our own homes anymore.

But, ‘NSA! NSA! NSA!’

Right, ‘I’d rather give up my stuff and be safe than be free’ peeps?

Resist We Much on August 1, 2013 at 3:08 PM

Dean isn’t really a doctor either seeing that is okay with killing children still in the womb.

zoyclem on August 1, 2013 at 4:17 PM

Hmm, that should be ‘seeing that he is ok…”

zoyclem on August 1, 2013 at 4:18 PM

only on msnbc does howie dean become the great definer of libertarians

by the way, i’m a libertarian, and pro-life, GFY howie

burserker on August 1, 2013 at 5:18 PM

How exactly is Howard Dean an expert on libertarianism? Furthermore, you don’t need to check every single box in other to be classified as a conservative, liberal, or libertarian. You just need to hold more beliefs than the others.

Rand Paul has always come across to me as a conservative. He believes in pretty much everything most of us believe in. The only thing where some might differ somewhat is on the issue of foreign policy and on government surveillance. Everything else, I see as pretty much the same.

BTW Mr. Dean, Paul has classified himself as a libertarian-conservative, not as a member of the Gary Johnson club.

Frank T.J Mackey on August 1, 2013 at 5:22 PM

I’m looking forward to voting for Rand Paul for president. Not very excited about any of the others. Cruz maybe? But I don’t think he’s that interested, honestly.

The fact that Howard “Welcome to the Jungle” Dean is trying to shoot him down now is good news.

I also realize Paul won’t win, the electorate is simply too Democrat. But at least I’ll enjoy voting for him.

happytobehere on August 1, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Ah, to be happy voting for someone again. I have held my nose for too long when voting for the rinos the republican party keep shoving at us.

Amjean on August 1, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Wake me up on the day that either your or uncle succeeds in that effort.

Resist We Much on August 1, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Lol! ; )

Bmore on August 1, 2013 at 6:25 PM

They changed the doctor’s oath to allow the killing of the unborn. What a sick bunch. The AMA and Dean can es.

CW on August 1, 2013 at 7:36 PM

Howard Dean: A taco short of a combination plate.
A clown short of a circus.
The wheel is turning but the hamster’s dead.

I could go on. Some things never change.

NoPain on August 2, 2013 at 8:21 AM

Dean is correct.

Libertarians believe that the right to life is a mere civil right, to be determined at the state level according to each state’s wit or whim. “What govt giveth, govt taketh away…blessed be the govt,” says the good little Libertarian, dupe of the socialists. Pay no attention to the language in our Declaration of Independence about those rascally “unalienable rights.” After all, according to both Libertarians and their socialist overlords, there is no god but Govt, and he does not grant unalienable (aka, inherent & inviolable) rights.

TXJenny on August 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

I love how people who aren’t libertarians, and don’t even understand what it means…try to define what libertarians are.

anyone else remember the old story about blind men trying to describe an elephant? you’re all right, but entirely wrong, at the same time.

warhorse_03826 on August 4, 2013 at 9:10 AM

Rand Paul was never a true libertarian to begin with, which is a good thing.

MelonCollie on August 4, 2013 at 1:19 PM

Nobody should take lessons from Howard Dean on libertarianism. We should listen to him on the different flavors of Ben and Jerry’s ice-cream, the only known product from his state of Vermont.

The remark on Chris Christie was just to glom onto a meme about NJ and tough-guys (yawn).

As for Scarborough talking about a party “in search of itself” – the search-party for Morning Joe’s political principles gave up a long time ago. He is a “cold-case” in terms of political opinion.

virgo on August 4, 2013 at 3:10 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3