Was The LP Radical Enough In 2008?

Was the Libertarian Party radical enough in the 2008 campaign? Was Ron Paul's 2008 campaign more radical than the 2008 LP Platform or nominee?

Positions more radical than the 2008 LP Platform are shown like this.
Positions less radical than the 2008 LP Platform are shown like this.

2008 LP Platform 2004 LP Platform Ron Paul Bob Barr
Role of Govt Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. The only proper role of existing governments in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. What should be the role of government be in free society? And the founders answered it pretty well, and it was to provide for a sound currency, it was to have a national defense and it was to protect liberty. We stand for the proposition of maximizing individual liberty and minimizing government power, getting the government out of one's home, one's school, one's workplace, one's wallet, one's personal life.
Defense We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. Any U.S. military policy should have the objective of providing security for the lives, liberty and property of the American people in the U.S. against the risk of attack by a foreign power. All U.S. citizens travel, live and own property abroad at their own risk. A: I happen to think that the market can deliver any service better than the government can. Q: Even — would you use that for defense too, or no? A: No, no, we'd have defense What‘s worth having our military fight for is whenever there`s a threat to the United States of America, a direct threat to our people, wherever they are in the world.
Secession Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of individual liberty, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to agree to such new governance as to them shall seem most likely to protect their liberty. We recognize the right to political secession. This includes the right to secession by political entities, private groups or individuals. The principle of self-determination applies to political unions as well. Secession is the last resort of states whose sovereignty is over-ridden by an overreaching federal government. Without the right to secede, state’s rights are meaningless. If Texas were to secede, the state might enjoy a significant inward migration of independent-minded citizens from other states, and precipitate a real boom in its economy.
Taxes All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service We oppose all taxation Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker's paycheck. There are a lot of shortcomings with a sales tax, but it would probably be slightly better than the income tax, so it would be an improvement. […] The Fair Tax as a replacement — I'm not a co-sponsor of that, but I'd probably vote for it if it came to the floor. Adopt a national sales tax, replacing the Internal Revenue Service and all federal income taxes as well as payroll taxes. We would need to couple it with repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment.
Entitlements Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. We favor replacing the current government-sponsored Social Security system with a private voluntary system. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use. Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. We favor replacing the current fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, government sponsored Social Security system with a private voluntary system. The proper source of aid to the poor is voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. We support an end to government-provided health insurance and health care. Q: Is [Medicare] something you'd get rid of? A: Yes, but that's not high on my agenda. As a matter of fact, we've taught a couple of generations of Americans to be very dependent on government. That's not my goal, because I think you have to have a transition period. Q: If elected president, Paul says he would abolish public schools, welfare, Social Security and farm subsidies. A: OK, you may have picked that up 20 or 30 years ago, it's not part of my platform. Q: You're OK with Social Security now? A: We need to offer the kids the chance to get out. I never voted to spend one penny of Social Security money. So I'm the one that has saved it. Now, if I save the money in this military operation overseas, I say take that money - and, and I say this constantly - don't turn anybody out on the streets. People we have conditioned - yes, technically we shouldn't have them, and it'd be nice to get rid of them, but I would say take care of the people that are dependent on us. Institute savings accounts that are credited against Social Security taxes. Don't increase [benefits] every time there is a cost-of-living inflation. This notion that we can't do anything, because it's a sacred contract with everybody, that's nonsense. It's an immoral program whereby the government takes by threat of force money from individuals and doesn't even provide them an ownership interest.
Money We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money any mutually agreeable commodity or item. We support a halt to inflationary monetary policies, the repeal of legal tender laws and compulsory governmental units of account. We call for the repeal of all legal tender laws and of all compulsory governmental units of account, as well as the elimination of all government fiat money and all government minted coins. We call for the abolition of the Federal Reserve System. Congress has a neglected but vital constitutional role in overseeing monetary policy. […] We, the Congress, have the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, but not to declare a legal tender. Limit the ability of the Federal Reserve to manipulate the currency for political purposes. The Fed’s “easy money” policy over the last decade greatly contributed to an artificial increase in lending and property values.
Bailouts We oppose government subsidies to business, labor, or any other special interest. Industries should be governed by free markets. We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We oppose all government subsidies to business, labor, education, agriculture, science, broadcasting, the arts, sports, or any other special interest. The loans of government-sponsored enterprises, even when not guaranteed by the government, constitute another form of subsidy. We oppose all government guarantees of so-called private loans. Taxpayers must never bear the cost of default upon government-guaranteed loans. Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don’t make me laugh. Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind – another example of the big choice we’re supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Because the government has caused this problem, similar to the savings & loan problem the government caused a generation ago, it has to do something. The question is: Can it do enough by providing some temporary security, some temporary back-up, as long as it’s done with the thought in mind that there has to be long-term congressional action here to restructure and reformulate the very way Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae operate, I think that would be an advisable solution.
Drugs We favor the repeal of all laws creating "crimes" without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes. Repeal all laws establishing criminal or civil penalties for the use of drugs. This war on drugs is totally out of control. If you want to regulate cigarettes and alcohol and drugs it should be at the state level. Get the federal government out of these issues, and return the power to the people. This should be an issue, based on the continued failure of our drug laws to really stem the tide or change behavior, that would probably be much better handled at the state level.
Immigration Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property. We call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally. 9/11 has occurred, why shouldn't we be looking at people who are coming in? When immigration is like an invasion, we have to treat it differently. Today, illegal immigrants violate our borders, and overwhelm our hospitals, schools, and social services. I want border security now. Physically secure the border. No more student visas from terrorist nations. Allow full and fair and lawfully robust immigration. If a person wishes to enter the U.S. for a lawful purpose, they ought to be allowed to do so. But they have to enter through a lawful border checkpoint, present valid identification so we can assure ourselves they do not pose a security risk to this country, and they submit to a communicable disease [check].
Marriage Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no discriminatory impact on the rights of individuals by government, such as in current marriage laws. Government does not have legitimate authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Individual rights should not be denied, abridged or enhanced at the expense of other people's rights by laws at any level of government based on […] sexual orientation. For federal legal purposes, the Defense of Marriage Act is proper, it takes care of all the problems. If you have to have rules and regulations, put it at the state level. DOMA simply stands for the proposition that each state can set its own definition of marriage, and can't be forced to adopt a different definition of marriage forced on it by another state.
Abortion Government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. Recognizing that abortion is a very sensitive issue and that people, including libertarians, can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe the government should be kept out of the question. I consider abortion an act of violence, and violence is on thing the government has a responsibility to curtail. But for the most part, acts of violence are handled by state law. It should be worked out at the state level. If there's one thing that should be illegal, it's the taking of life by force without justification. The same applies to the unborn fetus, which is a human being, a human life.
Iraq The principle of non-initiation of force should guide the relationships between governments. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. The United States should abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. The United States should not inject itself into the internal matters of other nations, unless they have declared war upon or attacked the United States, or the U.S. is already in a constitutionally declared war with them. The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. It is now time to bring our troops home. We must return our focus to finding bin Laden. In Iraq, we have and will have at the end of this Bush administration still close to 150,000 troops over there with all sorts of support personnel, $400 million a day. We need to stop that, there is absolutely no justification. We now know that there was not the justification in the first place.
Afghanistan The principle of non-initiation of force should guide the relationships between governments. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. The United States should abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. The United States should not inject itself into the internal matters of other nations, unless they have declared war upon or attacked the United States, or the U.S. is already in a constitutionally declared war with them. Shortly after 9/11, I voted for the authorization to go into Afghanistan because it told the president to do what he already had the authority to do: go after the ones who directly hit us. I was extremely disappointed that the mission there changed to one of nation-building, and I support immediate withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan. Afghanistan, what we should be doing there is not propping up the government. Use very specific, very surgical operations to ferret out the terrorists.
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License