Before I go into this, I want to very carefully explain to people – even though I am registered to vote as Republican, I am a very devout Independent at heart and in the head, for example I will vote for Third Party person Gary Johnson in the general election if the specific Republican I want for president loses the primary to some clown like Trump or Carson. The break down will be my philosophy and which factions of the GOP I agree with on which issues, then I will detail my initial history of endorsing people for president, then I will answer the titular question.
My Own Platform
Generally, I am what you would call a “Free-market liberalism” Republican, so basically a GOP-voting libertarian or “Republitarian”. I say ‘generally’ because I am one of the rarer Republitarians that supports an active international policy inspired by world liberation themes like “Empire of Liberty”. In terms of party loyalty though I am merely just a “small-R” republitarian, I do not care to embrace any party platforms aside from the Modern Whig Party platform.
As a republitarian, I endorse Free Markets, free trade, Free-market healthcare and private property under Laissez-faire. I also hold that all military service must be voluntary and there must be no draft, and I believe a vast majority of government functions should be privatized, and the domestic policing functions and scientific progress projects turned over to the city and town governments [both known as the “local level”]. Tax-wise I advocate replacing our current taxation system and the IRS with the Negative Income Tax [a flat rate system crafted for dodging all welfare traps] and the FairTax [a sale tax that takes 23 cents from every dollar of profit margin]. I additionally believe in eliminating all Federal regulations of economy and ridding our economy of the Federal Register [book of regulations].
My republitarian nature also has me endorsing civil liberties. Meaning I endorse these rights as originally popularized by the 18th century AD European thinkers who influenced America’s founding fathers, also as known in global terms nowadays [hence my choices of which Wikipedia pages about them I link to]:
- Freedom from Torture
- Freedom from Exile
- Freedom of Thought
- Freedom of Media
- Freedom of Belief
- Free Expression
- Freedom of Assembly
- Right to Security
- Right to Privacy
- Legal Equality
- Due Process
- Fair Trials
- Right to Life
- Property Rights
- Right of Self Defense
- Right to own handheld weapons
- Bodily integrity
- Freedom of Education
- Freedom of Choice
- Freedom of Association
- Freedom of Movement
But, in foreign policy, I diverge from most republitarians by supporting a strong military with a realistically high budget, a harsh foreign policy against Salafi [Islamic Authoritarian] regimes & militias in the Greater Middle East, and an eagerness to always support both Israel’s national sovereignty and Israel itself, and I support “Empire Of Liberty” expansionism. Most fellow libertarians, including most fellow republitarians; support a limited military with an idealistically low budget, a foreign policy of tolerating authoritarian regimes and militias who do not attack Americans on American soil, and an Israel policy of Only supporting that nation’s sovereignty, but not that nation itself. Plus this majority of my own psychographic opposes “Empire Of Liberty” expansionism. I agree with the National Security faction of the GOP on issues of foreign policy, I basically cannot say I agree with the Neoconservative faction on foreign policy as I disagree with them on a majority of political issues facing the US, especially in Domestic Policy.
So, instead of being a blind and inhuman sheep of agreeing with the current GOP platform on absolutely everything, I am one who can be most accurately described as “national security libertarian” republican or, simply put, “Neo-libertarian”. Both in a GOP-leaning sense and in the fact that I am an LP-leaning Independent at heart, in the head and in the soul; I am an “NSL”, National Security Libertarian.
Initial Endorsement patterns
The very first person I endorsed for President for 2016 was a guy who was very straight headed and very Independent-at-heart at the time: Wayne Root. Yes, the man who ran for Vice President on the LP [libertarian party] ballot in 2008 was going to be my first pick for president. But then the vile rhetoric of Donald Trump and Ben Carson corrupted him into sympathizing the Nativism of the Far Right, so now I can no longer call him a fellow middle-ground Neolibertarian let alone endorse him for president. I am just glad he still shares with me headstrong resistance to the political correctness of the Far Left.
Next I looked at the Republican Liberty Caucus’s “Liberty Index”, but regrettably the newest one around now is from 2013, and it says that this guy Marco Rubio has a 90% clean record in Personal Freedom and a 95% clean record in economic freedom, meaning this guy had a Liberty Index ratio of 93%. So then I look on his campaign site and notice his foreign policy inputs are mostly based in reality and I go to endorse him for president. Then I see a bunch of stances of his on other issues that make me wonder how he got a 90% record on Personal Freedom, such as his support for the Patriot Act and for extended NSA spying.
Finally, I look at Rand Paul with initial skepticism based on his foreign policy beliefs. Turns out he very recently rethought his foreign policy philosophy, and his entire platform on a whole, to sound exactly like something modeled to be similar to the Libertarian Defense Caucus tenants list and/or the Modern Whig Party platform. For example, right on his site, he says “I vow to explore all diplomatic options before sending our armed forces into battle”. Hmmm… sounds like the following LDC line:
- “We believe a Global War on Terror exists, and that the war must be executed by diplomatic, economic, and only as a last resort, military means.”
Both sound exactly like the kind of “Big Stick Diplomacy” myself and other neo-libertarians support in US foreign policy! You know, Theodore Roosevelt’s line “Speak Softly but Carry a Big Stick”.
Time to Answer the Titular Question
In case you were already predicting, yes, I endorse Rand Paul for president of the United States. But do I disagree with him on anything? Well… I disagree with him slightly on the issue of abortion, I believe there should be no government involvement in that issue, but I also respect Rand Paul and other pro-life people as I am one of the, unfortunately, very few pro-choice people who have the common sense to recognize from a Zoology-based perspective that the idea that human life and other animal life begins at fertilization, and that it’s been a common fact and norm of Life on Earth for a good 5 or 6 hundred-million years.
So, to end this post, I am a former Non-religious Deist and current Non-religious Atheist who Stands With Rand. But I will talk about my conversion to Atheism and why it happened later, if I have not already.
Thank you all for reading this entire thing,
~TLA [The Legendary Atheist]