If Rand Paul weren’t the son of his famous father, how many libertarians would be enthusiastic about him? He would be one of the less-offensive members of Congress, but he would ultimately be just another politician who’s defending the fundamentals of the status quo.
When Rand Paul ran for the U.S. Senate and his father, Ron Paul, retired from politics, many long-time Paul supporters saw the son as the natural successor to the man they had idolized for years. As much as I admire certain things about Ron Paul, I couldn’t support his candidacy, as I explained two years ago. What’s worse, no outsider candidate of the Ron Paul sort has any chance of being elected president running with libertarian principles.
Ron Paul was the ultimate outsider as a member of Congress. His fellow congressmen called him “Dr. No” because he voted against anything that wasn’t specifically authorized by the Constitution. He didn’t compromise and he didn’t play political games. He spoke the truth as he understood it and people thought he was a nut. And he left with a bang, asking a series of questions that statists are still ignoring.
His son is taking a very different path. Anyone who expected a principled libertarian has to be badly disappointed by Sen. Rand Paul.

What would I do with my time if the money made no difference?
Life choices: What’s important enough to spend your life doing?
Dark times on Earth trigger my emotions about Artemis launch
Why are killing, maiming people elsewhere called moral, ‘legal’?
Suppressing speech you don’t like is a lousy way to encourage tolerance
Whether it makes sense or not, I’ve learned to expect miracles
Dishonesty runs rampant when partisanship matters more than truth
My drive to be perfect led to lack of compassion for self and others