I remember when Little Green Footballs was the most unhinged right-wing website on the Internets. But even they think Rand Paul is beyond the pale. The official Republican line is that Rand isn’t ready for prime time because he’s being honest about what he believes. If he can just focus on “debt and terror” and the money the government is spending to get the unemployment rate down, he’ll be the next senator from Kentucky. That would be the debt that Bush’s unfunded wars and massive tax cuts for the rich produced, and the nonstop fearmongering that Cheney produced. As far as Lamar Alexander is concerned, Rand Paul can be a welcome member of the Republican caucus if he just learns to stop talking about what he believes and begins blaming the Democrats for the mess that the Republicans made when they were in power.
Here’s a thought. Why would anyone vote for a racist like Rand Paul or a diaper wearing senator like David Vitter or a guy like Richard Burr who wants to protect Wall Street? The Republicans have not articulated any reason to vote for them.
I see no reason at all to vote for the rest of that bunch but I would vote for a “racist” like Rand because he is anti war, anti fed, anti patriot act. He is (or was, anyway) vaguely anti drug war which is a plus. All your attacks on the Bush admin and most republicans are perfectly well taken and agreed to.
I would prefer Rand over a “non-racist” who seems inclined to continue a war in Iraq, escalate a war in Afghanistan, expand that war into Pakistan (dose killing Pakistani villagers with hardly a though count as racism, or not so much?) and toys with the Idea of attacking Iran.
That said, if to get over his current difficulties he joins the rest of the GOP war mongers, then of course I will change my mind about him.
Till then…he has my support.
Nevermind. According to antiwar.com Rand is said to have said the following.
“I do see Iran as a threat to the stability of the Middle East… Recently, President Obama took nuclear weapons off the table in certain circumstances, and I think that’s a mistake. I think it’s reckless to take them out of the equation.”
If he is pandering to the neocons to the point of suggesting the US should threaten or hint about the use of nuclear weapons, then he has no redeeming features whatsoever.
I still strongly support Ron Paul. But not Rand, though it has nothing to do with his views on the CVA.
Rand isn’t an extremist whatsoever. As has been stated, he’s just telling the truth. The truth is that he’s walking the line of the Republican manifesto that’s right on their website. The rest of the GOP is simply not willing to do the same.
I don’t know if Paul is a racist or not. Certainly he attracts racist loons (his former campaign manager, skinhead money bombs, etc.), as does his father. But to me, at least, it’s still an open question. He could just be incredibly naive about human nature, which is a common failing among the libertarians I know.
What I find interesting about Paul’s candidacy is what it says about the teabaggers. Paul claims to be their messenger. In his NYT column yesterday, Frank Rich said Paul’s election settles any questions about the mysterious teabagger ideology. I disagree.
I think if Paul’s more left-friendly libertarian views (anti-war, anti-drug war, etc.) were known, the social conservatives and warmongers in the teabag brigades (Palin, Hannity, Beck, etc.) would disown him. We’ll see if, like you suggest, he learns to shut up about what he really believes and chant the GOP line.
It is worth noting that LGF is no longer “the most unhinged right-wing website” and hasn’t been for sometime. They are now a consistent critic of right wing insanity. A bit like John Cole at Balloon Juice, the rw crazy became too ridiculous even for them.
Yep. The blog’s author even publicly broke with the right wing on his blog with a manifest that earned him a bunch of hate mail from conservatives.