Rand Paul Isn’t A Reform Candidate, He’s Just More Of The Same

Images via mediamatters.org

Images via mediamatters.org

Rand Paul for president? Yawn. I really hope that the Republicans who have mocked President Obama’s “Hope” logo for the last 6+ years are taking notes here. Remember how you guys laughed at all the people who fawned over then-candidate Obama as if he was the second coming of Jesus himself? Oh yeah, those people were a little bit nuts, but so are you if you think Rand Paul is really anything more than another Washington politician.


Now don’t get me wrong, Rand Paul is the most palatable of all the potential 2016 GOP contenders – if I had to choose between voting for a Republican and smashing my fingers, and both Home Depot and Lowe’s were all out of hammers. Seriously. To be fair, there are a couple of issues that Rand Paul and I agree on – like not getting involved in regional conflicts that aren’t our business or ending the failed War on Drugs – but he didn’t really mention either of those in his speech.

Here’s the first part of it:

I have a message, a message that is loud and clear and does not mince words. We have come to take our country back.

We have come to take our country back from the special interests that use Washington as their personal piggy bank, the special interests that are more concerned with their personal welfare than the general welfare.

The Washington machine that gobbles up our freedoms and invades every nook and cranny of our lives must be stopped. (Source)

How many times have we heard the same old promises to “fix Washington”? And if elected president, how many Republicans in Congress would actually go along with his agenda, if it was actually genuine and not just more of the same old contrived political platitudes?

For crying out loud, this guy’s whole speech is the same “freedom, ‘Murica, Constitution, hard work and greatness” shlock we’ve heard from just about every politician to run for office in the last couple of decades. Here’s an example:

From the time I was a very young boy I was taught to love and appreciate America. Love of liberty pulses in my veins not because we have beautiful mountains or white sand beaches, although we do, and not because of our abundance of resources. It’s more visceral than that. Our great nation was founded upon the extraordinary notion that government should be restrained and freedom should be maximized.

America, to me, is that beacon. We are unique among the nations that our — that our country stands for freedom. Freedom nurtured our country from a rebellious group of colonies into the world’s greatest nation.

When tyranny threatened the world America led the way to rid the world of Nazis and fascist regimes. Resolutely we stood decade after decade against Communism, the engine of capitalism finally winning out against the sputtering, incompetent engine of socialism.

We won the Cold War.

America and freedom are so intertwined that people literally are dying to come here. The freedom we have fostered in America have unleashed genius and advancement like never before. Yet our great nation still needs new ideas and new answers to old problems. (Source)

Hey Rand, do you actually know the difference between Communism and socialism? You do realize that the United States is a moderately socialist country, especially when it comes to corporate welfare?


You talk about how we need new ideas and new answers, but you bring nothing new to the table.

Sure, a bunch of libertarians will probably descend on the comments here shortly and talk about how both parties are the same, while ironically defending Rand Paul at the same time. They will of course miss the fact that Rand Paul is the Diet Coke of libertarianism and simply being against the War on Drugs or cutting spending on social programs does not a libertarian make. I’m also extremely wary of anyone who attributes their initial political success to Alex Jones from Infowars who is the leading conspiracy nut grifter in the entire United States.

In summary, the whole speech was the usual “let’s criticize Democrats and liberals for everything” shlock we’ve seen from every potential candidate without presenting any new ideas – and cutting taxes for corporations who are hiding their profits offshore or on people who are already so poor they don’t pay income tax doesn’t count either. Rand Paul isn’t a candidate with fresh new ideas, he’s just another Washington politician with same old ideas and a new coat of paint. Like his father, Rand Paul can be compared to a broken clock; he’s right twice a day, but another broken clock isn’t going to fix a broken political system. At least Ron Paul reminded me of a slightly more loveable Father Jack Hackett from the “Father Ted” TV series on Britain’s Channel 4.




Comments

Facebook comments

  • BobJThompson

    “We have come to take our country back from the special interests that use Washington as their personal piggy bank, the special interests that are more concerned with their personal welfare than the general welfare.”

    With his libertarian-ish leanings what that translates into is remove as many regulations that I can and let the free market sort it out. The “free” market being completely dominated by the same special interests that he’s decrying in his quote. So back to my main issue with libertarians, your plan to fight the special interests that dominate this country is to give them everything they want? Rand must be paying the Koch’s back for not backing him with their black hole depth pockets.

    • strayaway

      Why did Senator Obama vote for the Wall Street bail out? Why does president Obama want to fast track the TPP and provide cheap foreign labor to US employers? How do those Obama policies “fight the special interests that dominate this country”? It is difficult to imagine Paul could do worse. You can speculate all you want about Paul having his hands in the Koch brothers pockets but cannot deny that Obama has been a puppet promoting the US Chamber of Commerce’s agenda.

      • BobJThompson

        You assume that I’m an Obama supporter. Wrong. The only major party candidate that I support is Bernie Sanders. Otherwise I’ll be voting Green again. I refuse to support either party of big business and war.

        Also I support even less right wing economics, because I see that everytime they are implemented, they fail. Sure you get a bump for a few years in the economy. Then the bottom falls out and it’s everyone but the rich that take the brunt of the pain.

      • strayaway

        Sorry for my assumption. I have also voted third party 6/8 of the last presidential elections although more along libertarian and constitutional lines. That number includes one vote for Ralph Nader. I agree that our corporatist system is weighted on the side of the rich but there are two parts of corporatism; big corporate money and big government.

      • BobJThompson

        Big government is fine if it serves the will of the people. Not the handful of super rich. I’d be fine with big government setting up evacuated tube transports, repairing the roads, making health care affordable, etc. I do actually like what the libertarians SAY about getting the government out of personal lives and ending foreign entanglements. But if those come with ruining protections we take for granted and a dog-eat-dog no safety net hyper-capitalist economy, I’ll vote against them every time. History has shown lowering taxes and eliminating certain regulations only provides a short term boost to the economy. Then it crumbles.

      • strayaway

        One compromise and it isn’t really a compromise is to consider having state and local governments do those things you mentioned. At least they would have a much more difficult time getting so big that they would be spying on you. Besides, that’s what the Tenth Amendment suggests. When Vermont opted for a Canadian like single payer health care system, it was the (un)ACA thugs that squashed the affordability part of Vermont’s plan. That’s dog eat dog corporatism with the federal government acting as the guarantor of corporate profits. That’s what you’ll get even more of with Hillary.

      • BobJThompson

        You do know that portions of the patriot act are set to expire soon. If you want the national spying state to go away spread the word and have people contact their reps. I plan to.

        Obamacare was a decent step for some states and a huge step back for states like Vermont that already had proper health care. Frankly I have never been a fan, since it basically amounts to a huge give away to the health insurance industry. Single payer is the way to go.

        btw, not everyone on the left supports Hillary. Don’t assume.

  • Macdoodle

    Sounds like liberals are scared of this guy and so are the ultra right conservatives.They are starting the smear campaign.the country couldn’t go wrong with either him or Walker as president.

  • Flat Banana

    The “author” of this article highlights how Rand says we need to change the country, yet Obama has done nothing but wide the gap between the left and right to an unmeasureable distance while at the same time weakening our foreign policy.
    You complaining about how we shouldn’t cut funding to government social programs (welfare), why shouldn’t we? How long can we as a country sustain holding someone by the hand? Dems are infamous for creating the false hope of welfare being great for individuals and families, yet all these programs do is keep the people who are already in poverty down. These programs do not give individuals the kick start they need to improve their lives, it ruins their lives, their children’s lives and the lives of the tax payers.

    • Jillz

      Why is giving your tax $$$ to the poor who need it (government social programs) considered to be so bad; but giving your tax $$$ to the rich who don’t need it (corporate welfare) considered to be ok?