Rand Paul Makes Ridiculous Statement about Hillary Clinton and Democrats

rand-paul-idiotI’ll be honest, it’s really difficult for me to take anything Rand Paul says seriously. This is a guy who had such an inept staff that he was caught plagiarizing various sources, including an article in the Washington Times. 

He was also one of the key figures a few months ago who was trying to ridiculously use Monica Lewinsky to attack Hillary Clinton.

And we can’t forget when he suggested that the “imperfect among us” would be eliminated due to abortion.

Well, now he claimed that Hillary Clinton and Democrats are “afraid” of him running in 2016 because he’s not a war-hawk like us liberals.

On Meet the Press Paul said, “I think the American public is coming more and more to where I am and that those people, like Hillary Clinton, who, she fought her own war, ‘Hillary’s war,’ you know?”

“And I think that’s what scares the Democrats the most, is that in a general election, were I to run, there’s going to be a lot of independents and even some Democrats who say, ‘You know what? We are tired of war. We’re worried that Hillary Clinton will get us involved in another Middle Eastern war because she’s so gung-ho,'” he continued.

It’s amazing. Republicans are bashing President Obama for being “weak” on foreign policy, and Republican Rand Paul is trying to gin up the narrative that Hillary Clinton will be too “aggressive.”

You really can’t win with these people. If a president tries to avoid military conflict, they’re weak. If they’re more open to possibly military action, they’re a “war hawk.”

The truth is, Rand Paul is nothing more than Ron Paul 2.0.

Sure, he appeals to the anti-war crowd. But so did his dad. And the one thing he doesn’t seem to grasp is that no candidate is winning the GOP nomination for president appearing “weak” or “passive” against terrorists.

There are people who are always going to oppose war. So by pandering to those people, you’re always going to have a certain foundation of support.

But the thing about war is that it shouldn’t be based on public opinion or politics. War should be used as a last resort, when it absolutely has to be used. Paul’s “isolationist” approach is not only short-sighted, but it’s dangerous.

And another thing he seems to forget is that a lot of his other policies don’t appeal to independents or liberals. You know, like being anti-abortion, anti-immigration and wanting to abolish agencies like the EPA and FDA.

Let’s also not forget that he was right there alongside Ted Cruz pushing for the government shutdown. Or the fact that in 2010 he essentially said he would support the right for businesses to discriminate based on race. Though, of course, he’s since backtracked on those comments a bit.

See, that’s what someone like Rand Paul doesn’t seem to understand. Sure, he might get some support from independents and liberals who are sick of war. But he’s also going to lose much of that support because of the radically far-right tea party policies he supports. And he can’t win the GOP nomination without pandering to those unpopular, radically right-wing ideologies.

But as a liberal and a Democrat, I don’t fear Paul at all. In fact, if he won the GOP nomination for president, I would love it. Because while candidates like Chris Christie or Jeb Bush might actually put up a decent fight against Hillary Clinton in 2016, Rand Paul would get absolutely crushed.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • Avatar

    If Rand Paul have a chance as President, he’d declare the war on Our close allies for no reasons.

  • strayaway

    “War should be used as a last resort, when it absolutely has to be used. Paul’s “isolationist” approach is not only short-sighted, but it’s dangerous.”

    What isolationist approach? Rand supports trading with and talking to nations; not bombing them. Rand does not approve of all the wars and bombings Hillary supported. She voted to empower Bush to be the Iraq war decider, she supported bombing Serbia, Libya, and Syria. Apparently, Hillary thought that war “absolutely (had) to be used” on all those places “as a last resort”. There might well be some other reasons progressives would rather vote for Hillary instead of Rand but I’m surprised that progressives are such big fans of bombing that list of nations.

    Point Rand!

  • emcada

    Nice article. I agree, Rand Paul is basically the second coming of Ron Paul or as you so eloquently put it Ron Paul 2.0

  • Pipercat

    Gee Rand, don’t you remember that little exchange you had with Chris “Big Baccala” Christie a few months back?

  • forpeace

    I have been following and reading every single news article about this person, checking his stand on so many important issues, and his voting records, all I have to say: Thank God the Libertarian and the Koch Brothers & Tea Party’s tool Rand Plagiarizer Paul has a zero chance of ever becoming the President. This is how I describe this person:

    I don’t want government, I don’t like government, why do we need the government for, and etc., but I like working for government because I LOVE getting my pay checks, BEST health care, retirement plans and other benefits, my staff salaries and benefits courtesy of taxpayers from the same the government I DISLIKE so much.

    Did I mention being in U.S. Congress and NOT even working is making it easier for me to collect LOTS of money aka contributions from lobbyists and special interest groups?

    I have no clue what am I talking about, but I will say and do anything to become POTUS, even plagiarize my speeches and my book from Wikipedia, or by using other’s words or ideas, now gimme, gimme, gimme more taxpayers’ money.

    My name is Rand Paul, I’m an opportunist, clueless, flip-flopper, and Plagiarizer, I don’t even know WTH I am talking about, and I approve this message.

  • 2Smart2bGOP

    Rand Paul has as much chance of being elected president as I do of being chosen for the Rockettes, which is to say, absolutely none.

  • forpeace

    One other important issue that people such as Rand Paul are doing their best to completely ignore and never talk about it while babbling about “Small Government” is the fact that:

    His own state Kentucky gets $1.51 back for every tax dollar it sends to Washington D.C.

    I would like to ask Rand Paul what kind of small government can afford to help a welfare state such as Kentucky?

  • Gabriel Gentile

    “Because while candidates like Chris Christie or Jeb Bush might actually put up a decent fight against Hillary Clinton in 2016”

    Uhm….. How?

  • JasonPen

    I tried to post a comment on here and it hasn’t been “approved” yet…
    I think you are just trying to control the narrative and won’t dare let your biased readers hear anything that contradicts everything you said above about Rand Paul.

  • Wayne Stiles

    I’m an amputee and confined to a wheelchair so I have much time to kill. I am a reader, veracious actually, and listening to what is going on in politics is fascinating. Fox says something, I have to go fact-checking. Usually they are wrong. In reality, they are all full of shit to some degree. If they don;t out-right lie, they stretch the truth. What is interesting is how far they go. Dems like to take it and modify the truth, usually a few numbers. Republicans take the truth and find a better “story”. But I look at it this way, the Dems have no Koch brothers paying nearly a billion dollars to elect themselves a President. When two of the richest men in the world are that eager to throw money at an election, don’t bend over and keep the backdoor covered.