Sen. Rand Paul is getting a make-over to cover-up blemished past
It’s all but official that Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is going to make a bid for President in the 2016 elections, and that leaves many liberals groaning and fervently shaking their heads in disgust, while libertarians and teabillies alike are hopeful that Ron Paul 2.0 will summon victory from the depths of Mordor with the magic poodle toupee.
As he tours Iowa, the paleo-libertarian is said to be reinventing himself into a more likable character rather than being his father’s golem. Time Magazine’s next issue has him on the cover, with the headline, “The Most interesting Man in Politics,” a common phrase that’s often attributed to Paul these days as he has been called “The Most interesting Man in the Political World” and “The Most Interesting Man in the Senate.”
If by “interesting,” one means completely insane.
In an interview with Reason TV this summer, the Kentucky senator said:
I think Republicans could only win in general if they become more live and let live.
While he may be right on the money with that, don’t be fooled that “Plagarism Paul” has anything good in store for Americans. He’s taken after his father on many issues in regards to immigration, government funding for healthcare, poor Americans, and being severely anti-federal government and pro-state and business rights.
Rand trying to reinvent his image as a GOP candidate is going to take a lot more than a policy make-over, he’ll also need a time machine and one of those Men in Black mind erasers and a lot of Thorazine.
Any rational person should not be able to forgive any of the extremist statements that have spilled out of the exit hole of his brain-anus. He may be willing to buff and shine his scaly hide during election season but that doesn’t mean he won’t shed his skin again once in office, which admittedly has as must chance as avian swine racing taking over NASCAR as redneck’s favorite past time.
For instance, in a Senate subcommittee hearing on the human right to healthcare, the anti-dreamer said:
[Accessible healthcare] means you believe in slavery. It means that you’re going to enslave not only me, but the janitor at my hospital, the person who cleans my office, the assistants who work in my office, the nurses.
Basically, once you imply a belief in a right to someone’s services — do you have a right to plumbing? Do you have a right to water? Do you have right to food? — you’re basically saying you believe in slavery.
Those comments were not surprising at all given that the self-certified opthamologist believes nearly every government agency should be privatized. He’s even mentioned that he wanted the Americans with Disabilities Act repealed and that the 1964 Civil Rights Act should have never been passed because it was “unfair” to businesses. But don’t call him a batshit racist! He also got under a few atheists skin when he said America would not need laws if everyone were Christian and lest we forget that he believes that gay marriage will lead to people marrying non-humans. Don’t blame him though, he’s apparently has no understanding of the term consent or even what makes this country great for that matter (inclusiveness, freedom of religion, and non-discrimination).
While this is any teabagger/libertarian’s siren song, most Americans greatly value government programs, regulating business, and recognize their worth to the greater good of all. If you are ever unsure if all libertarians are not completely insane, simply ask them if there would be a sex offender registry under a libertarian government? Didn’t think so. Americans like their socialistic programs because it unites us under a common cause, while a libertarian government threatens an “every man for himself” paranoid and chaotic way of life. While he may try to reinvent himself to be able to at least speak to all Americans, don’t be lured in towards the rocks lurking just beneath the surface; the rocky beaches of paleolibertarianism are littered with the bodies of believers.
Time Magazine, which won’t hit shelves until Oct. 27, alludes to Sen. Rand having what it takes to fix the problems within the GOP (the GOP itself is the problem, one cannot simply fix poor ideology built on a swamp), then let’s see if he has the chops there first before we let him up on the main stage.