Red Phillips: Rand Paul’s Sell-Out is Absolutely Undeniably Complete

Red Phillips is a longtime IPR contributor. The following was published on his blog, Conservative Heritage Times.

July 12, 2013

The Jack Hunter fiasco fall-out continues. Now it has completely finished off Rand Paul as well. Someone please give Rand a Testosterone injection.  He is clearly running low. For those who have argued that Rand Paul was just making rhetorical concessions as part of “playing the game” but was still stealthily one of us, I thought that argument lost credibility when

1) he babbled PC platitudes before a Howard University audience, or

2) spouted PC immigration boosterism before a Hispanic organization, or

3) offered Israel a security guarantee to placate the neocons (You see how well that worked out don’t you?)

but I could see that some still held out hope. Gentlemen, I’m sorry to inform you, but it’s time to give it up. It’s over. Rand Paul is done. (Here is the original HuffPo interview.)

“I’m not a fan of secession,” Paul told Fineman. “I think the things he said about John Wilkes Booth are absolutely stupid. I think Lincoln was one of our greatest presidents.”

I actually don’t doubt that Rand Paul still stealtily holds views very similar to his father’s. That is the impression he gave when he stumped for his father in 2008, before he ran for Senate, but what good do those stealth views do for us? Does anyone think that Rand is going to stealthily get himself elected to the White House and then on day one declare “Ha! I fooled you!” and start vetoing all unconstitutional spending (almost all of it), or shutter the Fed, or grant the South a free pass to leave the Union? At best he is going to marginally tax less, marginally spend less, and marginally pull back on our foreign policy adventurism, because he has talked himself into a corner. So we pay slightly less in taxes and the country financially collapses in 2035 instead of 2030. Whoopee!

This is why I have such an aversion to rhetorical concessions. I don’t have a problem with stylistic concessions. I don’t have a problem massaging how you say certain things. I don’t have a problem with “playing the game” (competing in a GOP primary or being active in the party for example) to a degree. I don’t have a problem conceding the political reality as it actually is on the ground. In fact, I have always been very realistic about the sorry state of our present political reality.

It is partially because our reality is so sorry that rhetoric matters so much. Because at this point it’s all we got. Therefore we have to be willing to wage the rhetorical battle and make some headway there before the political battle will matter. When a national politician with Presidential aspirations can say to a HuffPo reporter “Darn right I think Lincoln was a tyrant and secession is a perfectly legal option! If I didn’t I wouldn’t be a propper conservative.” and the “right” doesn’t go into spastic denunciations, then we will have made some progress.

At this point, ours is primarily a rhetorical battle whether everyone wants to accept this fact or not.

Note: For those who say we are overdoing the Hunter story, you’re wrong. Fighting the PC Thought Police is the field of battle right now.

The P.C. Thougt Police Go After Jack Hunter (a.k.a. the Southern Avenger)

July 9, 2013

By Red Phillips

The Cultural Marxist PC Thought Police are frothing at the mouth again. They’ve identified a new thoughtcriminal for their Two Minutes Hate, Jack Hunter, a.k.a. the Southern Avenger.

Here is the Washington Free Beacon fatwa … err … article that got the jihad started. When I first heard rumblings that the PC Gestapo was going after Jack, I suspected the author might be the loathsome PC enforcer Jamie Kirchick, but it wasn’t. It’s some writer I’ve never heard of named Alana Goodman. Here is Goodman’s bio per the Free Beacon:

Alana Goodman is a staff writer for the Washington Free Beacon. Prior to joining the Beacon, she was assistant online editor at Commentary (neocon alert!). She has written for the Weekly Standard, the New York Post and theWashington Examiner. Goodman graduated from the University of Massachusetts in 2010, and lives in Washington, D.C. Her Twitter handle is @alanagoodman. Her email address is

Jonathan Chait picked up on the story here. Chait isn’t someone I normally associate with this type of PC Thought Enforcement campaign (I could be wrong), but this drive by smear job is inexcusable. He says this:

But his son and progeny Rand Paul also has a close aide who is a huge racist, reports Alana Goodman.

A “huge racist?” Actually Chait, Goodman isn’t even shameless enough to say that in so many words even though her “article” is a transparent PC/neocon rightthink enforcement hitpiece. (I say neocon in addition to PC because she heavily focuses on foreign policy and highlights among other things his belief that the nuking of Japanese civilians was unjustified.)

Salon piles on here.

What’s noteworthy about the Goodman piece is just how lame the allegations are. Anyone who has followed Jack’s career at all knows that he is pro-South and supports the right of secession. As Dave Weigle points out in a semi-snarky pile on of his own, this is not news, but the PC Rightthink Enforcers thinks this is a scandalous revelation. Beyond that she presents a laundry list of statements and policy positions that are supposed to scandalize all decent rightthinkers. I could defend each of Hunter’s statements individually, but I don’t have time for that now. In general, taken together the quotes and positions place Hunter in an identifiable paleocon/paleolibertarian sphere, but there is nothing here that is not routine opinion in those circles and each individual opinion can be found in mainstream conservatism as well.

Looked at as objectively as I can as an interested co-combatant, the thing that might be most shocking to the ears that the Rightthink Enforcers are aiming to prick is his use of the word terrorism to describe the nuking of Japanese civilians and his comparison of that act to 9/11. (FTR, I don’t think terrorism is the right word to describe our use of nukes against the Japanese civilian population. It is needlessly inflamatory and isn’t really an accurate word choice. It is more accurate to describe it as a war crime, but that is for a separate thread.) Beyond that Hunter is accused of saying that there is a double standard against whites. Other races can celebrate their race but whites can’t celebrate theirs. Well no duh! This is a thoroughly mundane and unarguable observation. He’s also acused of saying our foreign policy in the Middle East is influenced by Israel. Is there anyone who seriously denies this? In fact, the interventionist at the Free Beacon celebrate this as right and good. He is excoriated for suggesting that immigration alters the culture. Again, no duh! Does anyone seriously deny this? In fact, immigration boosters celebrate the fact that immigration brings about change in the culture. You know, that whole “Diversity is our greatest strength” mantra.

I could go on, but you get the point. Unfortunately, Jack concedes too much in what was I’m sure a damage control interview with the Free Beacon. Those of us who have followed Hunter’s career for a while have recognized that he has become more politically pragmatic over the years, thus his defense of some of Rand Paul’s misguided concessions. But I have always hoped that that old self-described “right-wing radical” still lurked beneath the surface. But this is not the time to criticize Hunter. Now is the time to defend him against the baying PC Rightthink mob. They’ll be time for dragging him fully back into the fold once the PC Enforcers have been called out for their rightthink policing shenanigans.

To read more coverage on the recent saga of Rand Paul aide Jack Hunter that has been receiving a substantial amount of mainstream press, go to the following articles from Red Phillips and other contributors from his blog:

Jack Hunter’s mistake (July 10, 2013)

More Jack Hunter Thoughts and Reactions (July 10, 2013)

A Tale of Two Secessionists (July 11, 2013)

The Lesson of Jack Hunter, the Southern Avenger (July 12, 2013)

 Mainstream news stories, including the Free Bacon article that started it all:

Rand Paul staffer has history of neo-confederate sympathies, inflammatory statements (July 9, 2013)

Rand Paul’s team has another white supremacist (July 9, 2013)

Rand Paul: Crawling out from Under the Rubble of Jack Hunter-gate (July 10, 2013)

RJC Calls on Rand Paul to Distance Self from Controversial Aide (July 12, 2013)

 Jack Hunter and Rand Paul ‘playing the game’  (July 12, 2013)

22 thoughts on “Red Phillips: Rand Paul’s Sell-Out is Absolutely Undeniably Complete

  1. Deran

    One thing that I think we can all agree on is that when the League of the South talk about secession, they are talking about the s certain persuasion of white people would take the former states of the Confederacy and create a white nationalist homeland. Yes?

    And the difference between White Dixie and MECHA is that the white dominated at that time United States, invaded Mexico, beat them militarily, and annexed half of Mexico. Which would be illegal mow under treaties the US Senate has ratified and the President signed.

    So MECHA cultural nationalism and autonomy as a tool to reinvigorate a minority exploited by the white dominated capitalist set up/ The League of the South is the former white majority attempting to consolidate their power in one region where they can maintain their dominion.

  2. Deran

    Sorry, I realize my comments are necessarily germaine as to whether Rand Paul is a Marxist or whether past leadership in a white supremacist organization is a statement of a person’s core values or not, but, have you noticed that this League of the South and the Southern National Congress et al are sort of a white nationalist revanchism, compared to Harold Covington’s “Northwest Qunintet” of novels promoting a new white homeland in the Pacific Northwest of the US, and his Northwest Front org. (Covington copped the idea from that hippie Ernst Callenbach’s mid-70s novel, “Ecotopia”, abt an environmentalist utopia in the Pacific Northwest seceding from the US.) I would assume Chuck Baldwin has read Covington’s novels and moved to western Montana, and yet is becoming a leader in the competing white fantasy dungeons and dragons game of the League of the South.

    Maybe these people are much more heavily armed, much angrier and more fanatical then I am and I should not find them so funny?

  3. RedPhillips

    Chuck Baldwin supports a right to secession and doesn’t admire Lincoln, but as far as I know he doesn’t have any affiliation with the League of the South. I think you are thinking of Michael Peroutka who was the CP 2004 nominee and is now on the League Board.

  4. Tom Blanton

    Perhaps there is a good reason that “conservatives” and “liberals” love to passionately debate 19th century politics, and perhaps that reason is because if they debated 21st century issues it would be revealed to all but most severely mentally handicapped that there is not a whole lot of difference between the fundamentally statist beliefs of these groups.

    In other words, it’s a lot more fun to gin up the emotions of rubes with ad hominem attacks and vague insinuations using guilt by association than it is to discuss whether to cut taxes by 1% or raise taxes by 1% or other statist nonsense.

  5. Deran

    @3, Yes, you’re right, Red Phillips, yes you’re entirely right about that. I did conflate Mr. Baldwin’s and Mr. Peroutka’s (at least) crypto-white nationalist affiliations.

    But it does make me wonder all the more if Baldwin has read Covington’s book?

    We do have a fairly recent tradition out here, in the Pacific Northwest; Aryan Nation, The Order (The Order was also inspired by a novel) etc.

  6. Oranje Mike

    I support succession. I support succession of regions from states and of states from this union. Force cannot unify. Unification requires consent (just like a marriage). I even support the socialist loonies that wanted Vermont to succeed from these United States.

  7. RedPhillips

    “there is not a whole lot of difference between the fundamentally statist beliefs of these groups.’

    Tom, this may apply to some discussions, but it doesn’t apply to a discussion about secession. Secession is fundamentally counter to the modern nation state.

  8. RedPhillips

    Deran, the Tale of Two Secessionists article illustrates two PC double standards. First, that “mainstream” leftists are allowed to associate with their “extremists” with little outrage, but “mainstream” rightists don’t get to associate with their “extremists.” If a rightist ever associated with David Duke, for example, all Hell would break lose, but Obama gets to pal around with Bill Ayers, and it’s not a problem. Second, non-whites get to express their racial identity and it is considered natural and good, but if a white expresses racial identity it is the worst possible thoughtcrime. These double standards can be defended but can’t be credibly denied.

  9. Thomas L. Knapp

    CC @ 10,

    Last time I checked, he was not only not the best candidate for the Libertarian Party’s 2016 presidential nomination, he wasn’t even a candidate for the Libertarian Party’s 2016 presidential nomination.

  10. Jared King

    Actually Concerned Citizen, Newt Gingrich is clearly the best canidate for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination in 2016. Maybe Rand Paul could be his running mate.

    Hardy har har har…

  11. Robert Capozzi

    9 rp, there’s a difference. I take your point about associations. But there’s for me a difference with expressing racial pride when one is a minority vs. a majority race. This is especially true in the US, which still has cultural reverberations from its history of chattel slavery. Historically, blacks have been handicapped by being hated by -thankfully -an ever-diminishing majority racist element.

    Undoing the social engineering of slavery is incomplete, though my sense is that significant progress has been made.

  12. Erik Viker

    “Gretchen, stop trying to make Rand Paul happen. He’s not going to happen.”

  13. paulie

    How is this a story about third-party or independent politics?

    I think Red Phillips is with the Constitution Party IIRC.

    I support succession.

    From context, it appears you mean secession. Succession is what happens when a leader steps down, dies or loses power.

  14. paulie

    Rand Paul is the best candidate for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination in 2016.

    Rand Paul says he is not a libertarian. LPKY says he is not a libertarian. He will run for the Republican nomination and will not run for or accept the Libertarian nomination.

  15. paulie

    Newt Gingrich is clearly the best canidate for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination in 2016.

    Newt Gingrich is even less libertarian than Rand Paul, and in no way a libertarian. Newt Gingrich is a loathsome turd.

  16. Matt schutter

    No way Paul. Rand Paul is a homophobic pig. I don’t want him representing my Libertarian Party. Rand is only for Liberty when it is good politicaly for Rand. He is an insult to the Paul family right behind Jesse Benton

    Lehigh Valley PA Libertarian Party Chair
    Matt Schutter

  17. J Rolland

    The Libertarian Party would say Rand is a sellout. They are a competing party. The Libertarians will raise a candidate in 2016 that will fail like Gary Johnson.
    Ron Paul said it best in Tampa in reference to the RNC “we will become the tent”. Rand is the means by which that will happen.
    The Libertarian Party serves a good purpose in trying to send a message that liberty is popular, but then defeats that purpose when they tread on Libertarian minded republicans like Rand.
    There are so many things wrong with that. Libertarians are famous for being exclusionary. You do realize that in order to win an election, you need idiots to vote for you right? That doesn’t mean you have to change your views, you just have to present them in a manner that will appeal to the masses. Rand is doing that. I have registered as a Libertarian to send a message, but Rand has my vote 100%. Voting for him is a more practical approach to making this country more Libertarian than voting for a third party guy like Johnson.

  18. Thomas L. Knapp

    While agreeing with the general theme of Red’s take, I have to disagree with his perception that Paul’s sellout is “complete.” I suspect Paul has not yet begun to publicly defile himself.

  19. JD

    If at first you don’t secede, try, try, again. I am a Southerner by birth and I would love to see an independent, multi-racial, and liberty-based Southern nation. Not all Southern nationalist are racist or white-nationalist.

    The fact of the matter is the southern states have a unique culture and deserve the chance to express themselves through an independent nation free from slavery and coercion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *