By Mark Wachtler at Opposition News:
Which pearl of wisdom is more correct – Keep your friends close and your enemies closer? Or, an enemy inside your house is more dangerous than an enemy outside your house? Kentucky US Senator Rand Paul is currently waging a one-man war against independents and opposition candidates across the country. He’s coordinating with the elites of Washington and Wall Street and going after independent media outlets. You may have even seen one of his campaign commercials in your state telling you not to vote independent.
US Senator Rand Paul
“With friends like Sen Rand Paul, who needs enemies.” That’s the sentiment that continues to grow among America’s independent, conservative and libertarian voters. And with the exception of Senators Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), probably no member of Congress has the support of independent and opposition voters across the country more than Sen Rand Paul (R-KY).
That’s why GOP Party bosses used him in campaign commercials this election asking independent and opposition voters not to vote for the independent or opposition candidates on their ballot because it would cause Republicans to lose their respective races to Democrats.
This isn’t the first time the darling of the Republican Tea Party has used his friendships with the opposition to politically stab them in the back. Many former fans of the father and son team of former Congressman Ron and current US Senator Rand will insist that both men betrayed their national voter base by selling out to the GOP.
The article goes on to say:
Rand Paul attacks independent journalists
Immediately after Sen Paul’s endorsement of Mitt Romney over his father Ron Paul, two independent journalists asked the Senator the question no establishment news outlet dared to ask – how could you endorse Mitt Romney over your own father? For the crime of not following the Capitol Hill propaganda protocol, those two journalists were accused by Rand Paul of criminally harassing him, leading to interrogations by everyone from the Capitol Hill Police to the FBI to a collection of Washington DC media bureau chiefs.
Those two journalists – Abby Martin of RT News and Media Roots, and Luke Rudkowski of We Are Change – were the two unfortunate reporters who dared to ask that question and were now suffering the wrath of Rand Paul and the GOP establishment. They are legitimate reporters, they had proper credentials and press passes, and they had every right to be at the Capitol and ask that question. But none of it mattered. Read the 2012 report from our sister publication Whiteout Press for further details, ‘Rand Paul uses new Friends to terrorize Indy Media’.
Jesse Benton and Mitch McConnell
Showing just how intertwined the Paul family and the Republican establishment have become, Sen Rand Paul again did the unthinkable and officially endorsed one of the two most hated Congressmen in America – Sen Mitch McConnell (R-KY). The other most despised is McConnell’s Democratic counterpart Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV). Rand Paul even campaigned for the Republican Senate Minority Leader and gave him the Paul family campaign manager – Jesse Benton.
Benton is a key figure with his own alleged criminal controversies. He’s been accused of stealing the millions-strong membership list from the Pauls’ Campaign For Liberty and giving it to Senator McConnell and the RNC. Assumedly, for that act of loyalty, Jesse Benton was hired as McConnell’s campaign manager for the 2014 election. Soon thereafter, Benton was forced to resign after criminal investigations were launched over his alleged bribery of Republican Party delegates to the GOP’s 2012 Presidential nominating convention. Read a recap of the controversy from Kentucky.com. Also, read how Mitt Romney publicly conceded that he now knows the Republican Party stole the 2012 Presidential nomination away from Ron Paul, ‘Romney admits GOP stole 2012 Nomination for him’.
Read the full article at Opposition News
And I’m sure Hillary Clinton will appreciate that support 🙂
I agree that his case against Ron Paul is weaker than his case against Rand Paul, but he does not leave it completely unsupported. Much of his case is built around Rand Paul going around the country stumping for non-libertarian Republicans and specifically using his independent/contitutionalist/libertarian”ish” “street cred” to persuade voters with those leanings into eating a Republican turd sandwich rather than voting for the independent, Libertarian or Constitutionist in the race. Ron Paul has been doing the same thing for decades, albeit to a less prominent extent. A recent notable example was when both Ron and Rand Paul played key roles in the Republican establishment’s dirty smear campaign against Robert Sarvis in Virginia last year, contributing to costing us the best chance we have ever had so far at ballot retention in a key battleground state which includes a chunk of the DC metro area. This was far from the first time Ron Paul was used by the Republican Party this way. Granted, Rand Paul has kicked it up another notch with his massive ad blitz this year and his shameful endorsement of Mitt Romney before the nomination and before his father officially withdrew from the primary.
I agree that over the years, Ron Paul has doled out some endorsements that he should not be proud of, and to some extent has sullied his reputation by doing so. But to say that such endorsements constitute “selling out to the GOP” and becoming “intertwined [with] the Republican establishment”, as the author does, seems to me to be a tremendous leap of logic, especially considering all the ways in which Ron Paul (unlike Rand) has publicly thumbed his nose at the GOP establishment over the years, including his refusal to endorse any of the last 3 GOP presidential candidates (and probably more than that – I’m not sure whether he ever endorsed Dole or Bush I, but I seriously doubt that he did).
Which brings me to the conspiracy theory about his supposedly agreeing to help Romney, in exchange for Rand getting the nomination in ’16. This is absolutely preposterous. Not only did Ron Paul have no leverage to cut such a deal (as you yourself point out), but as Thane pints out, Ron Paul never endorsed Romney! This seems to be just another case of the author conveniently conflating Ron and Rand. In fact, the whole thing smells like a classic guilt-by-association hit piece, probably by someone who disliked Ron to begin with, and is now taking the opportunity to hold Rand’s actions against Ron.
Rand Paul is not a libertarian. He has never said he was. He claims to be a “constitutional conservative” which isn’t necessarily a bad thing but he is surely NOT a libertarian. I don’t trust him but having said all that… if it is Rand versus Hillary I sure won’t vote for Gary Johnson! If the LP doesn’t find another Harry Browne I will definitely vote for the lesser of two evils!
The word I used for Rand yesterday was “baffling”. I’m hoping he’s truthful as to why he voted it down, but this is the same week he voted for the pipeline. The Senator is worrisome, for sure.
I knew someone would make that joke. I’d hardly say he’s the biggest. Though I can certainly understand why Libertarians would find him problematic.
“To me he’s the biggest enigma in politics.”
Shouldn’t that read “enema”?
I’m inclined to think Rand is truthful when he says the reason he voted against the NSA bill was because it did not eliminate the Patriot Act. It seems to me that if he’s trying to earn establishment support, saying you oppose a bill the establishment supports because “It does not go far enough” would be the worst reason to use. He’s on record as wanting to end the Patriot Act. It just makes little sense as a strategy to me.
But this is why I don’t think he’ll get the nomination,even though McConnell has recently announced support for him. He’s too much of a wildcard. Even if he has completely (pardon my language here) whored himself out to the mainstream of the party and would screw his father and his supporters over happily once elected, no one’s going to risk backing him when there are more acceptable candidates like Rubio, Walker, Christie.
Also, I’d point out that several Democrats who tend to defend surveillance such as Reid himself, were backing this. (The soon to be former Majority Leader actually said this bill would be “Good for the Country” if passed.) I find it hard to believe they were truly concerned about the issue, leading me to believe this was all feel good political theater that did nothing substantial to actually solve the issue.
Now, am I a Rand apologist? Eh, perhaps. I’d like to think I’m not. In truth I’ve moved on a bit from my Paul supporting days, though I still hold a tremendous amount of respect for the elder Paul. But Rand himself has annoyed me numerous times. He’s too pro Israel for my liking and has sounded too much like a hawk for my tastes. I expect were he elected he’d be less effective than his supporters hope while being slightly more effective than those suspicious of him care to admit. I do believe he has genuine “Maverick” tendencies, such as his courting of minorities who overwhelmingly vote Democratic. He does seem to genuinely care about making a case to them.
When he first announced his run for senate, he admitted he voted against McCain and wrote in his father. I do wonder if he’d be willing to admit that today. To me he’s the biggest enigma in politics.
“in which Ron Paul would drop out of the race and endorse Mitt Romney, horrifying his independent and libertarian voter base” – This sounds to me like the article author is unable to distinguish “Ron Paul” from “Rand Paul”. When ever did Ron Paul endorse Mitt Romney?
Other than that it does put a lot of information together in one place.
I agree that his case against Ron Paul is weaker than his case against Rand Paul, but he does not leave it completely unsupported. Much of his case is built around Rand Paul going around the country stumping for non-libertarian Republicans and specifically using his independent/contitutionalist/libertarian”ish” “street cred” to persuade voters with those leanings into eating a Republican turd sandwich rather than voting for the independent, Libertarian or Constitutionist in the race. Ron Paul has been doing the same thing for decades, albeit to a less prominent extent. A recent notable example was when both Ron and Rand Paul played key roles in the Republican establishment’s dirty smear campaign against Robert Sarvis in Virginia last year, contributing to costing us the best chance we have ever had so far at ballot retention in a key battleground state which includes a chunk of the DC metro area. This was far from the first time Ron Paul was used by the Republican Party this way. Granted, Rand Paul has kicked it up another notch with his massive ad blitz this year and his shameful endorsement of Mitt Romney before the nomination and before his father officially withdrew from the primary.
Another part of Wachtler’s case is based on a conspiracy theory stemming from the 2012 primaries:
I think Wachtler wildly overstates his case with that one. If you really believe that Ron Paul was “surging to what many believed would be a victory in the GOP Primary,” you are getting high off your own supply. Ron Paul never stood a real chance at the Republican presidential nomination, and what little chance he stood was long gone by the time this alleged deal took place – most likely in Iowa and New Hampshire. What made the Romney gang’s vindictive behavior against Ron Paul and Paul delegates even more appalling was that it was not necessary; Romney would have won anyway, and as usual for him, he was a rotten winner who cheated when he didn’t need to (even after the fact, giving Ron Paul and his entourage a final fuck you with a TSA top to bottom inspection of their private plane when leaving Tampa).
I’m also skeptical that the RNC traded the 2016 Republican Presidential nomination to Rand Paul way back in 2012 in exchange for his father’s non-existent threat to the Romney coronation. IMO Rand Paul is still a long shot for the 2016 NSGOP presidential top of ticket, although he has a better shot at it than his father ever did. And to the extent that he does have a shot I do not believe it is some kind of done deal, especially not in exchange for chips that he wasn’t holding to begin with.
However, I would not be entirely surprised if Rand Paul does in fact become a leading contender for their nomination, or even wins it, and I expect maximum level dirty tricks against the LP, CP and any independents from his end – especially if he is on the Republican presidential ticket, but even if he’s not.
Rand Paul’s attacks on Abby Martin and Luke Rudkowski and the other points against Rand Paul that Wachtler makes do not apply to Ron Paul as far as I know.
While I have no desire to defend Rand Paul, I will note that this article seems to practice a particular form of intellectual dishonesty by pointing exclusively to Rand’s misdeeds, but then drawing conclusions that it applies to Ron as well as Rand.
For example: Many former fans of the father and son team of former Congressman Ron and current US Senator Rand will insist that both men betrayed their national voter base by selling out to the GOP.
Or this: Showing just how intertwined the Paul family and the Republican establishment have become, Sen Rand Paul again did the unthinkable and officially endorsed one of the two most hated Congressmen in America – Sen Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
In both these cases, the article levies charges against both Ron and Rand, while presenting evidence only against Rand. The author apparently wishes to turn the old proverb on its head by punishing the father for the sins of the son.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/rand-paul-nsa-libertarians-113042.html
Sean Campbell
@Periclesisright
@LPNational People believed @SenRandPaul was #Libertarian but @politico shows he the same old politician. #Fraud politi.co/1yUiKAp
Rand doesn’t stand
By David Nather @DavidNather
Rand Paul says he wants surveillance reform. Instead, he helped sink it. And now he’s under fire from the civil liberties groups who have been his strongest allies in his war on the NSA’s domestic…
@politico
Tonight, he killed the bill to control the NSA somewhat. He says it’s because it didn’t go far enough, but I consider that a rather lousy reason, and suspect it isn’t fully truthful from the friend of Romney and McConnell.
A great article. Sad that so many people are fooled by this ass.