Friday, May 21, 2010

Rand Paul, American Reactionary

Rand Paul, an eye doctor who last Tuesday captured the Republican nomination for junior Senator from the state of Kentucky,  is a reactionary.

His most recent gaffe--or expression of his honest viewpoints---was his dissatisfaction with an important part of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, stating that private businesses have no need to be prevented from discriminating against African-Americans. 

He also considers criticism of the recent massive oil spill by the BP Corporation in the Gulf of Mexico as "un-American".

He favors almost no regulation of firearms, going even further than the National Rifle Association in making it all too easy for people to get a gun without a background check.  

In the past he has stated that the USA, Canada and Mexico will secretly become part of a greater North American nation with the "Amero" as a common currency. Andthat a secret highway is being built from Texas to the Canadian border that will be without any traditional state control.   

 He is in the tradition of the Pat Buchanan/Rush Limbaugh school of inciting people who feel disaffected by the uncertain future that recessions bring about, with a revisionist view of the past where all was well and minorities and women knew their place and big business can be entrusted implicitly--even when they, like the BP  Company, pollute the environment or run the economy into a ditch with their fanaticism for playing clever casino games with other people's money. 

Rand is the type of politician that says outrageous things and, when called to task for saying them, turns about and goes on the offensive, blaming the "liberal media" for the crime of reporting the shocking things he says as what they are--the shocking ravings of a man who has been so immured by his own hard-libertarian mind-set.  

 He craves an American past  where white males have controls over all the institutions of business and government.    
He knows that there are many others out there who share his views.  To trick is always to just say enough in code words to draw in the hotheads and still keep the sensible flock in line and not worried that  the man they just voted for  is in way over his head. 

That is a task Rand Paul failed to do this week, just days after his election night victory in Kentucky. He clearly is in over his head, clearly out of touch with a modern America where Civil Rights are no longer the subject of debate and no one with a lick of sense should expect to trust any large profit-driven  institution unless there is basic regulatory oversight.


  1. he is, but is that any different than the strange way our President does things or does not do things

  2. I agree that most of America has this modern American viewpoint you refer to. But as I child I remember dinner table conversation about the "silent majority". When a person like this wins an election, even only a primary, it means too many are too silent.

  3. I was a fan of his dad's,until the way he pulled out of the presidential elections. That irritated me.
    I saw Rand on CNN yesterday, and he "explained" some of what you've written. A lot of these things are on his dad's agenda too. Rand is the favorite of the TEA party movement, I refuse to call them a "party" like the press is. Rand is running as a republican, but he and his dad are Libertarians at heart. You just can't get elected as a third party candidate though, so they run on the republican ticket. I looked into the Libertarians awhile back, and they scare me! I'm liberal, but they're, well, more liberal.
    I think this was more a mandate on ridding Congress of incumbents than wanting libertarians.

  4. I suppose all politicans are a bit strange Tess. Point taken.

  5. Well said Mary Ellen. I remember as a kid hearing about Richard Nixon's "Silent Majority", and the sense that some people will accept a bad status quo as long as it doesn't directly effect them.

  6. I agree wholeheartedly with that last statement Jacquie. I'm sure a lot of non-libertarians voted for this guy just because he wasn't the establishment candidate.

    Maybe we'd be a better country without a two-party system of political parties. Hard to be sure of that. Paul tried to reel himself back in a bit on the CNN clip I saw, but I think you could see his heart wasn't in it.

    The Libertarians have some common ground with liberals, I agree, but they bring a lot of baggage with them. I'm glad I'm not the only one a little scared by them. I have a friend who is a libertarian and he seems constantly angry. Not the way I want to go through life, although he might not be the best example of the variety.

    Even some of the Tea Movement is backing away from Rand Paul, if this report from the Los Angeles Times today is correct:

    "But Paul's base — the "tea party" movement he has embraced and claimed to speak for — was also all but mum. Two leaders declined to claim Paul, the son of libertarian icon Rep. Ron Paul, as a movement spokesman. Others dodged questions about his statements.

    "He's a politician. He doesn't represent the movement on anything regardless of what he says," said Mark Meckler, national coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots, an online network for local groups. "He's a guy running for office."

  7. Rand makes his Dad look like a Liberal.

    He scares me. That's enough.

    (Now - whaddya bet there'll be a 'draft Rand' gig come the presidential primaries?)

  8. I listened to him trying to explain his point of view on the Rachel Maddow show. Interesting stuff...I don't think he is a racist (as some people seem to imply) but I do think he's too naive in thinking that simple market/business forces will enact social change. The very fact that such changes had not been realized by the 1960s required the Civil Rights Act in the first place.

  9. Rand Paul repeatedly warned of a coming Tea Party tidal wave - he warned about it as he was already apart of it. There is no doubt that from being a opthomologist in Kentucky to coming within the Senate that Senator McCain plaid a large role with this one as he and his Paul`s father have been good friends for years. Doug I think that last thing he wants is a connection between three countries as there is already by way of our trade agreements. But the case here is the Ron. I think that with all these politicians that are going on it really illustrates something with the character of whom is in office right now. As all Rand as many have agenda that without any doubts is set, devised to create as much propaganda. We have never seen or maybe it`s never been so obvious. I still believe within the current President along with his administration and truly I think they have done more and yet the propaganda has over shadowed some of the good things done to date. The ensemble of Rand and the others that you named here truly are creating dissension within the US - George Bush did the same thing in another manner with the code of alarms after September 11. If you remember there was the warnings on the television. And that is never done. If you can`t scare people by alternative manners. Silly if you ask me how this has all been brought together...Very good write there Doug these guys are not reactionary they actually seem to have an agenda set.

  10. This clip made it to NZ telly lol - rather ironical that BP stands for British Petroleum? I wonder if Rand thought about that.

  11. He said ," has anyone ever thought that this was simply an accident"? He never mentioned unAmerican in any interviews I watched, so If you could point me to one that he said this on, that would be great. Now I do not if he is any better in his ultra conservatism than this administration is in their ultra liberalism. Both are bad for this country. Moderation should be mentioned some where, but is not. I am still waiting for Obama to do something I consider positive for this country. daily speeches do not do it for me. And his choice to ignore the majority of people's ants is just crazy.

  12. BP: British Petroleum, UK
    Shell: Royal Dutch Shell, Netherlands
    Statoil-Hydro: Norse Owned
    Lukoil: Russian Owned
    Atlantic Petroleum: Faroe Islands
    Citgo: Venezuela
    Ecopetrol: Columbia
    Gazprom: Russia
    Gulf Oil: Luxembourg
    Petrobras: Brasil
    Reliance; India
    Repsol; Spain
    Sinopec: China
    Total: France
    All of these foreign owned firms have a huge presence in the US and these tea partiers and the ones who pimp them have long never got it.
    In fact more marketers are foreign owned and now refineries are being sold to other countries with stronger economies, such as Petrobras buying the Delaware City Refinery.
    I speak as one who works closely as a consultant to the Oil and Gas Industry, US and foreign, and you will see much more of the production sold.

  13. Yeah I'm with you Astra. And here I thought Palin was as scary as it gets!

  14. That's the whole deal in a nutshell Shedrick. Very well put. The naivete of the man is limitless when it comes to market forces always doing the right thing. What planet is he from? I don't want to demonize the majorities of businesses out there, but my mother greww up in Tennessee and she certainly saw enough Jim Crow Laws in action to understand why things had to change and the Act was needed.

  15. I agree Jack. It's all too easy to scare people who have gine through a shock. Our bad economic times lends power to amateurs like Rand Paul to pretend they are saviors due to their lack of expereince in any public office. People are grasping at straws here, trying to find a channel for their anxieties.

  16. Thanks for providing the national background on these companies. I imagine many of the Tea partiers have over looked this, just as our federal government in the past has overlooked bypassing the lobbyists and doing some serious inspections of the anti-blow out equipment these companies are using.

  17. I doubt he did Iri Ani. The word "un-American" as you might know was used in the 1950's to label anyone who questioned the far right (with their war on government action for public safety and social justice) as being de facto traitors or dupes or "agents of Moscow"!
    That sort of talk was probably fed to Dr.Paul like cereal when he was a kid.

  18. Here's the "un-American" remark Tess.

  19. "reactionary" seems too kind a word.

  20. On reflection, you're right Jeff.

  21. Perhaps 'dickhead' would be a better description Doug?.....He is certainly a chip off the old block alright, his dad's a rabid proto-nazi too...The only thing is someone who is straight out of Danny Kaye's Secret Life of Walter Mitty is never going to be exactly 'charismatic' is he?... except to chumps of the first order of course and to anybody who in the future goes to school in Texas.

    The whole Tea Party thing refers more to The Mad Hatter than to 'no taxation without representation' I think.....the Paul family want no taxation with representation (but only by them) more tea said the Dormouse.......`You might just as well say,' added the Rand Paul, `that "I breathe when I sleep" is the same thing as "I sleep when I breathe".....for poor Rand I'm afraid it is the same thing Doug :-)

  22. He certainly is a chip off something odius, AA.

    Hadn't noticed the resemblance to Mr. Kaye. A very apt comparsion, not the least of which he is another in a long line of amateur chumps who try to dash off to high office. Only the fantasy here is the going to be the reality the public must pay for in the end.

    You hit it square on the head---this breed of American libertarians believe they somehow shouldn't be taxed nor should their sacred busineses be regulated.

    Men like Paul are rather like junior-league divine -rightists such as King James and King Charles I were, insisting that the people have no right to regulate what he/they want to do because of some elevated view of themselves and their peer group as gods among men. Give me a break!!!