Why Ron Paul is > Rand Paul (and the Daily Beast is a Rag)

So I take it Rand Paul opposes arming the Syrian opposition, but supports US air strikes against ISIS. Fortunately, his libertarian fans see through his blatant difference splitting and are not happy about it. The linked article describes Rand’s weaseling but otherwise is a typical Daily Beast snarkfest.

On Thursday afternoon, Paul took the Senate floor to deliver an impassioned speech outlining his opposition to arming Syrian rebels as the U.S. fights ISIS. That part of Paul’s foreign-policy platform, his liberty-loving fans have no issue with. It is the other part—where Paul is openly supporting airstrikes in Syria and Iraq—that is causing some of them, at least those dedicated enough to the movement to attend LPAC, to stare at him squinty-eyed.

“Squinty-eyed?” Get it? That’s the author’s way of communicating disdain. Where did she go to journalism school, Patsy’s Playland?

Apparently we are supposed to be shocked and amused that one liberty supporter (Glenn Jacobs a.k.a. Kane) is tall, one has a pony tail and another wears a pro-second amendment belt buckle. One wants to ask the author, Olivia Nuzzi, if she has ever been to a libertarian gathering before. It’s not exactly the suit and tie GOP set. That there are pony tails and big belt buckles at a liberty gathering is about as newsbreaking as there being lobbyists and other influence peddlers at a Hillary Clinton fund raiser or childish snarkmeisters masquerading as journalists at a Daily Beast editorial meeting. But enough about Olivia who obviously has not progressed beyond her high school mean girl phase and is clearly not to be taken seriously.

Rand’s fence straddling is serious business for those of us interested in a foreign policy of minding our own damn business. Compare and contrast Rand’s pandering with his father’s clear declaration of noninterventionist good sense.

The limited mission the president promised just weeks ago has already greatly escalated, and now threatens to become another major regional war. In reality, however, this is just a continuation of the 24 year US war on Iraq that President George Bush began in 1990 and candidate Obama promised to end as President…

There are 200 million people bordering the countries where ISIS is currently operating. They are the ones facing the threat of ISIS activity and expansion. Let them fight their own war, rather than turning the US military into the mercenary army of wealthy Gulf states. Remember, they come over here because we are over there. So let’s not be over there any longer.

Even the people Ms. Nuzzi thinks are such a spectacle, have more foreign policy sense than Rand.

“That war’s supposed to be over. I’m surprised he’s supporting anything there,” says Charles. Yep!

Diane says Rand is “trying to game.” Again, yep!

Asked if he supported the airstrikes, Glenn Jacobs (Kane) replied, “No, no,” because “I think what ends up happening is you have unintended consequences.” Double yep!

Per Ms. Nuzzi, “Kane said he agreed with Paul on some things, but agreed with his father more.” My feelings exactly.

Sadly, that apple continues to roll  further and further from the tree, and the Daily Beast remains stuck in the playground sandbox.

Comments are closed.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner