Sen. Rand Paul said he doesn’t buy into the concept of gay rights because they are defined by a gay person’s lifestyle.
“I don’t think I’ve ever used the word gay rights, because I don’t really believe in rights based on your behavior,” the Kentucky Republican told reporters in a videotaped interview that has received little attention since it was recorded in 2013.
They’re lying about GOP foreign policyYea but Jack's got some credulity issues of his own in this column. For example, his first paragraph:
Rand Paul, who will likely run for president as a stay-at-home Republican, went to Guatemala recently and performed eye surgeries as a means of displaying his foreign-policy bona fides,” wrote New Yorker editor and Barack Obama hagiographer David Remnick. “Was Bashar al-Assad, Syria’s ophthalmologist-in-chief, impressed?”Now about that term, "hagiographer" - what does Jack mean by saying that David Remnick is an "Obama hagiographer"? Merriam Webster defines hagiography as:
a book about someone's life that makes it seem better than it really is or was : a biography that praises someone too muchIf that's the case, then I suppose Jack hasn't actually read the Remnick piece he so dutifully quotes. It begins with this:
Even the most forgiving judge of Barack Obama, one willing to overlook his preference for chipping onto the sunlit greens of Martha’s Vineyard rather than brooding in the fluorescent glare of the Situation Room, must admit that the President has sometimes been a thick-tongued steward of his own foreign policy.Yea, that's hagiography, alright.
It’s kosher to criticize Sen. Paul’s foreign policy views, to suspect expediency motivated the recent shift in them and to consider his inexperience in foreign affairs a handicap. (I have, I do and I do.) But to attack him for his charitable work is vile.I'm not exactly sure that Remnick is attacking Paul simply for his charitable work. Looks more like he's pointing out Paul's use of the charitable eye-surgeries as some sort of political photo-op (in this case, to bolster some sort of foreign policy credibility). And that is something to at the very least be cynical about.
The doctor and his patients greeted each other beneath the gaze of three television cameras, three photographers, six reporters, a political aide, two press secretaries, conservative activist David Bossie...And:
...Bossie’s presence cast aside any doubt that the trip was merely an opportunity for the senator to reconnect with his medical roots. Bossie is the founder of Citizens United, the group whose lawsuit led the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that corporations and labor unions can spend unlimited funds on direct advocacy for or against political candidates. A documentary filmmaker who has shadowed Paul before, he traveled here with his daughter and a film crew equipped with lights, cameras and an unmanned aerial drone for overhead shots. Bossie said little about his plans, other than that his footage would appear in a film either about Paul or an issue of importance to him.So it wasn't a purely charitable trip then, was it? Now go back and look at how Jack Kelly characterized Remnick's description of the trip. Wouldn't it have been much better to know more of the details before reading that it was "vile"? That's the set of facts that Jack left out - the stuff he doesn't think you need to know about before reading his opinion.
Paul’s entourage included family members and friends; his top political aide, Doug Stafford; and political ad makers Rex Elsass and Rick Tyler, the latter a former close aide to Newt Gingrich. The ad team was joined by a Spanish-speaking colleague who was responsible for trailing behind another film crew with legal release forms that needed to be signed by anyone interviewed or appearing in their footage. It wasn't clear whether Guatemalans presented with the release forms understood what they were signing.
Mr. Remnick also mocked New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie for saying Russian President Vladimir Putin wouldn’t push him around the way he has President Obama and snarked at former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s prediction that the invasion of Iraq would be a “cakewalk.” [Emphasis added.]And:
Mr. Remnick’s snark is sustained only by his ignorance of or disregard for facts.
The invasion of Iraq was a cakewalk. Saddam Hussein’s regime was ousted 21 days after the U.S. coalition attacked. Just 172 coalition soldiers were killed. The Six Day War between Israel and Arab states in 1967 probably was the only victory in the history of warfare won more swiftly or easily.So Jack is saying that Rumsfeld wasn't wrong to say that the invasion would be "a cakewalk" right? Jack then foils that with Rumsfeld's opposition to the Iraq occupation. So Remnick must be wrong, right?
The troubles came during the occupation afterward, which Mr. Rumsfeld — who wanted the United States to set up a coalition government and then leave — had opposed.
Chris Christie insists on the efficacy of big men and tough talk—the Great Jersey Guy theory of history. Recently, he suggested that Vladimir Putin would not dare sponsor the bloody destabilization of Ukraine were Christie in charge. “I don’t believe, given who I am, that he would make the same judgment,” Christie said at a meeting of Republican activists. “Let’s leave it at that.” Christie is trying to bone up on world affairs by reading Kenneth Adelman’s book on Ronald Reagan. Adelman was the cheerful adviser to Donald Rumsfeld who insisted that the U.S. invasion of Iraq, in 2003, would be a “cakewalk.” [Emphasis added.]But let's be sure. Was it Rumsfeld or Adelman who said the invasion would be "a cakewalk"?
More than a year ago, Kenneth Adelman, a prominent national-security official in the Reagan Administration who now serves part time, with Richard Perle, on the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board, wrote a piece for the Washington Post. Its title was “Cakewalk in Iraq,” and its payoff went like this: “I believe demolishing Hussein’s military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk. Let me give simple, responsible reasons: (1) It was a cakewalk last time; (2) they’ve become much weaker; (3) we’ve become much stronger; and (4) now we’re playing for keeps.” [Emphasis added.]So whose "ignorance of or disregard for facts" are we talking about when Jack said (incorrectly) that Rumsfeld said the invasion of Iraq was (and Jack even used the quotation marks) "a cakewalk"?
According to a local Fox station, Valle had attempted to approach Paul before the debate took place, dressed in a blonde wig and with a "RepublicanCorp" sign mocking him as a stooge of special interests.Valle spoke to reporters after the incident. She later filed charges with the police and went to the hospital with head pains.
Attendees around Valle are heard screaming, "get the cops" as cameras captured her being dragged to the pavement by her red sweater. Once on the ground a man wearing white sneakers pushed the sole of his shoe down on her head.
A spokesman for the Lexington Police Department, Lt. Edward Hart, tells The Huffington Post that as off 12:30 a.m. Eastern Standard Time they have not yet identified the man captured on video stomping the head of the MoveOn volunteer. Hart said that the department would be reviewing news footage of the incident and that they "are hoping someone can identify who the person is." Until then, he said, it is a "pending investigation."Here's the man who stomped on her head:
In a separate incident, according to the Kentucky Post, "a Conway supporter stepped on the foot of a female Rand supporter, who recently had foot surgery. The woman was wearing a surgical boot, but after the injury, her incision was cut open. Police say she refused medical treatment and also filed an assault report.".
Do you remember Rand Paul?
He's the extreme tea party Republican candidate for Senate in Kentucky who went on Rachel Maddow's show to oppose provisions in the Civil Rights Act after his surprise victory in the primary.
Since then, he's gone on to talk about opposing the Americans with Disabilities Act, Medicare, and federal financial aid for students.
Imagine a destructive force like Rand Paul in the U.S. Senate. It would be a disaster.
I need you to help Jack Conway, Paul's Democratic opponent. Jack launched a moneybomb today for his Conway Fight Fund. I'm joining supporters all over the country coming together to help beat Rand Paul.
I know Jack could use your help too.
Click here to contribute $5 or more to Jack Conway's moneybomb to beat Rand Paul now!
Today, supporters from all over the country have pledged to make contributions in the same 24 hours.
It will stand as a sign of our determination, a sign of our unity, and a sign that people all across the country are coming together to beat Rand Paul.
Jack Conway has spent years protecting people as Kentucky's attorney general, including many of the very people Rand Paul would leave out to dry.
Jack also went after prescription drug companies and financial fraudsters, supported Wall Street reform, and has promised to vote for filibuster reform if given the chance.
[snip]
Rand Paul's campaign manager has been caught on tape saying "that each individual Senator has the power to blow up legislation, so Rand Paul can blow up so much" legislation he doesn't like.
And believe me, there's basically no such thing as legislation Rand Paul likes. He'd be a one-man wrecking crew.
I can't emphasize the importance of electing Jack Conway and defeating Rand Paul. We have to win this.
The strangest episode of Paul's time at Baylor occurred one afternoon in 1983 (although memories about all of these events are understandably a bit hazy, so the date might be slightly off), when he and a NoZe brother paid a visit to a female student who was one of Paul's teammates on the Baylor swim team. According to this woman, who requested anonymity because of her current job as a clinical psychologist, "He and Randy came to my house, they knocked on my door, and then they blindfolded me, tied me up, and put me in their car. They took me to their apartment and tried to force me to take bong hits. They'd been smoking pot." After the woman refused to smoke with them, Paul and his friend put her back in their car and drove to the countryside outside of Waco, where they stopped near a creek. "They told me their god was 'Aqua Buddha' and that I needed to bow down and worship him," the woman recalls. "They blindfolded me and made me bow down to 'Aqua Buddha' in the creek. I had to say, 'I worship you Aqua Buddha, I worship you.' At Baylor, there were people actively going around trying to save you and we had to go to chapel, so worshiping idols was a big no-no."And, via CBS:
Nearly 30 years later, the woman is still trying to make sense of that afternoon. "They never hurt me, they never did anything wrong, but the whole thing was kind of sadistic. They were messing with my mind. It was some kind of joke." She hadn't actually realized that Paul wound up leaving Baylor early. "I just know I never saw Randy after that—for understandable reasons, I think."
When I asked Benton late last week if Paul remembered any of these episodes from his Baylor days, he replied in an email: "During his time at Baylor, Dr. Paul competed on the swim team and was an active member of Young Conservatives of Texas."
Benton tells Slate, "We are investigating all our options -- including legal ones. We will not tolerate drive-by journalism by a writer with a leftist agenda."
First, that would be two non-denials by his campaign. I mean, how hard would it be to say something like, "Rand Paul never blindfolded and tied up a woman and tried to force her to smoke pot"?
Second, someone who would blindfold and tie up a woman and try to force her to smoke pot is a sick, twisted, sadistic piece of shit.
Third, why should anyone be surprised that an extreme anti-choicer would be interested in controlling a woman's body (for fun or profit)?
Fourth, I heard Chuck Todd on MSNBC refer to this as a "quirky" story.
(h/t to Spork, TPM.)
.
Is Kentucky Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul a creationist?Barefoot and Progressive tracks down the Christian Home Educators of Kentucky and finds that one of the group's objectives is to:
Last week, Paul spoke at a conference for the Christian Home Educators of Kentucky at a Louisville church where he dodged a question about the age of the earth and expressed skepticism about faith-based programs.
The first question during the Q&A was from a man who asked a two-part question, including how old Paul believed the world was.
"I forgot to say I was only taking easy questions," Paul joked, adding: "I'm going to pass on the age of the Earth. I'm just going to have to pass."
Protect children from mental physical, emotional, and sexual abuse by secular humanists in a socialist society or governmental system.Though they never actually get around (as far as I could see) to describing exactly all that means.
Andrew Willis of Elizabethtown, who teaches his four children at home, said he hoped Paul's answer would jive with his own belief that the earth is about 6,000 years old.How is it controversial? Either you accept the science of radiometric dating or you don't. If you don't then the burden is on you to explain how the data points to an Earth 4 billion years old but the truth is something else.
"I'm not at all surprised that he didn't want to answer that question," Willis said shortly after posing it. "I know that is hugely controversial."
An embryo has no rights. Rights do not pertain to a potential, only to an actual being. A child cannot acquire any rights until it is born. The living take precedence over the not-yet-living (or the unborn).Now that's a surprise, isn't it?
Abortion is a moral right—which should be left to the sole discretion of the woman involved; morally, nothing other than her wish in the matter is to be considered. Who can conceivably have the right to dictate to her what disposition she is to make of the functions of her own body?
While insisting that discrimination in any form was abhorrent to him, Mr. Paul told [Rachel] Maddow that under the Constitution, the racist owners of private businesses should have the latitude to refuse service to anyone they want. Such brutal logic is based on the arcane theory that Title II of the Civil Rights Act violates individual liberties by denying a bigot his right to free speech and association.And then:
Thursday, the Paul campaign issued the following statement declaring that its candidate considered the 1964 Civil Rights Act settled law and that he would not support its repeal:Talkingpointsmemo has a run down of Rand Paul distancing himself from himself:
"I support the Civil Rights Act because I overwhelmingly agree with the intent of the legislation, which was to stop discrimination in the public sphere and halt the abhorrent practice of segregation and Jim Crow laws."
