Sunday, May 23, 2010

The Tea Parties Paul Problem

I have been to Tea Party events and no bigotry and I went looking for it. The Paul problem is caused by the Tea Party crew's identification with the kooky Paul family. Rand Paul does not share his fathers mania about Israel. However, his comments and floundering on the Civil Rights Act is disturbing but not shocking.

Rand Paul's repeated appearances on Alex Jones radio show that features Tuther material that is frequently antisemitic is cause for concern. This would not be a problem if Paul were not the son of a crank who has accepted support from KKK types.

Hopefully, Rand Paul will be asked these questions in the coming days. Truthers have no place in any respectable group.


Misfit410 said...

Personally I think Ron Paul handled the whole KKK thing pretty well even though Liberals will always hang over it. He came right out and said he is not beholden to people who donate to his campaign, if a citizen happens to be a racist who donates he neither cares to send the money back nor supports every persons views who support him.

Obama was endorsed by a former Klansman.

beakerkin said...


It is not as simple as that. One can see multiple threads on Stormfront in support of Paul whose insane position on Israel are sufficient cause for concern.

Most of us are alarmed when Obama associates with communist racist clergymen and communist terrorists. We can not pretend this is less odious when done by Paul or in the GOP.

Oddly if you go to a Nuremberg Style Communist Peace Protest you will frequently find Paul and Buchanan supporters. Communists are
quite fond of Paul. This only shows
how Central the Jooooo obsession is
with Commies.

Mark Levin frequently mocks Paulists who call in. There really is no place in the GOP for his type of idiocy.

The Pagan Temple said...

I live in Kentucky, so this affects me directly. I have a choice between Paul, and Kentucky State Attorney General Jeff Conway, the Democrat, who is in favor of the Health Care Reform Bill, and Cap And Trade. That's all I need to know. If he was the most conservative Democrat in history, he would still caucus with the Democrats, and this contribute to making the Democrats the majority party and add to that majority. For me, its a no-brainer.

I don't give a rats ass as to how Rand Paul feels about ancient history, I care more about how Jeff Conway feels about things going on in the here and now. And I know for a fact that he would be a consistent vote for Obama's and the Democrats agenda.

The most horrifying thing that could happen in the US Senate with Jeff Conway as the junior Senator would be when he breaks ranks and casts his vote with the Republicans? What would be so horrifying about that? Simply put, that would be an unmistakable sign that that piece of Democratic progressive legislation is going to pass without his help anyway, and Conway is being "allowed" to vote against it in order to mollify Kentucky voters.

Rachel Maddow and others of their ilk need to keep their skank asses out of Kentucky, it might not be healthy for them. And as for Rand Paul, he needs to focus his campaign in Kentucky, running in Kentucky, and campaigning for Kentucky votes from Kentucky voters, not living on national television trying to be the libertarian darling of the nation. If he does that he'll do fine. Kentucky voters don't care about CRA, they care about the here and now, and it is worth noting that before all this blew up, Paul was 25% ahead of Conway in the polls.

That's the real story behind Maddow's and her ilks self-serving gotcha journalism.

beakerkin said...


I do understand that most people will
be voting on local issues. However, multiple appearances on the Alex Jones show is cause for serious concern.

To the best of my knowledge he has not been asked about Trutherism. He should exercise better judgment than to appear with Alex Jones.

I share your concerns about Obama, but I would never vote for a Truther under any circumstances. His positions need to be fleshed out and examined over the next few weeks. It is a good sign that he does not share his father's anti Israel obsessions.

Ducky's here said...

Paul is the Baggers gift to the Dems.

It's going to be a field day ripping this Libertarian clown apart.

The whiny little creep is already complaining about the "liberal media".

Ducky's here said...

Beak, the only one here obsessed with Jews is you.

beamish said...

The Tea Party endorsement of Rand Paul is valid reason to believe Tea Party attenders have no hope of ever causing a 3-digit number to pop up in IQ test results.

The one thing I hate more than leftists is leftists who try to pass themselves off as libertarians or conservatives. Rand Paul fits that description.

beakerkin said...


This is amusing, do you tell Uptown or Craig Bardo they are obsessed with Blacks? Do you tell Justin he is obsessed with gays. Personally, I think you are more fixated than Justin on gays.

Run back the logic of telling a Jewish American he is obsessed with his own community and spin out whatever the antisemitic party line is at the moment.

The Pagan Temple said...


If you want to vote in somebody who will do anything to hurt the Jews, or especially Israel, then you should vote for the Democrats all day long.

I don't agree with Paul, or others like Buchanan, but you are mistaken about their perspective. It's not about hating Jews or Israel with them, they just don't want America involved with foreign disputes unless its a direct matter of national security.

Where I disagree with them is it is a matter of national security. We have a right to protect our commercial shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf. Israel has been, up till now, a steadfast partner in protecting our interests in that vital region. As such, we should support them and their rights to defend themselves however they see fit.

But that's almost a quibble. Buchanan and Paul would, if they had their way, not give one dime's worth of support more to the Palestinians or any other Muslim faction than they would Israel. They only speak up for them out of a mistaken idea of a need for balance, since we are already involved. They would prefer we not be involved with either one, at all.

However you feel about that, you can't seriously put that on the same level as the Democrats and their constant harping by the UN playbook, their insistence that Israel exercise what would amount to unrealistic restraint in protecting themselves from constant attacks, Obama's complaining about Israelis building apartment buildings in Jewish sections of Jerusalem, hell the list goes on and on.

Jeff Conway is not going to do one thing to change or moderate Obama and the Democrats policies towards Israel, I can promise you that, and as for Rand Paul, should he be elected, he is not going to change the Republican policy either. It's up to you to decide which is more acceptable.

beakerkin said...


We do know that Paul's position on Israel is markedly different than the disturbing views of his father. This is a non issue, but his appearances on Alex Jones is a serious cause for alarm.

Maybe I will have to look for some you tube clips. He should have more sense than to go anywhere near Truther Central HQ.

beamish said...

I feel bad for you, PT. Your two-party choices in the Kentucky Senate race are between an imbecilic racist and a racist imbecile.

Also know as Democrat and Diet Democrat.

beamish said...

I doubt Rand Paul's views on Israel are any different from his dumb ass father's views. I see no evidence that they are different.

beakerkin said...

Mr B

Rand has tried to distance himself from his father on this count. However, one can find Obama statements that are similar and look at the mess. I trust him as far as I can throw him.

More interesting is the comment of Duncy. He says I am obsessed with Jews. Would he make similar commentary about Blacks or the folks at Laraza who share his communist views? We think not.

The Pagan Temple said...


Paul is not in all probability a racist, he is simply a libertarian ideologue, which can be problematic. If I could have a chance to grab him by the shoulders and sit him down to have a long talk with him, I'd just tell him, listen, there is no such thing as a private business that does business with the general public. If a public business wants to exclude blacks or other minorities, they need to sell memberships to a select few, like a country club. Then they can exclude anybody they want for any reason and they don't have to explain themselves. They might have to do without certain tax credits, but that's beside the point.

Paul seems to be laboring under the impression that a privately owned business that does business with the general public should be considered no differently than a person who decides who comes into his own private home.

Nobody with an ounce of sanity would suggest that you should be forced to allow a set number of blacks or other minorities into your home, or that you should be obliged to form friendships with a certain percentage of them. On the other hand, the minute you turn your own private home into a bed and breakfast and get all the required permits to do so, you are pretty much obligated to not discriminate as to who you do business with, at least not so far as race or religion is concerned.

That's the problem with ideologues, they are so wrapped up in their ideologies they don't think things through. They are so caught up in their particular flavor of Kool-Aid they are at the point where they can't think for themselves. This would otherwise not be a problem, but Paul just opened his mouth and created a big one.

Now, thanks to him, what should have been a sure thing-Paul was leading Conway by 25% according to Rasmussin the night after the primary-is not looking like such a sure thing after all.

I do repeat though, Paul will caucus with Republicans, Conway with Democrats. That's all I need to know.

beamish said...

If I had a chance to sit down with Rand Paul I'd tell him the Apollo moon landings really were not faked with technology recoved from a Roswell UFO crash. Then I'd super glue a tin foil dunce cap on his head.