Sen. Rand Paul |
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) certainly has a knack for boldness. On Sunday's Meet the Press, he dubbed U.S. military engagement in Libya “Hillary’s war” and stated the rise of the Islamic State (ISIS) is not a result of President Obama's inaction in the Middle East but the unintended consequence of the U.S. military engagement in Libya.
The comments predictably caused heads in the GOP's foreign policy establishment to explode. The Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin called the rhetorical gambit “ludicrous” and said Paul holds the same views as his father, the libertarian former-Rep. Ron Paul. In an email to me, John Yoo, the former top Justice Department official in the Bush administration, said Paul is the Republicans' “own version of George McGovern.”
In a phone interview, Paul expanded on his remarks and offered a detailed rendering of his views on foreign policy that, regardless of their merits, are undoubtedly innovative for a man likely to seek the GOP's presidential nomination in 2016. Paul told Breitbart News:
I would say the objective evidence shows that Libya is a less safe place and less secure place, a more chaotic place with more jihadist groups—and really, we’ve had two really bad things happen because of Hillary’s push for this war. One is that our ambassador was killed as a consequence of not having adequate security and really as a consequence of having a really unstable situation there because of the Libyan war, and then most recently our embassy having to flee by land because they couldn’t leave via the airport because of such a disaster in Libya. So I think it’s hard to argue that the Libyan war was a success in any way. From my perspective, the first mistake they made was not asking the American people and Congress for authority to go to war.
While Muammar Gaddafi, or Syrian dictator Bashar Al-Assad, or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein—deposed during the George W. Bush administration—were certainly bad actors, Paul wants to know: who takes their place?
To say that Rand Paul will never be president is an insult to our intelligence. Its a statement that supports War Hawks across the political party spectrum. It says that the American people will never want common sense and adherence to the US Constitution in Government. It says that the United States of America is the world's police force and that we must accept fleecing taxpayers and future generations with TRILLIONS of unfunded liabilities to support this position. Senator Rand Paul IS the best chance the GOP has of beating the Democrat nominee in 2016. I really hope Larry that you take stock of the words you choose because like it or not, you have influence over how people form opinions and ergo how they vote. It is my hope that you truly want to make sure that the Democrats do not continue their reign over the Whitehouse/Senate.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious to know in what way Larry Elder is a libertarian. As far as I can tell, he basically has the same foreign policy as AEI. He is anti-immigrant. He certainly is not a civil libertarian. He thinks heavily militarized local police never abuse the rights of citizens. I guess he is pro-free trade. Apparently picking and choosing a few ideas from Milton Friedman makes someone a libertarian now. The guy is more George W. Bush than libertarian.
ReplyDeleteI was excited to find Larry Elder again. I listened to him all the time on AM Radio and tried to catch him on Fox News. Some folks have the courage to call evil for what it is. Just plain evil. You just don't poke a bear. But if you're going to you better be prepared to kill it.
ReplyDelete