While I have no problem with libertarianism or the Austrian school of economics, I am not a fan of Rand Paul. I believe that he is every bit the nutter and small time grifter as was his father Ron Paul, and only in a deeply polarized America where the GOP is in disarray, could this clown make it to the big game.

His propensity to say provocative things may attract the media’s attention, but his very words make him unfit to become the President of the United States.

I also believe that Rand Paul is a closet bigot and anti-Semite and his refusal to disassociate himself from white supremacists and others is not only distasteful, but extremely troubling. It is that I regard Rand Paul to be every bit a nutter as Lyndon LaRouche and his young LaRouchies who would do or say anything necessary to grab power. Rand’s recent homage to Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli lobby appears to be in the vein.

Consider Paul’s squishiness on illegal immigration and Obama’s “executive” amnesty. And, Paul’s support of social liberals (RINOs) like Mitt Romney and Mitch McConnell, far from any vestiges of conservatism. Although, Romney would have made a much better president than Obama.

But the real danger of Rand Paul is that he is another Barack Obama – a Senator without and executive or governance experience and would be prone to error during his “on the job” training.

Perhaps Rand Paul needs a dose of reality …

Rand Paul says GOP hawks ‘created’ ISIS

Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul is blaming his own party for the rise of the Islamic State group.

The freshman senator from Kentucky said Wednesday that the GOP’s foreign policy hawks “created these people.”

The Islamic State group, commonly referred to as ISIS, has seized one-third of Iraq and Syria and in recent days made gains in central Iraq.

“ISIS exists and grew stronger because of the hawks in our party who gave arms indiscriminately,” Paul said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” He continued: “They created these people. ISIS is all over Libya because these same hawks in my party loved – they loved Hillary Clinton’s war in Libya. They just wanted more of it.”

Source: Rand Paul says GOP hawks ‘created’ ISIS | New York Post

1. The GOP “Hawks” had little or no influence on U.S. foreign policy since 2008 and the election of Barack Hussein Obama.
   
2. ISIS is al Qaeda in Iraq; although the “group split apart from al-Qaeda in February 2014 because it wouldn't listen to al-Qaeda HQ's commands, including orders to curtail its violence against civilians.”
   
3. ISIS grew in strength due to President Obama’s withdrawal from Iraq. Leaving a power vacuum to be filled by a militant Sunni-organization that redressed many of the grievances caused by Iraq’s government when they removed the majority Sunnis from positions of power and leadership and allowed the minority Shia to exact a measure of revenge against the Sunnis. Another contributing factor is that most Iraqis remained loyal to their tribal leadership and not to the President of Iraq who was little more than the corrupt Mayor of Kabul. Thus, with no loyalty and little to defend, they cut and ran – leaving behind their weapons.
   
4. Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi venture saw the transshipment of military-grade weaponry to Islamic militants via Turkey and the 9/11 attack on the joint CIA/State Department compound was not only a terrorist attack, but could possibly be classified as an opposition attack on a “legitimate” military target.
   
5. Barack Obama is actually aiding Shia Iran against the Sunni ISIS – perhaps believing that such support that cedes power over Iraq to Iran will help him get a photo-op and a meaningless agreement in the nuclear negotiations.

Bottom line …

While I do not believe that Rand Paul will ever be elected President, the harm he can do to the GOP is enormous; first by muddling the GOP message, and second, by splitting off votes from legitimate candidates. Since I believe him to be a small-time grifter, I am looking forward to seeing how he plans to “sell” his support to a more viable candidate.

I believe Paul to be a libertarian ideologue and that he is a libertarian first, a republican second, and becomes a conservative only when convenient and his libertarian values coincide with the core values of conservatives.

To further illustrate Paul’s danger, consider his previous opinion that enforcing anti-discrimination laws shouldn’t be legal because of the conflict with the constitutional rights to private property as embodied in the Fifth Amendment. Or, that Paul engaged it moral equivalency when he saw Iran’s acquisition of a nuclear capability as being no different from our own nuclear capabilities. When questioned, it is all about rhetoric and ideology which is neither clear nor easy to understand.

The GOP needs to marginalize Rand Paul if they are serious about winning the Presidency and curtailing the damage done to viable GOP candidates during the primary season.

-- steve