Sunday, September 16, 2012

Rand Paul's Speech Writer Should Get a Bonus for This

At the Values Voter Summit, which took place  Friday in Washington, D.C., Rand managed to say he struggled thinking about war and thinks a good leader should try to avoid war, but he never exactly comes out against any of the wars the U.S. is in, or may get into in the near future:

The Christian Post reports:

He also spoke of feeling conflicted on the issue of war. After reading All Quiet on the Western Front, Paul said, he "recoiled at the horror of war" and "wondered whose grand design is this."
"I'm not a pacifist," Paul said, "but I do think it unacceptable not to hate war. I'm dismissive of those who champion war as sport and show no reluctance to engage in war. Any leader who shows glee or eagerness for war should not be leading any nation. I believe truly great leaders are reluctant to go to war and try mightily to avoid war."
Yahoo, he is dismissive of those who champion war a sport!

9 comments:

  1. I'm, I'm, I....

    talk about egocentric....

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yet he supports Romney who would attack Iran within 30 days of taking office.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I feel the complete opposite. I love MMA, which is a very primal form of war, and also a sport. Football is also, more or less, a primitive war simulation.

    In sport, the people participating are doing so voluntarily. Also, sports tend to match somewhat equal opponents. Nobody wants to watch or play in a game of NFL vs. Junior High Schoolers.

    If groups of young men wanted to designate an area and use state of the art weapons to see who was 'king of the hill,' I think that would be infinitely better for humanity than the US launching drone strikes at weddings in Pakistan.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Corny generalities. Who in politics doesn't pay lip service to these sentiments? Holding them alone won't prevent a war with Iran, even as they failed to prevent perhaps a million dead from the Iraq war.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Once again Rand Paul is being criticized for taking a solid libertarian position. War should be moral, and it should be constitutional; but, although Rand has opposed our foreign interventions on previous occasions, he doesn't mention specific interventions on this one. Perhaps because he is speaking to a value voters conference and not to a foreign policy association.

    Political commentary should be instructive, but what we're getting from this site is that Rand Paul endorsed Romney at the wrong time and therefore he is wrong on everything else as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What you see from Rand is a chameleon like metamorphosis from child progeny to capitol hill prostitute. It is moving along quite nicely.

      Delete
  6. And I bet he probably got booed by the War Hawks in attendance.

    The crazed Marxist and moral relativist mindset of the typical Democrat rally boils my anger.

    The sociopathic war rallies of the typical Republican rally depress me.

    And in the end, they both support the same policies. Both sides are evil, they just emphasize different evils.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I wouldn't jump to conclusions on this. In fact, only one Christian Evangelical denomination endorsed the Iraq War. That was the Southern Baptists. Mostly the others objected that it did not meet Christian just war theory. Of course, the media didn't give much coverage to this little fact, but we shouldn't jump to stereotype just because the media does. I don't specifically recall the exact details of Christian just war theory, but Rand's argument is a close approximation of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How many evangelicals do you know? I know tons of them, and they all currently favor bombing the hell out of Iran and any other nation. They love war. The evangelicals who don't love war are the rare ones, robb.

      Delete