Thursday, March 7, 2013

Neocon: Rand Paul Filibuster is a Stroke of Political Genius

Justin Raimondo correctly identified Charles Krauthammer as "always in the avant-garde of neocon-dom." Thus, it is instructive that following Rand Paul's useless filibuster, Krauthammer is leading the cheers for Rand. In the clip below, he calls what Rand did (which was nothing) a stroke of political genius and something that will make him a national figure.

Folks, this kind of stuff doesn't happen by accident. Neocons are not out there with lanterns looking for honest and principled men. They are looking for men who will advance the neocon agenda. The sudden support Rand is getting, from every neocon, says to me that chips will be placed on Rand in the 2016 presidential election. They are very comfortable with him, which makes me very uncomfortable.


(ht John Duncan)

19 comments:

  1. Bob, you're much too intelligent for this. If Krauthammer said the sky is blue, does that make it yellow? He was stating a political fact, not that he agrees with Rand's views. It WAS a stroke of political genius, it HAS raised his profile considerably, and it IS the launch of a national political movement that we libertarians ought to be supporting. That doesn't mean uncritical support, but it does mean ditching what is essentially a sectarian view of the state of the libertarian movement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rand Paul voted for the NDAA and the sanctions on Iran. Sanctions which starve and kill Iranian civilians. He's a murderer. Libertarians don't support murderers.

      Delete
    2. Rand voted for the version of NDAA which did not include the provision allowing indefinite detention of American citizens. When that provision was put back in, he voted against the bill.

      Delete
    3. Rand voted for the version of NDAA which did not include the provision allowing indefinite detention of American citizens. When that provision was put back in, he voted against the bill.

      Delete
    4. Rand voted for the version of NDAA which did not include the provision allowing indefinite detention of American citizens. When that provision was put back in, he voted against the bill.

      Delete
    5. Sanctions which starve and kill Iranian civilians.

      It turns out that 60 per cent of Iranians are overweight.

      Delete
  2. Bob, I am just about ready to call you a witch hunter. I am ready to accept any reduction in the state no matter it's source. No, that does not make me a libertarian traitor and advocate of the state. If Rand or anyone can bring this much attention to what the president, cia, military, etc can do I will gladly accept and promote it. If someone is playing the game to get up in the ranks politically while taking measures to reduce the state, fine. Just call it what it is. If someone misinterprets what Rand or whomever is doing as true libertarianism, hell will not freeze over and the sun will still shine. Speak the truth and call things for what they ACTUALLY are and we will do well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't know for sure, but when have the neocons ever been known for acknowledging the successful moves of their 'enemies'? I don't think so. If Krauthammer et al didn't agree with it, there is no way they would be acknowledging it.

    It's not accurate or beneficial to think that the powers-that-be play by 'rules' that we mortals play by. They make their own rules as they go along. As such, any acknowledgment by a major neocon player of the filibuster or other action by Rand is because they agree with and condone it. (Which can be expected, since they probably orchestrated it.)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kraut hammer is evil.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm still on the fence about Rand. He's great in some areas and pretty poor in others. But I totally agree with you, if the standard neocons are comfortable with him, I'm worried.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rand's dad is comfortable with him.

      Delete
    2. He is not comfortable with him and it's evident almost every time he speaks about him. He knows his son is infinitely better than most of Washington, but he also knows that he is NOT pure of heart for liberty. He walked out of the convention before Rand's speech because he couldn't watch his son sell his soul to the devil. Ron is worried Rand will not carry the torch.

      Delete
  6. How many people knew who John Brennan and what he said about drone warfare last week? Ten? Now thanks to the headlines Paul generated, maybe 15 now. So what if Paul is playing politics. I still think the best way to roll back the government is to play one side against the other. Much like they divide us to rule, we should take advantage of their infighting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Uh...when has government rolled back?

      What gives you confidence Paul is "playing politics" in a way that is any different than...any other politician? He's already got the blood and suffering of Iranian innocents on his hands. What about him gives you faith that he's really got some super secret awesome plan that he's just going along to get along so he can implement?

      Delete
    2. I think he is playing politics, perhaps better, perhaps worse than others, I have no opinion. An example, here in Wisconsin we had the famous Walker versus union battle. Was Walker playing politics by trying to weaken his political enemies? Of course. Did I support his efforts in the hopes it would lower my taxes? Sure. BTW I neither said or implied that the government has been rolled back or that Paul is some secret libertarian subversive. You read things that aren't there. By golly, this preordained opinions about subjects is disappointing, I expect more from libertarians.

      Delete
    3. I know Paul is playing politics, whether better or worse than others I have no opinion. I neither say or imply he is some secret subversive. An example: here in Wisconsin we had the Walker/Union battle. Is Walker a secret libertarian or was he trying to weaken his political opponents? The latter of course. Should we not take advantage of such infighting to our advantage if possible? The unwillingness or inability for people to understand what others are saying about an issue is troublesome.

      Delete
  7. Clearly McCain and Graham did not approve, so does that mean that since they are very uncomfortable with him that I should be comfortable with him. It's not that simple.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Bill Hicks used to do this bit about newly elected presidents. Since Kennedy, every new president gets welcomed by a committee of uniformed and civilian guys who take him to the White House screening room. The doors close and the pres elect is invited to take the sole chair, surrounded by these committee guys who remain standing. After a few seconds, the Zapruder film is played on the big screen, but it's not the Zapruder film - it's from an angle no one has ever seen before. Then the lights come up and one of the committee guys says, "Have we made ourselves clear?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They don't need to assemble in some room to play the film. hell all they need to do is park an open top limo within sight of the oval office windows.

      Delete