Wednesday, June 12, 2013

The Email Rand Paul's Staff Sent to a Neocon Columnist

WaPo columnist and neocon, Jennifer Rubin, reveals parts of an email she has received from Rand Paul's staff. The staff is apparently trying to appease her neocon mind:
 Sen. Rand Paul’s long-time confidante and chief of staff Doug Stafford e-mailed me Tuesday evening regarding my post on his boss’s foreign policy incoherence. In particular, Stafford complained: “He supports keeping Gitmo open and military tribunals for foreign combatants. Been so since I have been with him. He reiterated that as recently as last month on ABC. ”
 Stafford also objects to the idea that Rand Paul wants to “slash” defense [...]Stafford also complained: “Saying the person who is trying to condition aid on things like the treatment of pro-democracy workers and religious minorities doesn’t care about international human rights in insultingly wrong.”
Rand, clearly, wants to be in all camps, including the neocon camp. Rubin gets this and will have none of it.

He seems not to understand that isolationism is inconsistent with support for human rights and a pro-Israel foreign policy. His foreign policy would look like Obama’s on steroids (fewer bases, fewer surveillance programs, fewer impediments to genocidal regimes) than mainstream Republican (which wants bases overseas and wants the United States to promote our interests and our values on the world stage).
Paul is walking a fine line here between trying to keep his libertarian, staunchly isolationist fans happy and trying to adopt enough buzz words to convince mainstream Republicans he’s really with them. You can’t do both. That’s the nub of his dilemma.
The question now becomes how far is Rand willing to go to appease Rubin. Judging from the email, as far as it takes. Dealing with a neocon woman, though, is a very difficult thing. It reminds me of a  Jennifer Donnelly quote:
“For mad I may be, but I will never be convenient.” 


  1. "(fewer bases, fewer surveillance programs, fewer impediments to genocidal regimes)"

    Her statement is not even remotely connected to reality. Just because you make non-factual statements in a major newspaper does not make them magically true.

  2. LOL....How is bombing and slaughtering Muslims "support for human rights"?