Thursday, July 11, 2013

Rand Paul's Contortionist Triangulation Defense of Jack Hunter

Nothing quite comes to my mind to explain the contortionist act that Rand Paul is attempting to pull off in his defense of his aide Jack Hunter. The closest visionary image I can conjure up is the picture of Vladimir Putin's girlfriend in a twisted contortion gymnast pose:

Rand is at once attempting to distance himself from Jack Hunter comments, while attempting to keep Hunter as a close aide. Rand's Hunter defense is also requiring Rand to display a new found love-hate relationship with Abe Lincoln.

The three key points to Rand's Hunter defense are:

1. Hunter is not a racist.

2. Lincoln was a whack job who steamrolled over the freedom of the press and the right of habeas corpus.

3. Lincoln was a great president.

1 and 2 are true, 3 is not.

The neocons, the left and MSM will not allow Rand to get away with points 1 and 2. They will let him get away with untruthful point 3.

The neocon, left, MSM alliance will continue to promote Hunter's pro-southern views as racist, white-supremacist views, when they are nothing of the kind. Hunter's views can no more be justifiably labeled racist than a fan of German beer can be be labeled as one holding a favorable opinion of Hitler.  

Chris Hayes and HuffPo double team Hunter and Rand on the racist charge here. This won't stop.

But Rand is on the right track when he tells HuffPo:
People are calling him a white supremacist..[...]Look and listen to the actual words and not to the headlines, people
Rand is also on the right track, when he says:
 Do I think Lincoln was wrong is taking away the freedom of the press and the right of habeas corpus? Yeah.
Rand then contorts all this by telling us that Lincoln, who would not allow the southern states to secede and started a horrific civil war, this:
 I think Lincoln was one of our greatest presidents.
Thus, Rand takes out the notion of secession and the evil Lincoln, with one lying bowling ball tossed down the lane---and once more creating confusion and muddying up of correct thought. Rand will be able to get away with this with MSM, but not with keeping Hunter as an aide.

You need to be ruthless when you seek power, especially in a country that is quickly becoming more totalitarian.

As Freidrich Hayek reminded us in his brilliant chapter, Why the Worst Get on Top, in his book The Road to Serfdom:
[...]the unscrupulous and uninhibited are likely to be more successful in a society tending more toward totalitarianism.
The neocon, left, MSM axis will want more than a mere contortionist-like curtsy to Lincoln. They will want Hunter's head. Thus the question becomes is Rand unscrupulous and uninhibited enough to toss Hunter? How hungry is Rand for the presidency? Is he ruthless enough to call Hunter into his office, where sits on a coffee table a book with  photographs of ruthless leaders, and tell Hunter to resign or will he say the presidency is not worth it? In his mind Rand may think, at this point, that he can keep both Hunter and the axis happy, but this axis is one jealous mistress that will not tolerate half way measures.  It's total subservience to them, or you are out of the presidential race.Which steps Rand ultimately chooses to take from here on the Hunter issue will tell us an awful lot about the man. The triangulation defense, with Lincoln as "one of our greatest presidents", is not a good first step.

1 comment:

  1. I like the interview Rand gave with Politico where he said he liked Lerone Bennett's view of Lincoln, which was that he was pretty tyrannical. Rand is doing his best, but he is pretty successful in exposing the neocon/left-wing alliance. Hopefully the grassroots wakes up.