Why Rand Paul Is Backing the Sponsor of the Marketplace Fairness Act Over Liz Cheney

Republicans were treated to a strange surprise last week when Jonathan Martin reported on Liz Cheney's plan to primary three-term Republican Sen. Mike Enzi, of Wyoming, in 2014. Martin captured some hostility toward Cheney ("She just moved back here, she didn't even grow up here"), but provided little insight as to why the intellectual heir to Dick Cheney's War on Terror was preparing to challenge a popular--if inactive--GOP incumbent.
While Cheney refused to comment for the article, Enzi suspects that "she may take aim at his legislation, passed this year in the Senate, to let states collect sales tax on Internet purchases"; Martin, meanwhile, wonders if it's because Enzi "is too willing to work with Democrats and not vocal enough in pushing conservative causes."
As long as we're spitballing, what if Cheney is primarying Enzi because he's too willing to work with Sen. Rand Paul?
Here's a Politico headline from last week: "Rand Paul: I've got Mike Enzi's back vs. Liz Cheney." Paul told the publication that Enzi's "a good conservative," and that the two are friends. While that might come as a surprise to anyone who witnessed Paul's blitzkrieg against the Marketplace Fairness Act (which Enzi introduced), it makes plenty of sense if you go back to March 6 of this year, when Paul filibustered for 13 hours to block the confirmation of CIA Director John Brennan. Among Paul's supporters that night was Enzi, who released this statement the following day:
Mr. President, I rise to speak in opposition to the nomination of John Brennan for CIA Director. This Administration hasn't been forthcoming in answering a vitally important question of whether or not Americans could be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime or being found guilty in a court of law. This should have been a very simple answer. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney stated today that the Administration does not have the authority to kill Americans on American soil. That's great news, however, it shouldn't have taken a United States Senator 12 hours of non-stop-talking for the Administration to acknowledge the simple fact that it cannot kill American citizens on American soil without a trial.
I would like to applaud Senator Rand Paul's courage and conviction last night as he stood on the Senate floor for nearly 13 hours defending our rights under the Constitution. Senator Paul deserves recognition for standing up for the American people and bringing this issue to light. And it's an issue that I and many of my constituents in the State of Wyoming find very troubling.
In fact, as I traveled around Wyoming several weeks ago, it become [sic] abundantly clear that people are very concerned over this Administration's disregard for constitutionally guaranteed individual rights.
Emphasis added.
If I had to take a stab at why Cheney's running against Enzi, I wouldn't point to the Marketplace Fairness Act, about which the Cheneys have said either little or nothing. But drones? Rand Paul? Daughter and father have a lot to say about both of those topics, and they can't possibly be happy that Enzi took Paul's side over theirs.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Maybe Rand Paul just doesn't like the idea of political dynasties.
I think a much more pertinent question for Rand is: which Heather does he back; Heather Thomas or Heather Locklear? Anyone who doesn't say Thomas is gay.
While much more libertarian and straight-speaking than most, he is a politician. He'll say he likes both. Which makes him bisexual.
Heather Graham.
yummy
I'm pretty sure backs Joey Heatherton.
Heather Graham
This kind of thing illustrates a common quandary for libertarians. Sometimes we are asked to evaluate a side which may at times be on the right side of liberty and at other times not. How to weigh different transgressions against liberty? Is proposing a massive new tax worse than supporting the non-transparent and unchecked executive use of drones to kill (and to kill US citizens)?
False dichotomy! Yay fallacies!
How so?
Derp ditty derp ditty derp derp derp!
Yes, well argued as usual.
You're the worst character ever, crypto-Tulpa.
Nice to meet you too.
Um, yes?
A simpler explanation: The Cheneys and the NeoCon block are going to be against Paul no matter what. Weighing in on their side in this fight would not get him a single vote in any caucus or primary.
By supporting Enzi, he could expect a quid-pro-quo support from Enzi and whomever Enzi could bring with him.
Exaaaactly. Anyone actually married to Darth Cheney can't at all decent.
Remember kids, the free market laws of supply an demand could never apply to healthcare. Never.
http://www.theblaze.com/storie.....es-online/
Not uh! When you are fire are you really going to ask the ER how much it is going to cost to treat your burns? I didn't think so.
Awesome. The hospitals typically have the system locked down. I'm surprised that they haven't tried to shut the down with a CON requirement or some other regulatory BS.
Linking to the Beckerhead's site? Fuck - why not HuffPo too?
Fuck off peckerhead.
John, the other day we discussed the legality and if anyone would have standing to challenge the Obama administration's delay of the employer mandate. This Volokh Conspiracy post quotes Michael McConnell as saying it is illegal but also links to someone making what will likely be the administration's argument that it is. Thought you'd be interested.
http://www.volokh.com/2013/07/.....r-mandate/
Thanks
I was just at the Surgery Center last week. My daughters broken arm was treated for at least $750 less than the minimum the hospital wanted. It was actually more convenient too.
Most medical treatment is pretty simple and shouldn't involve much expertise or cost.
I still remember my $800 hospital bill for a little bit of superglue on my daughter's nose.
Duh, the glue didn't cost that much, but what about the expertise of the surgeon putting her nose back together?
Supply and demand? Never heard of em.
/any proggy
Liz Cheney is a loathesome cunt, which pretty much explains it all.
She is like a mirror image of Stephanie Cutter. TEAMTEAMTEAM!
I was just at the Surgery Center last week. My daughters broken arm was treated for at least $750 less than the minimum the hospital wanted.
Did they report you to Child Protective Services?
Maybe this is an opportunity for a libertarian Republican to run and win in the primary in a three way race.