MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

GOP Hawks: Rand Paul is a ‘misguided ideologue’ and ‘liberal Democrat’

National security conservatives go ballistic over Paul’s Patriot Act obstruction

"... and from that day forward, they called me 'The Aqua Buddha'".... ||| Senate TVSenate TVLast week Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) helped block an extension of the Patriot Act's notorious Section 215, and an amendment-less version of the USA Freedom Act, and a number of temporary extenstions of the surveillance status quo, giving the Senate essentially one day—May 31—to vote on something (and get the House to agree) before a number of Patriot Act provisions expire. As The New York Times reports, "That hard deadline again puts the fate of Section 215 in the hands of Mr. Paul, who has made his stand against government surveillance central to his presidential aspirations."

In an interview on CBS This Morning today, Paul played Mr. Reasonable. "I'm just asking for two amendments and a simple majority vote," he said. Unsurprisingly, the pro-interventionist GOP establishment sees things a different way.

"... that way, when you snap your wrist, you get a real 12-to-6 break on your curveball...." ||| ABC NewsABC NewsHere's hawkish horse-whisperer William Kristol, on ABC News this weekend:

Rand Paul has now decided he wants to be a liberal Democrat—undercut necessary intelligence collection, weaken the police officers and our intelligence services. And Rand Paul thinks that's going to sell in a Republican primary. I think he's deeply misguided about that. But I guess he sincerely believes it. 

Floundering New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who last presidential cycle was seen as a very promising candidate/blank slate onto whom hawks could project their interventionism, continued his long-running bet that explicitly anti-libertarian politics is where the GOP is at:

"... besides, you can always get elective surgery to restrain the bloat..." ||| CNN.comCNN.comIn a statement from his political action committee, Christie slammed "misguided ideologues" with "no real world experience in fighting terrorism" for "putting their uninformed beliefs above the safety and security of our citizens." […]

"The Senate's failure to extend the Patriot Act is a failure of the U.S. government to perform its most important function — protecting its citizens from harm," he said. "This dysfunction is what we have come to expect from Washington, D.C., but usually it does not have such dangerous and severe consequences."

For a Jersey libertarian's take on Christie's bluster, I recommend Paul Mulshine. Meanwhile, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who last month clucked that surveillance is "the best part of the Obama administration," said he agrees with Christie:

"There is ample evidence that the PATRIOT Act has been a tool to keep us safe," Bush continued. "There is no evidence of anyone's civil liberties being violated because of it."

Other conservatives in the stand-against-Rand caucus include South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham ("I'm going to challenge his construct that the NSA and those who work there are more dangerous to our country than the al-Qaeda and ISIL threat"), Graham's Arizona pal Sen. John McCain ("Some time ago senators would try to sit down and work things out and obviously these individuals don't believe in that, and I'm sure it's a great revenue raiser"), John Sununu ("Senator Paul is also an advocate of gutting the defense budget. He's in fact to the left of Obama on both of those issues"), Max Boot ("these lawmakers are holding…renewal hostage until they get what they want—which is weaken our defenses against terrorism"), Andrew C. McCarthy ("Rand Paul is laughably wrong when he insists the NSA program violates the Fourth Amendment"), and so on.

What's interesting is that, as McCarthy explicitly acknowledges and laments, the pro-surveillance hawks are losing the argument. Rand Paul—excuse me, the dangerously unserious Rand Paul—has changed the debate, and he might well end up changing the law, too. Mark my words from July 2013: If Paul were to somehow come out the other end of all this as the GOP nominee, there will be some star-studded names at the Neocons for Hillary PAC.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Paul.||

    Rand Paul is a ‘misguided ideologue’ and ‘liberal Democrat’

    I'm struggling with this. Thankfully they didn't call him a "progressive Democrat" 'cause thems woulda been' fightin' words. Which I hear-a-tell are unconstitutional.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    They will call him a "socialist" next. If one is not a fire-breathing Bible-beating wingnut you are left of Che.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Floudering New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie...

    Christie ate the n.

  • Matt Welch||

    Thanks!

  • ||

    Kudos on the "hawkish horse-whisperer" line! I am going to steal it.

  • hpearce||

    “This debate that we’re having right now about the Patriot Act — it’s is a very dangerous debate because it’s done by people with no experience dealing what I’ve dealt with,” Christie

    I almost puked at that.

  • Libertarian||

    Perhaps, as president, he plans on putting Bob's Barricades up on all our border bridges in order to keep out terrorists.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Ha, yeah. He's like ipecac personified.

  • Swiss Servator, Kaffee bitte!||

    Yeah, fuck you fat boy - one of us has been shot at an awful lot by the Talib, HIG, Jaish al Mahdi and AQ....and it wasn't you, lard bucket!

  • Rhywun||

    The sad thing - well, to me since I have to work here - is that NJ's next governor is almost guaranteed to be worse.

  • R C Dean||

    "New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (Flounder - NJ)."

    Especially since "Flounder" should be his nickname, anyway. You have to admit, there is a resemblance:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/ent.....e=1.943686

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    He should be referred to as "New Jersey Democrat Chris Christie..."

  • Paul.||

    Senator Paul is also an advocate of gutting the defense budget. He's in fact to the left of Obama on both of those issues"),

    Man it's tough bein' a glibertarian. I'm left-wing! I'm right-wing! I'm liberal! I'm conservative!

  • Libertarian||

    Someone doesn't know what the word "gutting" means. Besides, Hannity says that Obama has already gutted the defense budget. How many times can something be gutted!?

  • Paul.||

    It's reptilian. It keeps growing new guts!

  • Pepperjack||

    The defense budget is so bloated the DOD has multiple redundant digestive systems.

  • ||

    Thread winner.

  • ||

    Gutting isn't just the removal of the intestines. Part of proper field dressing a game animal is also removing the rectum as part of the gutting process.

    You can only imagine how long it takes to remove an asshole in Washington.

  • DesigNate||

    All it takes is a couple foot taps or a picture of your wang.

  • ||

    I realize that my wang is magnificent and awe inspiring, but I had no idea that it had the power to remove assholes from Washington.

  • BDub||

    That was awesome!

  • ||

    Lindsey Graham's eye-roll/almost nose-pick during Rand's speech is infuriating.

  • Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns||

    He wasn't rolling his eyes, he was just reminiscing about a cute stable boy he knew in the days of his youth.

    What I'm trying to say is that Lindsey Graham is so closeted he's basically living in Narnia.

    NTTAWWT

  • ||

    There is no way that an officer in our Air Force could possibly be a homosexual. It does not compute.

  • ||

    You left a 'not' out of that sentence, somewhere.

  • SugarFree||

    He's thinking about the time he paid a niggrah boy to jizz into his sinus.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Lindsey brings out the best in you

  • sarcasmic||

    Alt text win!

  • ||

    Very much so. However, I do not think Bill Kristol has ever actually thrown a baseball before.

  • Andrew S.||

    The alt text on the Christie picture is even better.

  • Matt Welch||

    While true, you have to admit his grip is perfect.

  • SugarFree||

    Or he's trying to scratch out the eyes of the demon who watches him when he's out making with the fancy punditting.

  • Paul.||

    If Paul were to somehow come out the other end of all this as the GOP nominee, there will be some star-studded names at the Neocons for Hillary PAC.

    Good. Send 'em on over. They'll be much more at home over there anyway where they can argue over minor differences about what area of leviathan to expand.

  • ||

    It might be nice to have all of the Total Statists in a single group.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    "There is ample evidence that the PATRIOT Act has been a tool to keep us safe," Bush continued. "There is no evidence of anyone's civil liberties being violated because of it."

    Keep it coming, Jed. As poisoned as you are in this race, the things you spout are bound to have at least some people who agree scratch their heads and rethink the issue.

  • Charles Easterly||

    I especially enjoy the times he shows himself to be little different from Obama and Clinton - and vice versa.

    What difference, at this point, is there between them?

  • R C Dean||

    There is ample evidence that the PATRIOT Act has been a tool to keep us safe,

    FBI admits no major cases cracked with Patriot Act snooping powers

    http://www.washingtontimes.com.....picks=true

  • ||

    That is just the FBI bragging.

    Since the FBI seems to be behind each and every terror plot they feel pretty cocky that they NSA hasn't busted them once.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    "There is no evidence of anyone's civil liberties being violated because of it."

    This old bullshit has become once again one of their favorite talking points. I'd say that they don't understand the nature and dangers of arbitrary power, but that's too optimistic for me. I think they know fucking well the nature and dangers of arbitrary power and embrace them because they hope to get their hands on that power.

  • Paul.||

    I think they understand the nature of arbitrary power quite well.

  • Riven||

    I think they know fucking well the nature and dangers of arbitrary power and embrace them because they hope to get their hands on that power.

    I think you're right. There's some kind of unspoken rule that they always vote to expand all power, and then they just pass the power around until everyone has had their turn. Y'know, then it's fair.

  • ||

    Hey, that sounds like what we do with you mom. Coincidence?

  • SugarFree||

    SWARM! PROTECT THE QUEEN!

  • DesigNate||

    Wait, are we supposed to protect Epi or Riven?

  • SugarFree||

    Fuck you. Just swarm, dammit.

  • Paul.||

    Is Epi the queen in this scenario? This is all so very confrusing.

  • Swiss Servator, Kaffee bitte!||

    Just sting anyone that comes close to either of 'em!

  • Swiss Servator, Kaffee bitte!||

    I'm swarming, I am swarming!

  • Libertarian||

    Christie: "The Senate's failure to extend the Patriot Act is a failure of the U.S. government to perform its most important function — protecting its citizens from harm,"

    I get so godDAM tired of people saying that the most important thing for the President and Senators is to keep the country secure. Obama, himself, says this even tho' he's taken the Presidential oath THREE times. It's the defense of the Constitution that they swear to protect.

    Senate oath: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

  • sarcasmic||

    What can be done when government itself, as in the politicians who direct it and the bureaucrats that enforce their directives, is the greatest enemy of the Constitution?

  • Charles Easterly||

    Sometimes it seems to me that the government, as you've described it, is increasingly pushing the population to find out what exactly will be done.

  • ||

    A quick scroll of the comments on that McCarthy article are surprisingly against him. That is a good sign. You would think these fucksticks could see that, but I highly doubt it.

    They are our betters, after all.

  • Drake||

    The comments are wonderfully, gloriously viscous. McCarthy just got booed out of the house - like everyone else at NRO who has tries to defend the program.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    A quick scroll of the comments on that McCarthy article are surprisingly against him.

    Yup. The GOP is pretty much in a civil war right now. If the leadership views the socons with contempt and condescension (and they do), they view the libertarians with fear and loathing. All the more so now that a lot of conservatives are starting to pick uip on the obvious.

  • Ted S.||

    Where are the comments on the NRO articles? They don't show up anywhere, and a look at the list of links didn't seem to show any link to comments.

  • Marianna||

    Go back up to the top of the article. The links on the right

  • Drake||

    I saw again - read the comments in the conservative journals such as NRO. They hate the NSA, Christie, and the establishment morons who like the domestic surveillance.

    This is how the Neo-Cons are going to lose the Republican base.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I never would have guessed the true essence of the great American experiment would eventually be revealed as "Fear and Hate". Exceptional, indeed.

  • ||

    Personally, I am happy to see Rand Paul go back to standing up for things he believes in, unlike his lame response to the Baltimore riots.

    It may hurt him with GOP hawks, but he was coming dangerously close to destroying his own brand there, and what's the point in voting for Rand Paul if he's not going to present a meaningful alternative?

    He's like the anti-Hillary-Clinton. You actually have to stand for something in order for people to give a shit.

  • waffles||

    You actually have to stand for something in order for people to give a shit.

    Nailed it. This is why I am excited about Rand. To all those looking for a perfect libertarian candidate. Stop it. Just be excited that one politician is standing up for something even if it makes him an enemy of the establishment.

  • ||

    I'd say Gary Johnson is pretty close to the perfect libertarian/Libertarian candidate.

  • waffles||

    And I voted for him and supported his campaign in the Republican primary. However, Senator Rand is inspiring fear and loathing in the right sort of political enemies I find that arousing.

  • ||

    However, Senator Rand is inspiring fear and loathing in the right sort of political enemies I find that arousing.

    Oh, I totally agree. I love what he's doing to both neocons and progs.

  • ||

    Ummmm....pics?

  • Ivoted4KODOS||

    I'd say Gary Johnson is pretty close to the perfect libertarian/Libertarian candidate.

    Very true, but as a 3rd party candidate in a country filled with folks terrified of actual choice in political parties he stands little chance of getting elected. It is ironic that in the 2012 pres election he had more executive experience (and much better success), more entrepreneurial experience and less ties/obligations to specific industries (wall street/unions/military) than Barry O or Fluff Romney and yet he couldn't even get mentioned in the media much less get into the debates, get on 50 ballots or earn more than 1%.

    He was (is if he runs in 2016) the best player in a game where security keeps him from even stepping onto the field to compete.

    Hence, Rand is the better bet, since he bribed/cajoled the right people to get into the game and give himself a chance to win.

  • kinnath||

    Senator Gary Johnson would have been pretty close to the perfect libertarian candidate.

    He was useless running as a third-party candidate for president. I am still pissed at him for walking away from a nearly guaranteed seat in the Senate.

  • ||

    I wish he would go that route, too. Or House - he could pick a district in NM that leans libertarian, move there, and run as an I or L.

  • kinnath||

    Ron Paul proved that a congressman has no power at all.

    Rand Paul is showing the power that every single Senator has to fuck with the process.

    Rand Paul and Gay Johnson together could have been a wrecking crew.

  • Robert||

    On the national scene, Gary Johnson isn't a good political candidate of any kind.

  • JulioFranco||

    Gary Johnson is good because he is a former governor, who has actually won elections. He is an extremely mediocre Libertarian Party on the actual issues.

    Johnson supports anti-discrimination laws, which is extremely unlibertarian. He has supported small but unlibertarian things like mandatory nutritional labels in restaurants and going after that Joseph Kony guy. A couple of years ago I heard him interviewed and he had read almost none of the free market economists. All he came up with for influences was Atlas Shrugged and the Cato Institute handbook. He didn't know who Henry Hazlitt was.

    He isn't bad. But he is hardly ideal.

  • AlaskanIndependant||

    I beg to differ on a few points you made starting with the nutritional labels. One could argue that free trade stems from liberty and liberty begins with the rights of individuals, not commercial pursuit. What I'm trying to say is that the right of consumers to know the contents of a meal before ingesting it overrides the right of producers to nondisclosure. In the same vein of thought anti-discrimination laws should be libertarian bread and butter as the singular goal is a tangible front against the violation of civil rights. The rights of an individual should be the base of a constitutional system and the rights of people engaged in commerce while important, absolutely should not be considered bedrock.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    "The Senate's failure to extend the Patriot Act is a failure of the U.S. government to perform its most important function — protecting its citizens from harm," he said.

    Huh. All this time I thought the most important only legitimate function of government was to protect the rights of the individual.

  • Paul.||

    How do you protect those rights with terrorists hiding behind every blade of grass?

  • R C Dean||

    Hah! I have not one single blade of grass in my yard. All cactus, all the time.

    I'm safe!

  • Ivoted4KODOS||

    I have not one single blade of grass in my yard

    communist

  • AlaskanIndependant||

    If water conservation by law is communist then communism has an important role in every state that suffers from chronic drought. Want to make that pitch to Texas?

  • Hank Phillips||

    I was laboring under the same delusion... silly me.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    "There is no evidence of anyone's civil liberties being violated because of it."

    "Well, technically speaking, there was some evidence, but we destroyed it. So STFU," he explained.

  • ||

    They were discovered listening in on Army officers having phone sex. Only a simpleton would believe they don't have a top 5 best sexting of the week mail group going.

  • Ken Shultz||

    There's an article above this about how Hillary Clinton is a masterful political tactician, but I think this is precisely the kind of reaction Rand Paul was hoping for.

    They've got the torture apologist/surveillance state/scaremonger vote split five different ways--and he's pretty much the only one who can distinguish himself among Republicans whose against this shit.

    We should also remember that Rand Paul is young. He's going to be running for a long time. That he's already managed to land toward the front of the pack being a junior Senator from Kentucky says a lot. I hope it happens this election cycle, but if it doesn't, there will a whole lot more election cycles before Rand Paul is too old to run again. And that scaremongering/surveillance states horseshit isn't going to hold water forever. It's already generates a fraction of the support it used to--just a few years ago.

  • waffles||

    Gee Ken, you're infecting me with optimism.

  • ||

    I remember saying the same thing in 2007 and The Wine Commonsewer loving it. Sigh. Those were the days.

  • Ken Shultz||

    TWC was a great guy. Where the hell is he anymore?

    Anyway, we have made huge strides since 2007 with the general electorate.

    That was still during the Bush Administration, and it seemed like we were going to be on red alert forever. People were openly advocating for torture, and the Democrats were still rubber stamping everything the Bush Administration did--including warrantless wiretapping.

    Things are better now. We've come a long way since then. We're still not where we need to be, but we have made a lot of progress with people--if not policy. But that's the way it has to go--the people have to come around before the policy changes. Horse before cart.

  • waffles||

    His blog still exists and is updated. Seems like a happy guy.

  • Marshall Gill||

    Gee Ken, you're infecting me with optimism.

    Get waffles a Balko column, STAT!

  • Paul.||

    That he's already managed to land toward the front of the pack being a junior Senator from Kentucky says a lot.

    You know who else landed at the front of the pack being a Jr. Senator?

  • R C Dean||

    John Kerry?

  • Ken Shultz||

    Ashley Judd?

  • Charles Easterly||

    John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

  • Libertarian||

    Hillary?

  • Swiss Servator, Kaffee bitte!||

    M. Cornelius Sulla?

  • Swiss Servator, Kaffee bitte!||

    Dammit L

  • Invisible Finger||

    Frank Howard?

  • AlaskanIndependant||

    That idiot who sent a letter to Iran?
    (short lived, thank goodness)

  • Hank Phillips||

    The ku-klux kleptocrats are simply trying to steal libertarian votes, just like the People's Party, Socialist Labor Party, Greenbackers, Progressive Party, Republicans, etc, lifted the income tax plank out of the communist party manifesto of 1848 to seduce looter support and get their candidates' hands in the till.
    One doesn't expect the truth from them that takes what ain't theirs. The Federalists/Whigs/Red Republicans will never change, but they can be sent packing. Think of it as evolution in action.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I am one of those people who believe Rand would be of more/better use to us as a Senator than as President. But I absolutely enjoy the sight of him poking these snakes with a stick in order to make them hiss and strike ineffectually at the air.
    For what that's worth.

  • kinnath||

    A career spent halting bills like the Patriot Act would be a fine career indeed.

  • Hank Phillips||

    I second that. An antiabortionist Senator is less embarrassing in the eyes of nations less supertitious. And Congress passes the laws anyway. The president is charged with their faithful enforcement, supervising the bombing and shooting of anyone Congress declares war against, and carrying off the blame as a scapegoat so Congressmen can be reelected for thirty years.

  • DesigNate||

    I am very disappointed that you all aren't defending Bush's legacy like the republican's we're supposed to be.

    For shame.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    shriek hardest hit

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I'd say Gary Johnson is pretty close to the perfect libertarian/Libertarian candidate.

    He certainly doesn't appear to be consumed by an insatiable lust for power and prestige; unlike, say, Hillary Clinton.

  • Ivoted4KODOS||

    He certainly doesn't appear to be consumed by an insatiable lust for power and prestige; unlike, say, Hillary Clinton.

    GJ burns away that lust with all his biking and iron man training. God help us all if he ever stops...

  • Hank Phillips||

    It's a pity Gary never mentioned the Libertarian Party platform when he had the chance. All he did was whine about how rude the two looter parties were to each other. An intelligent candidate would urge voters to listen closely to what the looters are saying about each other, and remember that when they see LIB on a ballot (or write it in).

  • Rebel Scum||

    Bush continued. "There is no evidence of anyone's civil liberties being violated because of it."

    I guess ole Jeb never learned to read and compare/contrast.

  • Vampire||

    "Christie slammed "misguided ideologues" with "no real world experience in fighting terrorism" for "putting their uninformed beliefs above the safety and security of our citizens." […]"

    Last time I checked, Christie was never able to meet the weight standards for the military, and never went to war himself. So this douchebag has no experience combatting terrorism, and never learned from the history of war and the violent state. If he did, he wouldn't be promoting war, nor the state for that matter.

    Screw that war mongering William Kristol too.

    They had no problem calling Romney a conservative last election, when he was a socialist who embraced corporatism. So whatever they say should have no bearing on things.

  • Loki||

    Christie slammed "misguided ideologues" with "no real world experience in fighting terrorism"

    Whereas Christie's a former SEAL...

    FUK off fattie.

  • ||

    "Governor, have you been eating ice-cream?"

    C:"No, I just blew a SEAL."

  • Inigo M.||

    Former SEAL? More like a current walrus!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    When Christie says, "real world experience in fighting terrorism" what he means is "watching the WTC collapse on the teevee".

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Christie does have real world experience in giving the President a rimjob while he flies around in a helicopter sightseeing.

  • 1984ATLASTRUTH||

    This pro-surveillance anti-bill of rights propaganda is a legitimate blood lust for loss of liberty in the name of pseudo security. The more they bash this Rand guy, the more I want to vote for him in the primary. The hawks and neo-cons would rather Hillary Clinton be the next president than Rand. Sounds rather curiously corrupt to me. These worthless war hounds need to go back into remission.

  • 1984ATLASTRUTH||

    Christie put the lives of motorists at risk when he violated the department of transportation security codes in BRIDGE GATE. He has no authority to criticize Rand for upholding the constitution. Maybe he should look into owning Kristy Kreme Donuts instead.

  • Vampire||

    Wouldn't it be nice if these politicians went off to own business themselves. This way, when they implement their fantasy economics, it effects them and those stupid enough to give them investor capital.

    Imagine someone promoting the federal reserves business plan? Well, we mismatch assets and liabilities......so.....uh you folks should invest in us..........

    Being folks don't have to put up their property, or money for these programs, they are shielded from any consequences and screw over future generations.

  • Radsenior||

    GOP hawks? They are all TEA party fanatics, not GOP! Ask Boehner! Misguided Idealogues? That's the description of every Libertarian who ran as a Republican!

  • BambiB||

    Paul's right. The war-mongers are wrong. And who ever thought they could be so hysterical? They're light frightened women!

  • Letitride||

    stand with Rand

    The war Hawks are facists

  • Hank Phillips||

    True, but I'm sure their motives are altruistic.

  • EndTheGOP||

    The Grahams, McCains, Kristols, Christies, etc. are going to be the ones to blame for the GOP loss in 2016. Without the Libertarian wing, the Republicans will NEVER win another presidential election again in our lifetime.

    Now what is that website for contributing to Rand Paul again...

  • Hank Phillips||

    See? The True Christian™ GOP takes its cue from the Prohibition Party Platform of 1912, scratch that, 2012: ban abortion, shoot them Satanic dopers, bomb them mohammedans! Oh, and Creation Scientists now join the Environmental Purity Nationalsocialists in opposing nuclear power plants as a manifestation of Satanic Hellfire.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online