Yet Another Neocon Rand Hit Piece Today In Washington Post 7-18-13

[anaconda]

I made several comments but most are shallow negative HuffPo type comments ("racist" "dope" "neo-confederate" "bad hair", etc.).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...73b7e0424_story.html?wprss=rss_michael-gerson

The front page reference to the article carried the title "Rand Paul's Spectacular Fall." LOL (they wish).

 

[Origanalist]

It going to be non-stop real soon.

 

[anaconda]

It going to be non-stop real soon.

Rand has the facts on his side. I think he needs to go on the offensive and start calling out the corruptions in the system for what they are. No more political correctness for fear of being called "conspiratorial." He should talk almost like Webster Tarpley on foreign affairs and the military-industrial complex. Or maybe I'm wrong and and the powers that be are trying to goad him into a war of words in the press that they can use to label him as a conspiracy kook.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Rand has the facts on his side. I think he needs to go on the offensive and start calling out the corruptions in the system for what they are. No more political correctness for fear of being called "conspiratorial." He should talk almost like Webster Tarpley on foreign affairs and the military-industrial complex. Or maybe I'm wrong and and the powers that be are trying to goad him into a war of words in the press that they can use to label him as a conspiracy kook.

Unfortunately, you are wrong. That is exactly what they are trying to do. Here's a thread from a couple of days ago, about how "they" are pretending to be concerned about how Rand's "conspiracy kook" father might be hurting Rand's prospects as a "serious" politician:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...Business-Empire-Hurt-Rand%92s-Chances-in-2016

 

[thoughtomator]

This is straight off the CFR presses FYI.

 

[goRPaul]

They're getting their cheap shots in while they can. I think Rand brings too much to the table for this to be the excuse to ignore him. The left has its racists too, those who hate black conservatives.

 

[Anti-Neocon]

This is straight off the CFR presses FYI.

More like the reincarnation of the PNAC presses. These people are plain evil and obviously feel threatened by Rand, so he must be doing something right. The murderous Zionist/war profiteering complex is scared.

 

[Jackie Moon]

Similarly, Paulites have been critical of the 1964 Civil Rights Act for violating both states’ rights and individual property rights — an argument Rand Paul himself echoed during several interviews as a Senate candidate.

Ahh yes, there it is.

They're getting their cheap shots in while they can. I think Rand brings too much to the table for this to be the excuse to ignore him. The left has its racists too, those who hate black conservatives.

Yeah, even if I were looking at this as an average person from the outside I'd think these were pretty weak shots. The whole thing with with Hunter just seems like such a stretch and shows how desperate they are to find something to attack him with. But if this is the best stuff they can come up with I think it may end up backfiring on them.

 

[tmg19103]

The title is "Rand Paul can never be a mainstream Republican".

Good. The GOP is toast. Independents won't vote for MSM Republicans and Rand needs their votes.

 

[radiofriendly]

I bit...my comment:

Two revealing quotes from this...article, "Paulites tend to hate war and federal coercion" and "Paulism...is a form of libertarianism that categorically objects to 150 years of expanding federal power." Let's explore this: "Gerson and the Neocons tend to love war and fed coercion and celebrate 150 yrs of expanding federal power." Just let that percolate a bit...

 

[WD-NY]

When commenting on articles like this, DO NOT address the smears made against Rand. Instead, HIT BACK by challenging them to explain their support of Obama and the DEM's pro war, pro-drone assassination, pro-wall street,big Pharma & crony-capitalism,, pro-fed drug laws, pro-NSA/FISA/SOPA/PIPA, etc. policy.

Do not attempt to engage in "reasonable" discussion. That is not the game these dembot, Rules for Radicals comment brigades and hyper-partisan "columnists" are playing.

 

[AlexAmore]

When commenting on articles like this, DO NOT address the smears made against Rand. Instead, HIT BACK by challenging them to explain their support of Obama and the DEM's pro war, pro-drone assassination, pro-wall street,big Pharma & crony-capitalism,, pro-fed drug laws, pro-NSA/FISA/SOPA/PIPA, etc. policy.

Do not attempt to engage in "reasonable" discussion. That is not the game these dembot, Rules for Radicals comment brigades and hyper-partisan "columnists" are playing.

QFT

All these attacks are a good sign.

 

[JCDenton0451]

Here is one of the top comments. I find it interesting.

Oh, Rand Paul is mainstream Republican alright. Through and through.

He recently sponsored an amendment that would have made adoption of a Federal Flood Insurance authorization contingent upon first adopting "personhood" foe unborn fetuses.

He's as Republican as Republican can be (I apologize for resorting to such harsh language, and typically try to avoid such mud slinging).

See? Many WaPo readers find Paul's social-conservatism even more incriminating than his associations. If you think that things like fetal amendment can simply fly under the radar in 2016, you're greatly mistaken.

 

[spladle]

Here is one of the top comments. I find it interesting.


See? Many WaPo readers find Paul's social-conservatism even more incriminating than his associations. If you think that things like fetal amendment can simply fly under the radar in 2016, you're greatly mistaken.

Did these WaPo readers vote for Mitt Romney in 2016?