Thursday, January 31, 2013

Jack Hunter, Propagandist for Rand Paul

In a recent piece Jack Hunter tries to defend his support for Rand Paul, and is happy to call himself a “propagandist” for Rand Paul. It’s fine to be a propagandist, everyone is for their own cause. However, his defenses of Rand Paul don’t repel the more serious criticisms of Senator Paul’s choices in the past few years.

"Ask the average grassroots conservative what they think of Ron Paul and you typically get a mixed reaction. Ask them what they think of Rand Paul and you find much more enthusiasm. The philosophy hasn’t substantively changed. The methods and style most certainly have."

The problem with this argument is stuff like Rand’s vote for the NDAA in 2012. It’s one thing to play along with the party and endorse the horrific nominee, it’s one thing to make arguments against federal disaster relief based on budget issues only (while ignoring more important arguments), it’s one thing to say an attack on Israel is an attack on the US (and then claim/clarify it’s just in a nuclear war scenario), but to start voting for extremely bad legislation is crossing the line. That’s no longer style/rhetorical difference. It’s aiding the ideological enemy.

"For every questionable action—support for Mitt Romney, comments about the US’s relationship with Israel, (was trying to think of more here for good measure, but these seem to be the primary two)—these things do not diminish the overall record of the most libertarian Senator since the Founding era."

Indeed, he easily became the most libertarian Senator, but since the bar was so low in the Senate to begin with, that’s not the impressive feat it sounds like. Rand Paul had the opportunity, being Ron Paul’s son and all, to be so much more. Politics is a lagging indicator, but Rand actually knows more about liberty than most politicians, so he could have stepped ahead of the curve and led like his father.

"I have not always agreed with Ron and Rand Paul. When I didn’t, I’ve said nothing. Silence.

[…]

Bad votes or comments should not go uncriticized."

Which is it, should bad votes and comments be criticized, or will you remain silent? Probably the latter, since Hunter likely wants to stay on Rand’s good side. Maybe he is hoping to land a job in a Rand Paul Administration.

The increasing questioning of Rand Paul’s methods is not going away, Mr. Hunter. You’re taking a huge risk, hoping another politician’s trip down the slippery slope of compromise to grab the ring of power defies history and actually works this time.

There is no shortcut to liberty.

No comments:

Post a Comment