by Sunnyjane
 |
| I did NOT have plagiarized sex with my hair! That was my OWN idea! |
There is a major chapter in Reince Priebus' 2016 Republican Tea Party playbook titled When You're Desperate, Just Spout Stupid Shit. In Rand Paul's copy, this particular section has been referred to so often that it's become thoroughly thumb-spit-moistened and dog-eared. (I understand that the Centers for Disease Control is considering classifying it as an infectious disease carrier.)
Just one of about three hundred or so Republicans who are planning to run for president in 2016, Senator Paul (RTP-McConnellville) is searching high and low (mostly low) for a solution in need of a problem. And because he's up against some tough competition for the top Tea Party spot in the Governors v. Congress Cretins race to the bottom, he intends to get the publicity he thinks he so richly deserves: I want to be part of the national debate, so whether I run or not, being considered is something that allows me to have a larger microphone.
So anxious is the senator for that larger microphone, that he actually gave a pre-taped response to President Obama's 2014 State of the Union address. In it, he began with the Godhead we discussed in a recent post, Ronald Reagan. I kid you not! If you're up for it, you can watch Paul's less-than-riveting rant for nine minutes and thirty seconds. Personally, I decided I didn't have enough time left in my life to waste more than sixty seconds on him.
Obamacare: BAD Thing! Freedom to Die: GOOD Thing!
Even though Ted Cruz has pretty much co-opted the Affordable Care Act for his own Down-With-Obama project, Rand Paul has had to take a stand against it, too; his Tea Party backers demand it. Sen. Paul has said that Obamacare will kill women, kill seniors, kill children...oops, sorry, wrong Tea Party hack. What he really said about the ACA was equally stupid: Just because a couple of people on the Supreme Court declare something to be "constitutional" does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional. Gosh, why didn't the Democrats come up with that argument after the Citizens United decision? Although it is definitely not true that President Obama injured his knee when he fell on the floor laughing at this statement, there may be some truth to the rumor that the Supreme Court has sent the esteemed senator a fifth-grade United States Government textbook with the chapter on Role of the Supreme Court in American Democracy prominently highlighted.
Since the upstanding Sen. Paul admitted to an audience in October 2013 that while he never lies or cheats, he sometimes spreads misinformation. It's a great tactic. Misinformation can be very important, it should come as no surprise that he spread a little misinformation about his son's being signed up for Medicaid against his will. Turned out, not surprisingly, that it was a lie.
Even weakling Wolf Blitzer, who rarely if ever challenges a Republican's veracity, pummeled Paul on his statements about the Affordable Care Act: [President Obama is] making the point that if you have health insurance you're going to be healthier, presumably, because you'll be going to doctors. You're a physician; you understand that. Senator Paul's response was a spin that's definitely snort-worthy: It doesn't necessarily equate. Now, good behavior, exercise, and diet may prevent illness. Going to the doctor doesn't necessarily prevent illness. (Gosh, I don't believe I've seen the senator speak out in support of a similar initiative that is championed by the First Lady. Hmmm...) Besides, if this is his philosophy -- good behavior, exercise, and diet may prevent illness -- I wonder why he hasn't told his Medicare and Medicaid patients that these practices would prevent their glaucoma, cataracts, and macular degeneration. Perhaps then he could avoid accepting that awful government socialized medical insurance.
Paul's war on Obamacare seems to be a losing one, as the latest figures show that over three million people nationwide and more than two hundred and thirty thousand citizens of Kentucky have signed up, thirty-five percent of whom happen to be under age thirty-five -- a significant number for the push to insure young people. In addition, six Republican-run states (Florida, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, North Carolina and Wisconsin) are expected to meet or exceed figures they had originally projected.
Keep digging, keep digging...
Extending Unemployment Benefits Makes Jobless People Lazy
When the Republicans left Washington in late December to enjoy their bounteous holidays with their families, they did so with a Let-them-eat-fruitcake disdain for 1.3 million Americans who, because they remain jobless due to the GOP's refusal to pass a jobs bill, are now without unemployment benefits.
Using Tea Party Libertarian logic, Sen. Paul had no compunctions about this unfairness at all because ...the longer you have [unemployment benefits], it does provide some disincentive to work and there are many studies that indicate this. And just which study did he rely on to back up his idiocy? Welllll...he chose a paper by economist Rand Ghayad, who upon hearing this bit of news, said that Rand Paulwas a colossal idiot had completely
misread his work. In a rebuttal article, Ghayad said, There's
no reason to cut unemployment benefits. People aren't long-term
unemployed because they prefer getting benefits. People are long-term
unemployed because there still aren't enough jobs.
Well, at least he didn't plagiarize Mr. Ghayad's work, right? And speaking of which...
I Challenge Thee to a Duel!
Just one of about three hundred or so Republicans who are planning to run for president in 2016, Senator Paul (RTP-McConnellville) is searching high and low (mostly low) for a solution in need of a problem. And because he's up against some tough competition for the top Tea Party spot in the Governors v. Congress Cretins race to the bottom, he intends to get the publicity he thinks he so richly deserves: I want to be part of the national debate, so whether I run or not, being considered is something that allows me to have a larger microphone.
So anxious is the senator for that larger microphone, that he actually gave a pre-taped response to President Obama's 2014 State of the Union address. In it, he began with the Godhead we discussed in a recent post, Ronald Reagan. I kid you not! If you're up for it, you can watch Paul's less-than-riveting rant for nine minutes and thirty seconds. Personally, I decided I didn't have enough time left in my life to waste more than sixty seconds on him.
Obamacare: BAD Thing! Freedom to Die: GOOD Thing!
Even though Ted Cruz has pretty much co-opted the Affordable Care Act for his own Down-With-Obama project, Rand Paul has had to take a stand against it, too; his Tea Party backers demand it. Sen. Paul has said that Obamacare will kill women, kill seniors, kill children...oops, sorry, wrong Tea Party hack. What he really said about the ACA was equally stupid: Just because a couple of people on the Supreme Court declare something to be "constitutional" does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional. Gosh, why didn't the Democrats come up with that argument after the Citizens United decision? Although it is definitely not true that President Obama injured his knee when he fell on the floor laughing at this statement, there may be some truth to the rumor that the Supreme Court has sent the esteemed senator a fifth-grade United States Government textbook with the chapter on Role of the Supreme Court in American Democracy prominently highlighted.
Since the upstanding Sen. Paul admitted to an audience in October 2013 that while he never lies or cheats, he sometimes spreads misinformation. It's a great tactic. Misinformation can be very important, it should come as no surprise that he spread a little misinformation about his son's being signed up for Medicaid against his will. Turned out, not surprisingly, that it was a lie.
Even weakling Wolf Blitzer, who rarely if ever challenges a Republican's veracity, pummeled Paul on his statements about the Affordable Care Act: [President Obama is] making the point that if you have health insurance you're going to be healthier, presumably, because you'll be going to doctors. You're a physician; you understand that. Senator Paul's response was a spin that's definitely snort-worthy: It doesn't necessarily equate. Now, good behavior, exercise, and diet may prevent illness. Going to the doctor doesn't necessarily prevent illness. (Gosh, I don't believe I've seen the senator speak out in support of a similar initiative that is championed by the First Lady. Hmmm...) Besides, if this is his philosophy -- good behavior, exercise, and diet may prevent illness -- I wonder why he hasn't told his Medicare and Medicaid patients that these practices would prevent their glaucoma, cataracts, and macular degeneration. Perhaps then he could avoid accepting that awful government socialized medical insurance.
Paul's war on Obamacare seems to be a losing one, as the latest figures show that over three million people nationwide and more than two hundred and thirty thousand citizens of Kentucky have signed up, thirty-five percent of whom happen to be under age thirty-five -- a significant number for the push to insure young people. In addition, six Republican-run states (Florida, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, North Carolina and Wisconsin) are expected to meet or exceed figures they had originally projected.
Keep digging, keep digging...
Extending Unemployment Benefits Makes Jobless People Lazy
 |
| Go to hair school and I'll let you give me Mohawk. I've gotta pow-wow with Native Americans. |
Using Tea Party Libertarian logic, Sen. Paul had no compunctions about this unfairness at all because ...the longer you have [unemployment benefits], it does provide some disincentive to work and there are many studies that indicate this. And just which study did he rely on to back up his idiocy? Welllll...he chose a paper by economist Rand Ghayad, who upon hearing this bit of news, said that Rand Paul
Well, at least he didn't plagiarize Mr. Ghayad's work, right? And speaking of which...
I Challenge Thee to a Duel!
 |
| Too many laws and regulations! Stealing other people's work shouldn't be a crime! |
Like another Tea Party ignoramus we could easily name, Rand Paul hasn't learned to keep his mouth shut when he's called out for his political ignorance and his various transgressions. And he certainly should not pick a fight with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow; that is one he'll never win.
Maddow has been all over Paul about his little plagiarizing habit, so much so that he'd like to shoot her or stab her -- if dueling were legal in Kentucky of course, because people who call him out are haters and hackers. Maddow's response: There is nothing wrong with the reporting. You can try to make this about me, but how about addressing the substance? Responding to the person rather than to the charge is a time tested tactic. Honestly, it is a symptom of immaturity in our political discourse that it's expected that this is part of the way he'll respond.
It has also come to light that for his book, Government Bullies, the senator lifted three pages almost verbatim from a Heritage Foundation paper without a proper citation.
Snarling Little Ankle-Biter Goes After Beloved Big Dog
Before the interminable Benghazi hearings even began, little Rand Paul was hot-footing it around the country telling anybody who would listen that Benghazi should disqualify Hillary Clinton from ever again holding high office. Then, during the hearings, he told her directly that If I were president, I would have relieved you of your post. I'm not certain, but I believe I saw former Sen. Clinton stifle a grin.
Well, that whole thing didn't turn out too well for the GOP or Rand Paul, and it was delightful to read General David Petraeus's praise for the former Secretary of State: Hillary Clinton would be a tremendous president. Like a lot of great leaders, her most impressive qualities were most visible during tough times. In the wake of the Benghazi attacks, for example, she was extraordinarily resolute, determined, and controlled. Ouch! That certainly must have put a crimp in Sen. Paul's colon.
Further demonstrating his acute economy of good sense, the flapping yapper has decided to attack the Big Dog.
The senator initiated this bit of argle-bargle when he decided that Bill Clinton's 1998 peccadillo with then twenty-five-year-old intern Monica Lewinsky was somehow germane sixteen years later. It gets a little confusing here, dear readers, so bear with me: Randy thinks that is important now because the Democrats insist that the Republicans are waging a war on women and Bill's predatory behavior and being a serial philanderer and people who benefited when Bill raised money for their campaigns should be ashamed and should give it back and if they don't they have a lot of explaining to do because Bill used his authority to take advantage of a young woman in the workplace and even though he's not so sure what all of this has to do with Hillary running for president, it's hard to separate Bill from Hillary.
Jesus! Did you get all that? (I continue to be perplexed by the GOP's definition of what is timely news and what is not. Scott Walker seems to think that his emails from 2010 are old news not worthy of discussion, while Rand Paul thinks that the 1998 Monica Lewinsky issue is pertinent and must be rehashed immediately.)
While I cannot think of one person who condoned Bill Clinton's behavior, it's important to understand a little of Ms. Lewinsky's less than savory sexual history. She was having an affair with a married man when she decided to become a political intern. In fact, she told the wife of the guy she was screwing that I'm going to the White House to get my presidential knee pads. So it's difficult to put her in the category of a sweet young thing who was an innocent being taken advantage of by a powerful man.
Oh, you do remember that Rand Paul called Newt Gingrich, who had an affair with his twenty-seven-year-old intern at the same time he was trying to get Bill Clinton impeached, a sexual predator and a serial philanderer when Newt was running for president in 2012, right? No, I don't remember that either. Didn't happen.
Karl Rove, whom you will remember is trying very hard to keep Republicans from being verbally asinine (and losing the battle), said recently that Rand Paul spending a lot of time talking about the mistakes of Bill Clinton does not look like a big agenda item for the future of the country. Snort!
But Reince Priebus, who's never been accused of being the sharpest pair of scissors in the tailor's shop, thinks it's all fine and dandy, telling Andrea Mitchell earlier this month, Hillary Clinton provides a lot of opportunity for us. Everything's on the table for 2016.
Trust me, that particular statement will come back to haunt the GOP during the upcoming presidential campaign cycle. Everything's on the table for 2016 cuts both ways.
End Note
Maddow has been all over Paul about his little plagiarizing habit, so much so that he'd like to shoot her or stab her -- if dueling were legal in Kentucky of course, because people who call him out are haters and hackers. Maddow's response: There is nothing wrong with the reporting. You can try to make this about me, but how about addressing the substance? Responding to the person rather than to the charge is a time tested tactic. Honestly, it is a symptom of immaturity in our political discourse that it's expected that this is part of the way he'll respond.
It has also come to light that for his book, Government Bullies, the senator lifted three pages almost verbatim from a Heritage Foundation paper without a proper citation.
Snarling Little Ankle-Biter Goes After Beloved Big Dog
Before the interminable Benghazi hearings even began, little Rand Paul was hot-footing it around the country telling anybody who would listen that Benghazi should disqualify Hillary Clinton from ever again holding high office. Then, during the hearings, he told her directly that If I were president, I would have relieved you of your post. I'm not certain, but I believe I saw former Sen. Clinton stifle a grin.
Well, that whole thing didn't turn out too well for the GOP or Rand Paul, and it was delightful to read General David Petraeus's praise for the former Secretary of State: Hillary Clinton would be a tremendous president. Like a lot of great leaders, her most impressive qualities were most visible during tough times. In the wake of the Benghazi attacks, for example, she was extraordinarily resolute, determined, and controlled. Ouch! That certainly must have put a crimp in Sen. Paul's colon.
Further demonstrating his acute economy of good sense, the flapping yapper has decided to attack the Big Dog.
The senator initiated this bit of argle-bargle when he decided that Bill Clinton's 1998 peccadillo with then twenty-five-year-old intern Monica Lewinsky was somehow germane sixteen years later. It gets a little confusing here, dear readers, so bear with me: Randy thinks that is important now because the Democrats insist that the Republicans are waging a war on women and Bill's predatory behavior and being a serial philanderer and people who benefited when Bill raised money for their campaigns should be ashamed and should give it back and if they don't they have a lot of explaining to do because Bill used his authority to take advantage of a young woman in the workplace and even though he's not so sure what all of this has to do with Hillary running for president, it's hard to separate Bill from Hillary.
Jesus! Did you get all that? (I continue to be perplexed by the GOP's definition of what is timely news and what is not. Scott Walker seems to think that his emails from 2010 are old news not worthy of discussion, while Rand Paul thinks that the 1998 Monica Lewinsky issue is pertinent and must be rehashed immediately.)
While I cannot think of one person who condoned Bill Clinton's behavior, it's important to understand a little of Ms. Lewinsky's less than savory sexual history. She was having an affair with a married man when she decided to become a political intern. In fact, she told the wife of the guy she was screwing that I'm going to the White House to get my presidential knee pads. So it's difficult to put her in the category of a sweet young thing who was an innocent being taken advantage of by a powerful man.
Oh, you do remember that Rand Paul called Newt Gingrich, who had an affair with his twenty-seven-year-old intern at the same time he was trying to get Bill Clinton impeached, a sexual predator and a serial philanderer when Newt was running for president in 2012, right? No, I don't remember that either. Didn't happen.
Karl Rove, whom you will remember is trying very hard to keep Republicans from being verbally asinine (and losing the battle), said recently that Rand Paul spending a lot of time talking about the mistakes of Bill Clinton does not look like a big agenda item for the future of the country. Snort!
But Reince Priebus, who's never been accused of being the sharpest pair of scissors in the tailor's shop, thinks it's all fine and dandy, telling Andrea Mitchell earlier this month, Hillary Clinton provides a lot of opportunity for us. Everything's on the table for 2016.
Trust me, that particular statement will come back to haunt the GOP during the upcoming presidential campaign cycle. Everything's on the table for 2016 cuts both ways.
End Note
 |
| HELP! I'm stuck ass-up in here, a rat is eating my face, and I still haven't found a scandal! |
No comments:
Post a Comment