Libertarian is a nice word. It sounds reasonable and positive; evoking civil liberties. Unfortunately, when this anti-guvmint ideology moves into the real world it gets creepy. Its adherents start frothing at the mouth about things that most people think that government *should* do. That brings me to this week’s dishonoree, Rand Paul. I usually try to stay off the beaten track with the malaka of the week BUT this guy is a piece of work and thereby worthy of the malakatudinous title.
Rand Paul is, of course, the Crown Prince of Paultardia and the GOP nominee for the US Senate in Kentucky. His father, Ron, sugarcoats some of his nastier beliefs with a mild mannered persona and liberals groove on his loathing of the neo-cons. Ron Paul manages to sound fairly reasonable but his little boy Rand is cold and cocky. Perhaps it’s because he was named after Ayn Rand, the Nietzche of the American Right. Whatever the reason, Rand Paul makes less effort to hide his nasty side than the King of Paultardia. He reminds me a bit of former British Tory LeaderMichael Howard whom both friend and foe compared to Dracula. Rand, however, has better hair than the follically challenged Howard BUT he’s an equally nasty piece of work. I hope Democratic nominee, Jack Conway, has an ample supply of stakes and garlic…
In his victory speech the other evening, Crown Prince Rand was careful to mention the Tea Party types who helped secure his victory, He mentioned the teabaggers 9 times but only mentioned the Commonwealth of Kentucky once; giving the impression that he’d represent the former, not the latter. Hey Rand, racehorses and Bourbon need representation too.
Then there’s the matter of his doctrinaire Libertarian views. Crown Prince Rand is so opposed to government action that last month he told a Louisville paper that he was against the1964 Civil Rights Act. The section of that landmark act dissed by Rand bans discrimination by private parties in businesses such as hotels, restaurants and the like. Rand maintains that he’s not a bigot but that freedom of association trumps the public good. How predictable: malakas like Rand Paul tend to echo Margaret Thatcher who once said: “There is no such thing as society.”
Now that he’s had his head handed to him by Rachel Maddow, Paul is walking back his earlier remarks by saying that he doesn’t support a repeal of the Act but what should we believe? I’m inclined to believe his original position, which was made before the spotlight got too bright. He wants to hang that nasty embarrassment in a dark closet alongside the aide who resigned for posting racist comments on his MySpace page.
Kentucky is a conservative state so malaka Rand has a chance to win the general election, which could be worse for Republicans than his defeat. Imagine Senator Pure serving with Chinless Mitch? The mind reels. I think Democrat Jack Conway has a fighting chance: both of proto-teabagger Jim Bunning’s races were squeakers. Conway is already signaling that he’ll be running as the candidate who wants to serve the people of his state and not an ideology. I’m one of the few, the proud who still believes that our polity is fundamentally non-ideological and centrist. If the center holds, malakatude won’t prevail, if it does heaven help us all.
Finally, it’s time to praise Rachel Maddow for helping to bring Rand Paul’s retrograde views on civil rights to a national audience. Well done, Ms. Maddow. Here’s her interview with the malaka of the week:
p align=”center” class=”asset asset-video” style=”margin: 0pt auto; display: block;”>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640