FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Rand Paul Sells Out

by RALPH NADER

Senator Rand Paul is widening the difference between his father, the long-time former Congressman from Texas whose “no” votes on principle, whether you agree or not, have shaped his place in history. See his lengthy farewell address upon retiring from the House of Representatives Ron Paul has just established the non-profit Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

The differences between father and son are ones of personality, policy and opportunism. Since Rand Paul is intent on running for president in 2016, his drift toward the corporatist Republicans is noteworthy.

Senator Rand Paul appears sterner. He is also far less likely to return calls than his father. When he was running for the Kentucky Senate Seat in 2010, I made several calls to ask whether he intended to support the bills his father was proposing in the House, including the legalization of growing industrial hemp in the U.S. for food, energy, clothing, paper lubricants and many other uses. He never responded, even though he was called by the Louisville Courier Journal on this subject. (Senator Paul has now sponsored legalization of industrial hemp cultivation.)

Soon I realized that others had difficulty in reaching him both during his campaign and since then. In 2010, his campaign director did tell me that when Rand Paul becomes Senator, he would go after the overblown military budget.

Remembering that assurance, I was more than surprised to learn how far Rand Paul has moved from his libertarian/conservative base. Here are two recent statements of his that received little coverage.

Last month, the Associated Press reported Senator Paul saying:

“They’re precisely the same people who are unwilling to cut the spending and their “Gimme, gimme, gimme—give me all the Sandy [Hurricane Sandy] money now,’ those are the people who are bankrupting the government and not letting enough money be left over for national defense.”

A few days later on August 6, Senator Paul was at Fort Campbell in Kentucky where he said: “If we were to cut somewhere else in the budget, I would try to restore some money to the military.”

Well, well, the corporatists and crony capitalists may have a new recruit—Rand Paul—who is not heeding President Dwight Eisenhower’s  famous caveat about the military industrial complex in his 1961 farewell address to the American people.

Kentucky has numerous military installations and military contractors who must be quite pleased with how Rand Paul has dropped his fathers’ notable opposition to the bloated military budget and the imperial consequences of empire building. Meanwhile,  Senator Paul has little trouble on another spending front—namely that Kentucky gets $1.51 back for every tax dollar it sends to Washington D.C.

Newt Gingrich—a military empire builder if there ever was one—is now praising Rand Paul in the Washington Times.

Libertarians do not like sovereignty-shredding authoritarian trade agreements such as NAFTA and the GATT. Rand Paul not only declines to challenge the autocratic systems of transnational governance created by these agreements that drive ‘corporate managed trade,’ but he votes for more drastic bilateral extensions with South Korea and Colombia.

Senator Paul received much deserved publicity in March when he spoke for 13 hours on the Senate floor against drone warfare and the extent of the President’s right to commit homicide. That led some commentators to say he positioned himself ahead of the pack for 2016. The Senator has discovered showhorsing—get all the publicity but hold back from continuing to seriously workhorse the issue.

Mr. Paul did the same last year when he voted against the National Defense Authorization Act which contained a provision that many argue authorizes the president to arrest anyone suspected of terrorist support or activity and jail them without charges. Rand Paul turned down pleas from some of his outside political advisors to put “a hold” on the bill that would have intensified his opposition and aroused the public. That signaled Senator Paul had complied with the demand of the Senate Republican leadership club.

Senator Paul refers often to the Constitution and its preamble that starts with “we the people.” But his votes seem to reflect that he supports big business, including big oil, gaining more power over the people or at the expense of the people. Surely he knows that nowhere in the U.S Constitution do the words “corporation” or “company” appear.

Perhaps political ambition also has deterred physician (ophthalmologist) Rand Paul from applying the Hippocratic Oath (never do harm) in the Senate. He voted with 46 Senators who wished to rollback violent toxic emissions (including mercury) from electric power plants.

There was a time when the corporate state in Washington, D.C. was anxious about candidate Rand Paul. They thought he would defiantly oppose their many corporate welfare benefits, instead of just pitching words. They sensed that he would be the hairshirt and watchdog over the lucrative, wasteful military budget and militarism abroad. The anxiety is gone. The word around the world of corporate lobbying inside the Beltway is that Rand Paul is becoming “bankable.”

So much for his fellow Kentuckians back home who don’t have Inc. after their names. For these people, Rand Paul will continue to voice unlimited free market rhetoric. None of that will help hardworking folks earn a decent livelihood with life-saving full Medicare and free choice of doctors and hospitals—or safer environments. Those are visions that Ophthalmologist Rand Paul did not learn much about in medical school.

On the matters of corporatism, Empire, militarism, the big Wall Street banks, crony capitalism and the unlawful, repressive national security bureaucracy, Rand Paul is being pulled from his father’s positions by the pressure of Republicans who thrive off the corporate state. His libertarian base will have to weigh in before the tipping point of political ambition confronts his first supporters.

Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer and author of Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us! He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, published by AK Press. Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition.

Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer and author of Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us! 

February 09, 2016
Andrew Levine
Hillary Says the Darndest Things
Paul Street
Kill King Capital
Ben Burgis
Lesser Evil Voting and Hillary Clinton’s War on the Poor
Paul Craig Roberts
Are the Payroll Jobs Reports Merely Propaganda Statements?
Fran Quigley
How Corporations Killed Medicine
Ted Rall
How Bernie Can Pay for His Agenda: Slash the Military
Neve Gordon
Israeli Labor Party Adopts the Apartheid Mantra
Kristin Kolb
The “Great” Bear Rainforest Agreement? A Love Affair, Deferred
Joseph Natoli
Politics and Techno-Consciousness
Hrishikesh Joshi
Selective Attention to Diversity: the Case of Cruz and Rubio
Stavros Mavroudeas
Why Syriza is Sinking in Greece
David Macaray
Attention Peyton Manning: Leave Football and Concentrate on Pizza
Arvin Paranjpe
Opening Your Heart
Kathleen Wallace
Boys, Hell, and the Politics of Vagina Voting
Brian Foley
Interview With a Bernie Broad: We Need to Start Focusing on Positions and Stop Relying on Sexism
February 08, 2016
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Privatization: the Atlanticist Tactic to Attack Russia
Mumia Abu-Jamal
Water War Against the Poor: Flint and the Crimes of Capital
John V. Walsh
Did Hillary’s Machine Rig Iowa? The Highly Improbable Iowa Coin Tosses
Vincent Emanuele
The Curse and Failure of Identity Politics
Eliza A. Webb
Hillary Clinton’s Populist Charade
Uri Avnery
Optimism of the Will
Roy Eidelson Trudy Bond, Stephen Soldz, Steven Reisner, Jean Maria Arrigo, Brad Olson, and Bryant Welch
Preserve Do-No-Harm for Military Psychologists: Coalition Responds to Department of Defense Letter to the APA
Patrick Cockburn
Oil Prices and ISIS Ruin Kurdish Dreams of Riches
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange, the UN and Meanings of Arbitrary Detention
Shamus Cooke
The Labor Movement’s Pearl Harbor Moment
W. T. Whitney
Cuba, War and Ana Belen Montes
Jim Goodman
Congress Must Kill the Trans Pacific Partnership
Peter White
Meeting John Ross
Colin Todhunter
Organic Agriculture, Capitalism and the Parallel World of the Pro-GMO Evangelist
Ralph Nader
They’re Just Not Answering!
Cesar Chelala
Beware of the Harm on Eyes Digital Devices Can Cause
Weekend Edition
February 5-7, 2016
Jeffrey St. Clair
When Chivalry Fails: St. Bernard and the Machine
Leonard Peltier
My 40 Years in Prison
John Pilger
Freeing Julian Assange: the Final Chapter
Garry Leech
Terrifying Ted and His Ultra-Conservative Vision for America
Andrew Levine
Smash Clintonism: Why Democrats, Not Republicans, are the Problem
William Blum
Is Bernie Sanders a “Socialist”?
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
We Can’t Afford These Billionaires
Enrique C. Ochoa
Super Bowl 50: American Inequality on Display
Jonathan Cook
The Liberal Hounding of Julian Assange: From Alex Gibney to The Guardian
George Wuerthner
How the Bundy Gang Won
Mike Whitney
Peace Talks “Paused” After Putin’s Triumph in Aleppo 
Ted Rall
Hillary Clinton: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Gary Leupp
Is a “Socialist” Really Unelectable? The Potential Significance of the Sanders Campaign
Vijay Prashad
The Fault Line of Race in America
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail