Rand Paul Can’t Find a Sugar Daddy http://t.co/RVNeKXiuvH via @politicalwire
— Taegan Goddard (@politicalwire) May 29, 2015
Has Rand Paul tried Grindr for a rich Republican sugar daddy?
— Bob Schooley (@Rschooley) May 30, 2015
From the Politico article:
… While his rivals cultivate wealthy backers who will pump millions of dollars into their candidacies, Paul has struggled to find a similar lifeline. It’s led to considerable frustration in his campaign, which, amid rising concerns that it will not be able to compete financially, finds itself leaning heavily on the network of small donors who powered his father’s insurgent White House bids.
It hasn’t been for lack of trying. In recent months, Paul has sought to woo a string of powerful Republican megadonors — from Silicon Valley executives to a Kentucky coal mogul to the billionaire Koch brothers — who, it was believed, would be philosophically aligned with his free-market views. In each case, he met disappointment.
At the top of the list was Peter Thiel, the eccentric Northern California venture capitalist who funneled $2.6 million to Ron Paul’s presidential campaign. But Thiel is being far less generous this time around, leaving Paul’s crestfallen advisers with the distinct impression that he won’t give them a dime. They’ve been left guessing as to why. One speculated that Thiel, who didn’t respond to requests for comment, was unhappy with the rollout of Paul’s policy platform. Another surmised he was skeptical of Paul’s 2016 prospects or that he’d become tired of political giving and would sit out 2016 entirely.
There was Sean Parker, the flashy Napster co-founder who was portrayed by Justin Timberlake in the hit 2010 movie “The Social Network.” But Parker, who has known Paul for several years and has met with him to discuss 2016, isn’t expected to endorse Paul — or any Republican candidate, for that matter. Those familiar with Parker’s thinking say he’s most likely to provide financial support to Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton.
There was Larry Ellison, the former Oracle CEO known for his penchant for megayachts. In October, Ellison hosted a Silicon Valley fundraiser for Senate Republicans that Paul attended — an event that led to speculation that Ellison, whose net worth is said to hover around $54 billion, would get behind the Kentucky Republican. But he’s instead thrown his support to Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and will host a fundraiser for him on June 9.
“It was love at first sight,” one person close to Ellison said of his feelings toward Rubio.
Not even two months into his presidential campaign, Paul is scrambling to compete with opponents who have established fundraising vehicles underwritten by well-heeled contributors. Jeb Bush has tapped his family’s formidable network of donors, a wide-ranging list of names that includes real estate developer Mel Sembler and Anheuser-Busch distributor John Nau, to fund a super PAC that’s expected to raise an historic $100 million by the end of this month. Rubio has won the backing of Norman Braman, a Miami auto dealer who’s expected to pour anywhere from $10 million to $25 million into his bid. Ted Cruz is expected to receive around $30 million of support from Robert Mercer, a New York hedge fund manager.
Even Rick Santorum, who barely registers in polls, is expected to have a deep-pocketed benefactor: Foster Friess, a businessman who helped keep Santorum’s 2012 presidential bid alive, has said he will donate again…
“Philosophical alignment” be damned, what the deep-pocket Silicon Valley disruptepreneurs like is winning, and when they look at Prince Rand they’re not seeing a winner.
Second best tactic for a political sugar baby, if you don’t look like a strong winner, is to provide that extra level of customer service so prized by the .0001 Percenters. Marco, Ted, Rick: those boys know how to please the most demanding customer. His foibles are their foibles, his philosophical alignment shadowed, whether it’s fetal-viability regulation or flat-tax celebration. Even Jeb, for all his family’s clout, has a proven track record of assiduously sucking up to guys with money — just ask Florida’s real estate developers or charter school owners.
But Rand, Son of Ron is used to being the crown prince of his daddy’s backwater little duchy. As long as he didn’t stray too far from the free-market serfs in their Objectivist kingdom, he was free to have advanced notions about substance deregulation and military defunding. The yokels were even proud of their free-thinking maverick and all those wacky proposals, bless his heart. Rand grew up considering himself a deep thinker, an eloquent orator, and probably (as the Yiddish proverb would have it) a better-than-karaoke level singer. Like a lot of aspiring conquerors before him, Rand Paul seems to have mistaken himself for a shark in the ocean, when he was just a pike in a pond…
This makes me happy. I cannot abide that whiny, arrogant, Tribble-wearing prick.
@raven: Speaking of bait, it’s almost time for hubby and me to go find some if we’re going to stick to our pier fishing plan this morning…
Poor little Aqua Buddha. His sophomoric wet dream of a libertarian paradise where no one pays any taxes and everyone is heavily armed, but yet the land is flowing with milk and honey, will just have to wait….
It makes me happy too, because the low info morons think that Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders are somewhat interchangeable. And they go nuts when you point out that Rand is a Tea Party darling with a 100% conservative rating from some conservative group.
And Fox News is rage-cropping him from their poll graphics, like an angry teenager tearing up a yearbook photo. The memo came down from Roger that Curly’s trash talk about the neocons was unacceptable.
My favorite video clip was when he put down his hamburger after one bite and ran away from the young lady who wanted to ask about his immigration policies.
Or was it those times he hushed the lady interviewers who simply wanted clarification of his views? Or maybe when he said business owners had a right to refuse service to minorities? Did he really say that last one? Or was I dreaming?
I someone telling me, back in 2012, that they’d like to see a Kucinich/Ron Paul ticket.
It actually made me dizzy for a moment. Wouldn’t they cancel each other out? Like the calico cat and the gingham dog?
the larry ellison thing is weird.
he’s a jewish atheist, whose daughter is an openly gay hollywood producer and he’s backing a light weight who panders to religious extremists.
I saw him interviewed once, he didn’t seem like a wingnut. I guess for some people they just become reactionary at a certain age.
Rand should go on Shark Tank to see if he can get a shark to invest in him.
Antiestablishment mentality. Policies are meaningless.
@Germy Shoemangler: It’s people who think in soundbytes. They hear something that Paul supports (legalizing weed, no taxes eveh) and just assume he’s a flavor of liberal. They also think libertarians are what you call a group of liberals.
Suggesting they actually look up voting records and policy positions of someone like Paul is too much work*
*Also true for people who vote Republican but believe that “they wouldn’t REALLY cut Social Security”.
Well, that’s certainly one of the things that he’s known for.
@Betty Cracker: You know what you are doing. LIVE!!
OT: (sorta) but we’re still fundraising for this:
Link fail? Here
There is no OT on helping animals. Here is the link to the page. Let’s get it Juicers!!!!
@Baud: Yaaay! “Hillary”! Nothing wrong with being antiestablishment.
What the goal is set for is the heartworm treatment, and some overnights at the vet for the worst of it given Belle’s fragile state, and a spay when she has recovered enough for that too.
@Dr. McCoy: if it defeats your purpose and furthers the advancement of your opposition there is.
Not really, Ellison wanted a top Republican candidate of his own, but Bush, and Walker were already taken.
As an end in itself, it usually leads nowhere, or some place worse.
So Rand Paul will be the first Klown to fall out of the Kar? A whole seven months before primary season? Oh dear. How humiliating.
That would be something, because Paul gets a lot of free press, but even that may not be enough anymore.
Just reading the list of rich men backing these troglodytes makes me sad. Think how much good in the world could be accomplished with the money they will piss away on the primaries and in the general, if they aren’t sitting it out in a sulk by then. Just boggles the mind.
Second best tactic for a political sugar baby, if you don’t look like a strong winner, is to provide that extra level of customer service so prized by the .0001 Percenters.
“Customer service”, you say?
There is something pleasurable in watching a Libertarian strike out with so many rich Silicon Valley sorts.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
Elison is control freak as they come. Between him destroying Sun Microsytems and his private war with Bill Gates.
@Germy Shoemangler: Paul doesn’t believe in telling businesses who they can serve because the free market will take care of it. Of course, the laws were passed because the free market didn’t take care of it.
@Germy Shoemangler: My favorite video clip was when he put down his hamburger after one bite and ran away from the young lady who wanted to ask about his immigration policies.
I know we’re just into the first turn, but that clip is the leader in the “2016 Yakety Sax Sweepstakes”.
@JPL: I don’t understand how he expects the free market to take care of it. Lawsuits? The minorities who are turned away leave bad yelp reviews?
@ThresherK: That incident was such a window into his soul. He tries to portray himself as a fearless crusader, but he looked more like a teenager skipping out on a restaurant bill.
you’re not the boss of me…..DAD!
I guess if you convince yourself you’re the smartest, and have all the angles figured out, the world isn’t such a big scary place.
Meh. It’s not like the money was ever going to anything like that anyway. These aren’t nice people. Maybe the yacht and hookers and blow industries will suffer. Maybe.
Dear Rand Paul:
Where’s John Galt when you need him?
@Betty Cracker: I don’t know what to compare Rand Paul’s hair to, but it isn’t think enough to be a tribble. Tribbles are round roly-poly furballs.
Cautionary wrapup of the economy from a nontraditional source.
The slump is broadly expected to continue through a large section of this year, with the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta predicting a growth rate of just 0.8 percent in the second quarter. If that were the case, economic growth in the first half of this year would be effectively zero.
He really dodged a bullet with the discussion focused on restaurants. If someone really wanted to pin him down they’d ask him if this:
applies to housing and purchase of property: land. I’d love to see him squirm his way thru that. It’s much more explosive than the breezy “restaurant” example.
He’s just such a lazy thinker. The minute it came time to enforce the property owner’s “right” to discriminate based on race there’s then state action and it’s government discrimination. I don’t understand someone who is a US Senator who has never followed that thought out to it’s logical conclusion.
@Enhanced Voting Techniques:
Yep. I know someone (I forget her exact title) who is three org-levels removed removed from Larry himself, and he personally reviews and signs off on every personnel decision she makes. She fervently wishes he’d become a recluse on Lanai and leave everyone the hell alone.
As for Rand, Tweety Matthews is certainly getting a thrill up his leg. He was practically drooling in last night’s “let me finish” segment.
As the kids (who won’t get off my lawn) would say – Cry more noob.
Fox could care less about the shushing, but they definitely did not anticipate the reaction they’re getting from the fringes. The poutrage should provide enjoyable watching for months to come.
@Kay: He’s in good company with Rubio, Cruz, McCain, Graham….not able to follow a thought to a logical conclusion, the lot of them.
@Kay: I think you’re right. It’s lazy thinking.
Or maybe he doesn’t want to follow it to it’s logical conclusion. That would interfere with his original theory.
GOP rhetoric has embrased twitter culture — you’re supposed to look at what they say for 2 seconds and then move on to the next thing without thinking.
@Germy Shoemangler: this
Hmmmm…. No roads? No Fire Dept services? No Police? No sewer? No water? No ad infinitum?
Thast’s not even 1/100th of it. Where libertarian “liberals” really run aground is environmental protection. They have to turn cartwheels with that. One could ask Rand Paul a different practical, basic question on how his theory works in practice each day for the rest of the 2016 campaign and take him apart, but no one does.
That was going to be my other question. Why not? Would questions like that create more questions about modern conservatism in general?
What he really objects to is the reach of the Commerce Clause, but because that implicates basically the entire federal structure, he doesn’t want to say that.
His Democratic opponent in the Senate race was an AG, so he got it. That’s what his opponent was trying to make the race about – but debating Rand Paul is like debating clouds, or air, or something. He knows this stuff is radical so he wafts in and around it rather than tackling it directly.
Women barred from voting in parts of Pakistan
Siraj-ul-Haq, leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, an Islamist party that jointly controls the KP government, argued that the women of Lower Dir had merely chosen to respect local traditions by not voting.
I wonder which local tradition they were respecting, the stoning of women who try to vote or the beheading of women who try to vote?
Villago Delenda Est
@satby: Well, both of them don’t care much for the Patriot Act, so this is a pretty decisive similarity for low info, reality-challenged voters, aka Dudebros.
Villago Delenda Est
@OzarkHillbilly: Check in with Jim Bob Duggar on that. I’m sure he’ll be able to sort it out.
I don’t know why they don’t ask him the really hard questions. The restaurant dodge is an example. With “restaurants” he can say “markets, blah, blah, blah” but with something neccesary and fixed like housing or buying property- he can’t do that. They can’t dodge property because what are they going to say? Move somewhere else or buy a different piece of property if the seller happens not to want black people living there? That’s an explosive statement re: civil rights. It’s profound.
Villago Delenda Est
@Amir Khalid: Faux noise neglected to include him in the list of possible debate participants, even though he’s polling better than half of the dimwits Faux mentioned.
Failure to follow the fascist line on the Patriot Act will get you that.
I have to go offline for a family funeral back in Chicago (cousin in law’s mom) but for the folks who donate to Joy’s Belle funder, leave me a message on my Etsy page with your addy so I can send out your sample pack thank-yous.
Edited to add: I already am happy to count a number of you as customers of my shop, so I have those addresses.
Beautiful morning to be spent putting in hostas, marigolds, vinca, impatiens, tomato plants (finally), rosemary, basil….and cleaning up all the stuff i blew out of the gutters a couple of days ago. Oh yes, and cutting back the wisteria, which is putting out shoots at the rate of roughly a foot a day. To be followed by much rain and a high of 62 tomorrow.
Another politician with a daddy problem, IMO. People tend to forget about ol’ Ron.. but the family drama can’t be ignored. In that context, it’s really somewhat ironic that Rand Paul can’t find a sugar daddy.
“Bad news, Senator. We’ve confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt that Howard Hughes really is dead. And while we’re still investigating all possible leads, the consensus is leaning to the affirmative that Arthur Jensen is a fictional character.”
@NotMax: I doubt Montgomery Burns would even donate to Rand. He’d be put off by all the anti-neocon talk.
I’m going to quibble and say that a lot of the appeal of “libertarian,” for the kind of people who are drawn to such things, is precisely that it’s not liberal. It’s a way to disagree with the conservative dominance of politics without having to admit that the DFHs were right.
@Kay: Whenever an acquaintance starts in with libertarian dogma or quoting Ayn Rand (to the extent there’s a difference), I mentally check them off as being intellectual lightweights. But I’ve always found Rand Paul to be vacuous even for a libertarian. He obviously thinks he’s brilliant, when everything he’s achieved has been through privilege, and that he’s a rebel, when everything he believes coincides with what his daddy thinks. He makes the Bush brothers seem self-aware.
I am actually surprised he can’t find a “sugar daddy.” I’d think some billionaire out there would love his thinking. No laws. Basically no government or taxes.
@PurpleGirl: TBOGG says it’s a merkin on Paul’s head.
Rand Paul’s comments about ISIS and the Iraq War, are correct. I understand that it upsets the Republicans but tough. Bush created the uprising that is occurring in the mid east.
That’s weird, I didn’t see a paypal link on you caring but when I went to pay it popped up!
@Tokyokie: Well Charles Pierce at Esquire has a Paul rule. It is a five minute rule. Rand and his father can almost sound reasonable for about five minutes and then they go pretty much off the rails. That is is my take on libertarians. It seems to sound like a good idea until you think about it. Take it to the logical conclusion.
@nancydarling: K, that works. TBOGG rules the snark.
1) I think most zillionaires, however disconnected and entitled, understand on some level that zero government is bad for business. I mean look how many of them make a fortune from government contracts or benefit from government corruption. It’s one thing to want to privatize the welfare state or pass the tax burden to the middle class, but Rand Paul’s vision of the government is so nihilistic it gives even them pause.
2) Like the original post said. Rich people like a winner. That ain’t Rand Paul. Why support him when there are all these other anti government types who have much more appeal with the public?
@Chris: I want to think your first point is accurate. I really am not so sure. Your second point I think entirely accurate. Paul has no chance to win his own primary, but less a general election.
TBogg does rule the snark, but bigod that’s an image I could have done without.
Been meaning to ask: Have you ever bumped into Alice and Staughton Lynd? You’d love them.
I think my first point comes with two clarifications; one, that’s most billionaires, not all. Some really are that crazy. Two, I don’t think they themselves think of it in those terms… most of the time. It’s just that when push comes to shove, they’ll decline to follow Rand off the cliff.
I *STILL* don’t really get why the technolibertarian dudebros love the Pauls. Standard Republicans minus the wars and plus pot I guess.
O’Malley’s deputy campaign mgr Lis Smith was just on my TV. She sorely needs vocal training. Wowza. I have no idea what she just said. She sounded like one of the cartoon chipmunks. I hope they don’t plan to have her do much speaking on behalf of the campaign.
@Chris: The money to be made from government is staggering. I think Paul would cut that. Has to scare rich people. I worked for many years in DC for the largest government contractors. Billions. Countless billions. Pretty sure they don’t want that well to dry up.
That actually sounds quite endearing.
@Tim C.: They give lip service to the things that the technolibertarians claim to want.
Good Morning, Everyone :)
Off to swim and run errands.
I take it you’ve never had to suffer through one of those movies or the Christmas album.
It’s hard out there for a Libertarian Ho.
You live in Texas? ;-)
No. I’ve spent my life successfully avoiding them.
I don’t know much about Lis Smith. She worked for DeBlasio?
The pop psychology explanation seems to be that a lot were bullied in school for being nerds, and Ayn Rand’s story of talented, exceptional people dragged down by the common philistine mob appeals to them. Don’t know how much I believe that one. At the very least, big grain of salt.
A related explanation, sans Traumatic Childhood Origin Story, is that they’ve put a lot of effort into mastering a genuinely challenging skill (I say this with no irony, as I’m pretty trch illiterate myself), are enormously impressed with themselves for having done it, and turn that into contempt for all the burger flippers and other blue collars out there who clearly just aren’t as smart or hard working. Hence, again, the Objectivism, and Rand Paul voting.
Gin & Tonic
@Bobby Thomson: Don’t know about the hooker or blow businesses, but the yacht/sailing businesses employ a lot of regular people here in the Ocean State.
I always got the impression that they were the school bullies.
@Chris: Throw in the idea that they did it all on their own, and never got any help from anyone else.
While I know this whole post is heavy on the snark, I just come away depressed thinking about how all this money perverts our entire democracy. As an infrequent little donor, in every sense of the word, I am sick of the requests for money. I am especially sick of the growing influence of big money donors. How can any candidate of any stripe remain his or her own person or hew to any “for the common good” principles? It cannot happen within such a perverted political process. I do hope to live long enough to see all my conservative relatives who think that there’s nothing wrong with money in politics finally admit that it is very wrong.
Mike in NC
Another one in need of a billionaire sugar daddy is Lindsey Graham. What’s he got to offer but a few more endless wars in the Middle East? To date his campaign comes complete with a laugh track.
@PurpleGirl: I refer to Paul as Senator Ferret Hair. Who by the way is gracing Northern Kentucky today with an appearance in Newport.
@BGK: “Tweety Tingler” would be a great name for an acoustic roots group.
For right now, keep them more dependent on lots of little money donors. The problem with your conservative family is that money in politics will only be wrong when Democrats are using it to win. As long as the money keeps flowing to Republicans, they’ll view it as trying to get the right people into power.
Agreed. And maybe I’m being simplistic here when I ask: What is all this money needed for? For radio and television ads? If that’s where all the money is going, then why can’t any candidate who can demonstrate enough support (petition signatures) get free air time? Do away with the obnoxious political ads (that everyone hates anyway) and give all candidates one-half hour of free TV time to deliver a presentation of the issues.
Where does the money go? Campaign bus, gas, hotel room, airfare…. should that really cost millions?
@Kathleen: What do you have against ferrets?
@Mike in NC: That would actually be a good youtube project. Upload speeches from the GOP Klown Kar, but dub in a laugh track.
@satby: The Pauls get some justifiable support from lefties when they go after the military-industrial complex or civil-liberties violations… but Rand seems to flip back and forth on that.
And they just ignore their hard-right positions and assume that anyone with a libertarian reputation must be OK on that.
Hardly. He spoke this ugly truth the other day, and made himself more enemies than ISIS:
I guess Paul is trying to set himself apart from the rest of the clown car, but he’s not going to get any big donor if he keeps saying stuff like that.
@Omnes Omnibus: Well, I’m not saying the ferret is happy about it.
I believe so and I think is dating Eliot Spitzer.
@MomSense: O’Malley will send her a polite memo and ask her NOT to huff helium before her next appearance.
Haven’t seen the O’Malley announcement but so far it seems like the 2016 race is between the angry, regressive Republucans and the boring with good ideas Democrats.
…and we all know what plays better on TV.
I think it’s some kind of Professor Quirrel Dark Lord situation with a furry disguise.
Interesting that he blames Republican hawks for “arming rebels” rather than, you know, destroying Iraq. It’s still blaming them for acceding to Democratic policies, rather than getting the ball rolling in the first place.
And yeah, it’s a paradox: how do you make yourself stand out in a competition where the slightest hint of individuality will get you instantly canned?
Level of fervor regarding the one accepted truth.
That’s probably right.
The New Yorker:
Early On, Hillary Looks Strong
by John Cassidy
What’s concerns about “trustworthiness” when you are up against “batshit crazy” and “Darwinian on steroids”?
When are we going to see some polls on that?
Hey, New Englanders, did you know we still have snow piles in Boston? Not only did I not know, here’s why we still have ’em.
@Belafon: Knowing a number of these people from science fiction fandom, that’s definitely part of it. They are under the delusion that they got where they are by their abilities, didn’t get help from others, can negogiate their working conditions (no need for unions or group action). They have and can go it alone, and government is some kind of scam they don’t approve of. When they do think of government and political participation, it’s at the most basic level.
I have one friend who found himself mired in economic problems. He was getting healthcare from LA County. I talked him into contacting food stamps about getting help there. I reminded him that he’d been paying taxes for years, it was time to get the benefits he’d been paying for others to get. While he complained about having to be recertify every few months, he was thankful for the aid because he allowed him to eat better and he felt better. Well, DUH! I also managed to convince him to vote for Barack Obama in both elections.
@Elizabelle: I read most of the NewYorker columnists, and Amy Davidson seems to have a serious problem with Hillary.
@MomSense: He’s finishing up on C-Span right now. It’s been a good speech.
@Germy Shoemangler: Salaries of the people who make up the commercials and ads and such. They ain’t cheap. All those consultants who discuss strategy aren’t cheap either.
Whether it’s heartfelt or motivated by profit from click bait, the Times has it out for the Clintons. I wouldn’t rely on anything they report about them without verifying it first.
Shouldn’t be necessary. If each candidate is given 1/2 hour of free air time to deliver a powerpoint presentation. Hell, ban campaign commercials altogether. Give your presentation and get out.
Okay, I’m in unicorn and rainbow territory now.
@Baud: I noticed that. Even if there’s nothing incriminating in the article, it will be worded just so.
And the headlines are always alarmingly suggestive.
They won’t be running on distinct policy platforms. They’ll be running on what the Marketing People call their Personal Brand. Rand is the Libertarian. There are two Wowsers: Santorum the Catholic Wowser, and Huckabee the Baptist Wowser. There is Fiorina the Tech CEO Lady. (The Lady part is important, though not to be acknowledged too much, because she is rather optimistically already running against Hillary.) ¡Jeb! is claiming Mitt’s position in 2012 as The Boy Your Parents Picked For You To Marry. And so on.
I think I’d prefer the plutocracy.
@Germy Shoemangler: Imagine that!
He said all the right things but wasn’t it kind of snoozy?
@Germy Shoemangler: And really appears to have nothing to do with winning elections. There he is in the Senate. I doubt most of his supporters are fans of logic, at least in a political environment.
Republicans might go for that because their views could potentially be expressed within half an hour.
@Baud: Make them use kitten graphics.
@MomSense: I thought the speech was good but he could have mingled more with the crowd. When they left it appeared there was a car for the females and a car for the males. I found that odd.
I spent time with them in law school, not socially, I just somehow ended up in their general area a lot, and they were really the opposite of “bullied”. They were extremely confident. Too confident, in my view. The assumption always was “if you knew what WE know…” If you want to see some frantic Left-leaning but libertarian people, take an environmental law class with them. They have to hate the EPA and federal environmental law but they don’t want to be perceived as unfashionable polluters. You really can’t regulate “air” or “water” solely at the state level, for obvious reasons and of course the First Principle of private property must never be encroached upon, so that’s a hurdle.. It’s painful to watch.
It was weird and can someone please tell the Democrats to stop playing anything by Journey. It doesn’t exactly come across as very forward.
how about john beresford tipton? of course, a millions dollars doesn’t go as far today as it did on a 50s TV show.
@MomSense: Good god, did he play “Don’t Stop Believing?”
you guys simply don’t understand… Rand would have thousands of sugar daddy backers but they’re so busy eschewing modern methods blazing their own trails being self sustaining and all, that they can’t be reached by conventional methods….///////
Here are some Amy Davidson Hillary Headlines:
The Coming Hillary Clinton Train Wreck
Can Hillary Clinton Close Her Benghazi Chapter?
What the Clinton Foundation is Costing Hillary
Which Of Hillary’s Pasts Will She Want Us To Pay Attention To?
Hillary Clinton Is Ready For Hillary
Media decides “serious” candidates need to spend a lot of money on media.
Funny how that works.
I may to have to sit out this election until I get my phone list in September ’16. I don’t know if I can spend the next 16-17 months with any of these candidates.
Not to worry — America’s Liberty PAC is on the job.
FFS yes. Not right before he spoke but in the lead up.
Or maybe Rand Paul’s sugar daddy wants to pay him in bitcoin?
Don’t Stop Believing.
I was afraid of that, as was Omnes ….
@MomSense: Please, can someone tell people everywhere to stop playing Journey? Bad music, like bad wine does not improve with aging. It just becomes vinegar on the ears.
And Fleetwood Mac.
Wouldn’t do any good. They’d just comb the Hall and Oates catalog.
The doctrinaire libertarian solution is essentially evolutionary. Business A excludes Black people. Business B doesn’t. Thus, business B has access to a larger customer base than business A and will necessarily out compete it over time.
The analysis is flawed, of course. It’s based on a population argument (Black + White) is necessarily a larger set than (White only). But even in theory there’s a snag, because business B’s customer base is not actually (White+Black). It’s (Black+White-People-Willing-to-Patronize-Non-Racist-Establishment). If most of the White people in your city are racists, business B is not going to win that competition in the long term.
Of course, if you make that argument, your doctrinaire libertarian will then start hand-waving that there actually are no racist people, and that governments create racist sentiment as part of divide-and-rule policies.
At that point, you realize that you are not having a debate with a thinking person, but with a religious fanatic, and so you back slowly away.
I’d love to see one of the GOP candidates walk onstage to the sounds of “The Man Who Sold The World”
(Bowie, Pere Ubu or Nirvana version all acceptable)
My vote goes to the first Democrat who plays I Kissed A Girl at one of their rallies.
Rand Paul is an arrogant little snot.
@Germy Shoemangler: Dog yes. We are cursed with an infinitude of bad 70s-80s music.
Yakkity Sax would be better than a laugh track.
@Lurking Canadian: You also have to note that minority populations don’t have as much disposable income as whites.
I had to travel to FL when that song came out so I made it my ring tone.
Somebody needs to gut up and announce to “Bringing Sexy Back.”
@Baud: Jill Sobule or Katy Perry?
And it could be very funny if it was Hillary!
You kidding? That should be a litmus test for any serious candidate’s platform. Sexy has been left to languish in the shadows too long.
@Elizabelle: Sure, but it’ll probably be Huckabee.
I also wish movies, TV, and trailers would stop using the “Hallelujah” song, quite possibly the most overused piece of music in TV history. Well, the most overused piece of music I dislike. Just as long as we’re talking about hated music.
Or if they are going after a slightly older demographic, I’m Sexy and I Know It.
If I were advising Rand, I would have told him to make Garden Of Weed his theme song.
@Germy Shoemangler: @Elizabelle: I had to remind a relative the other day that Hillary doesn’t have to talk to the press for them to do their job. They could do their job by talking to the people she’s listening to, and going through records. There’s candidates who would love to talk to the press and would give great quotes and video, like Bernie for example, but they’re fixed on ignoring him. They’d prefer to chase her van rather than do their job. Yet, he still thinks that she ought to talk to the press more because she’s running. /sigh
And I’ve begun thinking, it’s not the 1990’s or even 2007 anymore. She’s neither dependent on the press to get her “message” out, and she’s used to how they’ll denigrate her, so why does she need to make it easy on anyone? She can let the Republicans punch themselves out, until she actually wants to say something. Maybe she’s even learned to not play the “win the morning or the week” game from Obama.
It’s amazing how many libertarian douches I have to try to avoid giving money to.
There’s so much talent out there, why not hire a songwriter? They hire speechwriters.
@Baud: My money will go the first Republican who uses Peter Gabriel’s “Intruder”:
I know something about opening windows and doors
I know how to move quietly to creep across creaky wooden floors
I know where to find precious things in all your cupboards and drawers
Slipping the clippers
Slipping the clippers through the telephone wires
The sense of isolation inspires
I like to feel the suspense when I’m certain you know I am there
I like you lying awake, your baited breath charging the air
I like the touch and the smell of all the pretty dresses you wear
IMO, that’s exactly what she is doing. OTOH, as you point out, there are quite a few people who see that as hiding from the press. I think her strategy is smart.
Actually, I think philosophical alignment is very important here. If there’s one thing that voting patterns have eloquently proven, it’s that ‘libertarians’ are anything but. They’re Republicans who don’t like that ‘I’m a bigot’ label. The only difference is the label. Rand is too wishy-washy. If they’re going to claim they’re overlooking racist, misogynist, warmongering, I-want-everyone-but-me-to-suffer views because Democrat economics will destroy the country, why not go with someone who gives them bigger thrills?
The argument, and this is well-trodden and long predates Rand, is that if you just stopped forcing people not to discriminate, it will all work out because hardly any white people are racist. Stores that don’t allow blacks will go out of business. It’s cruel and unfair to force people, and actually slows down the process. This is totally against the evidence, but they just argue that segregation would have naturally stopped any minute now, and probably would have already if the feds had just left the South alone. You can’t show hard proof that it wouldn’t have happened.
He is playing an established argument to a huge established audience who really, really hate that laws and public scorn stop them from being openly bigoted.
No. I understand what you are trying to say, but there is no position the Pauls have that is justifiable for a liberal to support. Especially Ron, since as you’ve noticed Rand just says whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear at the time. Any time a sound bite of the Pauls’ positions seems reasonable, it’s a tiny sliver of some larger, totally insane position, and cannot be separated from that position.
Case in point: They want marijuana laws relaxed because they want to remove all restrictions on all drugs of all kinds, including medical regulations and abolishing the FDA. People like hearing the ‘we throw too many people in jail for marijuana’ part without realizing that it’s just a side effect, a detail of something catastrophically ugly and stupid.
Didn’t work out so well for Sir Robin.
@Omnes Omnibus: She’s not hiding from the Press, she’s ignoring them. There IS a difference.
@Frankensteinbeck: They should remember the scandal that formed the FDA.
The guy who was responsible committed suicide.
@OzarkHillbilly: I agree. However, you will find people who do not see a difference.
@Chris: I can think of only one TV show that used “Hallelujah” and it seemed appropriate and now I’m spacing the name of the show and its star. They used used it for only one episode, too.
I like the Pacabell “Canon in D” but for few years there it too was every where. I have a cartoon somewhere in my papers of a prisoner in a cell and there’s a speaker on the wall and a voice says “For your listening pleasure, one more time… and the strains the Canon D supposedly starts.
@Omnes Omnibus: bang!
@WereBear: They want a song with known qualities — tune, words (even when they have no bearing on the candidate’s real beliefs), whatever. Hell, even TV commercials are cannibalizing pop music instead of getting new music written.
@Omnes Omnibus: It is my impression, that the people who seem to be critiquing it the most right now are Republicans, Blue Dogs or the corporate media. No links to back this up, really just impressions, a gestalt of what I’ve been reading.
@PurpleGirl: Republican policies are essentially cannibalistic and non-generative.
Thus, the way they simultaneously help themselves to art when it suits them, and refuse to pay for it.
@PurpleGirl: The Google is my friend… the TV show was Without a Trace.
“The West Wing” when the Secret Service agent played by Mark Harmon got shot in a botched robbery.
and for some Canon in D amusement, look up “Pachelbel Rant” on YouTube.
@MomSense: Snoozy? Maybe. But he sounded sincere and said lots of good things. Lots of allusions to earlier speeches by JFK and others, of course.
Hillary’s speeches often drove me up the wall. They sounded excessively coached (“now make sure you speak . slowly . and . clearly . here…”) Obama’s speeches have great content and I can’t say that I recall one that I would call bad. But Obama’s always come across as reserved. O’Malley seems more natural in his delivery.
But all that is minor to me. What matters is the policies they push and the coat-tails they have to get good policies implemented.
I saw snippets of someone on Melissa’s show complaining that he didn’t talk enough Freddie Gray and the problems with policing. I’m not sure what he was expecting…
It’s still very early. We’ll see what happens.
Just Some Fuckhead
It’s just plain unfortunate that Comer Cottrell died last year. He would have made the perfect sponsor for Rand Paul.
HRC’s speeches drive me up a wall, too for similar reasons. There is no energy–perhaps it has been coached out.
Don’t get em started. Rand would probably be happy to privatize all those services …
@WereBear: This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this this This this this this this this this This!
I agree. :-)
@Tenar Darell: Yup. Good call.
Especially if they’re going with the article titles Germy S put up at post # 125.
And that’s The New Yorker. A “friendly” (not, I guess).
At least no one is using O Fortuna from Carmina Burana. Yet. AFAIK
@Origuy: Love the music, anyhoo.
I guess the free hand of the market has spoken. It’s infallible, you know.
@Southern Beale: Hah! I was just going to post exactly that same comment, almost word for word.
GHayduke (formerly lojasmo)
Those are our own stolen taxes, so recompensation, et cetera.
GHayduke (formerly lojasmo)
So in a thread expressly about Paul’s failure to get funding, and after somebody already commented about his statement on Isis (and after a hundred democratic politicians have already pointed out the same thing) you somehow figured out that paul;
a) is standing apart from the republican establishment on a couple issues
b)won’t get funding because of a
Your prescience is uninspiring.
@Lurking Canadian: This. My grandfather ran a drugstore with a soda counter for many years in Topeka, Kansas – not necessarily notable as a rabidly racist Southern state (though Brown vs. Board DID originate there!) – and ran into this conundrum. If you begin serving black customers, almost ALL your customer base that isn’t black/Hispanic will quickly evaporate, and in a community where black vs. white demographics is 5%/95% or whatever, you won’t survive the economic blow. HE wasn’t racist, but enough of his white customer base was, and he couldn’t have kept the business if he crossed the “color” line. This was the economic reality of the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s in this country. And this is what glibertarians don’t get. When federal regs/laws are enforced, EVERYONE HAS to conform, or face the legal consequences. My grandfather was then able to say “hey, it’s federal law” and serve anyone who came in the door. The federal government levels the playing field in thousands of ways in this manner. Returning to the 1890’s won’t make things better for ANYONE.