Even If Rand Paul Was A Libertarian, The “Chirping Sectaries” Would Complain

October 6, 2015

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – “I am still a fan, promoter, and supporter of Senator Paul. He’s one of the only honest, true voices in the United States Senate, and quite possibly has actually read the United States Constitution, may have even read some of the ratifying debates, and understands what a federal system is supposed to be. Do I have some differences? Yes. Some things I disagree with, that we do not concur on? Yes. Just put that at the beginning of this conversation. Does everybody got that?” Check out today’s transcript for the rest….

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike: A small, innocuous headline sent our way by Bloomin’ Wednesday host Jordan Bloom, pulled from the archives of Politico, “Rand Paul super PAC goes dark.” By the bye, I don’t know what made me think about this but I’m going to mention it. It’s just a tick before 5:13 when I launched into topic number one. To the hate mailers out there that have accused, [mocking] “You don’t even get into your first subject until 25 or 30 past the hour, after you’re done promoting all the crap that you sell.” Yes, crap. Just a note. I made it to the first story at 5:13 a.m.

This is interesting. This also has been talked about here on this radio show. I’m not sure if others have brought it up in the manner in which we have brought it up. It’s been the subject of conversation for almost three years. When I say three years, it was apparent to me after an event that occurred at the Republican National Convention in September of 2012 that then very young and fresh out the gate Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky was going to run for the presidency. Don’t ask me to detail the event because I’m not going to. I’ve refused every entreaty to do so. However, I knew on that day that that was what was in the offing.

I also knew on that day that the direction that was going to be taken was that the senator was being advised by, I guess people that were purported to be wiser than the average libertarian advisor, and he was guided and told along the way that catering to the

coalition or catering to the supporters of his father, Congressman Ron Paul, was a way to lose. I don’t think this was a personal calculation; I think this was a political calculation. I also think it was boneheaded, absolutely misguided, arrogant, and boneheaded. It presupposes that some of the same people that helped run the previous Paul campaigns had some new sort of light to shed on the matter. The decision must have been made internally that certain people, certain entities, and certain groups must be avoided. What also must be avoided is the way that they think, the things they stand for, the things they’re willing to defend, etc. This was borne out over the next two years while the question was still being asked: Is he going to run? Is he going to run?

Folks, before I get any deeper into this, please let me say, for anyone that’s interested in what I am actually about to say, write this down. Before you send your little hate mail off or get out there on your Twitter feed and do all the other things to try and take all the joy out of the remainder of the day who will view your judgment porn, write this down: I am still a fan, promoter, and supporter of Senator Paul. He’s one of the only honest, true voices in the United States Senate, and quite possibly has actually read the United States Constitution, may have even read some of the ratifying debates, and understands what a federal system is supposed to be. Do I have some differences? Yes. Some things I disagree with, that we do not concur on? Yes. Just put that at the beginning of this conversation. Does everybody got that? You got that on your notes and what you’re going to send out? By the time this discussion is finished, I will be accused of all sorts of things that the statement that you just heard will totally disarm. Then again, we’re not about truth in our judgment porn society, are we? [mocking] “Mike, if it’s going to disarm them, that will totally ruin their day.” Bingo, exactly. According to Politico, here’s the story:

[reading]

One of the three super PACs supporting Rand Paul’s presidential campaign has stopped raising money, dealing a damaging blow to an already cash-starved campaign.

In a Tuesday telephone interview, Ed Crane, who oversees the group, PurplePAC, accused Paul of abandoning his libertarian views — and suggested it was a primary reason the Kentucky senator had plummeted in the polls.

“I have stopped raising money for him until I see the campaign correct its problems,” said Crane, who co-founded the Cato Institute think tank and serves as its president emeritus. “I wasn’t going to raise money to spend on a futile crusade.”

“I don’t see the point in it right now,” he added. [Mike: First of all, it’s not a crusade. As a matter of fact, to call it a crusade is to do damage to the actual crusades. The two have nothing in common.]

PurplePAC has been in existence for around two years, but over the summer Crane transformed it into a Paul-focused vehicle. It joined two other super PACs, America’s Liberty and Concerned American Voters, that were expressly designed to support Paul.

In July, PurplePAC announced that it had raised around $1.2 million – the vast majority of it coming from Jeff Yass, a Philadelphia options trader.

Crane said the organization currently had over $1 million cash on hand, but no longer wanted to ask for contributions. “I just don’t want to do that to my friends,” he said.

The libertarian views that catapulted Paul to national prominence had “disappeared,” Crane said, leaving many of Paul’s longtime backers miffed.

“I want to grab Rand by the lapels and say, ‘What are you doing?’” Crane said. “I’m a big fan of Rand Paul. But whatever motivates his campaign, I don’t get it.”

The decision comes at a perilous time for the Kentucky senator, who has fallen in polls and struggled to raise cash. Paul has raised just $13 million between his campaign and the three super PACs – a fraction of many of his rivals. There are also fresh questions about how much America’s Liberty will be able to raise going forward. Last month, Jesse Benton, a longtime Paul aide who helped to oversee the group, was indicted on charges that he concealed payments to an Iowa state senator while working for Paul’s father, Ron, on the 2012 presidential race.

Benton, who has taken a leave of absence from America’s Liberty, has said he expects to return to the organization once he is exonerated.

Sergio Gor, a Paul spokesman, noted that the two super PACs that were originally set up to help Rand Paul – America’s Liberty and Concerned American Voters – “remain active and ongoing.”

[end reading]

Mike: I’ll post this in today’s Pile of Prep if you want to read it and share it and do whatever else it is that you do with these things. Let’s analyze this for just a moment, shall we? If you watched the first two Republican debates, it is undeniable that the two smartest guys on the stage in either of the debates — [/private]it’s undeniable to me. I will say that it’s my preference or I would rank the two smartest guys on the stage as, and the ones that made the most amount of sense, especially from a federal point of view, were Senator Paul and, on occasion, Donald Trump. Certainly if we’re looking at intelligence level, Trump and Paul were the shining bulbs. [mocking] “Mike, Mike, Mike, what about Ben? What about all our other heroes? I need someone to worship. Don’t say it, Mike, don’t say it!”

Again, and I said this the day after the second debate, if we were to write the answers down, if you were to grab a transcript of the candidates’ answers and analyze them, I believe a fair reading of them from a federalist point of view, republican, remnant point of view would be the Senator Paul won handily, and made an awful lot of sense. Not quite as much, but Trump would have come in second, although Trump also told some whoppers. I don’t think that this campaign is “faltering” because of what it is that Paul is saying. I also don’t think that Paul has “abandoned” the libertarian point of view. He may not be doctrinaire on all the things that anarchists who fancy themselves libertarians wish him to be doctrinaire on.

End Mike Church Show Transcript