To paraphrase the Simpsons, “Hey Rand Paul, you used to be cool.”
Okay, so that’s not entirely true. You were, however, more politically interesting. You were never outright against marriage equality. You thought that each state should decide on its own whether or not to allow same-sex marriage.
This would be in line with the standard conservative point of view: let the states handle the issue. It’s admirable to stand by the old tried and true beliefs of the party you belong to.
But then you changed. You said in a prayer meeting on Thursday that you think the marriage equality debate is due to a moral crisis. Not marriage equality itself, but the debate.
Oh, Rand Paul…you certainly know a thing or two about moral crises, don’t you? Let’s talk about morals, since that seems to be a thing that you enjoy talking about in prayer meetings.
Let’s start with your certification in ophthalmology. Yeah, you remember that one, right? The one where you created a board to certify you? You didn’t agree with the requirements for certification the existing board, so you created your own.
You remember the National Board of Ophthalmology, right? The one that dissolved in 2011 and may not have actually been legal in Kentucky, the only state it ran in?
Yeah, that one. Seems that you like to fancy yourself a board-certified ophthalmologist, even though the board dissolved. You also thought it was a great idea to put your wife as the Vice President, even though she has no medical experience.
Hey, who cares, right? Who cares if you don’t exercise your due diligence as a doctor and take continuing education to make sure that you’re up to date on medical technology? We know that you don’t exactly have that time right now, as you’re a senator and have mentioned that you might just run for president.
Then there’s your plagiarism.
Yeah, we know all about that. It’s been repeatedly reported on. You had a staffer write a speech for you that wasn’t vetted…and he pulled word-for-word from a Wikipedia post for the movie Gattaca. Meaning, you quoted Wikipedia. In a speech.
I would say that’s a rookie mistake, but it’s not like you haven’t done it before: you copied an article from The Week for your Washington Post op-ed piece about mandatory minimum jail sentences.
Then there was that three-page passage in your book…that’s right, the pages that you lifted wholesale from a Heritage Foundation case study. You didn’t just use numbers, you lifted the whole report. It was credited, but not acknowledged as a direct quote.
Then there’s your standing on vaccinations.
You are fairly anti-vaxxer for a board certified doctor. Not only did you say that you think that vaccines should not be required, but you also erroneously stated the very dangerous and repeatedly disproven argument that vaccines can cause mental disorders. This makes you dangerous as a general physician. The issues that you say happen have been shown to not be a problem with any vaccination.
While I agree that it can be scary to think that your infant might need a Hepatitis B shot, it is necessary. Not all adults get tested, and it’s a disease that can be passed from mother to child. Many of your claims can readily be discredited by doing a little Googling.
Oh, yes…and then there’s your standpoint on Iran. This is one where you flat-out disagree with your own alleged standpoint. In 2007 you stated at a rally for your father, Ron Paul, “Our national security is not threatened by Iran having one nuclear weapon.” More importantly, you said in January 2015, “I’m a big fan of trying to exert and trying the diplomatic option as long as we can. If it fails, I will vote to resume sanctions and I would vote to have new sanctions. But if you do it in the middle of negotiations, you’re ruining it.”
Comepare this to your more recent actions—namely, signing on to Tom Cotton’s open letter to Iran. Yes, we all remember that letter. The one where you decided to get on board with superseding the president and elicited a thoughtful response from the current leader of Iran.
More importantly, that diplomatic option that you wanted to keep open? This pretty much says it’s no longer an option.
Did you have any moral qualms about signing this? Did you feel anything as you realized that you just made yourself a hypocrite by essentially saying, “Screw diplomacy, we’re going to invade you if you sign a peace treaty with this president”? Did you even think about that?
You want to talk about gay marriage as a moral crisis, Rand Paul? I think you might want to be more thoughtful before using the word “moral.”
You know what, given your actions, I think it’s safe to say that this moral high ground that you think you possess…it’s not real. I’m sure you’ve heard the saying “people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”
You might want to consider that next time.