---

Rand Paul’s Inadvertent Warning to Tea Partiers and Conservatives

-By James Simpson

Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media and America’s Survival has a post at News With Views about Rand Paul’s now infamous gaffes on the Rachel Maddow Show. In it he warns that some of Rand’s libertarian views could put him at odds with conservatives on a variety of issues and open him to criticism from all sides.

According to Kincaid, “The libertarian movement was the product of seminars held by the far-left Institute for Policy Studies back in the 1960s and 70s.” And while libertarians are good on fiscal matters, because they believe in limited government, their isolationist positions on national defense, if adopted, would provide opportunities for our enemies to flourish and grow in the vacuum created by our absence.

Furthermore their particular views of limited government lead them to support legalization of marijuana, gay marriage and other positions that are anathema to conservatives. In the case with Maddow, Paul was painted into a corner by his own libertarian philosophy, which implies that government should not be able to regulate how private parties decide to conduct business at all, even if it means allowing them to engage in discrimination.

Whoops. Paul has since tried to clarify his position on this, but that doesn’t matter to the left. They got what they wanted.

Now, the media has no problem with racists like the New Black Panther Party intimidating voters at the voting booth. They have no problem with these people being shielded by a sympathetic Attorney General who committed a shocking travesty by dismissing charges against the Black Panthers after they had already lost in court. They have no problem with black-only or women-only clubs. They have no problem with all forms of reverse discrimination.

This is academic because it harmonizes with the radical left’s agenda to divide and conquer America’s majority, which just happens coincidentally to be largely white, although their real targets are not whites per-se, but rather traditional, conservative Americans, of any color. Their treatment of Justice Clarence Thomas and other prominent, non-white conservatives, or female conservatives, like Sarah Palin for example, is instructive.

If America had a conservative black majority, the left would be agitating for the poor, downtrodden and oppressed white people. Consider Angola, Africa, for example. When the Luanda-based minority mulatto elitists, descendants of Portuguese colonial rule, took power following independence in 1975, the American left got foursquare behind them. In a bid to maintain power, Luanda’s communist MPLA employed more than 25,000 Cuban troops, and another 430,000 Cubans assisted as “foreign aid volunteers”. The first MPLA Leader, Agustinho Neto, had even met with Che Guevara, a fact certain to endear him to the American left. The MPLA also received immense help from the Soviet Union, in weapons, training and other support.

The American left showed its support too. Teddy Kennedy consistently voted against aid to the Angolan rebels of Jonas Savimbi’s UNITA, while a Kennedy relative did business with the communist Angolan government. The hapless George H.W. Bush administration was easily outmaneuvered by the left regarding U.S. Angola policy and the Clinton administration of course sided with the communists. The end result of this war, which suckered gullible Republicans as well, was yet another disgraceful example of the United States abandoning an ally in the field, largely due to leftist foreign policy subterfuge. In this case it resulted in the murder of Jonas Savimbi and tens of thousands of his UNITA supporters following a fraudulent election that cemented the MPLA finally in power. Read the sad story here. Maybe the American left should be called “equal opportunity back-stabbers.”

To see the irony and the hypocrisy of the Left’s support for the Angolan MPLA, an analogy could be drawn by envisioning the American left supporting a cabal of rich Greenwich, CT stockbrokers who bought out the military and used it to take over the country… Or, better yet, imagine the radical left going on the march for largely white, Washington, DC, elitist kleptocrats who keep grabbing power while greedily stealing citizens’ wealth through excessive taxation – and vilifying anyone who complains. Oh wait, that’s what they’re doing!

Never mind.

Anyway, the left loved the MPLA and hated the traditional black community – personified by Jonas Savimbi’s UNITA – not because they love light-skinned people, any more than they like dark-skinned people, but because the group they sided with were communists. It is always about ideology and it is always about power. Nothing else matters to them.

Back to the present. It seems very clear that Rand Paul was deliberately ambushed by Maddow. In fact it is virtually certain that her strategy was mapped out well in advance, just as it was when the Congressional Black Caucus Partiers of making racist remarks at the health care rally in April – demonstrably proven to be a complete fabrication. Yet the “racism” mantra has been repeated endlessly since then, and Paul allowed himself to be tricked into making a statement that gave the left ammunition to further promote that narrative. All they need is an excuse.

There has already been a call for Jim DeMint to renounce Paul, this time from an obscure South Carolina Senate candidate whose comments have been published, predictably by Daily Kos. But you knew this would happen. This is their game plan. It is always their game plan. As one of the most effective conservatives out there, DeMint may have been the ultimate target to begin with.

Rand Paul should have known better than to go on that show. It was a setup all along. The reason people like Maddow, Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman exist is to protect and defend the Democrat political machine and savage political enemies. They do not do news. They don’t even do politics. They do political hits. That is their entire justification for being.

These people consider candidates like Paul, and practically any conservative for that matter, the enemy. They would not even have invited Paul on unless they had already carefully crafted a plan of attack and were confident of the outcome. There is no excuse for any principled candidate to offer these people any opportunities whatsoever.

People with star power like Paul give partisan hacks like Maddow an audience they wouldn’t otherwise have. Most of these shows will continue to be subsidized by MSNBC despite their low ratings, because MSNBC’s owner, General Electric, has its fortunes tied to the utterly corrupt Democrats.

Let GE drain its own resources supporting those losers. Don’t help them out. Don’t go on their shows. Don’t give them the time of day. Don’t even bother watching those shows. At some point, their management will need to make a sound business decision and drop these people or answer to shareholders. We should help them along with a complete boycott.

So this fiasco points up one serious issue that people should heed: Every single person in the Tea Party movement and every single conservative candidate must be perfectly clear-eyed in recognizing that the Left is a vicious, unscrupulous enemy, with a game plan firmly mapped out to smear the entire tea party movement with the “racist” label or any other label they think they can make stick.

Candidates should try to think their positions through a little more before making stupid remarks. We have had enough of stupid Republicans. With friends like them we don’t need enemies.
______
Businessman and freelance writer James Simpson is a former Office of Management and Budget (White House budget office) economist and budget analyst. Best known for his exposé on the Cloward Piven Strategy of manufactured crisis, his writings have been published in American Thinker, The New Media Journal, Washington Times, FrontPage Magazine, Whistleblower, DefenseWatch, Soldier of Fortune and others. His blog is Truth and Consequences. To contact James you can Email him/a>.