Rand Paul Follows Ted Cruz To Sean Hannity’s Fox News/GOP Welcoming Party

Yesterday marked the arrival of the second official candidate for the Republican Party’s nomination for President of the United States. Kentucky senator, and former self-certified ophthalmologist, Rand Paul placed himself in contention for the nomination at the Galt House in Louisville. For those fortunate enough to have never slogged through Ayn Rand’s tedious and preachy novel “Atlas Shrugged,” John Galt is a leading figure who is best known for epitomizing the childish “take my ball and go home” philosophy of social interaction.

Rand Paul 2016

In what may signal a trend in the GOP’s strategy for launching a political campaign, Paul went straight from the Galt House to Sean Hannity’s House at Fox News for his first post-announcement interview. That is exactly what Ted Cruz did after announcing his candidacy at Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University, where students were threatened with fines if they did not attend. Perhaps Fox News has implemented the same policy wherein Republican candidates will be fined, or otherwise punished, if they do not pay their respects to Hannity before proceeding with their campaign.

While it is no surprise that GOP presidential wannabes would kowtow to Fox News (aka the PR division of the Republican Party), it is a demonstration of their arrogance that they are not at least trying to disguise their biases for the sake of appearing to be credible. Apparently that ship has sailed, been commandeered by Fox pirates, and is now rusting on the ocean floor.

As for Paul, he delivered what he called a “a message that is loud and clear and does not mince words.” Indeed, it was loud. And that message turned out to be decades old sloganeering whose words relay nothing of substance: “We have come to take our country back.” It’s easy to mock this theme by asking simply “back to what?” From all appearances, Paul wants to take us back to the Reagan years, with its soaring deficits, crushing unions and working people, abandonment of the poor and mentally ill to the streets, and illegally bankrolling foreign terrorists with money made from selling arms to terrorist states.

However, the more interesting question is who does Paul mean when says “We?” The “we” that he is leading so that he can snatch the country back from the citizens who twice elected Barack Obama, are the bankers, oil barons, and other privileged elites who he would free from regulations that protect the public from their greed and abuse. Paul is a favorite of the Koch brothers and, of course, Fox News kingpin, Rupert Murdoch.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

It will be interesting to see how the rest of the GOP roster rolls out their campaigns. Marco Rubio is anticipated to be next in line. He would be smart to skip the Hannity ring-kissing ceremony, if just to differentiate himself from the pack. After all, he could go straight to Megyn Kelly and still satisfy his bosses at the network.

And just for fun…

Paul was famously outed as a plagiarist by Rachel Maddow who noticed that his speeches were curiously identical to the Wikipedia page for the movie Gattaca. If that seems like an odd source for staking a false claim of authorship, then what do we make of his having designed a logo for his presidential campaign that appears to be a rip-off of the logo for the hook-up site, Tinder?

World on Fire

I’m just asking. And while we’re at it, why do both Paul and Cruz feature flames in their logos? Is it to convey their belief that “the world is on fire,” as Cruz told a frightened little girl?

UPDATE: Marco Rubio did indeed make Hannity his first media stop. That makes Hannity and the GOP field three for three.


11 thoughts on “Rand Paul Follows Ted Cruz To Sean Hannity’s Fox News/GOP Welcoming Party

  1. Rand Paul is not ready for prime time. He doesn’t have the temperament for the office he holds much less the presidency. He has an entitlement aura about him. In all the interviews I’ve seen him in, whenever a real journalist makes him a little uncomfortable and calls him on bullshit, or flip-flopping or being on the wrong side of an issue, or the plagiarism, he gets all butt hurt; not because he was found out for his bullshit but because someone had the audacity not to let him get away with it.

    I hope most of his remaining potential interviews are done by women as I have noticed he turns into a misogynistic, condescending, offensive little shit when a woman dares questions his positions on issues. A few more interviews like that and he will fade away.

    He should also kill that thing on his head. It probably shits on him twice a day. No wonder he’s such an ass.

    • I wonder if you had the same opinion of our current president – who at this point accomplished a whole lot less and still bamboozled his way to the top political office in the land.

      I bet not. You may be right on some counts, but as is typical here, I expect the rules are very different for anyone who doesn’t have a “D” behind their name.

    • Rand Paul will never be president. Too short, bad dresser, not very attractive (to me, he looks a little too much like Ronald McDonald) … and then there is the Kentucky hillbilly accent (who wants to listen to that for four or more years after eight years of Bush’s awful, cultivated Texas accent?). As for his views … many are just plain bizarre or the product of small-town Southern living. Same-sex marriage “offends” Rand but many are very offended by that cat that sits on his head (and shits on him twice a day). I’m sure he was probably a decent person before he went into politics and started to believe his own publicity.

      • I agree; he does seem to think quite highly of himself.

  2. “I wonder if you had the same opinion of our current president…”

    No. Don’t be silly. He doesn’t have any of the deficiencies Paul does.

    — Paul lacks the gravitas and graciousness required as the head of state when dealing with the press and probably with anyone who disagrees with any of his policies.

    –The president welcomes those arguments and disagreements and always pushes for debating the issue because that’s productive and what leaders do. His opponents have just decided not to engage.

    — Paul seems to take it personally when anyone he deems as “beneath” him has any criticism. Another disadvantage Paul has is that he is a “B” player on the “B” team.

    You’ll also notice when he got the same kind of scrutiny from Sean Hannity of all people, Paul didn’t get all butt hurt about those questions as he was well aware he was in “friendly” territory. When questioned by real journalist, Paul should recognize that the people watching are the very people he needs to convince of his qualifications. That hasn’t dawned on him yet.

    As far as accomplishments go, freshman senators as a rule don’t get to do much other than stay out of the way and don’t say or do anything stupid in public. Paul and Cruz have both have wildly violated these basic concepts and have shown why neither have the leadership qualities worthy of the highest office on the planet. The president must have impressed a lot of people since as a state senator he was selected as the keynote speaker at the ’04 dem convention. Regardless of ones ideology, you don’t get that gig unless you have your shit together. A lot of you on the right have failed to recognize he has the “it” factor as did Reagan (for different reasons) and once he got the gig, he delivered and proved everyone right, including the majority of citizens who voted for him for U.S. senator and president…twice.

    Bamboozlement (is that a word?) really doesn’t apply. Nice try, though.

    And let’s be clear—this isn’t a left/right thing. Reagan and other repubs didn’t view the press as the enemy as Nixon did but viewed them as a checks and balances idea necessary for a strong democracy.

    • I’m not here to push Rand Paul – but Holy crap – I’ve read some incredibly dumb things but that defense of Barack Obama as a candidate as compared to him is dumb beyond belief. Barack Obama was one giant deficiency – and he’s proved it practically every day since being president. He may not have the exact same weaknesses, but his background at the time had ZERO in it to justify his candidacy – but with a dumbed down electorate I guess that doesn’t matter anymore.

      • All your opinion. That is all it is worth. Just letting you know, because you seem to be quite full of your own shit.

        • I guess it depends on what makes a good candidate – one could easily argue he was a great candidate since he could so easily pull the wool over the eyes of the american people given his total lack of any useful experience – no great accomplishment these days. But as someone who hires people regularly – there is no doubt his “resume” could in no way justify him being president – but again, depends on what makes a good candidate in your book. He was a mistake by every measure, but you’re right, it’s really just my opinion. Judging by your position – I would assume his party affiliation and ability to bullshit (tell you what you want to hear) is all you need.

          • Sounds like you’re defining Mr. Obama’s predecessor. We appreciate your candor.

        • CS – just in case you missed it – my last sentence placed you squarely in the ” dumbed down” electorate group.

          • Steve – in case you missed it – I don’t care what you think.

Comments are closed.