When Rand Paul first started flirting with a presidential run, he looked like a formidable (and formidably scary) candidate. After all, Paul’s libertarian philosophy has attracted a lot of younger people who wouldn’t normally be found within a hundred miles of the nursing home that usually constitutes the Republican party. Paul was never likely to win the nomination, but for a moment last year it looked like he might inject some new (if still crackpot) thinking into the GOP.
Instead, Paul has run won of the worst presidential campaigns ever. And instead of bringing fresh ideas to the party, he seems determined to go out in a blaze of good ol’ homophobic glory that would do Rick Santorum proud.
The problem with Paul’s campaign seems to be Paul himself. He shows little interest in campaigning. Just this week, his staff tried the gimmick of having the campaign livestreamed for a day. In response to a staff-prepared question about the fact that one of the top Google searches for Paul is whether he is still running for president, the candidate responded, “I wouldn’t be doing this dumbass livestreaming if I weren’t.”
Not exactly the words of a man who loves being out on the campaign trail.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Unsurprisingly, Paul’s campaign has been running short of cash. One of the biggest failures of the campaign has been its inability to secure a major donor and in particular gay PayPal billionaire Peter Thiel. Thiel almost singlehandedly underwote the 2012 presidential campaign of Paul’s father, Ron Paul, who is every bit as nutty as his son.
But Thiel has opted not to shower his dollars on Rand Paul. Ostensibly, Thiel is supposed to be suffering from “donor fatigue.” A less flattering reason is that Paul couldn’t be bothered courting Thiel or for that matter pretty much any other major donor. (Don’t pity Thiel. He can always fall back on another homophobe that he bankrolled: Ted Cruz.)
At this point, Paul’s presidential campaign is on life-support. Even sympathetic right-wingers like Erick Erickson are sounding the death knell. This week, Erickson ran a column on his website titled, “Rand Paul, It Is Time to Take Your Campaign Out Back and Shoot It.”
But before he goes, Paul is reminding us that his so-called new ideas are really just the usual homophobia. In a rant that Mike Huckabee would be proud of, Paul endorsed the closet in the workplace, supported the right of employers to fire us and basically said if you don’t like it, get another job. “The things you do in your house — if you leave them in your house — they wouldn’t have to be part of the workplace,” Paul insisted.
What his comments prove is that Paul is not a new thinker at all. He’s cut from the same cloth as all the other antigay Republicans. Of course, there has been more than ample evidence all along that this was true. After the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling in 2013, Paul wondered if marrying animals was next. He offered support to fellow Kentuckian Kim Davis. He wants to kill the Department of Education because “I don’t like the idea of Suzie has two mommies being an appropriate family situation to talk about to kindergartners.”
One thing that Paul’s campaign shows is just how lacking the GOP is in fresh ideas. The one candidate who was supposed to appeal to a younger voter and to stir the race up with unconventional ideas is no different than any other candidate. Until the Republicans can come up with some truly fresh ideas (whether you agree with them or not), they are going to remain stuck in a cycle of lousy campaigns that doom their chances for the White House.
1EqualityUSA
GOP is curdled milk. Win some lose udders.
stanhope
LOL when the American Express bill comes…I am going to send them a note that I have donor fatigue
Kangol
Good riddance to this rancid little fake-libertarian hom0phobe. He can join his r@cist daddy in the dustbin of electoral history. Bye, Felicia(rand)!
Matt O'Brien
Bye Felicia! Buh bye
Cam
So in other words, the few old men funding the party all have the same opinions, so every single candidate will sound exactly the same because they are all competing for money from the same group of 20 or so people.
Trump seems like a douchebag but if you notice he is the only one saying a few different things about Social Security, Medicare, and employment. Mostly because he isn’t taking outside money.
So the entire GOP roster of candidates except one all parrot the exact same opinions so they can compete for money from the same people.
Pathetic.
1EqualityUSA
Citizens United is appalling.
Nathaniel McManus
Jack Walter
I’m surprised his stupidity hasn’t been noticed sooner.
Cam
@1EqualityUSA:
Don’t even get me started. If a Dem wins, hopefully they can appoint some judges that will get rid of that crime against the country.
Bauhaus
Could he be any more self-loathing? Typical closet-case.
As far as LGBT rights and protections, he’s no different from any of the other disastrous GOP nitwits running.
1EqualityUSA
Cam, Citizens United is a crime against Democracy. The Supreme Court Justices who approved of it should be ashamed of themselves. It may just backfire on the Tedious Right if big business ever feels as though the GOP are useless as tits on a boar pig, politically. Then the GOP will be crying about how unfair this law is. It needs to be overturned, no matter who benefits.
NoMoreWar
Queerty – this is such shoddy reporting that I am embarrassed for the writer and the publication. While he certainly made a stupid comment (“I think really the things you do in your house we could just leave those things in your house and they wouldn’t have to be part of the workplace to tell you the truth.”), the rest of the dialogue is a well-reasoned, very nuanced view from a federal standpoint. If there is one thing about Rand Paul – and the libertarian ideology – he can have his personal opinions on social issues, but he is consistent in that the Federal government does not have a role to play in legislating them. We are a very diverse nation – the most diverse on the face of the Earth – and laws regulating social issues will always create animosity between disparate groups. There are 50 states and 50 different possibilities of how these issues can be resolved (or at least regulated if that is necessary) – one size does not fit all in ANYTHING (except maybe scrunchies).
More importantly, why would a gay person want to work in a company that would fire someone for being gay? That is such a horrible culture. If this article had done real reporting instead of sensationalist writing on a sound bite, the readers would know that he said the private market is already taking this very portion of discrimination and writing into their own policies LGBT discrimination “laws”.
Desert Boy
Randy Paul is a symptom of the larger problem with the GOP. The party of Archie Bunker refuses to evolve and believes demonizing various groups will somehow earn them votes. The country has evovle on and I predict the Republican party in its current form will cease to exist in the next decade.
AtticusBennett
dear gay republicans, this clown is the LEAST homophobic of your candidates!! LOL!
Charles Talluto
Bigot homophobe closet case
Luis H. Lopez
Ran who ?
AxelDC
Why is it any harder for a Kindergartner to understand why Suzie has 2 mommies or no mommies or 1 mommy and no daddy? 5 year olds know nothing about sex or reproduction. They just understand love and nurturing.
Paul is falling into the same tired trap that talking about gays is pornographic, while straights talking about their families, weddings, dates, etc. is g-rated. He is just a tired bigot.
As much as I dislike libertarians, at least they want to keep the government from attacking gays. Paul readily betrays his alleged libertarianism to whip up some old fashioned homophobic statism.
BeachDaddyDave
I think that entire party has no political philosophy at all; its ideas are a theology, not an ideology. The GOP has devolved into the most serious threat ever to emerge in the political realm of our nation. I wish sane voters would turn out in droves and punish them into extinction.
Jim McHardy
He is a bigot and a loser
captainburrito
He’ll learn and eventually he’ll get support at around 15% once he accumulates enough knowledge on how to campaign like his father. That will give him one semi serious run by the time he is 70 or so.
Maude
Rand Paul is a sitting Senator and he ain’t goin’ nowhere.
He has a squired thought process that he shares with his father…..and he will not take failure lightly. If he thinks the Gay community is responsible for his failed attempt to be POTUS, he may seek revenge by voting against every Bill that may be presented in favor of the general Gay population……He’s young and could take another run for POTUS before he retires.
billeetee
I will attmept to ‘start the ball rolling’.
RAND…WHO?
1EqualityUSA
Wasn’t he that guy who got fired?
1EqualityUSA
Maude, You and Marion Paige need to get together for picnics.
Paul
I just read a transcript of an interview he had with Wolf Blitzer where he was confronted with his stupid statements at Drake University the other day, and as the conversation unwound, it was clear that part of the problem is that Paul doesn’t understand how employment discrimination laws work — after all, he’s a doctor, not a lawyer — and he’s coming at the question from the conservative-libertarian ideology which is generally opposed to employment discrimination laws. To somebody of that political orientation, all employment discrimination laws are undesirable because they appear to give people license to sue their employers for discrimination every time they encounter work-related adversity. Of course, such cases will be dismissed early on if the employee can’t allege specific facts giving rise to an inference of discriminatory intent. It’s not enough to say “I’m gay and I was fired.” The complaint has to allege facts that would suggest that the person was fired because he or she was gay. Paul doesn’t understand the way the law works. And further questioning shows that he doesn’t think people should be fired because they are gay. He does seem to have rather naïve views about human relations in workplaces.
animaux
@NoMoreWar: Well, the US is not the most diverse country in the world. But even if it was, so what? Moral relativism is not ok. Everyone should be entitled to human rights.
“More importantly, why would a gay person want to work in a company that would fire someone for being gay? That is such a horrible culture.”
What if the company is not homophobic? What if only one manager is, and he is the one who has power to fire you? But no one can do anything about it because Rand Paul took away all legal protections? All advances for LGBT people in the US came from legislation, not from the so-called free market.
Giancarlo85
@Maude: His daddy still hasn’t conceded defeat in the 2012 Election. Mental delusinos also run in the family.
@Paul: Libertarianism is the biggest crock of crap and is nothing more than conservatism in sheeps clothing.
@NoMoreWar: His argument was not well reasoned and borderlines on shitty. You libertarians have been sleeping under a rock for the past decade and only want to make us all slaves to corporations. Companies may not fire people for being gay, but certain people within the company might and use different “reasons” to fire someone simply for being gay. Your argument is pathetically bad and reeks of ass kissing.
You people just don’t get it. We live in a federal system. Not under the Articles of Confederation. We have a system of laws and regulations, something you don’t have the slightest clue about. You just want to destroy regulation because you have some stupid demented view that less regulation means “more freedom”. You don’t realize the hole you are digging for yourself.
Labor laws, environmental protections, and financial regulation (such as the Glass-Steagall Act and the Frank-Dodd act) didn’t come from the private sector. People like yourself want to gut regulation because you view it as a hindrance. You view it as anti-freedom. You simply don’t quite understand how wrong you are.
And of course we need laws regulating social issues. Don’t even try to go there. Are you really that naive? What is the 1964 Civil Rights Act? Or how about the 1965 Voting Rights Act (which people like Rand Paul want to destroy)? We definitely need laws regulating social matters, because people like yourself want a system open to abuse and oppression.
Giancarlo85
By the way, if you trust the “private sector” to do the right thing and write regulations, you are completely wrong and naive. Any “regulations” they write are totally inadequate without real enforcement. This is where the federal government needs to step in and place sanctions on those companies that violate federal law. This is why libertarians are so blind sided and stupid.
DuMaurier
@Giancarlo85: I’m no diehard Libertarian, but pretty much by definition “less regulation means ‘more freedom'”. If my conduct is “regulated” it’s axiomatic that I am “less free” to engage in conduct of my choosing. I think what you mean to say is that in some cases too much freedom is a bad thing.
BlueDude
“Self destructs”? He’s pandering to wingnut Repug homophobes, not sane people, BUT, it’ll happen sooner, or later. I’m waiting for the GOP Clownbus domino effect. How many more Debates (sideshows) do they have planned?
Giancarlo85
@DuMaurier: That’s a nonsensical argument. I am talking about financial activity. And no you’re not “less free”. This has nothing to do with you. Re-read my post. You libertarians are guilty of wanting to gut Wall Street reform. You’re being disingenuous.
Libertarianism is a pile of crap and has nothing to do with reality. Heavily regulated countries are ones that are actually more free. Wanting “less regulation” doesn’t make you more free… it has the opposite effect. It’s called blow back. And no, I didn’t mean to say that all. You don’t tell me what I meant.
Giancarlo85
@DuMaurier: By the way, your conduct should be regulated and it is in a nation of laws. You have a requirement to follow the laws and rules. If you wanted to “engage” in conduct of your choosing, what if you wanted to steal or hurt someone? That’s why libertarianism is a complete pile of crap. Any form of it is crap. It has nothing to do with reality. You want more “freedom” at the expense of others.
mujerado
@DuMaurier: Sometimes less restriction means more freedom to deny equal rights to others. That’s not a good freedom.
tusgold
Rand Paul is as bat shit crazy as his old man and he is a Republican They hate gays and blacks
woodin
@Jack Walter: it was, just like Santorum but he was a bit more persistent in the smoke and mirrors act …that he was a different kind of old angry bigoted white republican.
Brian Watson
“won” is not the same as “one” Queerty.
Richard
The Libertarian Party is not what it used to be. Paul’s father dropped out of it because of the changes. Apparently, from what I’ve read, father and son are at odds politically.
David Koch, of the evil Koch Brothers – owners the second wealthiest and first most polluting businesses in the nation – lost the bid for Vice Presidency some years back. I can’t seem to load anything on my browser at this moment so I can’t get you the facts. Koch ran on the Libertarian ticket. but since Koch’s presidential running mate lost the election, the Koch, he and his brother have been buying politicians in both federal and state, and they bought the very Supreme Court justices who decided that Citizens United was a good thing. (Justices Scalia and Thomas have been seen at various Koch fundraisers at $5K a plate). But not only is Citizens United a huge problem, an even worse problem is ALEC, mostly made up of big corporations, Wall Street CEOs, lawyers for those and Republicans seated in federal and state positions.
Through ALEC, Koch Industries and the rest of the huge corporations that form an Oligarchy are running the country outside Washington, D.C. It is a think tank for those who are making the most oppressive laws and regulations that are pushing the American voter completely out of the driver’s seat and into the junk heap.
The Kochs may be Libertarian, but with their billions they have added a new touch and that is the Tea Party. They have taken both the Libertarian and the Republican Parties and shoved them so far to the right that neither of the parties exist anymore.
So, forget about Ron and Rand Paul, and every one of the Republicans and Donald Trump, whatever he is, and concentrate on pulling ourselves above these freaks who are fast bringing fascism to the United States (I’m not kidding), and support Bernie Sanders who has been on our side long before any other politician ever was, say, back in the 70s? Sanders is for all citizens, not certain groups. The right wing lunatics have stolen us blind and are continuing to do so on a daily basis, and their only goal is to help the corporations overthrow our government (still not kidding). They have us in the Rise of the Fourth Reich, so unless you like the death and drama in your future, may I suggest that Bernie Sanders is going to fight these beasts of fortune and he wants us to work with him to do so (by “us” I mean the people). We can beat them if we stand up to them, then we won’t have to put up with their shit anymore.
Giancarlo85
It’s not just the Koch Brothers that are big libertarians. Also look up Sheldon Adelson. That guy is shady as hell. He’s a fucking gangster… and he’s bankrolling the republican party even more than the Koch Brothers. If people really investigated him, several republicans would land in jail too for taking bribes.
Giancarlo85
http://www.alan.com/2015/05/09/is-one-gop-megadonor-a-gangster/# – Reminds me of the Italian mafia… this guy has deeply implanted himself in the GOP. He funds just about everything they do. He has ties to organized crime.
He’s backing Marco Rubio right now, but he’ll bankroll whoever wins the nomination. He sent tons of money to Mitt Romney and McCain.
This is what we are up against. Organized crime could try to win the White House in 2016.
Ra Hill
On Hillary & Bernie (borrowed )
“Itâ??s really okay that we donâ??t all agree on every single issue. But can we make an effort to not attack each other in the name of self-righteous indignation? Arenâ??t there enough right-wing trolls to raise our collective blood pressure? Do we really need to prey on our own?
Bernie wonâ??t get in Hillaryâ??s way if sheâ??s the ticket. Hillary wonâ??t get in Bernieâ??s way if heâ??s the ticket. If another Democratic rock star emerges, that person wonâ??t get in the way of whomever wins the Democratic primary. Only ONE of them will emerge the victor, and it is up to US to decide who that will be.” WE Must Support the Democratic ticket, And we Must VOTE!!!
“What the media canâ??t comprehend is that Bernie Sanders is running a positive campaign about issues. The small group of Clinton haters on the left who insist on using their support for Bernie Sanders to attack Hillary Clinton have got it all wrong.”
twinkie1cat
Another one bites the dust! They better watch it or there won’t be anyone left except The Donald and Hilliary will chew him up and spit him out in the debates.
DavidIntl
As something of a libertarian myself, I am disappointed that Rand seems to have decided to take a path to the right of his father on social issues. I think the useful and viable niche for him would have been playing to that large group of independent voters like myself who are socially liberal but also wary of an inefficient large- and invasive-government economic approach.
Denis Camacho
ð??¤
Giancarlo85
@DavidIntl: Hilarious. So he would get another few percentage? Still wouldn’t help him win the nomination. And you would vote for him if you did? That is ridiculous. By the way, keep bashing on government… They are responsible for the lionshare of economic and scientific breakthroughs… Like the internet. There is nothing to be wary about.
And you are claiming that people who think like you are a large part of independent voters? Keep dreaming. You basically admitted you would vote republican. And your economic views are destructive and incompatible with social freedom.
animatedgifman
Please tell me when (if ever?) the Demon-craps will stay out of our wallets (stop advocating for ever bigger ever more dysfunctional government) and the Republi-Nazis will stay out of our bedrooms?
There is going to come a day when a third party candidate will look like the only sane choice and it is sooner than most think … (far sooner) …
Giancarlo85
@animatedgifman: Blah blah blah blah blah blah… more bullshit from a typical troll. “Demon-craps”…
You anti-government people realize what you’re using right now was created by government? ARPANet anyone?
animatedgifman
I don’t believe that being sick and tired of the ‘same old, same old’ (crap) makes one a troll, friend. I asked a legitimate question (still waiting for someone to directly address it).
BadSeed
How come nobody has anything to say about Peter Thiel? This gay billionaire, a San Francisco resident and self-styled Libertarian who now benefits from years of activism by SF’s gay left, should be doing penance for his alleged support of Rand Paul’s ol’ man and Ted Cruz. (Yes Ted Cruz — can that be true? Shocking!) He could be bankrolling the reopening of traditional gay bathhouses or maybe the liberalization anti-smoking laws in San Francisco. Instead ???
Giancarlo85
@animatedgifman: And what legitimate question is that? You have the wrong ideas about the DEMOCRATS.
animatedgifman
@scotshot: True enough, but truth be told it is certainly NOT as a result of Democrats lowering them. Historically, Democrats raise taxes and Republicans lower them (it’s simply a fact). Will I vote for a Republican as a result of that? Of course not. They have far too many other pieces of luggage to ‘hate’ them for. My point is, we apparently have to ‘settle’ for either ever higher taxes, larger government programs and ever more intrusion into the personal decision making process (Democrats) OR for the same old Bible Thumping nonsensical drivel from the Tea Bagging far right (Republican candidates). I sincerely wish for a viable third option (common sense responsible fiscal policies and a hands off approach to when people make personal life choices that adversely affect no one else. (Hint: Complete elimination of ALL so-called ‘consensual’ crimes). Government should have absolutely NO business telling people (adults) what they can or can not do provided said action does not adversely the life or property of a non-consenting other, period.
Ain’t Nobody’s Business If You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in Our Free Country (by Peter McWilliams)
http://www.amazon.com/Aint-Nobodys-Business-You-Consensual/dp/192976717X/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
scotshot
@animatedgifman:
“Simply a fact” except tax rates under Obama are lower now than Bush’s. A major problem? The fact that Bush cut taxes and then started wars that cost Trillions, plus there was a little problem with the economy. The wars totally erase any longterm savings from tax cuts. It seems all the Democrats do is clean up the messes the GOTP makes. And that’s a real fact.
On a state level you’re correct. Governor Brownback of Kansas enacted massive tax cuts. The State is a mess with no solution but to raise taxes.
I do agree personal privacy is none of the Government’s business. I’m amazed that those people can’t seem to understand that one little fact.
Ladbrook
Both Rand and a couple of his staffers have a reputation in DC as closet-cases who spend a lot of time engaging in the things closet-cases tend to do when they get together in small groups.
Obviously, rumors fly around DC about everyone (even Hillary/Huma) and not all of them are true, but if you spend any time at all listening to Rand, your gaydar will probably go off fairly soon.
Sad, really… aside from the homophobia, he’s not unattractive. He’d have made a great go-go boy back in the day.
GayEGO
@Matt O’Brien: Love your comments! :>)
GayEGO
Wow! I really do not understand why the GOPs are so stupid and do not seem to be able to learn anything. I shut off their debate because of the idiocy, but I watched the Democratic debate which contained more about the issues Americans are facing.
NoCagada
@animatedgifman: “There is going to come a day when a third party candidate will look like the only sane choice and it is sooner than most think … (far sooner) …”
I have heard that about as many times as “the world is going to end on _______”
scotshot
@animatedgifman: Compare taxes 50 years ago with today. your rates are lower today.
Ellafino
@Cam: Enough of this Trump is saying new things mantra. You know who else is saying new things, the crazy homeless guy out on Hollywood Blvd. Maybe he should run for president.
martinbakman
If Libertarians are OK with having no restriction on managers firing someone for being gay, then maybe Libertarians are a flawed bunch.
Giancarlo85
Libertarianism is fine with this:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/07/10/study-mchm-chemical-in-west-virginia-spill-more-toxic-than-previously-reported
The private sector can always be trusted. THe above is proof of that. Big bad “gobermint” can’t come in and regulate… that means LESS FREEDOM!
Less freedom to drink water tainted with “4-Methylcyclohexanemethanol”. But we should have the freedom to drink water tainted with that because the private sector is ALWAYS RIGHT and CAN BE TRUSTED to serve the public correctly.
—
This is libertarian bullshit in a nutshell.
Be prepared to drink water tainted with all sorts of chemicals. Don’t ask government to help you when you get cancer because libertarians hate public health care too and chopped that to pieces.
Libertarians try to tell everyone their world would be so wonderful… rather it’s more like a living nightmare.
Joe
Another moron to deal with!!
Jim Guinnessey
At one earlier time I thought Rand Paul might be a viable GOP presidential candidate but now it appears he is just another GOP nut job! Good riddance!