This guy is such a cartoon.
http://www.politico.com/...
Rand Paul lashed out at the "loony left" for pressing him on his view of the 1964 Civil Rights Act in an interview with Laura Ingraham this morning.
"I’ve never really favored any change in the Civil Rights Act," he said. "They seem to have unleashed some of the loony left on me."
(emphasis added)
Wait a minute. The "Loony Left" made him say this? Say What?
Let's be clear. This smarmy jello-head's only claim to fame is that he happens to be the son of Ron Paul. Otherwise he'd be enjoying the obscurity he deserves.
The "Loony Left" called you on your confused "philosophy?" And you've never "really" wanted to alter bedrock Civil Rights laws? That's really rich, Rand. While you blame your penchant for verbal diarrhea on the "Loony Left," the rest of us will look at the record.
We'll start with your dumbass website:
The Founding Fathers warned us that foreign alliances sacrifice our independence as a nation. In Thomas Jefferson’s First Inaugural Address, he asserted that America should have "peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none." Yet today, America is often subservient to foreign bodies such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, World Trade Organization (WTO), and the United Nations (UN).
Jefferson was talking about nations, you idiot. Entangling alliances with NATIONS. The IMF is not a Nation. The World Bank is not a Nation. I'll bet you don't even know what the World Bank is. I guarantee you no one who pulled the lever for you does.
The World Bank is one of five institutions created at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944. The International Monetary Fund, a related institution, is the second. Delegates from many countries attended the Bretton Woods Conference. The most powerful countries in attendance were the United States and United Kingdom which dominated negotiations.[4]
Although both are based in Washington, D.C., the World Bank is by custom headed by an American, while the IMF is led by an European.
That's right, genius. We invented it, we lead it, and it sits here in the U.S. Think that's really what Jefferson had in mind? That's just loony!
Let's try another one, Mr. Wizard! How 'bout the IMF?
It is an organization formed with a stated objective of stabilizing international exchange rates and facilitating development through the enforcement of liberalising economic policies [3] [4] on other countries as a condition for loans, restructuring or aid.[5] It also offers highly leveraged loans, mainly to poorer countries. Its headquarters are in Washington, D.C., United States.
Oops, there it is, sitting in D.C. again. Good thing it's not an "entangling alliance!" It would have to move out!
There's plenty of issues to hammer on about both organizations but their impact on our "sovereignty" isn't one of them.
Here is how the voting power of the IMF is broken down vis a vis the U.S. "Vis a Vis" means "in relation to," Rand. I don't want to confuse you.
IMF member country Quota: millions of SDRs Quota: percentage of total Governor Alternate Governor Votes: number Votes: percentage of total
United States 37149.3 17.09 Timothy F. Geithner Ben Bernanke 371743 16.74
Japan 13312.8 6.12 Naoto Kan Masaaki Shirakawa 133378 6.01
Germany 13008.2 5.98 Axel A. Weber Wolfgang Schäuble 130332 5.87
United Kingdom 10738.5 4.94 George Osbourne Mervyn King 107635 4.85
France 10738.5 4.94 Christine Lagarde Christian Noyer 107635 4.85
China 8090.1 3.72 Zhou Xiaochuan Hu Xiaolian 81151 3.66
Italy 7055.5 3.24 Giulio Tremonti Mario Draghi 70805 3.19
Saudi Arabia 6985.5 3.21 Ibrahim A. Al-Assaf Hamad Al-Sayari 70105 3.16
Canada 6369.2 2.93 Jim Flaherty Mark Carney 63942 2.88
Russia 5945.4 2.73 Aleksei Kudrin Sergey Ignatyev 59704 2.69
I know that's probably a little complicated for you, Rand, but you only need to look at the numbers at the very end. That tells you the number of votes and voting percentages of the top 10 members of the IMF. In other words, the U.S. has anywhere between three and eight times the voting power of any of the top ten members of the IMF.
And, by the way:
The United States has always been the only country able to block a supermajority on its own.[22]
I suspect for your ilk it's more a matter of who is in charge of those "elite international banking" institutions than whatever it is they actually do. But we'll leave that aside--for now. Let's go back to the "Loony Left. "
From your acceptance speech:
We have a President who went to Copenhagen and appeared with Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez, and others — Evo Morales — to apologize for the industrial revolution. ... These petty dictators say that to stop climate change it’s about ending capitalism. ...
Here's a list of attendees at the 2009 Copengagen Summit. It's 179 pages long. There were 30,000 participants. Why didn't you mention those? Is it because you're an idiot? Or just a liar? Wait--maybe you're a loon!
I mean, only a total loon would be reduced to doing damage control with a statement like this:
"unequivocally ... that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964."
Rand, most politicians have never been foolish enough to put themselves in a position where they had to make such a statement. I don't even think your outgoing Senator, Jim Bunning, was that loony.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/...
loon·y or loon·ey also lun·y (ln) Informal
adj. loon·i·er also lun·i·er, loon·i·est also lun·i·est
- Extremely foolish or silly.
- Crazy; insane.
n. pl. loon·ies also loon·eys or lun·ies
A foolish or crazy person.
You're the loon, Mister. The Left had nothing to do with that, thank God.