THE PROBLEM WITH RAND – AT 9:48 A.M. ET:   Readers of this site know that I am not a big fan of Rand Paul.  He seems, personally, to be a decent enough chap, and he has some interesting ideas.  But his foreign policy views, like his father's, are bizarre, and a throwback to the failed isolationism of the 1930s. 

I think that when Republicans actually learn of Rand's views, his bubble will burst.  The question about him has always revolved around how far the apple has fallen from the tree.  His father, who has a disturbing history of bigotry and an outrageous sympathy for America's enemies, tried to run for the GOP presidential nomination several times, and got little traction once the Republican electorate actually found out what he stood for.  Someone once described the father as head of the Taliban wing of the Republican Party.  Is Rand that different?  From Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post: 

Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul’s push to be a Reaganite on foreign policy is eviscerated by remarks caught on video last year in which he denigrates the potential use of force in Iran and bizarrely claims the United States was partially to blame for causing World War II. In the video, posted on a Paul fan Web site and dated Feb. 24, 2012, he minimizes the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapons, saying merely “It is not a good idea” and claims an Israeli official doesn’t think an Iranian bomb is an existential threat to Israel, something no Israeli government official or Obama administration appointee has ever agreed with.

American Enterprise Institute’s David Adesnik studies the history of U.S. isolationism. After viewing the video, he tells Right Turn, “Blaming the U.S. for Pearl Harbor is a long-standing isolationist habit that reflects tremendous historical illiteracy. Sen. Paul is very poorly informed if he thinks U.S. sanctions ‘probably caused Japan to react angrily.’” He explains, “The U.S. cut off oil supplies to Japan in August 1941, long after Japan had launched its atrocity-laden war against China in 1937. The evidence is conclusive that Japan was determined to dominate all of East Asia. Believing that the U.S. would not stand by passively if it overran Thailand, Singapore, Malaya and the East Indies, Japan launched its surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.”

And...

A foreign policy expert at a center-left think tank puts it simply, saying Paul sounds like the “unreconstructed Taft-Lindbergh-Buchanan wing of party, ” referring to isolationist Republican Sen. Robert Taft, America Firster Charles Lindbergh and Pat Buchanan (who has opined that WWII need not have been fought).

The remarks disparaging the potential use of force against Iran were echoed a year later at the Heritage Foundation when Paul opined that containment would be an option for U.S. policy. These comments, his bizarre take on historical events and his current opposition to sanctions (in accord with President Obama) raise troubling issues regarding his true beliefs and the degree to which his father’s radical libertarian ideas have rubbed off on him.

COMMENT:  Once Rand Paul's real views get circulated, Rand will make Hillary Clinton look like a stateswoman, which is extraordinarily hard to do.  There's a Rand Paul boomlet right now, but there was a Ron Paul boomlet at one time as well.

I really can't believe Paul will get the GOP nomination in 2016.  If he does, the party will be kaput.

March 31, 2014