Lanny Davis: Still a clueless tool

According to Lanny Davis, Rand Paul is a misunderstood Mr. Smith (like the one who “Goes to Washington”). And if we know what’s good for us, we’ll realize it’s just plain wrong to enjoy Rachel Maddow’s masterful takedown of Paul and the teabagger wunderkind’s subsequent national media flailing.

Know why? Because after initially enjoying Paul’s media roasting himself, Lanny Davis discovered that Paul is a sincere, principled man who is just echoing the Libertarian Party platform (even though he’s running as a Republican). How does Lanny Davis know this? Because he looked it up! On the Libertarian Party website!

…Maddow’s co-hosts at MSNBC, and Maddow herself, seemed to relish playing and replaying Paul’s humiliation just a little too much.

That’s when I decided to read the Libertarian Platform… I wanted to understand better why Rand Paul was taking what seemed to be such a politically suicidal set of positions. It explained a lot ... including about why my and my fellow liberals’ sanctimony about Mr. Paul might have been somewhat misplaced.

Under its “Statement of Principles,” the Platform states: “Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals.” Under “Property and Contract,” the platform states that “property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference…”

So there it is: If you believe in that principle, you wouldn’t agree with government compelling a private restaurant owner to serve anyone he or she doesn’t want to, regardless of the reasons.

Get. The. Fuck. Out!  Well, that totally excuses Paul from answering to any consequences that might flow from enacting legislation in line with that principle! Why didn’t you say so, Mr. Paul?

But wait—there’s more! Lanny Davis also concludes that we should extend the hand of brotherhood to Paul since he holds libertarian views that synch right up with our progressive ideals:

Ms. Maddow also failed to elicit from Mr. Paul, much less credit him, with clearly liberal positions on the major issues, also consistent with libertarian principles, such as the fact that he is unambiguously pro-choice (“government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration”)…

Hmmmm. Could be that Maddow “failed to elicit” that view from Paul because Paul doesn’t hold it. In fact, Paul’s campaign website says this on the choice issue:

I am 100% pro life. I believe abortion is taking the life of an innocent human being. I believe life begins at conception and it is the duty of our government to protect this life. I will always vote for any and all legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion. I believe in a Human Life Amendment and a Life at Conception Act as federal solutions to the abortion issue. I also believe that while we are working toward this goal, there are many other things we can accomplish in the near term.

Lanny Davis, ladies and gentlemen, blithering idiot who once served as special counsel to Bill Clinton in the White House. That might at least partially explain why our Bill was always in hot water on the legal front. Lanny Davis, monsieurs and madames, who argued vociferously that the superdelegates should overturn the Democratic primary election results because McCain would surely beat Obama in the general election. Christ, what a nincompoop.

Posted by Betty Cracker on 05/27/10 at 10:10 PM • Permalink

KY Libertarians have already thrown Paul under the bus.

Lanny should have asked them what they thought of Rand, before he bought the chocolates and wrist corsage, and rented a tux.

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.