Has Dr. Rand Paul Been Abducted by Aliens?

David Horowitz's NewsReal Blog ^ | June 25, 2010 | Jeanette Pryor

[HorowitzianConservative]

Rand Paul will never answer the question of when he stopped hating Israel because he really hasn't. He's exactly the same as his Dad, he's just smart enough to lie to get elected.

[mnehring]

I don't know too many real Libertarians who would claim Alex "Big Foot Demolished the WTC" Jones as one of their own. He is over the edge fringe even for the fringe. I think he is a member of a new version of the Bull Moose party, the Bull S*** party.

[NeoCaveman]

Rand Paul will never answer the question of when he stopped hating Israel because he really hasn't.

Rand Paul also will not answer the question of when he stopped beating his wife.

[Fichori]

He will be to you whoever you need him to be for you to vote for him.

[Pessimist]

What a pathetic article.

I guess she had to cough up X amount of words, and couldn’t get any answers, so she ended up ad-libbing.

[joesbucks]

He didn’t?

[OneWingedShark]

...what if it wasn’t aliens that abducted him, but Barney Frank?

[chuck_the_tv_out]

Rand Paul is better than the democrat.

We shouldn’t let random fears devolve into attack articles.

[NeoCaveman]

When did you stop beating yours?

(see it’s an accusation masked as a question, such as the one I was responding to.)

[mnehring]

Because she beats him?

[NeoCaveman]

No one beats anyone.

I was demonstrating absurdity by being absurd.

[mnehring]

I know, and I was being a smarta**.

[mnehring]

I don’t even think there is a decent third party option (as if there is ever) so the choice seems pretty cut and dry.

[NeoCaveman]

I’ve been beat at my own game.

[Mere Survival]

Wow. A member of the press that makes fun of a candidate can’t get access to his campaign. Stop the presses! We’ve got a story! /sarc

Sounds to me like they are more controlled than most campaigns if they are ID’ing her as unfriendly right off the bat.

[speciallybland]

Rand Paul will never answer the question of when he stopped hating Israel...

Haha.

Glad to see Rand Paul's big primary win has pissed off the Horowitz crowd.

[for-q-clinton]

But the US beat Algeria to advance in the world cup.
I know it’s soccer so it really doesn’t count.

[Frantzie]

Nice attempt at smearing a conservative.

[joesbucks]

I’m Single.

[TopQuark]

Ron Paul is bothered by our foreign aid ONLY when it comes to Israel. As I wrote on another thread, a true isolationist would demand our pullout from Europe, Korea and Japan, which have been infinitely more expensive than anything we gave Israel. Not a word from Ron Paul. Somehow, the only area to which he applies his "principles" is Israel.

That is far from objective. In fact, it's the favorite device of "enlightened" anti-Semites since mid-1800s. Prior to that they believed in G-d, and it was sufficient to say "Jews killed Christs." In 1800s their belief diminishes and Jews also were abandoning their religion en masse. A new invention was the seemingly logical argument of an enlightened person: (i) state a criterion, by which any group would fail if so judged, (ii) demonstrate that the Jews have failed by that criterion, and (iii) arrive at a conclusion that Jews deserve... fill in the blanks with whatever is expedient at the moment. After you are done, become indignant if someone calls you anti-Semite. The trick -- and the fallacy of the argument --- is, of course, that nobody else was judged by the proposed criterion.

This is precisely what Europeans now do with respect to Israel and, to some extent, to us. And then they become indignant is someone calls them anti-Semitic or anti-American: "No, I just disagree with Israeli policies. True, they do; but they never disagree with any of unambiguous atrocities happening in the world.

Back to Ron Paul. Given that he uses the same device, it is not unreasonable for people to conclude that he is biased. If Ron walks like a duck... You appear to be unfamiliar with this particular duck (the above-described "argument"), and criticism of Paul seems to you unreasonable. It is not.