Rand Paul's terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week

[ProSense]

Rand Paul's terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week

By Steve Benen

It's probably safe to say Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has had better weeks. Just over the last few weeks he started to lose his cool on NPR when asked about a neo-confederate he co-authored a book with; he was caught making ridiculous boasts about his record on minority rights; and he repeated a bizarre conspiracy theory about George Stephanopoulos that's already been debunked...after all of this, the Kentucky Republican sat down for a chat with Businessweek's Josh Green.

Green: A recent article in the New Republic said your budget would eviscerate the departments of Energy, State, Commerce, EPA, FDA, Education, and many others. Would Americans support that?

Paul: My budget is similar to the Penny Plan, which cuts 1 percent a year for five or six years and balances the budget. Many Americans who have suffered during a recession have had to cut their spending 1 percent, and they didn't like doing it, but they were able to do it to get their family's finances back in order. I see no reason why government can't cut 1 percent of its spending.

Except, whether the senator realizes it or not, his description of his plan is extremely deceptive. As Ezra Klein explained, Paul's response wasn't actually an answer: "Paul's budget eliminates the Department of Commerce. It also eliminates the Department of Education. And the Department for Housing and Urban Development. And the Department of Energy. The State Department gets cut by more than 50 percent. Meanwhile, it increases spending on defense by $126 billion. Perhaps these are good ideas! But Paul doesn't defend them. He obscures them. He tries to make his cuts sound small even though, in the areas Green asked about, they're huge."

In theory, Paul could at try to explain why he thinks cutting the State Department budget in half would be good for the United States. But he either can't or won't do that, so he repeats vague talking points that obscure the facts.

Wait, it gets worse.

Green: Any political consultant who saw that list [of cabinet agencies Paul intends to eliminate] would tear out his hair and say the American people would never accept it. You disagree with that conventional wisdom?

Paul: You know, the thing is, people want to say it's extreme. But what I would say is extreme is a trillion-dollar deficit every year. I mean, that's an extremely bad situation.

Except, we're not running trillion-dollar deficits every year. If the senator takes this issue so seriously, shouldn't he keep up with the basics of current events?

Green: Who would your ideal Fed chairman be?

Paul: Hayek would be good, but he's deceased.

Green: Nondead Fed chairman.

Paul: Friedman would probably be pretty good, too, and he's not an Austrian, but he would be better than what we have.

Again, Paul doesn't seem to know what he's saying. As Jon Chait explained, the senator's answer "makes no sense" because, "Paul is a hard-money fanatic who wants to abolish the Federal Reserve's role in using money policy to stabilize the economy. That's the joke. Milton Friedman, though, had the complete opposite view of monetary policy. His central academic insight was support for very active monetary policy."

- more -

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/08/09/19948061-rand-pauls-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-week

Rand Paul Outlines Budget Plan At CPAC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022507414

[mikeysnot]

1. the best way to deflate a tea bagger is to let him talk.

and blow it out his ass.

[Blue Owl]

2. On top of that, he botched his home perm

[hatrack]

3. Even stupider than I'd originally thought . . .

And I didn't think he was terribly bright to begin with .

[Scuba]

4. He was able to con the Republicans back home in Kentucky. On the national stage, not so much.

[bullwinkle428]

5. But he did get Tweety's "endorsement", so he's got that going for him!

[Scurrilous]

6. @#$% Rand Paul.