-
“Fediting 101”
June 13, 2013 | 1 comment
-
National Security and the Difficult Debate
June 10, 2013 | 12 comments
-
Just Because I’m Paranoid…
June 6, 2013 | 4 comments
-
ObamaCare Rate Spikes Revealed
May 13, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Quick CISPA Survey
April 18, 2013 | 1 comment
The Spectacle Blog
When we reference the “demagogue,” we imply a political leader who plays on the emotions and prejudices of the ignorant. A tub-thumping, rabble-rouser who doles out torches and pitchforks to the lowest common denominator.
If Rand Paul is a “demagogue in the making,” as Aaron suggests, then the senator’s 13-hour filibuster against Eric Holder’s prevarication was simply an anti-intellectual barnstorm.
I respectfully disagree.
Perhaps Aaron missed references to Lysander Spooner, Buchanan v. Warley, the presumption of liberty, most of our constitutional amendments, and Alice in Wonderland. When you mix in Ted Cruz’s passage recitation of Henry V, and Marco Rubio take on The Godfather, I imagine some intellectual high-notes got lost in the shuffle. Such was this enlightened demagoguery.
As Aaron notes, Rand mentioned Hitler. He did so to make an important point. Rand said it best:
“If you have a war that has no end, if you have a war that has no geographic limit, and then you have strikes that have no constitutional bounds, basically what you have is an unlimited imperial presidency.”
Thomas Hobbes couldn’t defend this sort of Leviathan.
This isn’t “hysterical paranoia.“ Ultimately, it wasn’t even about drones. Sen. Paul opposed the notion of an unchecked executive. He railed against a high-flying presidency, unencumbered by the fundamental checks and balances, separation of powers, and representative government the Founders envisioned.
So I salute him. Our freedoms don’t come cheap. They vanish absent our exertion. Public servants, and the citizens they serve, must actively fight to preserve our liberties. Sen. Paul did so, eloquently. This was emphatically not the boorish agitation of a demagogue.
Quite the contrary. It was the principled debut of a new GOP. The party of Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Tim Scott, Marco Rubio, Pat Toomey, Rand Paul, and the fifteen liberty-loving Representatives who offered their moral support.
If you won’t stand with these men, you might consider crossing the aisle. Sen. Graham may join you.
View all comments (5) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Reid Smith
http://spectator.org/blog/2013/03/08/lets-discuss-demagoguery
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Gabby Giffords Poisons the Well
- Celebrating Our Lady of Paris
- Once Upon a Time in the West
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Occam's Tool| 3.8.13 @ 1:51PM
As a guy who had a job offer that would have allowed me the "pleasure" of being Nidal Hassan's colleague, (spared by the Grace of G-d alone---another job), I take a somewhat different view.
If you have firm intelligence on a guy about to murder his fellow American citizens on Federal property in a terrorist attack, take the bastard out. Would I have supported a drone strike in Oklahoma City to take out the truck bomber? Sure.
Welcome to the world of Grey. I make decisions that involve the safety of the public versus a person's right to autonomy every goldarned day. And, unlike judges and attorneys, I can get sued bigtime for making the wrong one.
I have NEVER been sued for releasing someone who went on to murder some one else. And that's the way I intend to keep it. Further, no one under my direct care on the Alabama Chain Gang committed suicide successfully while under my watch, either. I'm an intense little fat bastard.
Red Phillips | 3.8.13 @ 2:19PM
Aaron is a bellicose interventionists. He worries that what Rand Paul did and especially the massive support from the base he recieved may signal that bellicose interventionism is losing its grip on the party and the base. He is right to be worried. That is why McAmnesty and Grahamnesty quickly came out and condemned Paul the next day. They want to stamp out this flicker of opposition to the warfare state before it grows into a raging brush fire.
Crassus| 3.8.13 @ 4:34PM
Sonny Boy is nothing but a grandstander out to further his own personal ambitions. It's really just that damn simple. It's amazing how people are turning to sheep in regards to the junior Senator from Kentucky.
William R| 3.8.13 @ 5:04PM
Even Rush Limbaugh said today that the Neocons are running scared because Rand touched a nerve on the foreign policy issue.
Rand Paul is the future of the GOP
1. Fiscal responsibility
2. Civil liberties
3. America first foreign policy.
rab| 3.16.13 @ 8:06PM
Oh come on! The intent of Rand's filibuster wasn't to question "an unchecked executive", it was purely a publicity stunt to promote himself. Hagel's nomination was already a slam dunk, and Rand's 13-hour posturing wasn't going to change that. It was media time he wanted, nothing else.