Round 1 – Ron Paul. Actual, unfeigned pity. Come on, wasn’t he the cutest little old chap?
Round 2 – Paul Ryan. The actuality and extent of this pity remains dubious.
Round 3 – Rand Paul. How something so cute and relatively moderate (in the right field) as Ron could beget something so un-cute and immoderate as Rand baffles me. Perhaps this time the pity belongs for the Republican Party. A for Effort? If people like Paul, Jr. and Marco Rubio are the new “easy, breezy, beautiful” faces of your party, then I pity you profusely. You tried.
Try harder. Indubitably, this guy says the most blatantly messed-up things, to put it colloquially. How the The New York Times can call Paul one of the Republican Party’s “rising stars,” and The Daily Beast can refer to him as “a smoother, more pragmatic political operator” than his pops amazes me. Not that he doesn’t warrant some credit – after all, he’s younger than the rest of the white old farts that constitute the Grand Ole Party today.
But he audaciously claims, on behalf of the National Association on Gun Rights (qualms should already be fomenting here), that Obama is “working with anti-American globalists plotting against our Constitution,” according to the Washington Post, with the U.N. “Small Arms Treaty.” Then he brashly proceeded to solicit people for donations in the eloquent and vehement email he sent out.
BTW: That treaty? It doesn’t even exist. Awk.
Plus, this week Paul asserted that Hillary Clinton should never again be able to, or should, hold high office. Without a doubt, there is still strong disapprobation with regards to how the former Secretary of State handled the Benghazi attack. But even if you see her record as ostensibly tarnished now (which is ludicrous, put yourself in her shoes), Clinton is so much more esteemed, experienced, and erudite than you, Paul, Jr.
So inevitably, I don’t pity Rand Paul. I pity the people who deem him the savior of the Republican Party. You’re out of luck, conservatives.