In Theory

Thursday 14 March 2013 - Filed under Uncategorized

Rand Paul is right. In theory at least. The Washington Examiner:

Speaking yesterday at a National Review breakfast, Sen. Rand Paul R-Ky. explained what he thought about the Tea Party movement vs. the Occupy Wall Street movement, as Jon Ward reports in the Huffington Post.

“The Tea Party, I always say, is more like the American Revolution, and Occupy Wall Street is more the French Revolution,” Paul said.

Paul explained that the Tea Party looked back to the rule of law.

“We hearken back to sort of rules,” Paul said, identifying with the Tea Party. “We weren’t unhappy with people just because they were rich; we weren’t happy with you if you were making money off of our taxes and we were bailing you out. If you were making $100 million, your bank goes bankrupt and all of a sudden we bail you out and you’re still making $100 million — that upset us.”

Of course when Tea Partiers had the opportunity to vote for a fiscal conservative in last year’s Republican primaries, they elected to vote for the likes of Santorum and Gingrich who are just fine with doling out federal money extorted from taxpayers towards businesses and groups they like.

In theory, however, Paul is correct. The Occupy movement seemed to be more of a “I want free shit” movement which was based on envy, while, originally at least, the Tea Party seemed to hold the idea that shoveling money from taxpayers to government favored institutions was inherently not cool. It would seem to me that Paul still holds this idea as paramount while most of the Tea Party has revealed themselves as nothing more than your average big government GOP supporter who likes their medicare and social security just the way they are despite being blatant extortion from younger demographics (as well as being completely unsustainable).

2013-03-14  »  madlibertarianguy