Neil Steinberg at the Chicago Sun-Times once again connects the dots. He notes how Paul Rand’s filibuster against something or other because of drones doesn’t jibe with his position on gun control, or the lack thereof.
money quote:
“He was elected by a majority,” Paul said. “But the majority doesn’t get to decide who we execute.”
This is the same Paul who is a fierce opponent of all gun-control laws, who wanted to push a bill to nullify the executive actions Obama took after Newtown, who has revealed that he and his staff go about armed, and who urges everyone else to do so, too.
Let’s see if we can connect these two political beliefs in the Randian universe.
On the one hand: The government cannot be trusted to identify a person as being so much of a threat he should be killed.
On the other: Any random citizen can.
The government should never be allowed to sidestep the system of laws we have in place to ensure that an American suspected of wrongdoing receives justice. That’s bad.
But individuals — Paul would like to see every teacher carry a gun — can and should. That’s good. Indeed, we should pass “stand your ground” laws to ease this process.
The intellectual incoherence of right-wing nutjobs is something that should be more often highlighted.