To vaccinate or not to vaccinate? Rand Paul Interview with CNN Fired UP #RandPaul
Rand Paul appeared on CNBC this week and was attacked for his stance that vaccinating children should be the parents decision and not mandated by government. The host just could not understand.
By: Yea Baby
View post:
To vaccinate or not to vaccinate? Rand Paul Interview with CNN Fired UP #RandPaul - Video
Ben Carson Can #39;t Explain Rand Paul #39;s Anti-Vax Stance
(Bloomberg) -- In an interview with Bloomberg TV #39;s "With All Due Respect," Ben Carson, a former neurosurgeon and potential 2016 candidate, said parents who do not vaccinate their children are...
By: Bloomberg Business
Link:
Ben Carson Can't Explain Rand Paul's Anti-Vax Stance - Video
O'Reilly joined the chorus of voices slamming the Republican from Kentucky on Tuesday for his comments that vaccines should not be mandatory and took the chance to take another swipe at the libertarian-leaning senator's foreign policy, calling him "perhaps the most controversial candidate in the race."
"That's not unusual for me disagreeing with Mr. Paul," O'Reilly said.
The conservative host also called Paul's stance on terrorism and Iran "nave," reprising previous comments that Paul's foreign policy views would hurt him in an eventual GOP primary.
Paul opposes the GOP-led effort to impose additional sanctions on Iran in an attempt to pressure the Iranians to give up their nuclear program.
"Sen. Paul loses traction because he has no plan to defeat the jihad and he comes across, maybe he's not that way, it comes across as kind of let them do what they want to do as long as they're not in the U.S.A.," O'Reilly said Tuesday.
Paul declined to appear on the show Tuesday, O'Reilly said, adding to a string of refusals to appear on the program apparently stemming from O'Reilly's criticism of the senator's foreign policy views.
O'Reilly attacked Paul last summer for flipping his position on Israel and denying that he ever wanted to cut foreign aid to Israel. Paul has beefed up his support for Israel and shied away from his isolationist foreign policy views as he began seriously considering a presidential run.
"Rand Paul is going to be hurt by his foreign policy," O'Reilly said during a previous show.
O'Reilly also suggested that Paul's father, former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, is becoming "increasingly radical."
Graham rebukes Paul on vaccines
Continue reading here:
O'Reilly slams Rand Paul for 'naive' foreign policy ...
Rand Paul had it so good.
TheNew Yorker likened him to the Republican Barack Obama, saying he was "the Partys most prized fund-raiser and its most discussed senator, willing to express opinions unpopular within his party, and capable of energizing younger voters."
Vogue chronicled "the air of expectancy around him."
Time and Politico both said he was the most interesting man in politics, heralded as a one-man think tank.
And Mother Jones (perhaps jokingly, perhaps not) called him "the leading fashion visionary of DC, nay, the world," for his commitment to turtlenecks.
He has actively courted the press, cultivating an image of openness and willingness to engage in a wayother possible GOP contenders -- and politicians writ large -- have not. And his press clippings, which almost universallyhinted at the ideological tightrope Paul was on, still suggested it was a good strategy. The Fix even ranked him -- for a time -- as the most likely GOP nominee in 2016.
But this week's debate over vaccines shows how things have shifted. Paul tangled with the press,shushing a CNBC reporter in one interview and blaming the same "liberal media" that he has endlessly courted for twisting his words.
This led Justin Miller, a senior editor at the Daily Beast, to curse Paul out on Twitter-- somethinghe apologized for and explained further to Politico:
"I replied from my personal account to what I felt was spin after Senator Paul said factually incorrect things about vaccines," Miller wrote. "It would've been better to respond with facts than an obscenity, and I deleted the tweet so it wouldn't reflect on the Beast. I'm sorry for the insult."
Now, one reporter's off-color Twitter comment hardly represents a trend. But the press reaction to Paul's unsubstantiated suggestion that vaccines could lead to "profound mental disorders" marks a far different tone than when Paul was the leading voice for privacy in the historically hawkish GOP in 2013. For a time, he has been all potential, a fresh GOP voice bucking the status quo. As he cultivated that image of being a more maverick-y John McCain, others, like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), have kept their heads down.
View post:
The Fix: The lamestream medias fascination with Rand Paul might be coming to an end
Story highlights The Wall Street Journal likens Rand Paul's thoughts on vaccinations to "libertarian dormitory passions" The Kentucky Republican says he supports vaccines but earlier this week said he's heard of vaccines causing mental disorders
"He will have to avoid these libertarian dormitory passions if he wants to be a credible candidate," the editorial says, adding that government requirements for vaccinating school children is "a legitimate use of state 'police powers' under the Constitution."
Paul, who's moving toward a presidential bid, caused a stir when he said Monday that he's "heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines."
RELATED: Gupta: Rand Paul's vaccine views are 'dangerous'
The vaccination debate became the center of a political firestorm this week with potential presidential candidates of both parties weighing in on the issue amid a recent measles outbreak that's linked to Disneyland, despite the virus being eliminated in the United States in 2000.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, also a potential presidential contender, kicked things off when he told reporters Monday that "parents need to have some measure of choice" in determining whether to vaccinate their children, though he personally endorsed the idea.
Paul said he's also in favor of getting vaccinated, but his comments -- especially as a physician -- lent credibility to conspiracy theories that vaccinations can do severe damage.
"Mr. Paul is an ophthalmologist, so he should know he was broadcasting misinformation," the Wall Street Journal editorial states. His office did not return a request for comment about the editorial.
RELATED: O'Reilly slams Rand Paul for 'naive' foreign policy, measles
The piece acknowledges that in rare cases vaccines can lead to "deafness, seizures, comas or brain damage," but the Centers for Disease Control says those results are "so rare that it is hard to tell whether they are caused by the vaccine."
Read more:
Wall Street Journal editorial board skewers Rand Paul