We hear over and over that Sen. Rand Paul is the Republican Democrats should fear most the guy who could win over anti-war voters with his anti-interventionism, young people with his supposed (mostly rumored) libertarianism, maybe even some African Americans thanks to his work on criminal justice reform.
But every time Paul gets attention for one of his interesting politicsl stands, hes likely to repel potential new supporters with one of his crazy ones. Politics aside, anyone who cares about science and reason is going to have a hard time supporting Paul the doctor who said last week that the government was lying about how Ebola was spread, and who (according to this new interview with Salons Elias Isquith) turned off the non-partisan, libertarian leaning comedian Bill Maher with his blinkered views on climate change.
Lets take Ebola first. In a breathless exclusive, Breitbart News revealed that Paul thinks the Obama administration is misleading the public about the nature of the threat and how the disease is spread. Theyre downplaying and underplaying the risk of this, Paul claimed. They keep emphasizing that its so hard to transmit. Well if its so hard to transmit why are doctors getting it with masks, gloves, boots and hatsthe whole works?
You might think an ophthalmologist (though hes not board certified) would be more responsible about spreading health panic. But youd be wrong. Could we have a worldwide pandemic? The Spanish flu in 1918 killed 21 million people, the plague in the 14th century killed 25 million people; Im not saying thats going to happen, I dont know whats going to happen. But I think we should have travel restrictions at this point in time coming from Africa, Paul added.
Health experts shot Paul down almost immediately. I dont think that theres data to tell us that thats a correct statement, with all due respect, NIH veteran Dr. Anthony Fauci told CBSs Face the Nation. We have had experience since 1976 with how Ebola is transmitted. And it is clear that its transmitted by direct contact with body fluids, blood, diarrhea, vomit, or what have you.
And theres no indication that there is another insidious way that its transmitted that were missing because of the experience that weve had. So, weve really gotta go with the evidence base. Theres always hypothesis and surmising about that, but theres no scientific evidence, Fauci added.
Then theres Pauls recent encounter with Bill Maher, which the comedian shared with Isquith. Maher made headlines last month when he said that even though he was a big donor to President Obamas 2008 and 2012 campaigns, he would consider voting for Paul in 2016, because of his anti-interventionism.Rand Paul is an interesting candidate to me. Rand Paul could possibly get my vote. Hes way less of a hawk than Hillary, and that appeals to me a lot because Im not crazy about how warlike she is.
Then the two men had a drink, and Maher explained what happened.
My big problem is I asked him about the environment, which is my big issue because he had made a comment that was very similar to what Dick Cheney said about a month or two ago, which was basically, Why are we talking the environment when ISIS is out there?
I said, Senator, yknow, you sounded just like Dick Cheney its very unfortunate that even he, who I consider, in the Republican Party, the most viable [presidential candidate], is apparently so far in the bubble on their environmental denial that he just doesnt have an answer that sounds like it should come out of the mouth of any politician in the 21st century.
Read the original post:
Rand Pauls dopey science: How Ebola and climate change exposed a quack