Rule 5 and
FMJRA
But Rand Paul does have one liability hurdle that may prove insurmountable…
A couple of issues over this recent statement by Ron: these attacks in France were the result of Algerians/Muslims who emigrated to France. While in a very broad sense France's past colonial territories, like Algeria, contributed to that immigration--this radicalization is a global phenomenon not limited to France. France also had little involvement with the Shah (that was the British and then Americans who were involved in that). Plus, these were Sunni attacks, there was no Iranian or Shiite influence (at least as far as I have heard).
Could you imagine the field day the press would have if Rand Paul was the GOP nominee and Ron kept opening his mouth during the campaign? Rand would have a difficult enough time with all the crazy stuff Ron has said over the year.
While Rand Paul the same as Ron Paul, a lot of people think the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Ron Paul's fiscal interests in a broad sense are sound, while I agree less involvement overseas is better, his view on complete pull out of overseas involvement would be very dangerous and would not make us safer. Ron Paul's ties to racist groups and refusal to reject their contributions to his campaigns is not good. But the biggest liability for Rand is Ron speaks in absolutes and cannot shut his mouth.
