Is Rand Paul as dumb as he sounds?

[proud2BlibKansan]

<skip>

As Sanders and Franken explain: If we make sure old folks have money for and access to adequate nutrition, fewer of them will need to be hospitalized or placed in nursing homes. Because Medicare would pay a lot more money for hospitalization or nursing home care than it would cost to make sure these old folks don't go hungry to begin with, this program is cost-effective in addition to being humane.

Here is Rand Paul's rebuttal: "It’s curious that only in Washington can you spend $2 billion and claim that you’re saving money." Then he went "hyck hyck hyck" and looked sort of smug. When the basic idea -- sometimes spending a bit of money now saves a lot of money later! -- was explained to him again, his response was to say something about the government being bad, and to suggest that if this insane magical spending-to-save thing is true, why not spend a ZILLION dollars feeding old people? (The cheapest option, I guess, would just be to not pay for old people to eat or go to the hospital at all, and to let them die in their homes and be buried in pauper's graves, but it is maybe rude to suggest that that is Paul's "plan.")

Rand Paul is either presenting a misleadingly simplistic argument because he knows it will appeal to dumb conservatives (only a big-city liberal would think you could save money in the future by spending it wisely in the present!) or he's actually as dumb as I have always said he is.

He's obviously some combination of willfully obtuse and dimwitted, but how much of his dimwitted is calculated?

more plus a video: http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/06/24/rand_paul_playing_dumb

[originalpckelly]

1. Considering that he's a doctor, no.

But, that doesn't mean he's not wrong. Dumb and wrong are two different things.

[plumbob]

4. Not sure if he's much of an opthamologist. He's been in practice very

little and had two malpractice suits filed, one of which was settled for $50,000.

I believe that he's a stunted cur with no intellectual curiosity, pinched off by his daddy's selection of that old psychotic, Ayn Rand.

Other than that, I'm sure he's just a narrow minded greedy bastard born into privilege.

[originalpckelly]

7. Disrespect his politics in any way...

but he's a doctor.

You don't just print up a degree for that. If he could make it through, that says a lot.

Corrupt, maybe.
Stupid, probably not.

[indepat]

10. Corrupt, maybe. Stupid, probably not, but wholly eaten up with a bizarre

ideology foreign to practically every American ideal. :patriot:

[xphile]

16. Lot of damn stupid people manage to get degrees.

And Rand Paul is an over-privileged, over-indulged, asshole who trades on his name more than his (not all that impressive) intellect to get by. He's not deserving of any respect.

[izquierdista]

19. That's the difference between learning and thinking

One can learn how to be an ophthalmologist without ever having to do much thinking. In fact, there are many professions where you can do quite well just recalling the correct piece of rote learning. Of course it takes more intelligence to regurgitate a pile of rote learning than to go "duh......", but it is definitely below the level of intelligence required to engage in the scientific method or analyze a set of facts.

This little exchange shows Rand to be a well trained parrot. I think the next intellectual test for Rand to try would be this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93gZ3NYa6X8&feature=related

[Anakin Skywalker]

21. Yeah? And G.W. made it through Yale! Means nothing!

Money and privilege will buy you anything!

[Brother Buzz]

18. He certified himself as an ophthalmologist

"His lack of standard certification as an ophthalmologist and its relationship to his self-anointing and self-created National Board of Ophthalmology does not make him a bad doctor, so STOP saying that!"

[DesMoinesDem]

20. 17 years is little to you?

I wanted to check to see if what you are saying was correct. It appears he has been a practicing ophthalmologist for 17 years. That is a long time to me, not 'very little'. And unfortunately malpractice lawsuits are common in the medical practice. Settling one malpractice lawsuit doesn't mean much. We have enough to attack this guy with based on his politics. Making stuff up about his personal life isn't only stupid, but it hurts real arguments against him. Making up false arguments isn't going to get anyone on our side.

[plumbob]

26. One year full time is little to me. Take a look:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_Paul

Paul has held a state-issued medical license since moving to Bowling Green in 1993.<22> He received his first job from Dr. John Downing of Downing McPeak Vision Centers, which brought him to Bowling Green after completing his residency. Paul worked for Downing for about five years before parting ways. Afterwards, he went to work at the Gilbert Graves Clinic, a private medical group in Bowling Green, for 10 years before creating his own practice in a converted one-story house across the street from Downing's office.<23> After his election to the U.S. Senate, Paul merged his practice with Downing's medical practice.<24> Paul has had two malpractice lawsuits filed against him since 1993. Paul was cleared in one case and the other was settled for $50,000.<23>


Okay, so he went to work in 1993 for a vision center for "about" five years. The next ten years, he works for a private medical group.
AFTER his election to the Senate, he merges his practice back with Downing, his original employer. Now which is full-time? His Senate seat or his eye practice?

Even before his election, he had another full-time project, beginning in 1994:

(back to wiki)

As founder and chairman of the anti-tax organization Kentucky Taxpayers United (KTU) since 1994, Paul regularly presents "taxpayers' friend" awards to state legislators. KTU, which regards itself as nonpartisan, but is criticized for being ideological and conservative,<31><32> examines legislator records on taxation and spending to inform voters where their own lawmakers stand on the issues.<33> Paul's editorial commentary on behalf of KTU has been published and recognized in the Kentucky Post.<34>


So ONE year after he starts "work" he also founds this full-time political activist organization. Or can he do all that stuff after hours and on the weekends?

Far as I can tell, he has ONE year of full time work at an eye practice, before he went into political activism, and eventually got himself a US Senate seat. Or maybe those are hobbies.

[onehandle]

9. The vast majority of the time I would support that premise, but listening to him...

His sentence structuring and the slow pace of his grasp of questions makes me wonder how he got this far.

I never actually thought that Bush was actually stupid, just inarticulate.

However, Rand Paul... I keep picturing Chauncey Gardner.

[mucifer]

13. please don't insult Chance the gardener. :)

[cui bono]

11. Correct. The republicons don't actually beleive what they say, so it's not stupidity

it's deceit. They'll say and do anything to get what they want.

And as we laugh at how "stupid" they are they laugh because they can see that they have changed the discourse in this country so that now we are actually talking about crazy ideas and since our president caves to them all the time some of them are even getting implemented.

Who's dumb now?

[dixiegrrrrl]

17. Drs can be dumb...I know. Oh god, do I know.

Mine is a Teabagger, and a fundie.
but one of the few female docs in this teeny town, and good enough for what I need, which is a signed script every 6 months for a mild
problem.
But man, she gets into these monologues about "that socialized medicine" and "big government" blah blah blah.

I am working on her. We spend a long time talking about non-medical issues, I think she likes the rarity of having a patient who can read and spell.

[Ohio Joe]

2. Yes

He is also a racist douchebag like his father.

[kestrel91316]

3. Rand Paul obviously never heard the old adage that "An ounce of prevention

is worth a pound of cure."

Tall me, Mr. Paul, why you HATE BENJAMIN FRANKLIN???

[The Big Vetolski]

22. LOL! You beat me to it. (nt)

[existentialist]

5. What you are asking about Rand Paul

could be asked about almost all of the Republican Party.

And it is a question that I have asked myself many times.

About Rand Paul in particular, although I don't recall his precise educational background, I do recall that except for the MD it is not very impressive.

I do recall that when he ran last fall I did examine a record of his educational background, and concluded that, MD notwithstanding, I am far better educated regarding history, government, economics, civics, and basic things that every congress critter should know than he is.

Irrespective of his MD his educational qualifications for his position are unimpressive at best.

[wilt the stilt]

6. someone should ask him if he changes the oil in his car

then after he says yeas ask him why. it costs $35.00 to change oil ans he could save probably $900 by the time he reached 100,000 miles. The problem is that at 101,000 he would need a new engine and that would cost $8,000. dumbass

[cui bono]

12. Or brushes his teeth. That idiot probably spends money on toothpaste and tooth brushes!

:rofl:


Seriously though, as I mentioned above, they don't believe what they say so you can't judge their intelligence by it. It's a concerted effort to change the discourse.

[jpak]

8. Dumb as a pounded post

yup

[bahrbearian]

14. I vote Dumb

[murielm99]

15. You have to distinguish between people who

can do well at an academic discipline and people who have common sense. It is possible to have both. Rand Paul does not. He doesn't have, as my dad would have called it, "horse sense."

If my dad was still lucid, I know what he would say about Sarah Palin: "If she had a brain, she would be dangerous."

[Canuckistanian]

23. Has Rand Paul never heard the expression "a stitch in time saves nine"?

Or does he even realize the validity of the old saying?

[The Big Vetolski]

24. Rand Paul's not stupid. He's a fanatical Libertarian. He lives up to

his namesake, Ayn Rand. You know, those who have wealth and power have it because they MUST have done something to deserve it, otherwise, they wouldn't have it! The Creative Individual should be able to do whatever he wants to whoever he wants because he is creative and productive, and everybody else are just collectivist losers. And of course, there should never, ever, be government intervention in the name of human weaknesses like charity and kindness.

Like Ayn Rand, Rand Paul is a True Believer. Unfettered capitalism is his religion. So it's natural for him to look smug when he says something like that because he really believes in that sociopathic garbage. Unfortunately, it doesn't mean he's stupid, which is a pity.

It really is a shame the Bolsheviks didn't catch Ayn Rand's aristocratic family before they fled the Russian Revolution. :evilfrown:

[Shagbark Hickory]

25. Oh he's plenty smart. It's his supporters that aren't too bright.

[EFerrari]

27. He hired a skin head to be his campaign communications guy.

I'm going with dumb as a bag of door knobs.

[bemildred]

28. He is certainly dumb enough. nt