Asserts “I don’t think Washington should have anything to do with the mining” of coal: “My energy policy is let the marketplace decide through capitalism.”
Such are the joys of listening to a true libertarian unfiltered.
The Tea Party crowd may get GOP voters to go ga ga over the likes of Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul — son of Ron (but not named after Ayn). But that’s only because the “mainstream” GOP is so extreme that they barely noticed how anarchical a pure libertarian is.
Fundamentally, libertarians think the government should be out of the civil rights and regulation business entirely. Environmental harm should be dealt with through private lawsuits. Safety regulations should either be nonexistent or left to local officials. I hope we get more tough interviewers exposing his dangerous views.
Today, ABC News’ Good Morning America today, host George Stephanopoulos pushed Paul on “how far” he would “push” his anti-government views. The answer is pretty damn far, as this video (via TP) reveals:
STEPHANOPOULOS: But you don’t want to get rid of the EPA?
PAUL: No, the thing is is that drilling right now and the problem we’re having now is in international waters and I think there needs to be regulation of that and always has been regulation. What I don’t like from the president’s administration is this sort of, you know, “I’ll put my boot heel on the throat of BP.” I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business. I’ve heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I think it’s part of this sort of blame game society in the sense that it’s always got to be someone’s fault. Instead of the fact that maybe sometimes accidents happen. I mean, we had a mining accident that was very tragic and I’ve met a lot of these miners and their families. They’re very brave people to do a dangerous job. But then we come in and it’s always someone’s fault. Maybe sometimes accidents happen.
Uhh, yeah, accidents happen — to companies run with Recklessness, Arrogance, and Hubris.
We now have a pretty clear understanding that BP was grossly negligent — and still is (see “Should you believe anything BP says?” and “NWF: BP cover-up begins to unravel“). BP has been working overtime to hid the true scale of the undersea gusher from the nation — but for Paul, apparently that really isn’t anybody’s business but the executives of British Petroleum.
Paul’s hypocrisy is staggering. In the worldview of extreme libertarians like Paul — and yes, the phrase is a somewhat redundant — it is government that is to blame for all of our woes. That’s why Paul demands utterly unfettered capitalism, as in this 2010 interview with a local newspaper, The Middlesboro Daily News:
MDN: Regarding energy policy, on your website, you wrote: ‘By subsidizing certain new energies like solar and wind, we distort the marketplace and make it impossible for companies to know what is really the most efficient solution.’ Can you elaborate on your idea of sound energy policy?
RP: I would say that my energy policy is let the marketplace decide through capitalism. So it shouldn’t be me saying: ‘I like wind mills and I hate coal, so therefore I’m going to give all these benefits to wind mills and punish coal.’ That’s kind of what I think the Obama administration is doing. Mine would be more of: let’s step back and let the marketplace decide. Coal’s still pretty cheap and it’s a cheap form of producing electricity. As far as the mining aspect of it, it should be decided in Perry county and Pike county and all these individual counties should make the rules for how the mining occurs. I don’t think Washington should have anything to do with the mining.
Yes, the federal government should have nothing to do with overseeing the mining industry. Now that position just happens to be pretty close to what Bush and Cheney believed and enacted. The result:
- 25 dead, 4 missing in Massey coal mine disaster
- Deadly Record: Massey’s Montcoal mine cited for 3,000 violations, over $2.2 million in fines
It seems like Paul shares the Darwinian worldview of the Massey CEO — Don Blankenship warned West Virginia that he believes in “survival of the fittest”
He blames government for everything, including our energy crisis. But when a self-regulating, self-certifying oil company recklessly causes a tragic catastrophe, he attacks anyone who tries to blame them.
Well, at least he is intellectually consistent — except, of course, when he isn’t (see TP’s Rand Paul opposes government spending “” except for when it benefits him).
Rand Paul is a good face for the Tea Party extemists and the new Republican Party. Let’s hope he continues to get as much airtime as possible with people who know how to ask reasonably tough questions.
Related Post:
- TP: Rand Paul: ‘The Hard Part Of Believing In Freedom’ Is Opposing Ban On Whites-Only Lunch Counters
- Virginia AG mocks dangers of CO2, telling Tea Partiers to hold their breath and make the EPA happy.
- Irony-gate 2: Modern day Tea Partiers outsource denial to Lord Monckton “” a British peer!
- Is BP the Goldman Sachs of Big Oil? CEO Hayward says to fellow executives: “What the hell did we do to deserve this?” Let’s see: How about a spotty safety record, insistence on voluntary ‘trust me’ self-regulation, a drilling plan that ignored key risks, and failure to use best shut-off technology to save a few bucks?
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga
I think we are seeing what’s going to happen with Rand Paul already. The more he speaks out the more he’s going to put his foot in his mouth. I think the Tea Party/Libertarian thing is going to be short lived.
peak Tea Party?
hope so
looking forward to hearing Ron Paul views on AGW for comic relief
Every progressive should launch a lawsuit against Paul, suing him for the few pennies in harm that his personal CO2 emissions do to our personal property. Let’s see if he has the courage of his convictions, and whether he will admit that everyone on earth suing everyone else is not the solution to environmental issues.
Libertarian philosophy has been around for a long time and it will not go away. It will go in and out of favor but it will not die. Fortunately they frequently speak without thinking or they speak authoritatively about things they know very little about. All they really ‘know’ is that we would be better off without government ‘interference’.
So, in the Rand Paul world, we would wait for children to show symptoms of lead poisoning before we would do anything about it. We would wait for the mine to collapse or for a drilling rig to explode before we would look at safety issues.
These people talk about private property and private ownership as if that trumps human life and health concerns. For Libertarians, humans are less important than private property. Once that is understood, it is easy to see how Libertarians would not have much interest in protecting the environment or civil rights.
I would hold that, for all intents and purposes, we had a Libertarian society in the 1800′s. Remember? Child labor, the “company store,” no workplace safety, etc. That’s what Libertarian’s would take us back to. Without regulations corporations (the “marketplace”) will naturally exploit everything and everyone it can for short term gains. We need a strong business environment but not an unregulated one as the Libertarians promote.
It’s worthwhile watching the entire interview with Rand Paul. He’s doing a LOT of back peddling now that he’s had his little victory.
In my view the “climate” is NOT the foe, the climate is a manifestation of the ignorance and incomplete world view of capitalism and corporate philosophy. Trying to mitigate climate change without addressing the fact that there is NO mandate for capitalism and corporations to endorse the long term survivability of humanity in capitalist/corporate, C&C, decisions is hopeless. Humanity must convince, or mandate C&C to work in common with humanities long term survivability… If so,I believe we might surprise ourselves.
Like wise, the fight against global climatic disruption is not a all out war with capitalism and corporate business. On the contrary, both could prosper beyond their wildest expectations in a WW III approach to humanities long term survivability. Humanity requires the success of both to have a chance in hell of success. However, C&C must acknowledge humanities rights to long term survivability. Humanity cannot survive without C&C, However C&C cannot survive without HUMANITY. Define the problem, solutions follow…
There is an interesting story on BBC re Heartland deniers’ conference- reading between the lines, I’m wondering if a few of the more rational deniers may have some self doubts and second thoughts as the land, ocean and satellite data keeps getting worse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8694544.stm
Bill Waterhouse
by iPod
Libertarians are caught between a rock and hard spot on global warming/climate change and environmental and health & safety issues in general.
It’s pretty easy to see why they tend to deny the science need for regulation since they have only three options:
1) Accept the science and the need for international cooperation and regulation to address the problem, but retain their political and economic ideology intact. Result: head explodes.
2) Accept the science and regulation and alter the ideology or ditch it entirely. Very, very hard to do.
3) Reject the science and regulation and retain the ideology unaltered. The path of least resistance.
I like his idea of legalizing marijuana but that’s about it.
Now if he means getting rid of *all* government energy subsidies, including the massive ones for oil and coal and internal combustion engines, and having an *actual* free energy market, shaped by the *actual* cost of resources, that would be a better program for clean energy than anything Bush and Cheney ever put forward. Not that such a program could ever be put into effect in the real world.
Oh, yes, the parents sue *after* the kid dies, and as long as industry’s willing to pay the price of lawsuits, lead paint gets sold.
I wonder if he supports the government regulation of doctors? He’s a licensed eye surgeon, does he think I should be able to practice surgery without training and licensing, as long as I’m willing to be bankrupted by the lawsuits that would surely follow?
Ron and Rand Paul have a huge appeal to people concerned about the corruption in government and the banking cartel. Unfortunately, the economy is so FUBARed that a lot of people will vote for them solely on those issues, there’s a sense of desperation out there.
I believe if people were aware of the ramifications of the Libertarian’s views on the environment and personal safety, they wold run from them as fast as possible.
Libertarians are charmingly romantic if they’re kept a safe distance away from actual policy creation and the operation of civil society. There’s an appealing simplicity and faith in human nature in Libertarianism, but neither the simplicity nor the faith actually map successfully onto the real world of human affairs.
I have a good friend who considers himself a Libertarian. He’s also a private pilot. One day while listening to him ranting softly about taxation I asked him whether he thought the renewal fee for his and all his fellow GA pilots’ license fees covered all of the navigation aids, subsidized general aviation facilities and the like which he enjoyed the use of. Of course, the answer could only be “no.” As I said to him, I do not resent a portion of my taxes flowing into his activities because as a societal resource general aviation largely justifies itself. But, by his philosophy, he should be flying strictly by the seat of his pants and landing in such pastures as are available, presumably to be charged on the spot by the owner.
I think every self-identifying tea party member or libertarian needs to be asked how they feel about child labor laws. I wonder if they would support eliminating this government intrusion on business.
Ummm…. you can’t lead a horse to water… that’s just common sense. and…. there’s more than one way to skin a cat. That’s what she said.
Vote Rand Paul – National Teabagger Candidate.
I think the Government should stop building roads. We all, or at least know someone who owns an SUV. Also, we need to legalize cannibalism to deal with unemployment, population growth, and welfare recipients.
videos of Rachel Maddow: http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2010/05/rachel-maddow-discusses-fallout-over.html#comments
My Suggestion (to CAP and Rachel Maddow)
I can’t wait for Rachel to get more into the climate change and energy issues. She’s one of the very few people in the media that can get to the bottom of things with folks and doesn’t put up with BS. Bravo to Rachel!!
That said, to you scientists, please make sure that someone offers to help Rachel and her team deeply understand global warming before she has to have those great conversations with the confusers and the confused on her show. It would be great to avoid the sort of thing that happened with Thomas Friedman in the early days, when, after writing so well about his deep concern about climate change, he was asked (I think it was on Letterman?) about how it actually worked, and his answer made it clear that he didn’t actually get it.
So, my plea here is for two things, quick:
* For Rachel to get into climate change asap, on her show, as a top priority, and for her to “do her thing” as only she can do, taking no prisoners.
* But first, for her to get help from a few folks to make sure that she fully “gets it” in terms of how climate change works, valid answers to the most frequent confusions, and so forth.
As Bob Dylan said, “I’ll know my song well before I start singing”, or something like that.
(Refer to his amazing, incomparable, insightful “A Hard Rain’s a-Gonna Fall”)
Cheers,
Jeff
Joe wrote: “Such are the joys of listening to a true libertarian unfiltered.”
If by “true libertarian” you mean a bought-and-paid-for corporate stooge spouting pseudo-ideological drivel to bamboozle weak-minded, ignorant, mean-spirited Ditto-Heads into voting for him, then yes.
If you mean to suggest that Rand Paul has any commitment to any principles at all, “libertarian” or otherwise, other than his own enrichment and aggrandizement in the lucrative role of a corporate tool, then no.
I see this guy as just another Republican, marinated in oil, and infatuated with anything black that can be burned.
The only difference between Paul and the rest of his party is that he speaks spontaneously. Inhofe and Murkowski had their talking points straight before they blocked raising oil company liability limits. Incredibly, they said it was for the benefit of the little guy, or the smaller oil companies. Even more incredibly, some people appear to have believed them.
Rand Paul doesn’t want to subsidize solar and wind power. Someone should ask him if we should drop all of the subsidies to fossil fuel production and use as well.
Re the link provided by Bill Waterhouse at #7 (off-topic, I know), there’s a “money quote” in there:
—
Even some right-wingers agreed the need to review the language of scam and fraud. Professor Roy Spencer, for instance, is a climate sceptic scientist from the University of Alabama in Huntsville.
But when I asked him about the future of Professor Phil Jones, the man of the heart of the UEA e-mail affair, he said he had some sympathy.
“He says he’s not very organised. I’m not very organised myself,” said Professor Spencer. “If you asked me to find original data from 20 years ago I’d have great difficulty too.
“We just didn’t realise in those days how important and controversial this would all become – now it would just all be stored on computer. Phil Jones has been looking at climate records for a very long time. Frankly our data set agrees with his, so unless we are all making the same mistake we’re not likely to find out anything new from the data anyway.”
—
Spencer says his dataset agrees with Phil Jones’ dataset. Of course, we already know that it does, but the point is that he actually said so, to a reporter.
George Bush and Dick Cheney took office in 2001 and Cheney was heading some energy conferences, all with carbon fuel energy producers and no environmentalists. Some environmental group dumped a truck load of coal in front of Dick Cheney’s house. (Apparently at the Vice-Presidents residence which is at some military-scientific base so I don’t know how it all worked out)
Wouldn’t it also be appropiate to take a few hundred barrels of that BP oil from the Gulf and dump it on Rands doorstep? Exactly how are few million gallons of oil in someones fishing, recreation and boating waters different from a few hundred barrels of oil on the lawn of some completely disconnected from reality politician?
After all, that’s what the tea party in Boston was all about, making peoples beefs getting heard. Maybe not a pie to the face, but a bucket of oil to the suit.
Thanks for informing me about his guy.
I think it’s incorrect to conflate Libertarianism with Anarchism. This lengthy exposition explains the difference in detail. Figure 5 provides a concise visual summary.
My comment: Frankly, Rand Paul sounds even more stupid than libertarian. (I’m not going to get into, in this comment, whether that’s a tautology.) Anyone who seriously thinks that every county could possibly come up with rules for regulating every dangerous industry that operates within their borders, well, that person doesn’t in fact think.
Just for one small example.
What Rand is doing here is backtracking because all hell is breaking loose in these under-regulated industries.
Without their support of legalizing marijuana there would be no libertarian party (to bother speaking about except as some abstract thing).
Not only are we suffocating in its CO2, but we are drowning in its back goo!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/gulf-oil-spill
Its going to be years before this lot is clean. Will we see more of these before this oil goes away. What a panic mess were dug ourselves in to.
To be fair, not all libertarians are the same. THIS libertarian understands that we are still social creatures, and likes that our roads, for example, are socialized. A true libertarian would not have been okay with the drilling in the first place, and would recognize that BP must be ABLE to be responsible for their own actions. THIS libertarian finds nothing at all unAmerican about bieng all over BP for this. THIS libertarian takes them to task for lying, for using solvents to try to bury the oil under the surface so they woudln’t have to clean it up, for being in a rush, which caused the explosions and loss of life in the first place, and for trying to dodge responsibility. THIS libertarian doesn’t trust them as far as their rig can be tossed.
A true libertarian isn’t pro-life, he’s pro-choice, and doesn’t think the government has any business telling people what to do with their personal lives.
This libertarian wouldn’t vote for that fanatic nutcase Rand Paul under any circumstance.
Rand Paul needs to understand a few things:
First, pricing CO2 emissions at zero is effectively a subsidy for fossil fuels. So I hope we would be for a gradually increasing price (via cap&trade or whatever). Then we can eliminate all the subsidies including ones for nuclear, oil, gas and solar and wind and see what technology wins out. If the carbon price is set to accomplish what we need to do, renewables would inevitably win out.
Second, does he seriously think that regulating multi-national companies like coal & oil at the COUNTY level is a good idea? First, the companies would have to spend huge amounts of $ to ensure they meet each county’s regulations. Also, does he think the COUNTY has expertise and time and people to regulate this kind of stuff? Way inefficient for both gov. and industry.
Here’s a new video that was posted six hours ago:
Why Dummies Can’t Build a Tea Party Future
I think Rand Paul is great – great for the Democrats and progressives in general. The more he talks, the more people will realize that the Republican Party (a.k.a. the Tea Party) is filled with crackpots and extremists.
Yes, he does seem far more concerned with the liberty of big business than the liberty of my person. I think the following was used by one of your regular commenters.
“Government of the people, for the corporation, by the corporation.”
Or in the language of libitarians “Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose”. Well BP has hit the noses of all gulf residents.
What a pompous creep. Let the folks in Pike and Perry County decide? I guess the “mouth of Sauron” wants to go back to the days when the coal companies gave their workers the choice of dying from starvation, a mining accident, or perhaps if they were lucky, black lung disease. Libertarian or Anarchist – you decide. What was that famous quote about anarchists from our last populist uprising? They are always trying to remake the garden of eden with a can of weed killer in hand (something like that).
@Jeff Huggins (#18):
You got the line right. I took a look at the lyrics (metrolyrics-dot-com*) and decided part of the last verse is relevant enough to post.
* They’re free of pop-up ads.