What Was Ron Paul Smoking When He Had The Ejaculation That Resulted in His Son Rand?

Funny, even though there is an absolute right to counsel in criminal cases that can result in jail/prison time, I’ve never heard of it being interpreted as some unfettered right of any criminal defendant to “come to my house and conscript me” into representing said defendant.*

But, we’re not dealing with reality here.  We’re dealing with yet another pile of worthless political progeny – in this case, Rand Paul:

With regard to the idea of whether you have a right to health care, you have realize what that implies. It’s not an abstraction. I’m a physician. That means you have a right to come to my house and conscript me. It means you believe in slavery. It means that you’re going to enslave not only me, but the janitor at my hospital, the person who cleans my office, the assistants who work in my office, the nurses.

Basically, once you imply a belief in a right to someone’s services — do you have a right to plumbing? Do you have a right to water? Do you have right to food? — you’re basically saying you believe in slavery.

Actually, Rando, you’re asserting that you believe in slavery: a slavery run by a corporate oligarchy that controls access not only to the commodities of food and water but to the ability to work at near-slave wages to pay for obscenely overpriced medical services as well as food and water and…

amd I forgetting something….?

Oh yes…

OIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Wednesday, ConocoPhillips CEO Jim Mulva outraged many on Capitol Hill when he released a statement calling it “un-American” to end subsidies to the Big 5 oil companies — ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips. A press release referencing the subsidies posted on the company’s website was headlined: “ConocoPhillips Highlights Solid Results and Raises Concerns Over Un-AmericanTax Proposals at Annual Meeting of Shareholders.”

This position is a stark reversal from what Mulva said just a few years ago. In 2005, he testified that he agreed with President Bush’s assessment that with “$55 oil, we do not need incentives to oil and gas companies to explore.” Mulva testified, “With respect to oil and gas exploration and production, we do not need incentives.” But with oil prices now hovering around $100 per barrel, Mulva has inexplicably changed his tune.

Yesterday Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) called Mulva’s “un-American” statement “truly outrageous” and said he expected Mulva to apologize. At today’s Senate Finance Committee hearing with the oil CEOs, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) repeatedly pressed Mulva for an apology, but the ConocoPhillips CEO refused to give one, claiming “nothing was intended personally” by his press release. Schumer then pressed the other oil CEOs to state their views:

SCHUMER: I want to ask you a specific question, do you think anyone who advocates cutting these subsidies is un-American? Yes or no, sir. That one we deserve a yes or no answer on, it was your release that said “un-American.” Yes or no?

MULVA: Senator, maybe you can hear me out on this because it’s a very important question.

SCHUMER: Do you apologize for it?

MULVA: Make no mistake, were these proposals enacted…they would place U.S. oil companies like our company…

SCHUMER: Sir, I have limited time. I know your view. Do you consider it American to have another view? Yes or no?

MULVA: Senator, I believe policies under consideration are going to have a very adverse impact with respect to energy policy.

SCHUMER: There are many people who disagree with that. … Do any of you others consider it un-American to be against the subsidiy that you’re for? If you do, raise your hand?

[No one raises their hand.]

SCHUMER: Alright, thank you I appreciate the other four of you not labeling those who are different from you un-American.

Remarkably, after Schumer wrapped up his questioning, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) rushed to Mulva’s defense and echoed his claim that it was “un-American” to end tax breaks for big oil companies.

Hey Rando! Are you going to go after oil criminals’ subsidies?  Isn’t it slavery for multi-national corporations to burst into out bank accounts – with the help of your current employer – and take our money?

Or are you going to try slip a subsidy for yourself into the next tax bill – maybe the aqua buddah subsidy?

Inquiring minds that didn’t emerge from the primordial ooze of a congressman’s sperm want to know.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has scheduled a vote for next week on a bill that would repeal $21 billion in oil subsidies over the next 10 years.

Hey Harry! Prove you’re a Democrat.  Also schedule a vote on a measure to censure aqua buddah boy for declaring that access to healthcare is equal to slavery.

*Yes, I am aware of some instances where judges have commanded lawyers who happened to be in range of their courtrooms when an indigent criminal defendant needed counsel to represent such a defendant – though there is scant difference between that and grabbing people off the street to fill jury pools, which also happens on occasion.

3 Responses to What Was Ron Paul Smoking When He Had The Ejaculation That Resulted in His Son Rand?

  1. Rob says:

    On Rand Paul’s slavery comment, I think he has it backwards. The fact is that licensing requirements in the health care sector create an artificial monopoly. Rand and his fellow doctors have access to monopoly rents because they exclude access by other potential providers through regulation (medical school, licensing, etc.). Unlike other taxpayers, a portion of his “earnings” are a result not of ability or talent but instead are a function of artificial restraints on competition. Thus, it is not the enslavement of doctors that results from universal health care, it is an in-kind tax on monopoly rents that he is currently receiving while he hypocritically rails against regulation (because he is a beneficiary).

  2. Erin says:

    He is ridiculous. If children in this country have a right to an education, are all of our teachers slaves? Is a teacher forced to tutor a 10 year old child who knocks on her door on a Sunday afternoon and needs help with his math homework? No, but he/she can chose to help. If we argue that a person has a right to some level of healthcare, that does NOT require a doctor to provide that service without compensation. (And, let me add, if you don’t want to provide healthcare, then change professions.) Supporters of socialized healthcare are not demanding that healthcare professionals work without compensation. They are demanding that our taxpayors (the 60% who pay taxes) fund that “right.” Since schools are funded at the state level, maybe a better analogy would have been our “right” to send and receive mail. Oh wait, that’s not a right, but it sure is socialized. Postal worker = slave.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: