Rand Paul

Rand Paul Misrepresents Statements from GOP 'Whistleblower' to Attack Hillary Clinton

Upon news that Republicans altered emails from government officials to make it appear that the State Department was engaged in a cover-up of the attack in Benghazi, Sen. Rand Paul attempted to revive the non-scandal in his column for the Washington Times.

Paul writes that “[Gregory] Hicks testified that he spoke with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on the night of the attack and that a special-forces unit was stopped from deploying.”

I think Mr. Obama has failed that test of power. From the cover-up in Benghazi to letting the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) target the Tea Party to First and Fourth Amendment violations in obtaining records from the press, Mr. Obama has shown disregard for the Bill of Rights and his responsibilities as commander in chief.

The handling of the tragedy in Benghazi continues to raise more questions than it produces answers. The White House’s original story, that no one was told to “stand down” on the night of the attack, was contradicted last week by Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens‘ deputy, Gregory Hicks. Mr. Hicks testified that he spoke with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on the night of the attack and that a special-forces unit was stopped from deploying.

But Hicks actually testified that the order came from Special Operations Command Africa, not the State Department or anyone in the Obama administration, and that the security team in question was not organized to intervene in the attack but to secure the airport for evacuation.

PolitiFact explains:

But Hicks’ testimony and a State Department review board report show it was clear the “people that were getting killed” were already dead when the security team was ready to go.

…

“We determined that we needed to send a second team from Tripoli to secure the airport for the withdrawal of our personnel from Benghazi after the mortar attack,” he said.

…

During Hicks’ testimony last week, Rep. Robin Kelly, D-Ill., read from a Defense Department press release explaining the security team was directed to stay in Tripoli because those in Benghazi “had shifted to evacuation.”

"We continue to believe that there was nothing this group could have done had they arrived in Benghazi, and they performed superbly in Tripoli," she read. "In fact, when the first aircraft arrived back in Tripoli, these four played a key role in receiving, treating and moving the wounded."

…

But it’s clear from Hicks’ testimony that four Americans "getting killed" in Benghazi were already dead when the decision was made to keep the special forces team in Tripoli. The mortar attack was over. A Defense Department drone watched overhead in Benghazi as Libyan militia members helped Americans get to the airport.
Brian Tashman's blog

Ted Cruz Mocks His GOP Colleagues, Calls Newtown Families 'Props' and Takes Credit for Blocking Background Checks

In remarks to a Tea Party group, Sen. Ted Cruz again showed why he's a political liability for the GOP.
Josh Glasstetter's blog Read more

Right Wing Leftovers - 4/23/13

  • Glenn Beck continues his efforts to expose the "disinformation campaign" surrounding the Boston Marathon bombing cover-up.

  • Who is running Mark Sanford's campaign and thought that this was a good way of handling his trespassing story?

  • CNN is bringing back "Crossfire" and is apparently considering Newt Gingrich for one of the slots. Sounds like a hit.

  • Trinity Broadcasting Network claims that it is responsible for 36 million conversions to Christ in the past 40 years.

  • Bryan Fischer seems to have caught the attention of the Anti-Defamation League but won't be issuing any sort of apology.

  • Finally, after leading a filibuster in protest over the possible use of drones on US soil, Sen. Rand Paul now says that he would have supported the use of drones in the search for the Boston Marathon bombers.
Kyle Mantyla's blog

Right Wing Round-Up - 4/12/13

Kyle Mantyla's blog

As Washington Begins Debate on Gun Violence Bills, National Responses Vary

Thu, 04/11/2013 - 11:15am — Kyler
As the U.S. Senate prepares to consider a package of gun violence prevention proposals this week, the current debate on the role of guns in society has led to a variety of legislative responses in D.C. and across the nation.
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
PFAW
Read more

Right Wing Round-Up - 4/10/13

Kyle Mantyla's blog

Right Wing Leftovers - 4/10/13

  • It looks like the Religious Right is threatening to leave the GOP ... again.

  • Happy Anniversary, David Barton.

  • Sen. Rand Paul says America needs a “spiritual cleansing of the people.”  If we were like the Religious Right, we'd freak out because that kind of sounds like "ethnic cleansing" and start warning that Paul wants to kill all non-Christians.

  • Apparently Rush Limbaugh thinks "the onus is on the black population" to realize the GOP is not racist.

  • Finally, Rick Scarborough says "the goal of Obamacare has always been to drive everyone into a single-payer, government system.  Once that goal is achieved – and it is about to be achieved – Big Brother Government will control every citizen who wills to live and find medical care."
Kyle Mantyla's blog

Rand Paul Raising Money for Right-of-NRA Gun Group

PFAW’s recent Right Wing Watch in Focus report on opposition to more effective regulation of guns noted that promoting conspiracy theories is a primary strategy used by extremists to block common sense policies.  New evidence comes in the form of a recent email from Sen. Rand Paul raising money for the National Association for Gun Rights, a group that is so far out there it thinks the National Rifle Association has gone soft.

Rand Paul’s letter uses inflammatory rhetoric to push the conspiracy theory that registration of guns and requiring background checks for gun purposes – which is supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans, including gun owners – is just a prelude to “confiscation” by the “gun-grabbers.”

And make no mistake, the gun-grabbers’ TRUE motives behind gun registration is always the same -- outright gun CONFISCATION, and to do that they must first register every gun and gun owner.

Another letter Paul signed for the group argues that President Obama is working to empower United Nations bureaucrats to confiscate Americans’ guns:

I don't know about you, but watching anti-American globalists plot against our Constitution makes me sick.

PFAW’s report on opposition to addressing gun violence notes that there are real consequences to the promotion of conspiracy theories by elected officials:

It is also true that the failure to challenge extremist and dishonest rhetoric can lead to damaging consequences for our common public life.  The promotion of false conspiracy theories, the claims by public figures that their political opponents are out to destroy freedom and America itself, and the false equation of sensible, broadly supported laws with the elimination of the rights of hunters and other gun owners, can foster a dangerous extremism, including threats of violence.

One of Rand Paul’s letters refers to Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s bill restricting ownership of assault weapons as “the effective END of the Second Amendment in America.”

I can hardly even think about what a DISASTER for our country it would be should President Obama, Senator Feinstein and their anti-gun pals succeed in ramming this monstrosity down our throats.

An earlier alert from the National Association for Gun Rights was labeled: “Obama declares war.”

Why is Rand Paul raising money for these guys?

Peter Montgomery's blog

Right Wing Leftovers - 3/29/13

  • Wouldn't cutting off funding for an anti-bullying program that critics say "bullies Christians and conservatives" itself be a form of bullying?

  • CBN "journalist" David Brody interviewed Sen. Rand Paul.  Take one guess what he asked him about.

  • We were wondering how long it would take the Right to get worked up about the plot of the new "Bioshock Infinite" game.

  • "Gay Patriot" Bruce Carroll has decided not to challenge Sen. Lindsey Graham.

  • Finally, FRC prays that the Supreme Court will uphold the traditional definition of marriage and that "this ruling [will] be the Waterloo for same-sex marriage!"
Kyle Mantyla's blog

Joseph Farah on His Friendship with Rand Paul and Why Ron Paul Isn't A Christian

Speaking to End Times radio broadcaster Jan Markell, WorldNetDaily editor and birther leader Joseph Farah described his recent tour of Israel with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), which was organized by the American Family Association and included a number of Religious Right activists.

Farah described a cozy relationship with Paul, whose staff he says reached out to him to come on the trip. But Farah did not have kind words for the senator’s father, former congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul, whom he claimed is not a real Christian.

“Ron Paul is hardly a friend to Israel and I don’t think that he is a Christian,” Farah said. “I don’t think he has a Christian worldview.”

Farah said that unlike his father, Rand Paul “understands the threat that the Muslim world holds not only against Israel but against us.” He added that he and the senator prayed together at the Western Wall and that the senator had a “spiritual journey” while in Israel.

I had the privilege of traveling to Israel with Rand Paul and spending a lot of time with him there. I was asked to go on the tour; his staff asked me to come on the tour because I think they wanted to hear the Israel point of view from an Arab-American journalist as opposed to just Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders and so forth and so I was able to do that. I also was very impressed with the fact that Rand Paul is not his father; I want to say that unequivocally.

I had many, many problems with Ron Paul. I do believe that Ron Paul is hardly a friend to Israel and I don’t think that he is a Christian; I don’t think he has a Christian worldview. Now, I admire Ron Paul’s economic policies, there were many things that he did throughout his career that I think were terrific. Rand Paul to me, I’m not endorsing him, I’m just telling you what I know and what I got to know from personal experience with him, is a believer. He went to Israel and he had a spiritual journey there that was very, very meaningful to him. I got to pray with him at the Western Wall. We went to visit all of the holy sites in Israel. It was with his wife and younger children, it was a moving experience for them, an unforgettable, life-changing kind of experience.

I got to grill him pretty intensively. I can sincerely say that I believe he thinks Israel is at least one of our best friends in the world if not our best friend. That’s a big, big difference from his father. He understands the threat that the Muslim world holds not only against Israel but against us. That’s a big difference from what his father said and understood.

And in case we had forgotten what a fervent conspiracy theorist Farah is, earlier in the show he told Markell that the country may soon become a dictatorship.

Markell: Do you think America is headed for a dictatorship? If so, what do you tell Christians who are watching their country morph into something unrecognizable?

Farah: I do believe we’re headed in that direction. Do I believe it’s irreversible? Absolutely not. I cling to 2 Chronicles 7:14; I cling to the idea that there can be a real revival in this country; I cling to the idea that Christians are going to awaken to what’s going on around them; and I cling to the idea that the Holy Spirit can move at any time and help us save ourselves from that terrible outcome. However, there’s no question that we’re moving closer and closer to tyranny, police state kinds of conditions. We’re seeing evidence all the time, the gun confiscation mania is just one of many examples.
Brian Tashman's blog

Phyllis Schlafly Implores Tea Partiers to 'Save America' From Karl Rove, Federal Takeover of Toddlers

The Religious Right and the Tea Party have not exactly been responding well to GOP strategist Karl Rove’s plan to spend big money bringing down unelectable Tea Party candidates in primaries or to RNC chairman Reince Priebus’ suggestion that the party make over its messaging.

Add to the list of right-wing discontents Eagle Forum’s Phyllis Schlafly, who this week sent out a six-page fundraising appeal urging supporters to “join together to save America” from Rove and his fellow “Establishment bullies.”

Schlafly blames Rove and the “Establishment” for every Republican president or presidential candidate since Reagan, all of whom she labels “RINOs.” But she sees hope for the “emergence of a new Reagan Republican Party” in the persons of senators Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Mike Lee, and former senator Jim DeMint.

As for the rest of the party, “Establishment Members of  Congress are doing nothing to stop Obama’s grab to put all 2 to 5 year-olds under federal control,” she warns.

Excerpts from the letter are below. All emphases are in the original.

Dear Fellow American,

The battle for control of the Republican Party has begun and I am asking you to answer the call to action!

The Establishment Republicans want to lead the Party down the road of big-government spending and globalist entanglements by selecting our nominees, deciding what issues they talk about, and controlling all the political money.

They want grassroots conservatives and the Tea Parties to shut up and just do what they are told. The future of America depends on how you and I respond to this challenge.

…

Let me tell you where we are in this battle, and how fierce it has already become. I need your help!

After Ronald Reagan’s two terms were over, the Establishment operatives (sometimes called RINOs – “Republicans In Name Only,” or country-club Republicans, or “moderates”), grabbed control of the Republican Party and gave us a series of losers as presidential candidates such as Bob Dole and John McCain.

And don’t forget their choices of George H.W. Bush (who betrayed his “no new taxes, read my lips” promise), and George W. Bush who gave us phony “compassionate” conservatism (which really meant big deficit spending) and even tried to put the U.S. in an open-borders North American Union.

The Establishment and Karl Rove even supported Gerald Ford against Ronald Reagan in 1976.

We can’t afford to let that crowd pick our candidates again. But Rove now thinks he should be the “decider” of which primary candidates are “electable” and which are “unelectable.”

Please vote NO on his dreadful scheme.
…

We must sound the alarm and rally activists from Alaska to Florida about the embarrassment that Karl Rove and his big-government allies – posing as “moderates” – are to the Republican Party.

The Establishment is trying to purge the Tea Party conservatives from the Republican Party. Let’s be clear – we welcome the Tea Partiers.

We must show the nation that Republicans – true conservatives – don’t want Karl Rove, or any Establishment guru to run the Republican Party off a cliff.

…

Fortunately, we are seeing an emergence of a new Reagan Republican Party. In 2010 and 2012, Republicans elected some real conservatives to the Senate after defeating Establishment candidates in the primaries: Rand Paul in Kentucky (who defeated Mitch McConnell’s choice), Ted Cruz in Texas (who defeated a fabulously wealthy Establishment candidate), and Marco Rubio in Florida (who defeated Establishment candidate Florida Governor Crist, who then showed his true colors and became a Democrat).

Jim DeMint (now with Heritage) and Mike Lee of Utah were two other successful non-Establishment Republican Senators. It’s time for the grassroots to take control of the Republican Party away from the elitists who want to choose our candidates, tell them what to say, and how to vote.

Our litmus test for Republican primary candidates should be: “Are you a Karl Rove candidate?”

…

The Establishment is doing nothing to stop Obama from his announced plan to promote a Zero Nuclear World by cutting our nuclear missile force and refusing to modernize our anti-missile system.

The Establishment is doing nothing to stop Obama from taking over the curriculum of our public school system – a plan that is unwanted by Americans, illegal and unconstitutional. Establishment Members of  Congress are doing nothing to stop Obama’s grab to put all 2 to 5 year-olds under federal control through federal daycare, early childhood education, Pre-K, and mandatory all-day Kindergarten.

…

We absolutely must join together and save America. Time is running out. Eagle Forum is ready to lead the way, but we need your active support.

Please return your Conservative Activist Pledge right away. The conservative grassroots must rally and fight back.

And please, make the very most generous donation to Eagle Forum you possibly can. We’ve beaten Establishment bullies in the past, and with your help we will do it again!

Faithfully,

Phyllis Schlafly
 

Miranda Blue's blog

Rand Paul's Abortion Exceptions Are Not Really Exceptions

Sen. Rand Paul’s chief of staff Doug Stafford appears to be scrambling to explain the Senator’s recent comments during a CNN interview where he said there would be “thousands of exceptions” to his “Life at Conception Act,” a federal personhood bill that would ban all abortion by granting legal status to embryos. He added that “each individual case would have to be addressed” and that there will “be a lot of complicated things the law may not ultimately be able to address in the early stages of pregnancy that would have to be part of what occurs between the physician and the woman and the family.”

Understandably, many people interpreted his comments to mean that the government shouldn’t be intruding on the medical decisions that are unique to each woman, or the opposite of what his sweeping anti-choice law would do.

But in an interview with LifeSiteNews, Stafford stressed that Paul’s mention of “thousands of exceptions” only “meant that a singular exception to save the life of the mother would likely cover thousands of individual cases.”

So the “thousands of exceptions” was only really one exception.

And when Paul said that women, their doctord and their families would be free from government interference during the early stage of the pregnancy, Stafford said that Paul was only referring to emergency contraception that prevents fertilization.

Emergency contraception, of course, only works up to 120 hours after sexual intercourse.

Stafford noted that such methods won’t be covered by the law because “it is not practically possible to legislate things like the morning after pill or other emergency contraception,” while stressing that Paul still seeks to ban RU-486.

Some pro-life activists were left scratching their heads after a recent interview Senator Rand Paul did on Wolf Blitzer’s CNN show “The Situation Room,” in which the senator seemed to say he supported “thousands of exceptions” to his general belief that abortion should be illegal. But Paul spokesman Doug Stafford told LifeSiteNews.com in an interview on Wednesday that the senator’s remarks were misunderstood, reiterating that Paul is staunchly pro-life.

…

After the interview, the Atlantic Wire ran a story with the headline “Rand Paul Isn’t 100% Pro-life Anymore,” arguing that the language Paul used in his answer sounded remarkably similar to pro-choice rhetoric claiming abortion should always be a private matter between a woman and her doctor.

But Paul’s chief of staff, Doug Stafford, said the Atlantic got it wrong.

Paul “was speaking medically,” Stafford said.

By “thousands of exceptions,” Stafford told LifeSiteNews.com, Paul meant that a singular exception to save the life of the mother would likely cover thousands of individual cases – for example, ectopic pregnancies or others that directly threaten the mother’s life.

The senator is not in favor of the more nebulous “health of the mother” exception that pro-life advocates argue can be applied to any woman facing an unwanted pregnancy.

But what about Paul’s statement that the Life at Conception Act may not be able to address early abortions? That, too, was a misunderstanding, according to Stafford. He said the senator was talking about things like emergency contraception pills, which may cause very early abortions, but since they contain the exact same drugs used in standard birth control pills, the senator believes they will be nearly impossible to ban.

Senator Paul “has always said it is not practically possible to legislate things like the morning after pill or other emergency contraception,” Stafford said. “It simply isn't possible to do so. The law will likely never be able to reach that.”

“You can legislate abortifacients like RU-486, and he would,” he said. “But you can’t legislatively ban artificial estrogen and progesterone.”
Brian Tashman's blog

Right Wing Leftovers - 3/20/13

  • LiveAction bizarrely claims that Steven Crowder's Ashley Judd rape joke at CPAC "never happened." 

  • Matt Barber blasts Pastor Rob Bell's "apostasy" for supporting marriage equality.

  • Bryan Fischer says "same-sex 'marriage' fails to satisfy even the companionship purpose for this most sacred of relationships."

  • Keep in mind that no matter how crazy Glenn Beck gets, Sen. Rand Paul will continue to regularly appear on his program.

  • And so will Gov. Rick Perry.
Kyle Mantyla's blog

Beck: Sen. Paul's Filibuster Is the Birth of 'a Historic Movement'

It is no secret that Glenn Beck fancies himself as some sort of historical soothsayer capable of seeing parallels between the past and what is happening today in order to make predictions about the future.  

On last night's program, Beck proclaimed that Sen. Rand Paul's filibuster last week the modern day equivalent of Sen. Charles Sumner's 1856 "Crime against Kansas" speech, which resulted in him nearly being beaten to death on the Senate floor. Likening the criticism Paul received from Senators like Lindsey Graham and John McCain to the savage beating Sumner received, Beck went on to declare that just as the Republican Party went from nonexistence in 1854 to capturing control of Congress and the White House by 1860, Paul's filibuster would one day be seen by future historians as a watershed moment and predicting that they "will look back in a hundred years and say 'this speech ignited a global freedom movement'" that eventually won the White House.

"You were here to hear the heartbeat when the Tea Party started," Beck declared. "And last week, you witnessed the birth":

Kyle Mantyla's blog

Meet the Extremists Who Are Holding Up Gun Violence Prevention Reforms

Here at Right Wing Watch, we’ve been closely following the right-wing freak-out over President Obama’s proposed gun violence prevention reforms. The president’s proposals, which include requiring background checks on all gun sales and restricting access to certain assault weapons aren’t exactly radical -- about three-quarters of Americans support them. But right-wing politicians and organizations are going off the rails in opposition, claiming that the president wants to set up gulags and gas chambers in order to bring about the “complete destruction of Western civilization”; that he is preparing the military to “fire on American citizens” and kill hundreds of thousands; that he using Obamacare to collect information on gun owners; and he is instigating a race war pitting “Christian, heterosexual white haves” against “black Muslim and/or atheist…have-nots.”

Stunningly, this small, extreme faction has for many years succeeded at defeating gun violence prevention efforts at the federal level. A new report from Right Wing Watch’s Peter Montgomery takes a closer look at the activists and groups who are holding up federal gun violence reform, how they have succeeded, and how they can be defeated. Peter writes:

While the White House, governors, Congress and other public officials grapple with policy responses to last month’s mass shooting at a Connecticut elementary school, many Americans wonder whether the massacre of young children will provide momentum for more effective laws that previous killing sprees – even one that gravely wounded a member of Congress – have not.

Some assume, wrongly, that nothing can be done.  Politicians’ fear of the $200+ million National Rifle Association (NRA) is generally cited as the reason for weak gun laws that undermine law enforcement and put citizens at higher risk from gun crimes.  The power of the NRA to determine the outcome of elections may well be more myth than reality, but even the perception of such power can give the group tremendous political muscle, along with its aggressive lobbying and strong-arm political tactics.

The NRA is not alone in attempting to prevent effective regulation of guns and promoting reckless policies that leave Americans vulnerable to crime.  Its efforts are supported by the same kind of coalition that undermines the nation’s ability to solve a wide range of problems.  Corporations, right-wing ideologues, and Religious Right leaders work together to misinform Americans, generate unfounded fears, and prevent passage of broadly supported solutions.
Understanding the extremism and dishonesty at the heart of right-wing obstructionism is crucial to overcoming it.

You can read the full report, The Lobby Against Common Sense: The Right’s Campaign Against Gun Violence Reform and How We Can Defeat It, here.

Miranda Blue's blog

Right Wing Round-Up - 1/29/13

Brian Tashman's blog

Right Wing Leftovers - 1/24/13

  • The Christian conservative magazine WORLD notes that while abortion is illegal in South Korea, abortion rates there are “double the U.S. rate.” As we’ve said before, abortion rates tend to be higher in countries where it is criminalized. 
  • Tomorrow, Rick Santorum, Rand Paul and Tony Perkins will speak at the March for Life [PDF], while Speaker John Boehner will send in a video message. 
  • New Mexico Republicans want to prosecute rape survivors who terminate the pregnancy with a felony charge of “tampering with evidence.” 
  • Concerned Women for America claims that feminism has left women “at the mercy of sexually liberated men.” 
  • A very delusional Joseph Farah maintains that Obama “got re-elected because there was virtually no opposition.” 
  • If you ever wanted to learn how to literally wrestle a demon and evade their “fiery darts,” here’s your chance.
Brian Tashman's blog

Rand Paul Says Obama's Inaugural Address Alluded to Hugo Chavez

While speaking to Iowa-based conservative radio host Steve Deace, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said that President Obama’s inauguration speech reminded him of Hugo Chavez. The potential presidential candidate claimed that unlike Obama, he would have included “reverence for the Constitution [and] reverence for our Creator” in his inaugural address, noting that while Obama “didn’t actually literally refer to Chavez” he “referred to a lot of liberal policies.”

Deace: If that was you up on that podium taking the oath of office, what would your inaugural address sound like and how would it contrast or differ from what the President had to say yesterday?

Paul: Well instead of Hugo Chavez you might hear references to Madison and Jefferson. I know he didn’t actually literally refer to Chavez but he referred to a lot of liberal policies. If it were me on that stage what you would hear is reference and reverence for the Constitution, reverence for our Creator and that all of our liberty comes and is endowed by our Creator and reverence for the rule of law. I think what you’d find is that I would talk about how this country can grow again and how we can prosper if we get back to and believe in the fundamentals upon which our country was founded.

Maybe Paul missed Obama’s speech or is simply dishonest, as the very beginning of Obama’s speech includes references to the Constitution, the Creator and the rule of law:

Each time we gather to inaugurate a president, we bear witness to the enduring strength of our Constitution. We affirm the promise of our democracy. We recall that what binds this nation together is not the colors of our skin or the tenets of our faith or the origins of our names. What makes us exceptional – what makes us American – is our allegiance to an idea, articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Today we continue a never-ending journey, to bridge the meaning of those words with the realities of our time. For history tells us that while these truths may be self-evident, they have never been self-executing; that while freedom is a gift from God, it must be secured by His people here on Earth. The patriots of 1776 did not fight to replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of a few or the rule of a mob. They gave to us a Republic, a government of, and by, and for the people, entrusting each generation to keep safe our founding creed.
Brian Tashman's blog

Rand Paul Pushes Conspiracy Theory that Obamacare 'Databanks' Gather Information on Gun Owners

The right-wing group Gun Owners of America has for the past few years been pushing the debunked conspiracy theory that the health care reform law will be used to collect information on gun owners, information that will later be used as part of a gun-confiscation scheme.

Speaking with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins yesterday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) echoed that theory, claiming that President Obama’s new executive actions have “language in there talking about doctors being required to report on patients and ask patients if they own guns or not.”

He warned that President Obama’s “going to use Obamacare apparently to have doctors informing on their patients to whether or not they have guns” and will put the information into “government databanks.” He added: “I’m very much opposed to this kind of information going into government databanks because I fear that the time will come when this data will be misused.”

Paul: He’s going to use Obamacare apparently to have doctors informing on their patients to whether or not they have guns.

Perkins: I mean, that’s crazy.

Paul: How exactly he’s going to make this work, I don’t know, but there is language in there talking about doctors being required to report on patients and ask patients if they own guns or not.

Perkins: I read that and I was just flabbergasted…. Senator, not everybody may know this but you’re also a physician so I think you have probably a pretty different perspective on that, not just as a patient but as a doctor. I mean do you want to ask, how are you feeling, got a little fever and by the way how many guns do you have? I mean, how do you work that into the conversation?

Paul: The whole idea that the government is going to be in between you and your doctor, that the doctor-patient relationship which is a very private relationship. In fact it’s part of our Hippocratic Oath that if you come to me and see me and I’m treating you for problems which often can become personal problems and private problems would you want me going down to the grocery store and saying, I just saw so-and-so and he’s got this. You know it’s really not the kind of relationship you want with your patients.

Same way would you want your government to know and does your government need to know what medications you take, whether you own guns. I’m very much opposed to this kind of information going into government databanks because I fear that the time will come when this data will be misused.

Paul’s interpretation of the executive action is, of course, completely off-base, as are his claims about Obamacare.

The White House statement does discuss having doctors talk to patients about gun safety if someone in the home has mental health issues, rebutting the rumor that Obamacare prohibits doctors from asking about gun ownership.

Contrary to Paul’s claims, this neither “requires” doctors to ask patients about gun ownership nor makes doctors give government “databanks” information on who owns guns. A plain reading of the law finds that it explicitly prohibits such data collection:

‘‘(c) PROTECTION OF SECOND AMENDMENT GUN RIGHTS.—

‘‘(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS.— A wellness and health promotion activity implemented under subsection (a)(1)(D) may not require the disclosure or collection of any information relating to—

‘‘(A) the presence or storage of a lawfully possessed firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property of an individual; or

‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition by an individual.

‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the collection of any information relating to— ‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition;

‘‘(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or

‘‘(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition.

‘‘(3) LIMITATION ON DATABASES OR DATABANKS.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used to maintain records of individual ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition.

‘‘(4) LIMITATION ON DETERMINATION OF PREMIUM RATES OR ELIGIBILITY FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.— A premium rate may not be increased, health insurance coverage may not be denied, and a discount, rebate, or reward offered for participation in a wellness program may not be reduced or withheld under any health benefit plan issued pursuant to or in accordance with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act on the basis of, or on reliance upon—

‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition; or

‘‘(B) the lawful use or storage of a firearm or ammunition.

‘‘(5) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUALS.— No individual shall be required to disclose any information under any data collection activity authorized under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act relating to—

‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition; or

‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition.’’
Brian Tashman's blog

Rand Paul's Travels with Birthers

While preparing up for the 2016 presidential election, Rand Paul visited Israel in a trip that “was arranged by the American Family Association and included 53 prominent evangelicals and conservative activists.”

This wouldn’t be the first time the far-right AFA worked closely with a potential Republican presidential candidate, as the group also put together Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s “The Response” prayer rally that he used as a springboard into the presidential race.

Guests included top Religious Right organizer David Lane, anti-gay activist Tamara Scott of Concerned Women for America and birther leader Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily. Farah praised Paul in his column today and saluted his opposition to foreign aid and marriage equality.

Farah’s participation is not surprising as the American Family Association also peddles similar conspiracies.

Farah and AFA spokesman Bryan Fischer have blamed the Sandy Hook shooting on the lack of school prayer, endorsed birther conspiracies, likened gays to terrorists and the Taliban, seek to restrict Muslim immigration and predicted that the Obama administration will use special security forces to persecute political opponents.

Of course, Rand Paul certainly won’t be the only potential GOP presidential candidate to court extremists like Farah and the AFA as more Republicans gear up to run.

Brian Tashman's blog
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious