The Rise of ISIS Should Have Put Rand Paul in the White House: Video – Republicans Made Sure That Didn’t Happen

Bonnie Kristian at Rare.US tells us that “[score]Rand Paul[/score]’s campaign was doomed by the rise of ISIS.” I have seen the same sentiment in my Facebook feed.

It isn’t true.

Trending: School Shooting Plot Exposed: You Wont Believe who Set it Up

Rand Paul’s campaign may have been doomed by the fact that not enough American voters agree with him. I don’t claim he would have won. But it is important to realize that the rise of ISIS completely confirmed the folly of years of U.S. intervention in the Middle East.

Let’s go back a few years to when a Syrian woman begged [score]John McCain[/score] to stop his mission of turning Syria into an Islamist hellhole where Christians are exterminated.

He didn’t listen.

This same man went to Syria and took a photo of himself with terrorists. He claimed he was unaware of who they were. But that’s the point! Arming “rebels” against Bashar al-Assad was criminally negligent behavior, at best. The “moderate” rebels worked with extremists all the time. And that’s assuming our politicians, including many Republicans, were not arming terrorists on purpose.

Thus, the rise of ISIS at U.S. taxpayer expense is an obvious piece of evidence that U.S. foreign policy is deranged. But the government and the media pretends this is just more evidence of the threat of terrorism and proof we need to spend more on “the war on terror” and on domestic surveillance.

It is like a farmer buying fertilizer because the salesman tells him it is a weed killer. When he uses it on the weeds, making them grow, he goes back to the store and buys more of the same thing. Obviously, the growing weeds demonstrated that he should spend more on “weed killer.”

Never let an emergency go to waste, said Rahm Emanuel. And often the government itself creates the emergency. That is certainly true of our Syria policy whether it involves Barack Obama or the cheerleading of John McCain or anyone else.

Not only should the rise of ISIS have promoted Rand Paul’s candidacy, it also can and should be used against Hillary. Our attack on Libya and the subsequent murders of our men at Benghazi were tied to the policy in Syria. The government used weapons from Libya to arm “rebels” in Syria. Yet, even though Hillary Clinton was responsible for much of what happened in Libya, Republicans have not used the issue to any real extent. They won’t point out that she created an ongoing hell on earth for the Libyans because most of them endorse that same strategy for Syria.

So, yes, the popular response to ISIS, based on government and media propaganda, hurt Rand Paul in his campaign. But that’s different than claiming the rise of ISIS hurt his candidacy.

Of course, it didn’t just hurt Rand Paul. It also has hurt the whole Tea Party movement. Back when the national debt was much lower, the American people launched a movement to stop the spending. Since then, panic over national security has cut the strength out of that movement. Yet, many of the national security fears that scare us are the consequence of our spending on national security!

Please leave your comments below