In 2010, I found myself writing and publishing a series of principled defenses for a politician with whom I shared little common political or philosophical ground: former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. Blagojevich may have done awful things, but that did not change the fact that he was operating within the twisted political norms of Chicago and that justice unevenly doled out is injustice. If "Blago" was to go to jail, many others politicos in Illinois deserved to go to jail before, during, and after him. Blagojevich instead was used as a scapegoat by a crooked political system.
Today I find myself looking at the developing field of conservative presidential candidates and seeing several candidates I can support.
The conservatives of the GOP are threatening to up-end the establishment in DC. In Illinois some call it "The Combine" - the combination of Democratic and Republican Party establishment interests to block out the voters and any political dissent. It's a masterful system, and would be more easily admired if it weren't so despicable. In DC there are all kinds of names thrown around for this same system, but it operates much like the Illinois Combine: establishment Democrats and Republicans cooperate nationally to secure their seats, enrich themselves, reward their benefactors, and squelch dissenting upstarts who would displace them or possibly alter that system.
Some of conservative contenders threaten that hegemony:
Donald Trump
Donald TrumpThe Memo: Biden comes out punching on COVID-19 Ex-Kansas state rep charged with fraud of more than 0K in COVID-19 relief money Medicare trustees sound alarm, but progressives press ahead with irresponsible Medicare expansion MORE - a political outsider who knows how to work the media is polling 25 percewnt in a crowded field of 17;
Gov. Scott Walker (R-Wis.) - loved across the country for his executive work in Wisconsin, his strength in standing up to the unions, and all done with his everyman common-sense;
Sen. Ted Cruz
Rafael (Ted) Edward CruzChris Wallace on lawmakers who contested Biden's election: I don't want to hear 'their crap' Jimmy Kimmel jokes unvaccinated shouldn't get ICU bed Trump schedules rallies in Iowa, Georgia MORE (R-Texas) - a masterful orator who knows how to massage big donors while speaking to the common man, and;
Sen. Rand Paul
Randal (Rand) Howard PaulRand Paul: 'Hatred for Trump' blocking research into ivermectin as COVID-19 treatment Masks and vaccines: What price freedom? Kentucky hospitals reaching 'critical point': governor MORE (R-Ky.) - the greatest threat to the Democrats, the neo-cons and to the DC Combine because of his ability to leverage and build the activist machine his father nurtured over decades of activism while pulling donors, volunteers, and voters from both the political left and right.
These men are not the establishment candidates. The front-running establishment candidates - Hillary Clinton
Hillary Diane Rodham ClintonHoward Stern rips vaccine opponents: 'F--- their freedom, I want my freedom to live' New Hampshire Democrat wins GOP-held state House seat Clinton thrilled to have Joan Allen recording her new book MORE and Jeb Bush - would be nearly identical as president. The goal of some who are active in U.S. politics is always to make sure that type of obedient candidate is nominated by both parties.
Over the last four election cycles we had the very similar options of Bush, Gore, Kerry, Obama, McCain, and Romney, each being so comfortable an option to the status quo that come Election Day the vote does not make much of a difference.
Rand Paul with his effective libertarian-conservative solutions is too much of a wild card. He doesn't fit the mold and he has that trained, funded, mobile, and vocal core or grassroots supporters from across the political spectrum.
On August 5, 2015, the night before the first GOP presidential debate, news broke that an indictment had been handed down involving two Super PAC officers who support Paul: Jesse Benton and John Tate.
Whether or not the terms of this indictment are true, and my experience is sadly that federal prosecutors seldom bring forth cases they think they will lose, the principle remains the same: Justice doled out unequally is unjust.
As a general principle, I hope either everyone worthy of punishment gets punished or no one guilty gets punished. The reality is the world is not perfect, so I would settle for 80 percent of law-breaking politicos ending up in court. It just doesn't work that way though. Only a small percentage are ever indicted, a percentage so small that it is obvious the punishments of the judicial system are meted out for political gain.
It almost makes one want to ask, who is the FBI a political arm of? The Bushes or the Clintons?
Three years after the alleged wrongdoing and now suddenly an indictment appears the day before the first Republican debate. It is simply too convenient a time to try attacking and dragging one of the most threatening conservatives through the mud. Astute observers will take note of the timing that this indictment took place and not dismiss the indictment, but take note of the fact that it was not likely to be a coincidence.
This too almost makes one want to ask, who is the FBI a political arm of? The Bushes or the Clintons?
There is nothing surprising about Rand Paul getting attacked on the eve of the first presidential debate. Many more attacks will come at him and the other conservatives. It's only proof of how threatening they really are to DC's entrenched political class.
Stevo (@AllanStevo) is a conservative writer on politics, based in New York City.
