In Oct. 16 IssueRussell County NewsBy Kathy Foley, Columnist
Recently, I saw a Rand Paul campaign ad responding to Jack Conway's assertion that he (Rand) supports a $2,000 Medicare deductible. In the ad, we were told that "Rand Paul has never supported higher Medicare deductibles for seniors. Conway lies to hide his support for Obama care."
(The underlined words were shown on the screen in red while the other words were in black.)
You may have missed this ad-I only saw it once. That is because it was almost immediately taken down and replaced with another ad:
"Rand Paul doesn't support higher Medicare deductibles for seniors. Conway distracts with negative ads to hide his support for Obama care."
(Again, the underlined words are shown on the screen in red.)
Now this one, you've probably seen and are still seeing. Interesting, isn't it? I guess someone finally clued Rand in on the fact that we now have video and he can't exactly hide from the fact that he has vociferously advocated for a $2,000 deductible time and time again. So now, instead of claiming he has "never supported" it, he is claiming he has changed his mind and "doesn't support" it now-now that he knows that his stand on this might lose him the election, that is. And, oh by the way, he only "doesn't support" it for seniors who are currently receiving Medicare benefits. For those of us who are 55 and younger, well that's a different story. If Rand Paul is elected, we can look forward to paying a very high Medicare deductible when we get there in the not-too-distant future, unless, of course, he and his "Tea-Party" cohorts are successful in abolishing Social Security and Medicare altogether, which is their ultimate goal. In that case, we can look forward to having nothing for all the money we have paid into Social Security.
It's odd, though, that Rand Paul says he is dedicated to cutting government spending and advocates cutting scholarship programs for our children, aid to farmers and abolishing entire agencies, such as the Department of Education and yet, he complains that Medicare payments to doctors have been cut too deeply and consistently defends that particular government expense as evidenced by his statement in a Wall Street Journal interview that "Physicians should be allowed to make a comfortable living." According to the Lexington Herald Leader, Paul has admitted that roughly half of his medical income comes from Medicare and Medicaid. Rand Paul may not be a career politician, but he certainly does have the self-interest instincts down pat.
Okay, so now that we know what Dr. Paul thinks about doctors' earnings, what does he think about the minimum wage? Well, we really don't know because he refuses to actually tell us. Many of his Republican counterparts in other states have made definitive statements against the minimum wage or for wanting to lower the minimum wage. In Connecticut, GOP Senate candidate, Linda McMahon, says it should be lowered. In West Virginia, wealthy businessman, John Raese, who is running for Senate on the Republican ticket, said on September 17th, "I profess that minimum wage be eliminated and we operate on the laws of supply and demand just like we did before the depression." However, Dr. Paul pretty much ducks the issue every time he is asked about it, like he did on Good Morning America back in May when he was interviewed by George Stephanopoulos:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Should the Federal government be able to set a minimum wage?
PAUL: It's not a question of whether they can or cannot. I think that's decided. I think the question you have to ask is whether or not when you set the minimum wage it may cause unemployment.
Let's hear it for Rand!
The silence is deafening.