Rand Paul 's vote on aid to Ukraine divorced from reality.

  On this issue of military support to Ukraine, Rand Paul's vote against aid 5/15 caused delays in shipping when the timing was crucial, Paul is a fool and a danger to our national security interests because his position is divorced from reality. It is ideologically motivated and ignores a fact that bad actors in this world wish us ill. He may be consistent, but his myopic vision fails to recognize the impact of isolationism as a danger to US national security. This gets him mentioned in the press, and delays needed aid to Ukraine for nearly a week. This also ticks the heck out of the vast majority of Americans on both sides of the aisle who get it that if Russia is not stopped now with its, ambitions to take over their former eastern European satellites, Putin will simply move on to his next target. Failure to support Ukraine will also be a signal to China to move on Taiwan using the same imperial rationale as Putin did and to make the same major miscalculation. Take a page from World War II. Japan's and Hitler's belief isolationists would keep us out of war gave them a green light to proceed. They miscalculated. When the chips are down, and national security interests are threatened, in the US, ideology loses to defense and self-interest. We are more interconnected with trade and communications and nuclear-armed now than we were in 1939. This is a far more dangerous world than we were then. Russia's and China's nuclear arsenal and military power are formidable. Their reach spans oceans. Fortress America no longer exists. There is an old saying: A stitch in time saves nine. Support for Ukraine now saves our security interests from unraveling later. that lead us to more deadly conflicts

Senator Rand Paul single-handedly holds up $40bn US aid for Ukraine | US Senate | The Guardian

Zelensky welcomes U.S. Senate delegation led by McConnell to Kyiv in surprise visit (yahoo.com)

Heads up: GOP's Repeal/replace Obamacare is a cat with 9 lives

Heads up. GOP's dire plan to repeal/replace Obamacare is a cat with 9 lives. It just needs calling up for a vote by the Senate leaders  or being rolled into tax "reform" during  the next budget reconciliation opportunity..There is one coming up. Flipping Rand Paul's vote with special considerations is always possible. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska went from a leaning "no" vote to neutral after the GOP offered her special deals.  Likewise, those GOP Congresspeople who claimed they opposed Graham-Cassidy because it did not "do it by regular order", hearings, CBO scores, etc., would not  use that excuse to oppose it again.  Regular order in theory would free more GOP members to support whatever comes out of committee. 
The Congressional committees must demand CBO scores on any health care repeal/replace/fix bills they are considering at the bare minimum so that the number of those losing affordable insurance, including Medicaid, will be known to the public.  That is part of regular order. 

 The battle for 2018 Congressional makeup should be started now by Democrats. They have a rich opportunity to force their opponents to tell how they would vote on any repeal/replace/fix bill or to justify why they voted as they did. It will be a very hot issue whether it is  sneaked through sooner or closer to the 2018 midterms.  The only way consumers can be assured they will not lose their insurance will be to flip the House to a Democratic majority and to protect what Democratic Senate votes they have. The GOP plans so far have only garnered 17-24% approval by voters and voters see this as family pocket book issues presenting a direct threat and loss to them. It is even much easier to understand than tax reform which will only relieve them (or not) of a  marginal tax burden. Putting money in a pocket is always politically easier than taking money/benefits  away.

Pres. Trump just announced he will issue an executive order to allow consumers to buy insurance across state lines, Rand Paul's proposal. Watch what Rand Paul does. Will he switch from "no" to "yes"on a promise?   It is going to be after Friday or  January,  February, or March Trump  says, putting the question into "regular order".and/or requiring 60 votes and bringing along some Democrats.  He says is fine  to go through regular process and still have a vote on Graham/Cassidy or others like them.

 Buying insurance across state lines is a mirage. The CBO has already scored it as only helping 3 million people more to  afford insurance under Obamacare. . Furthermore, under Obamacare,  multi- state  group plans were permitted, and they never took off.  There are reasons. Consumers lose easy appeal if they have a complaint about of state insurers since they would have to register and fight for  appeal in  the insurer's  home state. . Furthermore, big insurers  with affiliates  in many other states like Blue Cross and United can collude to set prices  across state lines since insurance companies are exempted from  federal anti trust laws. They could hike prices in other states . Without essential benefits being required, there would be .a full out race to the price  bottom of useless,  deceptive insurance with few benefits.

Expect, too, that the political problem of doing end runs around each state insurance commissions may create another potential opposition group.  State Insurance Commissions are long, old political plums and state by state control would be lost. 

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/25/obamacare-repeal-republicans-budget-243125

https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/m/ef2e06e5-f195-3ae4-bbb1-28e964b5fa8f/ss_aca-already-allows.html

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2017/09/26/what-republicans-must-answer-about-their-next-steps-on-health-care/?utm_campaign=Governan

Rand Paul comes unhinged on NATO expansion to Montenegro

Should NATO be expanded to Montenegro? Rand Paul thinks no; John McCain thinks yes. Paul called McCain too old and unhinged on MSNBC Morning Joe this morning (3/16/17). Rand Paul needs a history and geography lesson. Why is Montenegro important? It is located in a narrow spur of the Mediterranean, the Adriatic Sea, and directly across from it is Italy. So it is in American interests for Russia to have a submarine base there? Historically its Bay of Kotor is a port of enormous depth...
that is one of the best in the Mediterranean which Russia has coveted for centuries. It is particularly suited for submarines. Russia had tried to stealth take over Montenegro by huge investments in real estate and energy. However, the situation is not simple in politics there, but bringing Montenegro into NATO is a historical opportunity to block Russia's attempt to grab the port there. It is far more important to US strategic interest because of the port than even the Ukraine or Georgia. Paul is the one looking unhinged; not McCain. So important is that port to Russia that recently uncovered was an attempt to assassinate the PM of Montenegro who was advocating joining NATO. Russia was using Serbian operatives.

All presidential candidates should be asked these questions about their Iraq policy; answers should not be simple

With the presidential marathon race now off and running, there are  questions  we should demand every candidate to answer.   Top of my list is what to do about  Iraq and ISIS.  Most fascinating so far are the polar opposite views of GOP candidates jockeying for their party’s nomination, ranging from Sen. Lindsey Graham, the ultra hawk, v. Rand Paul, the ultra anti interventionist. There are no simple answers.

Assuming  the establishment wings of the Republican party manage to quash Paul’s candidacy, the likely successful GOP candidates will call for more aggressive policies there.

Recent polls are  showing that the US electorate is still opposed to sending massive  troops,  but more support a limited increase of boots on the ground. Expect the GOP to continue to scare  the wits out of the American public that ISIS is a personal threat to their safety, that the US is incapable of stopping ISIS’ attacks on the homeland, and that they have a solution that  will keep us safe.

Opposition to massive re-invasion of Iraq lags in popularity because many  Americans have not forgotten that  the US deployed 2.5 million troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.  400,000 of them were deployed three or more times. The Iraq war alone cost a conservatively estimated $1.7 trillion dollars of taxpayers’ money. As of April 2014, 6800 US troops had been killed in Iraq.

Where the hawks have an advantage is a message of simplicity.  Send more troops. Never mind even  Graham is only talking about 7,000 special ops and trainers in addition to the 3,000 already there. While forcefully criticizing Obama’s policies, all he proposes is to increase the numbers some. Pres. Obama at the G7 summit Monday indicated he had asked the Pentagon for proposals. Perhaps they are not that far apart.  Still the question lingers,  Would this be a forever intervention with continuing mission creep?

However, the situation in Iraq is not simple.   Unlike 2003  there is now a full blown three way civil war to fill a power vacuum left after the fall of Saddam and the US departure.  ISIS threatens the power of  the Saudi Royal family that has their own caliphate founded on  similar theology, yet the Saudis are usually an ally of the US.     There is  a full scale  religious  civil  war in Islam playing out in Iraq  between the Sunnis (the Arab Muslims) and the Shia, the Iranians.  The Shia dominated  government in Baghdad, closely connected to Iran by a shared religion,  is our ally, but their Sunni troops that had not already joined ISIS,  are not loyal to Shia leadership.  Iranian troops are already engaged fighting ISIS .  Simultaneously,  the Kurds , our most effective allies, hope their participation leads to independence, , which no one else involved wants.

 So the GOP hawks want us to get more involved in this mess and train and arm whom? As a friend of mine says,” How is the everyday Joe supposed to understand this? “ and that is the advantage the GOP hawks have in beating the war drums.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/18/politics/lindsey-graham-iraq-not-a-mistake-election-2016/index.html

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/03/08/iraq-opinion-polls/24276663/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/4/lindsey-graham-dont-vote-for-me-if-youre-worn-out-/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_media
http://time.com/3912543/barack-obama-isis-strategy/

http://www.costsofwar.org/iraq-10-years-after-invasion