Rand Paul Proposes A Flat Tax for Your Rights And Protections

In his interview with Fox Sunday, Chris Wallace asked Rand Paul if he would strike down DOMA on the grounds that the federal government is interfering in “a state matter,” not to be confused with the Mind-Your-Own-Fucking-Business laws that are traditionally acknowledged in lieu of constitutional rights and protections in the more domestically abusive corners of Wingnuttia, and the product of Ron Paul’s loins told Wallace:

You know, I think it’s a really complicated issue,” said the bigot. “I’ve always said the states have the right to decide. I do believe in traditional marriage. Kentucky’s decided it, and I don’t think the federal government should tell us otherwise. There are states that have decided in the opposite direction, and I don’t think the federal government should tell anybody or any state government how they should decide this.”

There are states that have decided that bigotry is enforceable, and therefore the federal government should just stay out of it, or not. Who knows?

He goes on, via Raw Story:

“I think there is a chance that the court could strike down the federalization part [of DOMA],” he thought aloud. “If they do, I think the way to fix it is maybe to try to make all of our laws more neutral towards the issue. And I don’t want the government promoting something I don’t believe in, but I also don’t mind if the government tries to be neutral on the issue.”

You know the tax code — I’m for a flat income tax, and we wouldn’t have marriage as part of the tax code.

The people’s government promoting equality and civil rights? Well, I never!

A neutral move in Rand Paul’s mind means eliminate federal tax support for all marriage and institute a federal flat tax that disproportionately favors the upper income percentile, thereby eliminating the promotion of marriage and passing all the savings along to the poor slobs left beholden to states’ rights bigotry.

Sounds like a great plan. Simple plans from a simple Jack. Cut subsidies for married couples, gay and straight, but preserve the rights of states to continue to discriminate against gays, women, the working poor, and voting minorities.

Gays and lesbians want the federal government to protect them from both federal and state discrimination laws? Here’s a Rand Paul flat tax! Now off you go! Done and done!

Your money or your rights. Rand Paul is sure you’ll take the money, and if not, you obviously hate liberty and the U.S. Constitution.

This guy is on a roll. The crazy train is leaving the station. All aboard, choo-choo!

This entry was posted in Epic Fail, Far-right Intellectual Violence, LGBT, Rand Paul, Republican Party, Taxes, Wingnuts and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://twitter.com/leftypolitix Andrew Sharp

    For some reason, I couldn’t help but read the quotes in my head in Rand Paul’s voice. It was awful.

  • muselet

    “You know, I think it’s a really complicated issue,” Paul asserted.

    Rand “I’m A Libertarian Except When It Comes To Ladybits” Paul thinks Dick and Jane books are really complicated, but I digress.

    “I’ve always said the states have the right to decide. I do believe in traditional marriage. Kentucky’s decided it, and I don’t think the federal government should tell us otherwise. There are states that have decided in the opposite direction, and I don’t think the federal government should tell anybody or any state government how they should decide this.”

    Just to remind the senator (!) from Kentucky, the Supreme Court has ruled that marriage is such a fundamental right that even prisoners serving life sentences can (bordering on must) be allowed to marry. Yet he believes the states should choose whether or not to prevent gay or lesbian couples from marrying. I look forward to his explanation of this inconsistency almost as much as I look forward to Antonin Scalia’s.

    “I think there is a chance that the court could strike down the federalization part [of DOMA],” he continued. “If they do, I think the way to fix it is maybe to try to make all of our laws more neutral towards the issue. And I don’t want the government promoting something I don’t believe in, but I also don’t mind if the government tries to be neutral on the issue.”

    But since he just got through saying he’s fine with allowing the states to prohibit gay and lesbian couples from marrying, that supposed neutrality would be less than neutral.

    “You know the tax code — I’m for a flat income tax, and we wouldn’t have marriage as part of the tax code.”

    “You know those ‘rights’ thingies the fags and dykes keep complaining about? Instead of giving them those, we should dink around with the tax code so rich people would get even more money.”

    Why, Kentucky? Why did you inflict this low-wattage bigot on the nation?

    –alopecia

  • D_C_Wilson

    There are states that have decided that bigotry is enforceable, and
    therefore the federal government should just stay out of it, or not. Who
    knows?

    Remember, Randy has already been on record as saying he believes the Civil Rights Act is unconstitutional. So, yes, he does believe that if a state decides to enforce bigotry, the federal government should stay out of it.