Nastiest Man in the U.S. Senate — Par Excellence: Rand Paul

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)

Here is the latest on this man and his insane views and opinions who is downright callous in his policy view and in some cases, some legislative proposals, whether by actual deed or passing implication. 

The highlights from Think Progress.org here >>>

At a luncheon for the Chamber of Commerce in Lexington, KY, Paul floated the idea of capping government benefits for women who have children out of wedlock, the Lexington Herald-Leader reports.

While he said that preventing unplanned pregnancies should be in the hands of communities and families, he then went on to say: “Maybe we have to say enough’s enough, you shouldn’t be having kids after a certain amount. I don’t know how you do all that because then it’s tough to tell a woman with four kids that she’s got a fifth kid we’re not going to give her any more money. But we have to figure out how to get that message through because that is part of the answer.”

The idea of withholding benefits from women who have more than a certain number of children is actually current policy in many states. 

While most programs through Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF, or the so-called welfare program) give families more money if they have more children, 16 states cap the assistance and don’t give any extra money for new children if someone in the household is already receiving aid.

More from Paul here (just a few choice snippets). As way of background, Rand Paul just like his father Ron Paul before him, has started to scam the brain-dead donors just like his father did for years, but what does he really stand for? 

Basically, he is one of America’s most radical ideologues in office today right next to a few others like Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL). 

He endorsed a discredited, century-old Supreme Court decision that would give employers nearly limitless power to exploit their workers.

He opposes bans on employment discrimination and on whites-only lunch counters.

He backs nationwide anti-union legislation that would reduce both union and non-union wages by $1,500 a year.

He backs a dangerous constitutional amendment that would have doubled unemployment and caused the economy to shrink by 17 percent.

But, this, his latest, is about as low as anyone can go. But, you know what? He doesn't care, not one bit.