Rand Paul blasts DC priorities: No one hit by severe Kentucky floods asked me to send more foreign aid

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., called out the “enormous disconnect” between Congress’ priorities and those of their constituents, as billions of taxpayer dollars have gone to foreign aid while people in his own state have little to no help with deadly flood recovery.

For his part, Paul is locked in a midterm election battle with progressive former state Rep. Charles Booker, D-Louisville.

Rand Paul blasts DC priorities: No one hit by severe Kentucky floods asked me to send more foreign aid

Related:

Rand Paul is Being Dragged For Requesting Federal Aid For His Tornado-Ravaged State After Routinely Voting Against Past Disaster Relief Bills

In 2013, after Hurricane Sandy devastated parts of the Northeast, including New York, Paul voted against a bill providing recovery funds. In 2017, he voted against relief sent to Puerto Rico after it was pounded by Hurricane Maria, as well as assistance for Texas after it was hit by Hurricane Harvey. In 2019, he voted against a sweeping bill that earmarked $17.2 billion in disaster relief funding to several federal agencies.

Who are the 11 senators who voted against the burn pits bill for veterans?

Political commentators were less surprised to see Mr Paul oppose the bill, as the libertarian frequently opposes federal spending — unless it directly benefits him.

[2012] It’s Time to Stop Using the ‘Fire in a Crowded Theater’ Quote

Posted more for my own reference, as I still see people quoting “fire in a crowded theater” while advocating for censorship.

It’s Time to Stop Using the ‘Fire in a Crowded Theater’ Quote

In 1969, the Supreme Court’s decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio effectively overturned Schenck and any authority the case still carried. There, the Court held that inflammatory speech–and even speech advocating violence by members of the Ku Klux Klan–is protected under the First Amendment, unless the speech “is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action” (emphasis mine).

Today, despite the “crowded theater” quote’s legal irrelevance, advocates of censorship have not stopped trotting it out as thefinal word on the lawful limits of the First Amendment. As Rottman wrote, for this reason, it’s “worse than useless in defining the boundaries of constitutional speech. When used metaphorically, it can be deployed against any unpopular speech.” Worse, its advocates are tacitly endorsing one of the broadest censorship decisions ever brought down by the Court. It is quite simply, as Ken White calls it, “the most famous and pervasive lazy cheat in American dialogue about free speech.”