Should it matter why Rene Boucher assaulted Rand Paul?
Face palms galore! Basically I say this because yesterday while I was making my dinner, next post will be about that, Rand Paul was being assaulted by someone. Frankly I looked at stories from the Moderates, both center-left and center-right, and no moderate on either side of the political spectrum has any clue why Rene Boucher assaulted Rand Paul. Yeah, that’s the perp I speak of, some might know this perp as the builder and copyright holder behind Therm-A-Vest, a pain relief vest I suspect is meant to heal back-aches and stomach aches among other torso aches just by being worn zipped fully shut.
Arguments I can see factual thought in on the ‘Yes’ side of the question
What question? Oh, right! The question “Should it matter why Rene Boucher assaulted Rand Paul?” Anyway, I am going to a number list of reasons to answer Yes and another for the list of reasons to answer No.
Some smarties might answer Yes because:
- Perhaps Boucher despised the healthcare reforms Paul stands for [escalated freedom of choice in healthcare providers compared to America’s status quo]?
- Maybe Boucher was Anti-Trump in the libertarian and liberal sense that built Rand Paul his primary season base, and thinks Paul is selling out by working with Trump?
- Allegedly Boucher may have lost health insurance to something stunningly inept that Trump did on healthcare and thinks Rand is somehow liable for it?
- Probably Boucher was angry at Rand Paul for at first objecting to the very idea of executive order, but then turning around and praising it.
As for me, while options 2 and 4 out of those above totally justify criticizing Rand Paul, none of these four options can ever justify assailing him. Because frankly, he was not physically assaulting anyone, this was an unprovoked physical assault with nothing to do with Self-Defense or Defense of Others, here!
Arguments I can see factual thought in on the ‘No’ side of the question
- An unprovoked physical assault is a violation of an individual’s right to bodily integrity, so why care about the intent?
- If some neighbor of yours came to you and broke parts of you, would you care why they did it? If so, why?
- How does it make any kind of sense to understand the motives of an aggravated assault when its perp has proven oneself to be animalistic?
- While many can respect an attempt at figuring out why this person did this violent crime, it might turn out to be something totally unsurprising, so why try to remodel this controversy to be about why?
Do I have any biases?
Guys and gals, this’s a dumb question for me to ask myself as I have! Every blogger and journalist harbors biases in favor of something. I for example harbor bias in favor of a few simple things in my political punditry, but I do “Yes or No?” posts like this one to be as fair as can be.
- Freedom of Speech
- Freedom of the Press
- Freedom of Religion
- Free Markets
- Free Trade
- Mobility Rights
- Bodily Integrity
- Empire of Liberty
- Strategic Defense
And I shall confess to the bias I hold in this regard: I happen to be on the Yes side of this debate, because then in making the case for or against a lenient sentencing of Boucher, better knowing his motives will make for a smarter, more informed case!
Thanks everyone for reading this thing! Please tap that Tipping button below and give me however much you want, and remember: bigger donations means better equipment including more books for making my commentary smarter and my humor funnier, both in this blog and in my videos! So, will you guys & gals tip, please?
~Kyle S. Perkins aka ‘Perkino’