<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Iraq And Rand Paul&nbsp;Antibodies]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[
<p>Contra Frum, who <a href="http://www.frumforum.com/rand-pauls-troubling-victory">asks</a> how &quot;is it that the GOP has lost its antibodies against a candidate like Rand Paul&quot;, Friedersdorf <a href="http://trueslant.com/conorfriedersdorf/2010/05/19/on-rand-pauls-victory-and-his-detractors/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+trueslant%2Fconorfriedersdorf+%28Metablog%29&amp;utm_content=Google+Reader">argues</a> Paul would be a net positive in the Senate:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I’d say that the GOP has lost its ability to discredit candidates with libertarian foreign policy sympathies by backing an enormously expensive, strategically ill-conceived war in Iraq. They’ve compounded that error by refusing to publicly acknowledge that many of their judgments about the war have proved utterly wrong. </p>
<p>Were I a Kentucky voter, I’d have cast my ballot for Rand Paul, despite the fact that I disagree with <em>some</em> of his views about the financial system, the gold standard, and various other matters. This reflects my estimation that it is vanishingly unlikely Dr. Paul will cast a decisive vote to abolish the federal reserve, and that a far greater danger is a reflexively hawkish GOP Senator foolishly backing a future military campaign as ill-conceived as Iraq.</p>
</blockquote>
]]></html></oembed>