Depending on which physician of the Paul family you decided to consult this week, Ebola is either cause for heightened alarm or a matter not yet deserving of hysteria.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a practicing ophthalmologist, spoke with conservative radio host Laura Ingraham on Wednesday and criticized President Barack Obama's decision to send 3,000 troops to Africa, saying there is a possibility they could carry Ebola back to the U.S.
"It's a big mistake to downplay and act as if, 'Oh, this is not a big deal, we can control all this.' This could get beyond our control," Paul said.
On the same day, the Kentucky senator's father apparently committed that very mistake.
Former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) warned that it would be "very dangerous" for the U.S. to overreact to Ebola, and that officials should use "common sense" to contain the deadly virus.
"I know there's a lot of reason to be concerned. It is a serious problem, but in my lifetime, when we have been frightened by this so-called coming epidemic -- most of it has never materialized," the former physician told Newsmax.
"Common sense should be able to handle this because they know what the virus is, they know how it is spread," he added. "I think sometimes overreaction can become very dangerous as well."
The two men certainly don't agree on every issue. But the elder Paul's strict adherence to libertarian ideology, and his tendency to espouse conspiracy theories, could cause problems as his son continues court a wider audience toward a possible presidential run. Their differing approaches to Ebola are just the latest example of the kind of issues a future Paul campaign may have to deal with in 2016.
H/T The Hill