Posted on 06/05/2015 12:40:52 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
It turns out that Republicans in Washington are united on one issue: their hatred of Rand Paul. John McCain says that he is “the worst possible candidate . . . on the most important issue.” Marco Rubio opines that “he has no idea what he’s talking about.” Lindsey Graham concludes that it would be “devastating” for the party to nominate him. Conservative commentators are even more vicious and ad hominem. The obsession with Paul is striking. In a Post op-ed last summer, then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry mentioned Paul 10 times. I cannot recall an instance in recent decades when so much vitriol has been directed against a leading political figure by his own party.
The attacks are almost entirely focused on Paul’s foreign policy, which is routinely characterized as dangerous and isolationist. In fact, the real problem appears to be that Paul is trying to force Republicans and many Democrats to defend what has become a lazy, smug consensus in favor of an ever-expanding national security state.
I have read Paul’s proposals and speeches on foreign policy. There are some bloopers, odd comments and rhetorical broadsides, but for the most part his views are intellectually serious and well within a tradition of what he (correctly) calls conservative realism. They are also politically courageous....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
You are one sick, freeper hating puppy.
That’s just it. You DON’T reveal why he is, as you say, a RINO. And besides, there are plenty of RINO’s out there - do you have the same angst for them as Paul? How about McCain, Boehner, McConnell, Snow, Christie? I bet not.
I still don’t know why you and others have such apparent hatred for him. I hear a lot of name calling. A lot of innuendos. But little to no substance.
And btw, you’re being just a little over dramatic about all of this. As I said, if Rand Paul, or Scott Walker, or anyone else is not up to the challenge, that will come out in due time.
You come across as a mindless emotional windbag. Are you really like that or is that the way Karl wants you to present yourself when discussing a candidate the establishment doesn’t particularly like?
I’m really not interested in some kind of a pi$$ing match with you or anyone else. I’ve much better things to do with my time. I suggest that if you want to pull someone over to your way of thinking, you do something more substantive than what you’ve done with me.
You seem to have ignored posts 11 and 12 so far, just like you said you would.
On foreign policy Rand is no better than what we have now. Why should we vote for that?
What we need is a strategy to defeat Isis and their aggressive taking of territory. That demands a military strategy, and is not a political decision.
Rand Paul is not willing to do that. As long as we continue to ignore the need for that military strategy, the world will become less and less safe. More and more people will be enslaved by the Caliphate, more Christians will be slaughtered, and our Homeland will be attacked in a way we have never seen.
I want someone as C. in C. who is committed to preventing that from happening. When I consider my choice for President, I always take into account, who would my son have been most proud to have in that position as he served his country. There is no doubt, were my brave son who made the ultimate sacrifice still here with us today, that man would be Ted Cruz.
“Paul wants to reduce our already smal military”
Can you provide a citation for that claim?
How many troops do you think we need to send? What countries should they be sent to? For how long? Just asking for some specifics
You mean like post 12?
Somebody typed that out. No link. Do you have a credible cite for it?
Quit being silly, Reagan couldn't give you those figures, that is a complex and shifting situation, what we do know is that Paul is weak, and wants us weak.
You’re like a liberal who doesn’t want to talk about the cost of the grand programs he supports. Questions about details are “silly”.
Why do we need to fight ISIS? Is it our territory?
Seems to me it is someone else’s territory ... and those someones are a different sect of ISLAM than ISIS’s sect of ISLAM. Seems to me this is a religious fight ... one that has been going on for more than 1,000 years.
I fail to see why our young people should fight and die and me maimed in a fight over which sect of ISLAM should be in charge of which territory, unless it is US territory.
It’s true. They don’t care how many die in a fight over which sect of ISLAM is the best.
The Muslim author doesn’t even agree with Rand Paul.
He just wants a debate on his favorite, lone issue between demonic-rats and the GOP, preferably GOPe.
We need a strong and capable military and to PICK OUR BATTLES wisely ... which we have obviously not done in a while.
Just being strong is not good enough. We need to be smart as well.
Here is what his supporters brag about. (His chart in post 12)
"Back in 2011, Paul introduced a budget plan that would have reduced military spending and troop size, eliminated many overseas bases, and most importantly, started a long-overdue conversation about what the U.S. military should look like and act like in a post-Cold War world where the major dangers to U.S. security came less from state actors and more from non-state provocateurs and terrorists."
Russia is on the move, China is on the move, the Middle East is going to heck under Obama, Muslims are getting the bomb, and Rand wants to go all Jimmy Carter/Obama with the military and national defense.
No thanks, Rand Paul is the last thing that we need to replace 8 years of Obama, that could be up to 16 years, that we and the world, may never recover from.
We cannot force Muslims to be at peace with each other. Ever. They have never been at peace with one another. Ever.
Is that you Ted Kennedy? just like Ted, you have a “cost is no object” attitude to govt spending. Geo Bush was the same way. He spent more than $1 trillion “liberating” the Muslims of Iraq. Or I should say, he Borrowed $1 trillion from China. Now you want to borrow more to send us back there. Or have the fed print the money out of thin air. It’s that kind of lunacy - your kind of fiscal liberalism - that’s making America weak.
That is a disgusting lie, as a vet I find your insults against freerepublic and freepers and conservatives, disgusting.
Perhaps you can point out the active duty freepers who agree with you about there being such people here at FR?
How many do you think are here that don't care about our people dying? All of the Reaganites? all of the conservatives? All of those who call Rand Paul a "Surrender Monkey"?
You are lying by editing what I said.
There are people here who want Americans to die so that one sect or the other of ISLAM can be dominant in a particular geographic area.
That is just stupid. Unless you really care which sect of ISLAM is dominant, then I guess you have a dog in the fight. I don’t and I would venture to guess most Americans do not give on hoot which sect of ISLAM wins out in any particular geographic area. In fact most of them don’t care about ISLAM at all.
But apparently there are people here who are all-fired ready to send others to fight for one sect of ISLAM or the other.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.