Skip to comments.Tea party friction: Sen. Rand Paul lashes Ted Cruz approach to Russia and China
Posted on 09/14/2013 10:00:42 AM PDT by SoConPubbieEdited on 09/14/2013 11:12:44 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON ó It was bound to happen eventually. Two tea party allies angling for president canít agree on everything, and Tuesday, a gaping foreign policy schism came into focus as Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul went out of his way to critique Sen. Ted Cruzís approach to Syria.
(Excerpt) Read more at trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com ...
Ted Cruz Ping!
Yep, which disproves the media's notion that we're all marching in lock step to the beat of one ideal.
One thing I CAN agree on with every Tea Partier is that the Clown and his party ought to be politically defeated at every turn.
Russia and China are hardly going to be embarrassed, even when they are not on the same said with American public or military opinion.
The paper does seem to be embellishing. Tempest in a Tea pot much?
Non-story. The libs are just trying to drive a wedge between the two.
“So in other words the paper is attempting to stir up crap.”
And last time I checked, Cruz wasn’t a supporter of the UN. Defund the UN!
Real Politik says that Russia and China are enemies of the US, even though Obama was seriously wrong on Syria and Putin saved his bacon.
I favor ABM shields and China having to worry about Taiwan.
Isolationism is naïve, adventurism is dangerous, interventionism is costly, but realism is just right.
Cruz is closer to me than Paul, but Paul has done well in his opposition to adventurism in Syria.
Sounds like Cruz is working to create the dynamic that would allow us to support our allies, embarrass Obama, and keep military contractors fully employed. It’s a mixed bag, but Rand’s approach sounds naïve. How do you negotiate with Russia when they support one side of a Syrian civil war and, via Obama, we support the other?
The allegation of Syria using chemical weapons has all the appearances of being yet another US government lie, told at the behest of its new world order masters.
After almost 30 years of voting, I will no longer vote for war mongering of any kind.
The number one way of staying out of wars is preventing new world order from instigating them. As long as new world order is allowed to instigate wars, all the military hardware in the world will not prevent wars.
I’ll never support a gold standard and I’ll never support removing Biblical morality from society and from our laws.
So I’ll never be pro-pot or any other recreational drug.
And I’ll never be anti-alcohol, which is unbiblical.
Seems to me that Cruz has a much deeper and more sophisticated strategy - looks like Presidential material at this point.
“How do you negotiate with Russia when they support one side of a Syrian civil war and, via Obama, we support the other?”
Well, we can start by cutting off the military aid to AlQaeda.
And by the way, Russia and China will not be embarrassed by votes in the UN. Nobody gives a rat’s a$$ about the votes in the UN.
Rand Slams Congress for Funding Egypt’s Generals:
‘How Does Your Conscience Feel Now?’
Foreign Policy | 15 Aug 2013 | John Hudson
Posted on 08/15/2013 5:44:10 PM PDT by Hoodat
Sen. Rand Paul is hammering his fellow senators for keeping billions in financial aid flowing to Egypt’s military — even as Cairo’s security forces massacre anti-government activists.
[by “anti-government activists” is meant church-burning jihadists]
Sen. Cruz Statement on Egypt (Suspend aid over anti-Muslim Brotherhood coup)
Ted Cruz blames Egyptian violence on Obamas disregard for foreign aid law
Rand Pauls immigration speech
03.19.13 | Hon Sen Rand Paul (KY)
Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg
...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.
Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.
Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.
Lets start that conversation by acknowledging we arent going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.
If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...
This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.
Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
[but hes not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
Here's the passage at issue:In the 1980s, the war caucus in Congress armed bin Laden and the mujaheddin in their fight with the Soviet Union. In fact, it was the official position of the State Department to support radical jihad against the Soviets. We all know how well that worked out.Let's leave aside for now the insulting, utterly asinine, sickening, inexcusable use of the phrase "war caucus" to describe those (including Reagan!) who supported the mujaheddin against the Soviets. That word choice alone is almost entirely disqualifying for its purveyor to ever be president.
Instead, let's just look at a little history here -- because the ignorance evident in this paragraph is truly astonishing. One would be hard pressed to find even a single historian, whether right, left, or center, who would argue anything other than that the Soviet failure in Afghanistan was not just a huge factor, but probably an essential one, in the Soviets' ultimate loss of the Cold War. [Rand Pauls Really Ignorant Paragraph | 7 Feb 2013]
Don’t see how this would come as a surprise. Thanks SoConPubbie.
We’ve got to be vigilant against this kind of thing. The media wants nothing more than to destroy both of them.
Paul tartly derided the idea of forcing "show votes" in the United Nations to embarrass Russia and China.Yes, of course he does. His old man is a 9/11 "truther" who supports Iran, and claims Hamas was invented by Israel. Rand doesn't criticize that, maintains his no-comment stance, because they are two peas in a pod.
...a United Nations Security Council vote condemning Syria for attacking its own citizens with chemical weapons... "would unify the world against the regime and expose Chinas and Russias support for this tyrant... we should make them veto it on the world stage... And if they do veto it, we should respond by, with respect to Russia, we should reinstate the anti-ballistic missile station in Eastern Europe that was canceled at the beginning of the Obama administration to appease Russia, and with respect to China, we should go through with selling the new F-16s to Taiwan that again this administration put the kibosh [on]."
Let's see where a meeting of the minds goes. After being so totally disappointed with Rubio traitoring us on immigration and Ayotte and Flake going against just about every word they campaigned on, I'm willing to give Cruz and Paul and the colalition they seem to be building time to coalesce.
At this point it's "show me the money". Cruz was against going into Syria. Rand Paul seems to be "getting it" on the invasion of the US issue with border security first. I'm not giving up on Rubio reaching that point.
These young Senators and HOR reps are evolving. Let's see which ones don't get sucked in by the DC fog.
That could work. But Rand has more experience so it should be the other way around.
They both attended the "Exempt America from Obamacare" rally last Tuesday:
Persian Gulf oil money and a Muslim sympathizer in the White House are trying to replace secular Assad with a Sunni theocracy. Chemical attacks are both a pretext and a false flag lie. This is against U.S. interests and against the interests of the people of Syria and the region. It would only benefit the Saudi royal family, the Qataris, and perhaps the UAE.
No federal politician is speaking this truth and that goes for our putative heroes Cruz and Paul. Can we be excused for thinking that they have all been bought?
classic isn’t it??
we get all these hypocritical left wing career politicians who mindlessly nod their heads up and down like bobblehead dolls for obama, and who’ve helped put this country in the crapper, complain “freshman” (aka, non-career politicians) are running the GOP...and now the left wing media are joyously cheering that there may be a difference of opinion amongst a few...
I’m sorry Rand, but if you think you can distinguish yourself and win over Cruz you are mistaken. To my recollection, Cruz never said “defacto amnesty and we might as well better.....”
Everything I’ve seen of Cruz is 100% conservative solid American not hobbled by genetics of a crazy coot father IMO.
Better step off son and make a deal with Ted for 16 if you don’t want to end up completely irrelevant like your dad.
"Compromise and accomodation are both forms of moral dishonesty."
“they are two peas in a pod.”
It’s unfortunate that you had to come here to smear one of the GOP’s rising stars.
Are you happy with the job that Obama is doing? If not, please stop acting like another one of his useful idiots.
Spot on, I have been pointing out the same quite often. The Saudis have us by the short hairs and are yanking. Right now you can only buy Saudi oil (did other gulf oil states) with US dollars, should that ever change the US economy would collapses and there would be riots all across the nation.
We should bite the bullet, end the petro dollar deal, and take a few years or longer to fix our economy. A good first step would be to end the fed.
I’d bet 28 was meant for you too, nice try. BTW Cruz and Paul have almost identical on illegals. Paul seemed to be going wobbly then steadied himself. It’s called evolving and as long has he is evolving in the right direction he has my support. I like Cruz too, but he has only been in office for a year.
divide and conquer!! as Lois Lerner’s recently released email exposes, the ruling class is scared to death of the Tea Party.
Again, let’s wait for the actual voting. If we can get Rand Paul and even Rubio to say secure the borders and US jobs for US citizens first, that will go a long way toward them getting on board with constitutional conservatives.
I’m not disagreeing. I’m saying let Rand Paul say now that the borders have to be secured first. Let him support EVerify as the law of the land for hiring and government benefits. Those two things will take care of a lot.
” lets wait for the actual voting. “
They already voted. Paul and Cruz voted in the exact same way but SoConPubbie likes to pretend that didn’t happen.
The Cruz supporters here should keep their powders dry because it’s very unlikely that he’ll run for president anytime soon. He’s not doing very well in the early polls. After 8 years of Obama, I’m guessing that most people want to vote for someone who was born in the US, but I could be wrong.
I believe that Ted is running, but if not, I remain skeptical of Rand’s coddling of illegals. But hey, I like the guy. I just think that he is a bit eccentric. Bob
Nothing to see here. They are not going to agree on everything. However, I am closer to Cruz than I am to Paul. I am not too happy to seen Paul play footsie with the Rino leaders under the table.
“too happy to seen Paul” = “too happy to see Paul”
Obama's second term proved that.
I think that they are both staking out political territory. They do differ on many points, but I would vote for a Cruz/Rand or Rand/Cruz ticket against any Democrat.
The deport them all people would be wise to realize (like it or not) the USA is not going to forcibly remove 25 to 30 million illegals. That is just not going to happen. I don't like sad fact either, but being a realist I have to accept that mass deportation is off the table. Paul knows this and Cruz knows it too. So what now? Protect the border, protect the vote and no new pathway to citizenship which is exactly what Paul was proposing.
I think it is the Jeb Bush faction of the GOP that is trying to tare down a good man. Or maybe Rummy is running again. I would think FR would be behind Paul simply because he is a big pain in McCain's butt being a wacko bird and all.
I don’t know.
Obama’s second term seems every bit as likely, due to two things:
First off, he’s the only African-American president. Likely to remain the only one, from what he’s show so-far.
And second, to tell the truth we ran candidates both races, who were remarkably like Obama.
Who in the world would vote against Obama, for Romney? Or vote against Obama, for McCain?
We need to stop imitating Democrat candidates, and stop nominating “me too” candidates.
No more McCain and no more Romney.
For that matter, no more GOP but that is just me.
IN 2016 we need a real, solid conservative. Or two.
(Palin, Cruz are just two possibilities)
For American jobs, and for America.
That’s the money paragraph. I doubt there would be much disagreement between Cruz and Paul on this common sense tactical approach...
We don’t like the UN, but I think you underestimate the need of dictatorships to save face. Paul’s point, if I follow him, is that America is exceptional and we need to act like it. Obama’s not doing that.
I do not support amnesty, I support legal immigration and recognize that the country has been enriched by those who seek the freedom to make a life for themselves. However, millions of illegal immigrants are crossing our border without our knowledge and causing a clear threat to our national security. I want to work in the Senate to secure our border immediately. In addition, I support the creation of a border fence and increased border patrol capabilities.
Immigrants should meet the current requirements, which should be enforced and updated. I realize that subsidizing something creates more of it, and do not think the taxpayer should be forced to pay for welfare, medical care and other expenses for illegal immigrants. Once the subsidies for illegal immigration are removed, the problem will likely become far less common.
I support local solutions to illegal immigration as protected by the 10th amendment. I support making English the official language of all documents and contracts.
Millions crossing our border without our knowledge constitutes a clear threat to our nation's security. Instead of closing military bases at home and renting space in Europe, I am open to the construction of bases to protect our border.
What a weak border security, amnesty wimp.
Must I use the /sarc tag?
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.