Rand Paul’s Worst Enemy

"...As a constitutional conservative who has argued this ground before, it wasn’t surprising [Sen. Rand Paul] made this case. In fact, it aligns with the central tenets of the conservative bloc of the Republican Party that believes that lawmakers should remain vigilant about ceding too much power to government. It was in keeping with William Buckley’s line about conservatives being the ones who stand athwart history and yell “stop.”

So far in the Republican primary process the national security debate has been thin:Obama is weak and the proper response is strength. Whether you agree with Paul’s national security positions or not, he has interjected some complexity into the conversation that might force the debate into something more than a choice between “weak” and “strong.” Doing so will give voters a better window into the foreign policy views the candidates actually do hold, and presumably that would help voters make a better choice.

The problem for Paul is that, in a nearly half-hour–long speech on the Senate floor, his case may have been swallowed up by a claim he made near the end: “People here in town think I’m making a huge mistake. Some of them, I think, secretly want there to be an attack on the United States so they can blame it on me.”

Paul gave his opponents a chance to dismiss his arguments as nutty and to take umbrage while promoting just the worldview that Paul was trying to challenge. Immediately,he faced several charges: He was being thin-skinned(he turned a policy debate into a personal one),narcissistic(it’s not all about you, senator),and finally, that he had lost his bearings in the debate, which isn’t what you want in a president who will face tougher challenges than criticism from Senate colleagues.....

Rand Paul’s Temperament or Lack Thereof

"..............Rand Paul really needs to get over himself.

....Ater Paul went off on Savannah Guthrie on Today back in April, he sheepishly told Megyn Kelly, "I do lose my cool, and I do lose my temper sometimes, and I should be better at that, but the thing is you don’t get any visual clues.”

It doesn't take much for Rand Paul to lose his temper in the heat of battle. If Paul loses his cool with Savannah Guthrie and can't endure a tongue lashing from Mitch McConnell then what chance does he have against Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping or the Iranian Mullahs?

For nearly 6 ½ years, we have had to endure a thin skinned dilettante with an ego expanding faster than the federal government living in the White House. We do not need another."

The shifting political landscape:

Sept 29, 2013, The Daily Beast:"....If Cruz has taken the movement’s championship belt, it can’t be ignored that Paul helped him put it on. And it’s certainly not because “wacko birds,” as Senator John McCain called the junior senators, flock together.

Paul has seen what happens when a candidate takes the tack Cruz appears to be taking with great relish. If a candidate starts on the fringe, he will get stuck there. And some labels don’t wash off.

Paul watched his father marginalized and mocked as he was trapped by the GOP establishment determination that he was a kook. Paul’s mission to avoid such a fate has long been clear. How he does so without alienating the movement that put him on the road to what is basically Senate Republican leadership at this point became clearer the more Cruz talked.

What Paul is showing now is that he has a knack for political maneuvering that separates contenders from the fringe and puts a premium on winning.

Paul isn’t Lee Atwater. But he seemed awfully happy to give Cruz a shove toward the streak of the Tea Party that wants to tighten its ranks for the sake of purity. And he did it under a somewhat credible guise of friendship.

Standing next to Cruz, Paul found the next step on his path to widening his appeal beyond the Tea Party, and it was just a short climb up using Cruz as a step-ladder. Paul has deliberately and cautiously walked toward a bigger audience, not toward the political center—his positions on abortion, gun control, dismantling the federal government and Obamacare, are the same he had when he left Kentucky—but more toward a personality center.

With each step, his 13-hour filibuster on drones being the giant leap, Paul draws suspicion from his Tea Party base but an as yet to be defined, but promising, Republican center ground.

The path from Kentucky rebel movement candidate to Republican presidential nominee is long and perilous and unprecedented. But Paul is moving forward, and he is enjoying success from the illusion of separation.

That’s the kind of thinking that wins elections....."

Rand Paul Controls the Wacko Bird Flight

---------

Or not.

Sorry, I cannot support Rand Paul, under any circumstance.

(1) He is ambivalent about Defense spending.
(2) He is ambivalent about defending Israel.
(3) He supports our current massive LEGAL immigration quota (1.25 million per year) and our current quota for work visas (about 1 million per year).
(4) He advocates releasing all non-violent drug offenders, even though 96% of federal inmates have accepted a plea bargain.
(4) He demands that NSA stop collecting and cross referencing phone numbers called by suspected terrorists.

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.