Posted on 06/04/2015 4:07:21 PM PDT by presidio9
Politicians talk a lot, and the more a politician talks, the greater the risk he or she will say something regrettable. If you run your mouth for 11 hours at a stretch, as Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is wont to do, the chance of putting your foot in it goes up correspondingly.
So maybe it was statistically inevitable that Paul would cover himself in the opposite of glory by declaring, during his Monday Senate speech against National Security Agency counterterrorism surveillance, that "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."
Amid the fury of his Republican colleagues, who were the implicit targets of this self-pitying smear (and annoyed that Paul was raising money off such grandstanding for his presidential campaign), Paul admitted on Fox News that he might have strayed into "hyperbole" and "impugning people's motives."
Then again, what if hyperbole, combined with a certain passive-aggressiveness, is not incidental to Paul's political style but essential? This is hardly the first time the presidential candidate has found himself explaining away an impolitic surfacing of his internal monologue. He's still trying to live down his
-SNIP- As is becoming increasingly apparent, however, Paul represents a darker, angrier corner of the libertarian imagination, the part that's not just concerned by government overreach in pursuit of legitimate objectives — fighting terrorism, say — but positively haunted by spies, war "hawks" and maybe killer drones. Also, the Federal Reserve, which Paul would subject to an "audit."
Paul has tried mightily to mainstream his brand of politics, distinguishing it from that of his father, Ron,
-SNIP-
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Rand Paul On Shutdown: "Even Though It Appeared I Was Participating In It, It Was A Dumb Idea"I said throughout the whole battle that shutting down the government was a dumb idea. Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea. And the reason I voted for it, though, is that it's a conundrum. Here's the conundrum. We have a $17 trillion debt and people at home tell me you can't give the president a blank check. We just can't keep raising the debt ceiling without conditions. So unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that and I can't vote for that. But the conundrum is if I don't we do approach these deadlines. So there is an impasse. In 2011, though, we had this impasse and the president did negotiate. We got the sequester. If we were to extend the sequester from discretionary spending to all the entitlements we would actually fix our problem within a few years.[Posted on 11/19/2013 12:16:51 PM by Third Person]
Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.[Posted on 01/31/2013 5:08:50 PM PST by xzins]
Rand Paul's immigration speech...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]
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.
Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't 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.
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reformLatinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]
[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
Rand Slams Congress for Funding Egypt's Generals: 'How Does Your Conscience Feel Now?'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 Christian-murdering jihadists][Posted on 08/15/2013 5:44:10 PM PDT by Hoodat]
Thanks presidio9.
It is interesting to see your pro-abortion efforts and pro-abortion defense of the whack case, Rand Paul, but...
The federal government has a lot to do with abortion, and not just abortion on military bases for federal employees, but in foreign policy, and their national issue influence is immeasurable.
Here is just one example:
*The Mexico City Policy requires all non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that receive federal funding to refrain from performing or promoting abortion services as a method of family planning with non-US government funds in other countries. The policy has not been in effect since January 23, 2009. Since 1973, USAID has followed the Helms Amendment ruling, banning use of US Government funds to provide abortion as a method of family planning anywhere in the world.
The policy was enacted by Republican President Ronald Reagan in 1984, rescinded by Democratic President Bill Clinton in January 1993, re-instituted in January 2001 as President George W. Bush took office, and rescinded January 23, 2009, 2 days after Democratic President Barack Obama took office.*
Why are you so interested in electing a president hostile to his party’s pro-life platform?
Paul is about fourth on my list (after Walker, Cruz and Perry), but I would not have any problem voting for him over any Democrat. Not in the least.
That sounds like the old Romney pushers, “he isn’t Obama”, was their persuasive argument for his liberalism, and here we see the Rand Paul version.
Vote for rino Rand Paul, he isn’t in the democrat party.
The Romney fall back argument, regurgitated.
Pro-Tyrany ? Why then does Rand Paul support Obama’s policies on Cuba and the Castro regime then ?
Rand Paul is really cozy with tryrants in Cuba though ?
How is that Pro-Life ?
You keep talking about tyranny ( TyRandny ) but yet ?
Rand Paul embraces Obama on Cuba and the Castro regime.
Rand Paul is a hypocritical phony.
Rand Paul has no business talking about the N.S.A’s tyranny when he is all cozy with Fidel Castro.
That's a lie. GWB directed federal funding for "stem research" or medical/scientific cannibalism of aborted babies. This was days before 9/11.
No one takes the shedding of innocent blood as seriously as God does. We can sit around our whole lives and argue about how "pro-life" each candidate is but the truth is that we have not yet seen a man who will sacrifice an iota of power or prestige much less go to war to stop it.
Murder was the absolutely shameless, top plank, front and center, highest priority ever single day, hour and minute of the last Democrat National Convention. At least Rand Paul pointed this out when he called out Elizabeth Warren on the life of a seven pound unborn baby. And she totally owned it. She smashed that baby out of the park and it seems like nobody even batted an eye much less cleared the bench and fed her to the dogs like the insane murdering Jezebel she is.
Good point, I'd quite forgotten that.
I hope you are right but I believe it will end in war of some kind with carnage that makes the Civil War look like a cake walk.
Somewhere you’ve gotten the impression that I’m a Rand Paul supporter BEYOND this attack on the 4th amendment via the NSA.
I said he was right about that. He is right about that.
Does that mean that I also like his favorite dessert?
Yes, it’s a Free republic tradition of commenting before reading farther, I apologize.
I take it your suggestion is that we stop vetting our candidates on the 55,000,000 human lives that have been sacrificed to legalized abortion on demand since 1973 until the rest of the nation comes around?
Sorry that position is incompatible with conservative politics.
And, as with many inconvenient political issues, Rand Paul is lying about this one.
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.