Posted on 03/14/2013 6:00:20 PM PDT by Signalman
Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky speaks at the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference hosted by the American Conservative Union on March 14, 2013.
Like romney “adjusted” his morality so he could get the nomination? That is one of the reasons he lost. A true patriot and morally decent person doesn't have to change his morality, it's who they are.
“Dept of education , OK but what shall we do for education as he has not mentioned that part.”
Huh? The Department of Education doesn’t educate anyone. It never has. No child has ever been taught by the Department of Education. The Department of Education doesn’t build schools, run schools, create or supply textbooks or pay teachers.
It is a giant beaurocracy that exists for the sake of having a giant beaurocracy. It could vanish and no one would ever notice and it would save countless billions in the process.
One has only to peruse to comments on ANY Ron Paul FR Thread in the past two years to conclude that Permissive Libertarianism is antithetic to the principled Republican, Conservative and Independent voters.
Rand did a great job of exposing the Monarchist wing of the GOP, whose mantra is: ‘My King, right or wrong.’
The twin GOP Elite Pigs, McCain and Graham proved themselves to be rock-solid Monarchists.
Rand needs to hammer at the financial reality of the US Government in order to be able to be someone responsible people will choose to lead them when the inevitable US Bond Bubble bursts.
Here’s my opinion: Obama will continue to be the party-guy, goof-off that flunks “Economics 101: ‘Always live within your means’ Course.”
No, it won’t be anything that the US Congress does, as they have reverted to the Monarch Stage where it is my King, right or wrong.
What will happen is a Bond Market Correction.
BTW, can you say “POP?”
” - - - The Department of Education doesn’t educate anyone. - - - “
WRONG! The Primary function of the Department of Education is to give children ‘Free” food. Hence, the “School Lunch Program.”
Children hand-fed at the local school commune dining hall, will automatically expect other ‘Free’ stuff from their communal University in the form more ‘Free’ food and ‘Free’ student loans that will never need to be paid back.
Thus, indoctrinated with the fuzzy-warm memories of Communal Coddling they, as legal adults vote in politicians who promise to give them even more ‘Free’ Stuff.
Romney’s morality was encapsulated in his Watershed Law: Romney’care.’
Rand Paul has an opportunity to learn that Permissive Libertarianism is incompatible with the Morality of those who are determined to CONSERVE the best of what is left of America.
If Rand can learn then he might have a chance. If Rand can’t learn, then we are on to someone who can.
That’s a good start.
Just my 2 cents — Sen. Rand Paul is a Republican with a capiol “R”, and a libertarian with a lowercase “L”.
You are assuming because he is “hanging onto counterculture and permissive views” that he isn’t a supporter of the U.S.Constitution?
I firmly believe ‘permissive’ isn’t the word to be used; the description ‘Constitutionalist’ would be more accurate.
The Federal government should be limited to those powers stated in the U.S.Constitution. Any powers not so stated are reserved for the States. Every State in the Union, for example, has an Education Department and an Agriculture Department. (Duplication is killing our economy!) Education of one’s children should be under local control, as should agriculture.
State governments are where social engineering belongs. The Progressives have reapeatedly, over the past 100 years, used activist judges to carve out so called “rights” that do not exist in the U.S.Constitution. That is why who we elect as President and as Governors is so important.
There is no right to murder unborn children.
There is no right to marry whoever or whatever you want.
“Permissive views on sex, drugs and victimless crimes make sense to libertarians.”
WRONG!!
Their view may state it isn’t their business to be nannies on the Federal level, and sometimes on the state level, as well. But it is not within the Federal governments power to monitor such behavior; it belongs to the States. If you live in a state that does legislate such behavior and you’re pleased with the result, good. But it isn’t the Federal government’s respnsibility - they do not have the power per the Constitution to deal with it.
“Dept of education , OK but what shall we do for education as he has not mentioned that part.”
_________________
I agree with you, I was quoting someone else.
I agree with you.
Thanks.
It has often occurred to me how much the Federal budget could be reduced by just governing per the U.S.Constitution. There is a huge amount of money wasted on duplication of efforts by the Federal and State governments.
The founders had views on morality that made today's average American look licentious (obviously) yet they managed to keep the Constitution focused on the proper & very limited role of government. If Paul can avoid getting wrapped around the MSM's axle & stay focused on the appropriate role of the federal government leaving the rest to the localities we'll have solved most of our problems.
Abolishing the Dept of Education so DC no longer can push its pro gay on the states is a good example.
” - - - Sen. Rand Paul is a Republican with a capiol “R”, and a libertarian with a lowercase “L”. - - - “
YES! That is the way I see Rand Paul. He, like many of us have many opinions, some of which will alienate other blocks of voters.
For example, he and Senator Cruz are the two Senators who, by word and deed, support the US Constitution the best of anyone in the US Senate.
I remain to be convinced that most Conservatives in the Republican, Democrat or Independent voter segments find much Constitutional support for the ideas of Permissive Libertarianism on drugs, border law violators, and marriage.
Hence, the conflict for Rand Paul: Strong support of the US Constitution on Governmental topics, and moderate support for Permissive expansion of the US Constitution on social matters.
IMHO, there are plenty of laws on the books for violators of border laws and drug laws. The main problem is that the US Federal Government refuses to enforce them to the limit of the respective laws.
Social issues are probably better handled at a moral level, with local laws instituted, if needed.
Those who embrace Social Issues in politics are embracing the proverbial Greek Hydra.
Ron Paul never figured it out, and lost significant support for his Constitutional ideas.
Rand Paul has the opportunity to avoid the Hydra of Social Issues by assigning Social topics to the sphere of Morality, and focus on the topics found in the US Constitution.
When asked by the Liberal Agenda Media to embrace the Social Issues Hydra, he need only reply: “ These are Social Issues that are best resolved at the Church or local level, unless mentioned in the US Constitution.”
The Constitution gives the feds no authority over any drugs that don't cross state lines. And opposition to drug laws is not "permissive" but simply a recognition of the limits of government's ability to effect positive change.
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.