Audit the Head!
Posted on 03/27/2015 6:49:13 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
<>Politico writes that Rand Paul is losing support among key followers.
One of the most prominent defectors is Drew Ivers, chairman of Ron Paul’s 2012 Iowa campaign, who says he will not endorse Rand Paul for president. On Tuesday, three members of Iowa’s Ron Paul-aligned Liberty movement — state Sen. Jason Shultz and former Iowa Republican Party central committee members Chad Steenhoek and Joel Kurtinitis — announced the same, adding that they will support Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.
Ivers, who had dinner with Rand Paul in August, said the Kentucky senator has abandoned many of the stances that made Ivers loyal to his father.
“He’s moderating on most of them, not taking a real clear stance on a number of them,” said Ivers. “The strategy of sending a blended message is one that has risk.”
An internal poll conducted last month by Liberty Iowa of Ron Paul’s delegates to the 2012 Iowa Republican Convention — the vanguard of his Hawkeye State loyalists — found that Rand Paul is still the preferred choice by a wide margin. But there are signs of erosion: less than 70 percent are leaning Rand Paul’s way in 2016, according to a person with knowledge of the polling who was not authorized to discuss it. Cruz was the group’s second-favorite candidate, with support in the high single digits, followed by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker....
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Rand comes across as a nasty and rude know it all. He’s a LIEbertarian.
You sir are nuts.
Have you ever heard the phrase “nature abhors a vacuum?” If we do not lead than others will. Those “others” want to destroy us as they hate the concept of freedom. Some also hate the idea of “civilization” (i.e. muslims).
We tried “tending to our own affairs” many times. It worked until 1812 when we were attacked. We won that and crawled back into ourselves. There were some minor issues we had to get involved in but it seemed to be ok until we had no choice but get into WWI.
Had we gotten involved in WWI 3 years earlier there would have been no WWI; it would have been another minor event. We crawled back into our shell after all those lives had been lost and all that money “wasted”. We didn't learn our lesson.
Dec 7, 1941 we were attacked. This put us into WWII. Had we gotten involved in WWII 3 years earlier it would have been another minor event and there would have been no WWII. All those lives would have not been lost and all the money would have not been “wasted”. We didn't learn our lesson.
After the Soviet Union fell apart we crawled back into our shell again. Sept 11, 2001 we were attacked. Had we gotten involved in the muslim terrorism situation 3 years earlier we could have taken out the main players in that attack and it would have been a minor event. All those lives would not have been lost and all that money would not have been “wasted”.
Are you seeing a pattern here? I do. All 3 of these events could have cost us a fraction of the money and lives that they did had we been proactive and taken out the treats before they became a major crisis.
I however doubt that this will sink into your head; you don't seem to realize that if good sleeps evil advances.
Good reply to DesertRhino, but you might want to check my response; I think you will like it.
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.