Posted on 06/02/2013 7:39:36 AM PDT by Innovative
Rand Paul is the latest Republican to tell his party to open up to a wider range of views within its ranks.
"The party can be big enough to allow people who don't all agree on every issue," Senator Paul told an audience in California, a state that produced three Republican presidents in the 20th century but now votes reliably Democratic.
"When the Republican Party looks like the rest of America, we'll win again," he said.
"It's not going to change who I am or what I talk about but I think we can be a big enough party to include people," Paul said at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., Friday evening.
In his Friday talk, Paul sought to define himself, among other things, as a Republican who cares about the environment.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Winning strategy. What Rand means, I think, is that we can win over members of other minority and ethnic groups into a belief in Freedom. Freedom is a potent force, capable of opening the eyes of even the most closed minds.
Also, it is my experience that, no matter who the public figure is, it's virtually impossible to agree with any individual on every issue.
Allen West, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney (lol), Rand Paul; whoever you can mention as one of your political heroes, I guarantee that there will be specific policy positions with which you will disagree. It's inevitable.
So, acknowledging that fact, I think that if Rand Paul's comments include "winning over" such people to embrace the core of a general belief in Freedom, minimal government, anti-Tyranny, and so on, then, yes, that's a winning strategy.
We have to understand that the best way to heal this country is to educate these low information voters into becoming high information voters. When that happens, our side begins to win the debate.
No matter how righteous our cause is, we will never be able to coerce our political enemies into adopting our views, and, given the demographic realities, educating them so that they can intelligently join with us is the only logical way to proceed.
No matter how deep the notion is submerged and repressed, we know that almost all human beings long for Freedom. We just have to awaken them to that. And FR, however imperfect its denizens may be, is an instrument to that end.
Drat! Oh, well, we can still rejoice. And he called conservatives “progressive fascists”, while leftists were “progressive socialists”. Apparently only libertarians are decent people. LOL
I was kind of liking Rand recently and would have supported him on the 2016 ticket. But if this is his attitude, then I can’t support it. As far as I’m concerned, the rest of America needs to look like the Tea Party. Which is to say, employed, productive, moral, self-reliant, responsible, honest. If Rand thinks we’re all supposed to go on welfare, just who does he think is going to pay for it?
I think the only way it will turn around is when things get so utterly horrible that people are actually hungry and they see in their own states hellish brutality.
Fat, lazy, glued to TV and porn, doped up, on welfare - and that includes any kind of entitlement and bennies from Uncle - has to come to a grinding halt and turn around.
And, IMHO, it will. But it’s going to get a lot worse first. Because there are way too many people completely dependent on Uncle, and willing to overlook too much as long as their check comes in, medical and drugs are paid, and so on.
LOL! Decent? Libertarianism is right up there with liberalism in the “mental disorder” category.
And apparently libertarians are completely unaware about the meanings of “progressive,” “fascists,” and “socialists.”
I sort of looked kindly upon our misguided libertarians, if not the “absolutely anything goes” branch of the party.
But every time one of them trolls Free Republic as this one did, I move farther away from that benign attitude.
I'm a Rand Paul supporter but I'd ask him: When does the innocent blood stop flowing?
Psalm 106:37-39
37 Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils,
38 And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood.
39 Thus were they defiled with their own works, and went a whoring with their own inventions.
The GOPe nominated a NE liberal RINO last time and we had Dole and McCain....
I agree, the GOP should be more open to CONSERVATIVE views.
oh. I misunderstood. I thought he was saying the GOPe, after McCain, Dole and Romney should try being more open to conservatives....
:p
as opposed to the vast majority who want the world to be a toxic waste dump I guess....
because they agree on everything
Anyone giving it to kids should be shot
I would get rid of about 90% of federal spending but I would not “legalize” homosexual marriage, child porn (abolishing age of consent is a ludicrous idea), drugs and open the border... so I guess I will still be called a big government statist.
exactly.
Won’t be anything left to win.
bump
I like the term “libertopian” because they believe in a Utopian fantasy that could not possibly work
Let me know if you feel the same way about anyone giving alcohol to kids. Or are you just a hypocrite...?
I’m pretty well convinced you are right-I’ve never accepted any unearned bennies from nanny fed-not even food stamps as a poor single mom and student-I just don’t think it is right, but I had plenty of friends who did it. Times are tough right now for me, but I’ll make it, because I’m ranch-bred and taught to be resourceful.
I’ve always lived a natural lifestyle, like an old hippie-but no drugs-illicit or prescription, or processed food, and I’m working toward growing even more veggies, having some chickens, building an off the grid home further into the woods, in a place nearby that is sort of a developing barter/commune area-going Galt as soon as possible-because I think you are absolutely right, and it is going to get worse-but I intend to be there to help it get better...
I agree on the 90%-and any civilized society needs to have an age of consent-you can’t allow the very young to become victims-that would make us no better than Rome, Greece or Viking raiders, carrying off kids into slavery.
I wouldn’t “legalize” any more social issues-but I wouldn’t muzzle priests, rabbis, and ministers either-that might put the proper pressure on, and stop the PC nonsense, which I really think is very wrong. And if there were enough border agents doing what we pay them for, and no freebies as an inducement to illegally cross those borders, the illegal problem would likely slow to a trickle pretty fast.
But, since neither you or I are in charge, I guess we have to keep voting and shouting till we are heard, and I pray to God it is soon...
[nodding] That sounds about right. [smiles]
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.