Posted on 03/10/2014 4:35:26 PM PDT by Mariner
On Saturday, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul won the presidential straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference by a landslide for the second consecutive year. Conservative firebrand Texas Sen. Ted Cruz came in second, but he actually gained the most ground of any candidate year-over-year.
On Sunday, Cruz began making a play to draw foreign policy distinctions between himself and Paul, both of whom are considered two of the GOP's top presidential prospects.
"I'm a big fan of Rand Paul. He and I are good friends," Cruz said on ABC's "This Week" Sunday. "I don't agree with him on foreign policy. I think U.S. leadership is critical in the world. And I agree with him that we should be very reluctant to deploy military force abroad. But I think there is a vital role, just as Ronald Reagan did. ... The United States has a responsibility to defend our values."
Cruz's comments came two days after Paul thrilled the CPAC audience by blasting President Barack Obama's drone policy. However, Paul didn't mention the preeminent ongoing geopolitical conflict — the crisis in Ukraine.
Paul's noninterventionist views on foreign policy have attracted a libertarian-leaning crowd. In the CPAC straw poll, 57 percent of respondents, when asked about the U.S.'s "role in the world," identified with this statement: "N early 70 years after the end of World War II, it's time for our European, Asian and other allies to provide for their own defense."
Only 37 percent, on the other hand, agreed with this statement: " As the world's only superpower, the U.S. needs to continue to bear the responsibility of protecting our allies in Europe, Asia and other parts of the world."
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
China and Russia aren’t as strong as people think; their respective economies have the illusion of strength, but if you look beneath the surface, you will see in the case of China a massive credit bubble (and credit bubbles don’t end well) and in Russia’s case a kleptocratic economy that is far too dependent on resources exports; Russia’s economy lacks diversity.
In the case of a caliphate, there simply isn’t one. The last caliphate sputtered to an end when the Ottoman Empire fell in 1923. Turkey, in theory, could be a major leader in the Islamic world, but with its fractious nature - not to mention an ongoing transnational Sunni/Shia religious war, akin to Europe’s Thirty Years’ War - the Turks would have far greater success in herding cats.
They have the potential to be a leading Islamic power, but it won’t be with Erdogan; he’s far too much his own worst enemy. And it won’t be Fetullah Gülen either. I don’t see that happening for another decade at least.
You know the little (l)ibertarians are split about evenly between Paul, Cruz and Palin, right?
If the GOP cannot, will not, make peace with the libertarians they'll likely not be winning many election henceforth.
Please, don't take that the wrong way. It's just my opinion based on how I see the country lining up.
The Caliphate is on the move and now has atomic weapons. That behooves those of us with MIRVed thermonuclear weapons and lasers to keep a sharp eye out.
PAUL/RYAN 2016!
(Just Goofin’...)
Exactly. In this interconnected world the ostrich approach will doom you as in "you may want to ignore the outside world however the outside world is not going to ignore you" We can try and ignore the Greater Muslim Jihad, ignore China's and Russia's rise but they will not ignore America.
China and Russia can get together with a few others (like Iran) and really screw the US dollar. Then all those self-concerned me me me me me me myself and I libertarians will cry how all imported items cost 4x much as before due to the collapsing of the US Dollar engineered by the above nations
Typical antagonism from BI.
There is no such thing as little l and big l, there is only l.
If you were a conservative, then you would not be calling your self libertarian, you call yourself libertarian because you are to the left of conservatives, and are opposing conservatism.
Libertarianism is a way to promote liberalism within the GOP and join with the GOPe and the openly left, in cutting off conservatism and God, and traditional America, and killing it, once and for all.
I like both Cruz and Paul also, but I’m leery of Senators as candidates, particularly if they never ran anything prior to becoming a Senator. I’m hoping some current or former governor will emerge. I would support Palin if she commits to running early, but I don’t think she wants to run. I’m assuming she won’t unless she comes out clearly and early. Scott Walker might be a possibility. He’s certainly shown he’s tough enough, though I haven’t really heard where he stands on a lot of issues. No telling who else may emerge.
57 percent of respondents, when asked about the U.S.’s “role in the world,” identified with this statement:
“Nearly 70 years after the end of World War II, it’s time for our European, Asian and other allies to provide for their own defense.”
Only 37 percent, on the other hand, agreed with this statement:
” As the world’s only superpower, the U.S. needs to continue to bear the responsibility of protecting our allies in Europe, Asia and other parts of the world.”
I associate myself with both of those. The only reason Europe & Asia don’t protect themselves is because THEY don’t have to. WE do it for them. It’s time for a change.
No more nation building, no more world policeman. Our military is far too precious to be wasted (killed & wounded) on such political fantasies.
I don't think the Romney win was "healthy."
In running for a high office, it is necessary to draw distinctions between yourself and the other candidates, but, as the Wicked Witch of the West said, "These things must be done...delicately." It has to be done in a way that allows the followers of the other candidates to rejoin the party under a common banner. After the battles are over, one has to find a way to live with the vanquished. Romney's Primary wins were anything but "delicate." His tactic was simple: Bury any candidate that challenges in the polls under tons of negative campaign ad buys. Lie if necessary. Accept the aid of Gloria Allred if you must. One by one, he picked them off.
In that process of winning by scorched Earth, he won very little support from the vanquished candidates' supporters. He left too many people who said, "I'll stay home before I vote for the bastard who destroyed my favorite with lies!"
There was a reason Reagan had his "Eleventh Commandment." He understood what I just described. You have to win, but how you win matters just as much. If we learned a "healthy" lesson from the '12 Primaries, it's that we can't let people like Romney dominate the field by destroying everybody else.
I think the idiots in the media are trying to turn a “non-issue” into a fight to divide conservatives. It worked last time and we ended up with Romney.
P/P........ Paul/Palin.
I can't agree more.
But that's what we'll get from the GOPe candidate...not Cruz or Paul. Or Palin.
That will come from Jeb Bush or some other scumbag.
Chamber of Commerce and Lobby Inc.
You know, the existing GOP.
We have to settle in on an insurgent, and outsider.
Whatever.
Only 37 percent, on the other hand, agreed with this statement: " As the world's only superpower, the U.S. needs to continue to bear the responsibility of protecting our allies in Europe, Asia and other parts of the world."
A false contrast. US allies should be providing their own defense as the first question suggests. The 2nd question, though, should be: "As the world's only superpower, in order to avoid great loss of life in establishing D-Day type beachheads on other continents, the US should work with other nations to maintain forward staging areas, especially in vulnerable regions."
Yeah, whatever to this.
“Libertarianism is a way to promote liberalism within the GOP and join with the GOPe and the openly left, in cutting off conservatism and God, and traditional America, and killing it, once and for all.”
No conservative would think that the end of America is a “whatever”.
Paul is embracing the GOPe against the Cruz/Palin/Reagan wing of the party.
He is hoping to either be the nominee, or to cut off the conservative right, or both if he can.
Cute, Palin won’t be running this time, so you want Paul over Cruz, who is the Palin/Reagan conservative.
Romney was the most hard left radical the GOP has ever nominated, a complete disaster who dominated and destroyed two election cycles as revenge against the right, and a traditional America that he had hated his entire life.
If you'd like to push me and my kind out, go ahead. Take your shot.
I happen to believe the Federal Government should stay out of many of the issues I suspect you disagree with LIBERTARIANS on. That's for the states to decide...and/or when necessary, 3/4 of the states in ratification of Amendments.
I'll vote in the GOP primary in my state, and may the best man win.
I respect that you have an opinion on what will destroy the country and what will further it.
I have one too. It's unlikely we'll agree...but I'm OK with it.
It's not like I'd stay home in 2016 because Santorum won the nomination. I'd vote for ANY non-GOPe candidate against ANY Democrat. But I have to admit I've lost my patience with those GOPe guys.
I swore to myself that Romney would be the last time I'd vote for the filth the establishment party had become.
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.