Posted on 03/11/2014 8:02:04 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Sen. Rand Paul continued his aggressive brush back of comments from his usual ally Sen. Ted Cruz suggesting that Paul is positioned at the left, dovish flank of the GOP on foreign policy, telling Fox News host Sean Hannity Cruz was “mischaracterizing” his views.
“We always have been good friends. I'm not real excited about him mischaracterizing my views. I won't let that pass. I think that sometimes want to stand up and say hey, look at me, I'm the next Ronald Reagan. Well, almost all of us in the party are big fans of Ronald Reagan,” Paul said.
“I've always been a big fan of peace through strength. I think America should and has a responsibility around the world and really, virtually all of the opinions that have been coming from Republicans are somewhat the same on this – that Putin should be condemned, he should be isolated. I favor sanctions on Putin. So, for people to characterize that as somehow not being the Reagan position, I think they need to have a re-reading of Reagan, frankly,” Paul added.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
LOL. His legalized illegals and their extended family members can admire it as they pass in and out of the gates with their shiny new Green Cards.
Green cards (which go to someone with a job) are not the problem, bums are.
I'd even vote Cruz/Walker.
Not sure why it should be such a point of intense argument since we’re going to end up with Ron Paul’s foreign policy anyway. It’s more a matter of doing it in a manner where it can be done in a controlled and somewhat orderly matter or in horrible mess where just getting the troops home is a struggle.
Would Cruz/Paul be like CatDog?
Ted did Rand a big favor in my opinion.
Man/Wife, yin/yang
“It’s especially hard to believe that it was only a decade ago, on a cold April day on a small hill in upstate New York, that another of these great thinkers, Frank Meyer, was buried. He’d made the awful journey that so many others had: he pulled himself from the clutches of ‘The [communist] God That Failed,’ and then in his writing fashioned a vigorous new synthesis of traditional and libertarian thought – a synthesis that is today recognized by many as modern conservatism.
It was Frank Meyer who reminded us that the robust individualism of the American experience was part of the deeper current of Western learning and culture. He pointed out that a respect for law, an appreciation for tradition, and regard for the social consensus that gives stability to our public and private institutions, these civilized ideas must still motivate us even as we seek a new economic prosperity based on reducing government interference in the marketplace. Our goals complement each other. We’re not cutting the budget simply for the sake of sounder financial management. This is only a first step toward returning power to the states and communities, only a first step toward reordering the relationship between citizen and government.
We can make government again responsive to the people by cutting its size and scope and thereby ensuring that its legitimate functions are performed efficiently and justly. Because ours is a consistent philosophy of government, we can be very clear: We do not have a separate social agenda, separate economic agenda, and a separate foreign agenda. We have one agenda. Just as surely as we seek to put our financial house in order and rebuild our nation’s defenses, so too we seek to protect the unborn, to end the manipulation of schoolchildren by utopian planners, and permit the acknowledgement of a Supreme Being in our classrooms just as we allow such acknowledgements in other public institutions.”
Reagan speaking on what has become the subject matter of this thread. Pretty interesting stuff. Here’s more from Heritage:
It’s a far cry from the nonsense we’ve seen in this thread about “liberaltarians” being socialists and whatnot.
“I hope they don’t get too bitter, though, because at the end of it they may be running mates.”
I will vote for Cruz, but not if he has Rand Paul as a running mate. I WILL NOT allow that man to get near being POTUS. He is a wackadoodle just like his nutcase daddy.
He is NOT a conservative Republican....he is a Libertarian and IF he had any integrity he would run as a Libertarian and stop screwing up the GOP. I despise Paul and his Libertarian faction as much as I do the GOP establishment that gave us Romney.
I am a Social/Moral Conservative Republican, and I want a presidential candidate that FULLY shares my values and goals.
We’ll miss you I guess, though I hope he runs to at least bring up issues that might otherwise not get brought up.
“These two guys should be on the same side......”
No, No, NO! Paul is NOT a conservative, he is a Libertarian and not of the same camp as Cruz. I will gladly support Cruz until he compromizes and sides with wackadoodle Paul.
It’s never too early for Republicans to take their eyes off the ball and start shooting at each other.
Very true. There’s the philosophy with the “l” and the party with the “L”. I’m often on Reason’s Facebook page “reasoning” with the L types, mostly about immigration. You are correct, many of them are quite nasty. Feel free to use this against them if the situation arises. Tell them you only want the same immigration policies that Galt’s Gulch had in Atlas Shrugged (you had to be invited in), and for the same reasons. Exploding heads will follow.
I’ve mischaracterized nothing.
http://www.paul.senate.gov/files/documents/TrustButVerify.pdf
Why should I when the text of his amendment is so damn easy to read?
You’ll read into it what you want. You’ve shown a propensity for that when you don’t like the plain facts....
“a lot of the time, you have get somebody really mad before they start to question what they have agreed with”
So very true. That argument about immigration has the benefit of using the work of one of their icons and one of her basic tenets (non-contradiction) against them. They have to disavow Ayn Rand, change their view on immigration, or start spinning. They usually start spinning. That’s good. It could lead to thinking.
At least we agree there...
Big L libertarians are exactly as you describe them and really aren’t our friends.
They’ll never run Palin. The left has done too good a job destroying her.
And it won’t be Cruz and Paul because there is not enough ‘diversity.’
It will either be Cruz + white female, black male, black female. His running mate will run a little more to the independent/moderate side to balance out the ‘extremism’ that the left is painting him with.
Or
Paul + Latino male, Latino female, black female, black male. His running mate will run a little more to the socially conservative side to balance out the “Libertarian” that the left is painting him with.
I think it is disgusting that demographics have taken over politics, but it has.
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.