Posted on 04/19/2015 6:22:22 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Bernie Sanders couldnt have said it better:
Theres a group of folks in our party who would have troops in six countries right now maybe more, the Kentucky senator told hundreds of activists at a GOP cattle call that has drawn every major presidential aspirant. This is something, if you watch closely, that will separate me from many other Republicans. The other Republicans will criticize Hillary Clinton and the president for their foreign policy, but they would have done the same thing just 10 times over!
Six countries maybe more? Which countries, Senator? And how many of your rivals have proposed sending troops to Syria? To Yemen? To Libya? (Do we have to count Lindsey Graham?)
Rand Paul is trying to separate himself from other candidates on foreign policy while not appearing to be a head-in-the-sand isolationist. But in doing so, does he have to lie like a Democrat about his opponents?
Everyone who will criticize me wanted troops on the ground, our troops on the ground, in Libya, he said. It was a mistake to be in Libya. We are less safe. Jihadists swim in our swimming pool now. Its a disaster.
Did Ted Cruz want troops on the ground in Libya? Did Scott Walker, Chris Christie, or any other GOP governor who might run for president want troops on the ground in Libya? Marco Rubio specifically advised against troops on the ground in Libya, believing that the president could have intervened more decisively but rejecting American military intervention.
Pauls statement is either an ignorant rant or a baldfaced lie. Falsely accusing opponents of things they dont believe and wouldnt do obscures Pauls real problems with rank-and-file Republicans who want a president to stand up strongly for American interests and want to make America the pre-eminent military and economic power in the world once again. Many simply dont believe his foreign-policy ideas are proactive enough. They are suspicious of his libertarian leanings on national-defense strategy.
One aspect of a Paul campaign Republican regulars can get behind is his position on NSA snooping:
Contrasting himself with most others in the field, Paul also promised to end the federal governments collection of American phone records if elected president. Im a Republican who believes in the right to privacy, he said. It doesnt mean collecting 300 million peoples phone records. The 4th amendment is not consistent with a warrant that says Mr. Verizon on it. Last I heard Mr. Verizon isnt a person.
Your phone records are yours, he declared. Its none of the governments damn business what youre doing on your phone.
You can say damn in New Hampshire, cant you? he quipped.
Damn straight, a man yelled back from the crowd.
NSA spying is a peripheral national-security issue and there is disagreement among the candidates about how much of what the NSA has been doing is really necessary. This is a legitimate way for Paul to put distance between himself and his rivals as long as he accurately enumerates their positions.
But otherwise, Pauls rank dishonesty in describing what his opponents would do if elected is intolerable. Might we see a sound bite of Paul dishonestly ripping his opponents in a Hillary Clinton commercial? Perhaps the senator should think about that the next time he feels compelled to grossly exaggerate the positions of his opponents.
The Rand Paul campaign propaganda sounds like it is in co-hoots with the communist Russians and communist Chinese to justify their increase of military spending to equal that of the USA’s military spending to level the playing field for Russia and China..
In war time like during WWII that would be treasonous and unpatriotic.
In ANY time, it is TREASON !
You just wait
Primary season brings out the long knives
Soon enough if you are not behind Ted enough you will be accused of being a Hillary lover
And in the end...,channeling Abby Road in my head
It’s all for naught
Im a libertarian, and Im supporting Ted Cruz
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3278302/posts
Supporters deserting Rand Paul for Ted Cruz (Including key people)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3273028/posts
Can Ted Cruz Make Rand Paul Obsolete?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3281265/posts
Ron Paul supporters bolt Rand Paul camp -Support Ted Cruz
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3276663/posts
Paulville getting lonely?
He’s sending troops here and they’re dying on the beaches.
Iowa, NH and Nevada will tell :b
and with the huckster joining the fray, Teds evangelical support will splinter a bit.
BTW, a couple of Paul bots putting their support around Ted does not equal a mass defection. Ted is going to have to play nice with Rand because he needs his base, but I hope he goes on full attack against Paul.
Lol
Even the Ron Paul blimp folks have gone over to Cruz. Cruz’s committee chair in Iowa is the Santorum man from 2012 and Bob Vander Plaats (arguably the biggest powerhouse in Iowa) predicts a Cruz win there. I myself worked two campaigns in Iowa and was a volunteer at the Polk County GOP headquarters for years.
If what you’re saying is that Ron is going to outperform Rand in Iowa, I think you’re on crazy pills. Despite what you may think, tea partiers, breitbart readers, drudge readers, the blaze readers all dig Rand. Rand has much more conservative appeal than his dad. Rand will easily outperform Ron in Iowa and may even outright win it, since the GOP field is so loaded. Rand will also win NH and Nevada, mark my words.
Fax me whatever you’re smoking.
You may want Rand to lose, but deluding yourself that he’s less popular than his old man doesn’t do you any favors. Nevada is a caucus state, Rand wins. New Hampshire had strong Rand get out the vote grassroots, win. Iowa Rand is placing second and third in the polls. This is fine since his grassroots machine can make up the difference, possible win... If not, second place.
A) He is less popular than his father and (B) his father never won. As for Nevada:
Nevada poll: Sandoval early favorite to succeed Reid; Cruz surges to lead pack with Walker
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3274863/posts
Ted Cruz aims to win the West
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3275274/posts
Nevada is a caucus state, Paul’s got that covered. And if you truly believe that Rand is less popular than Ron, be prepared for a rude awakening. This is all.
Just for my edification, what was your screen name the last time you were here?
Z taxman. I’m sorry if I’m not an echo chamber to your own beliefs, I promise sincerely I will try to work on that, if that’s ok with you of course.
You’re too self assured here to be a month and a half old. Whatever.
Meaning I should either tow the line or shut the hell up? I believe in extremely limited federal government and more empowered state government. I believe in the free market. I believe our culture is crass and off the deepend. This makes us allies, or should. But since I like Paul maybe not then? Funny thing is if Cruz wasn’t in the race Paul would be the most conservative candidate by far.
Your definition of conservative and mine differ.
How do you know that? Regardless, I’m an anti federalist of the highest order, in fact I call myself a neoconfederate. I believe each state ought to be supreme in holding their own law with the exception of military, monetary and abortion policy.
I also believe that the suppression of capitalism is a boon for cronys (wallstreet) and criminals (those most vested in the continuation of the drug wars are the cartels). But call me whatever you like.
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.