Posted on 03/14/2014 12:08:38 PM PDT by US Navy Vet
In an interview with Vocativ.com, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) expressed a desire for factions within the Republican Party to “agree to disagree” on hot-button social issues so that the GOP tent may expand to include more young people and alternative viewpoints.
Asked whether the general consensus at last week’s Conservative Political Action Conference was that the party must butt out of social issues, Paul replied:
I think that the Republican Party, in order to get bigger, will have to agree to disagree on social issues. The Republican Party is not going to give up on having quite a few people who do believe in traditional marriage. But the Republican Party also has to find a place for young people and others who don’t want to be festooned by those issues.
Paul maintained that his own view of gay marriage is one that allows the states to make decisions based on local mores, while the federal government “ought to take a neutral position” on the tax and benefit issues that arise from marriage.
The libertarian-leaning senator’s comments about the GOP echoes that of former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels who, in 2011, suggested the party ought to call for a “truce” on social issues in order to focus on the economic recession.
His comments were immediately rebuked by social conservative types likes former Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Sen. Rick Santorum.
Sen. Paul will likely face similar criticism, as certain conservatives eye the 2016 primaries and continue the push to rally the base and distance themselves from each other in unique ways.
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
Ooh, the old stepping on the rake trick.
If you give up social issues then the country sinks into the crapper and there will be no economic issues for Libertarians to focus on because there will be no money.
Um. So... Sen. Paul suggests that we give up our principles so that the GOP can “have a bigger base”; and the reason we’d want the GOP to win under those circumstances is... in order to promote our principles?
This must be some rare idiomatic version of “logic” of which I was not previously aware.
(What, exactly, would be left to defend? The right of Krispy Kreme to come in more than one flavour?)
The federal government is the main force behind advancing the Leftist social agenda - the agenda of death. A sampling of some of the evils big government sponsors:
***“sodomite rights” (a legal oxymoron) – forwarded by BIG GOVERNMENT;
***the infanticide of around 70 million unborn – state anti-abortion laws prevented by BIG GOVERNMENT
***sexual perversion taught to children as young as kindergarteners – forced upon them by BIG GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS
***throughout history, more people (hundreds of millions) have been murdered by their own GOVERNMENT than by any invading army
If we kill the excess in government and get it back into its constitutional cage, we won't have to worry about agreement/disagreement on these other issues because they would be decided at the state level. Fact is, at the state level, abortion would probably be universally banned and sodomite "rights" would in many states be rejected.
Vote for the guy who best understands that GOVERNMENT IS the political, economic problem and THE FREE MARKET IS the solution. Getting rid of the unconstitutional portion of the federal government will automatically allow the American People to cure many of our social ills as well.
Previously, and for generations, republicans comprise seem to be - dem propose a 10% tax increase, gop shouts victory at only 5% but year after year the combined increases have killed the country.
With libertarians, dem propose a 10% increase, Libertarians say a 10% decrease and we shout victory at 0%.
That's the spirit! And who is this Jesus guy that thinks he knows better than Moses?
HOLD THE LINE!! Don't let them tell you we must love thy neighbor and turn the other cheek! We are and always have been right on the social issues.
RAND PAUL
Evidence the Libertarian party is infiltrating the Republican Party with their immoral stances
FOR PEACE!
FOR POT!
FOR LEGAL HOOKERS!
FOR LOWERING THE AGE OF CONSENT FOR HOMOSEXUAL MALES!
FOR PAUL!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbebbqyQG6Y
Peter Schiff tells CT Libertarians they need to INFILTRATE and LIE to control the GOP
Without a social founding, fiscal issues will always devolve to base human nature, i.e. what can the government give me today.
This is something “fiscal conservatives” and libertarians fundamentally do not understand: there is no such thing as fiscal conservatism separated from its “social” aka moral roots.
Fiscally conservative and socially moderate is a platform at war with itself.
Conservatism works best with Reagan’s triad: fiscally conservative, socially conservative, strong military defense. Anything else is our side compromising before we even come to the table.
And you can't win elections by pushing away people that agree with you on more issues than your opposition.
So, they vote for your opposition instead, and your response is to complain because they won't support you.
Yeppir.
And you don't understand that fiscal conservatives and libertarians don't accept your premise. You can argue until you are blue in the face, but neither side will agree.
This is what Rand Paul means by "agreeing to disagree". Your choice is to work on the things you agree about, or lose because you refuse to set aside your differences.
“The Republican Party is not going to give up on having quite a few people who do believe in traditional marriage. But the Republican Party also has to find a place for young people and others who don’t want to be festooned by those issues.”
IOW, social conservatives: Just vote for us and shut the hell up!
This cup of STFU has been brought to you by Rand Paul & the GOP-E.
It depends on the social issue.
The simple fact is that conservatives aren’t going to win without picking up at least some of the libertarian vote. Personally I think a compromise on drug legalization might be enough but I have yet to see a libertarian willing to accept decriminalization is a reasonable compromise.
The only other issue is gay marriage and that’s not a compromise conservatives should be willing to accept.
He doesn’t stand for something and readily falls for anything. What’s bad is he tries to make others fall.
Since the hard-core libertarians aren’t going to lift a finger to help me on issues I care about, why should I help them?
“In other words, Conservatives have to compromise with libertarians”
There are a lot of conservatives who believe in states rights. Me being one of them. Rick Perry being another. He’s not a Libertarian and neither am I. Believing in states rights does not make you a Libertarian. It just means that the states get to decide a lot of issues for themselves.
The Washington virus has infected Paul, he is toast.
He had the “Libertarian Virus” first!
GDit...I knew it!!! Thank God it didn’t take him forever to reveal his true beliefs.
RP, which issues would like us to cave on first?
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.