Posted on 04/18/2014 9:52:49 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
Rand Paul will do his best to charm a group Mitt Romney’s top donors next week at an event facilitated by Romney finance director Spencer Zwick.
The Friday luncheon will take place in Boston at the offices of Zwick’s private-equity firm, Solamere Capital, according to a source familiar with the event. Romney’s eldest son Tagg is also a managing partner at the firm, and Romney is the executive chairman.
The event is yet another signal that Paul is preparing a for a serious presidential bid in 2016. Two years before the GOP primary, Paul is attempting to branch out beyond his libertarian-leaning base, and the ability to tap some of the establishment donors who helped Romney raise over $1 billion in 2012 will be critical to that effort.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Rand Paul's immigration speech...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]
Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.
Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.
Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.
If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...
This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.
Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reformLatinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]
[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.[Posted on 01/31/2013 5:08:50 PM PST by xzins]
Rand Paul On Shutdown: "Even Though It Appeared I Was Participating In It, It Was A Dumb Idea"I said throughout the whole battle that shutting down the government was a dumb idea. Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea. And the reason I voted for it, though, is that it's a conundrum. Here's the conundrum. We have a $17 trillion debt and people at home tell me you can't give the president a blank check. We just can't keep raising the debt ceiling without conditions. So unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that and I can't vote for that. But the conundrum is if I don't we do approach these deadlines. So there is an impasse. In 2011, though, we had this impasse and the president did negotiate. We got the sequester. If we were to extend the sequester from discretionary spending to all the entitlements we would actually fix our problem within a few years.[Posted on 11/19/2013 12:16:51 PM by Third Person]
Rand Slams Congress for Funding Egypt's Generals: 'How Does Your Conscience Feel Now?'Sen. Rand Paul is hammering his fellow senators for keeping billions in financial aid flowing to Egypt's military -- even as Cairo's security forces massacre anti-government activists. [by "anti-government activists" is meant church-burning Christian-murdering jihadists][Posted on 08/15/2013 5:44:10 PM PDT by Hoodat]
Thanks Bigtigermike. I can’t wait to see the laughable reaction, the rationalizing, the spinning, the tap-dancing-liars act of his lemming army when they get here.
The GOP remains THE party that ORIGINATED
and still supports both RomneyMarriage (gay marriage)
and RomneyCARE (ObamaCARE).
The GOP continues to GIVE.OBAMA.POWER (GOP).
I don’t trust him either, and frankly he strikes me as feeling entitled to the throne. Get some real experience, Rand. You are not ready for primetime. At least Cruz has experience in DC as an aide and his bringing so many cases before the SC.
Then there is the dynasty thing. Won’t vote for him. Do not trust him on the issues. McConnell? Really Rand?
But instead of developing in a more mature, consistant way core values that would inspire voters to trust and support him, Rand Paul chose to develop political support within the status quo. I'm disgusted. Another politician is lost to the DC fog.
I don’t like his condescention towards Conservatives. He keeps lecturing us just like McCain, Coulter and friends.
That is an arrogance I won’t tolerate.
THAT is what makes him attractive to Team Romney
(the imposers of statism, and haters of conservatism).
“Rand Paul will do his best to charm a group Mitt Romney’s top donors”
If he succeeds he’ll be unbeatable.
Rand Paul will need all the money he can get to crush the bushbots and hillarybots. They are everywhere and the one thing they have in common is their love for big government socialism.
Cruz, Palin, and Sessions are my top candidates.
Those with flaws that are acceptable are: Paul, Perry, Rubio,
Those that I’d rather not but probably will in trying to deny Hillary Clinton: Scott, Pence, Kasich, Gingrich, Huckabee, Bush.
It is clear to me that the only true conservatives (social, fiscal, and defense) up there are Cruz, Palin, Perry
If any up there turn out to be other than pro-life/pro-2nd amendment, then that’s a deal killer and their name goes off the list.
It is not about money.
It is about conservative principles.
Team Romney had and have none.
Rand Paul’s alliance with the liberal RINO wing
makes him only the darling of the MSM and the DNC.
Nonsense — he hasn’t changed one iota, this is just exhibit 405 regarding the way he actually is. He’s a Democrat who claims to be Republican and Conservative and Libertarian, while he is merely a demagogue and turncoat. IOW, he’s exactly like his father.
If one of these is to be the President that leads us out of the fascist wilderness, they must speak out on the Battle of Bunkerville. Rand Paul made some timid comments against tyranny.
From the best the Republicans have to offer, crickets. I predict all three will eventually come down on the side of tyranny. We have no friends in the Give Obama Power party.
Well unless something changes in Kentucky, Rand will need to decide if he wants to run for President or run for reelection to the Senate...because right now he can’t do both. And it would appear Rubio can’t either. I can’t say in this instance I give a flip as I’m not a RP fan at all.
“A bill allowing Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul to simultaneously run for the presidency and re-election to his U.S. Senate seat in 2016 died earlier this week when the Kentucky legislature adjourned for the year.”
I suppose one has to go after the money anywhere they can get it. It isn’t like he’s meeting with the AFL/CIO. I think his message to them will be all about business/economics.
Not one of them says what we need to hear. We need to protect our southern border instead of getting involved in Europe's situations and sending armed BLM agents to assault US citizens. Has anyone connected the dots in a way that they're believable in what they say?
Rand Paul already sounds like he is going to cave on abortion and traditional marriage. He won’t ever get my vote.
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.
