Posted on 04/10/2015 7:58:54 AM PDT by Kaslin
Paradigms are hard to change that’s why Cruz didn’t offer any real opposition to McConnell either, and he congratulated Thad for his disgusting win in the primary. I’m not going to speak for you but I don’t know what it’s like in the bowels of the DC GOP machine. I’m not real big on Ron Paul’s son, but I don’t think a lot of the criticisms from Freepers are fair.
Thanks for posting that, Paul was actually playing hide the pea, and the libertarians are concealing that the part about him revealing yet once again, that he is pro-choice.
Is Rand Paul the most like Mitt Romney?
How did Paul describe himself in that interview? "In general, I'm pro-life.", -----"in general"?
Anything less than a consistent warrior for liberty will either assure Hillary will be president, or assure we’ll be a third world oligarchy.
Rand Paul to steer clear of Mississippi runoff
Rand Paul: Its a misnomer to say McConnell isnt conservative
Rand Paul To Campaign for Romney
March, 2013Rand Paul endorses Mitch McConnell in 2014 Senate race, wont back tea party challenge
Wow, still putting the best spin on Paul and his pro-choice politics.
I’m being honest about what I’ll do if it comes down to Hillary versus XYZ.
I’ll vote for XYZ if I can at all bring myself to do it. If not, I’ll stay home. The third parties are a joke.
Did you read something positive in there?
Cruz NEVER campaigned or supported Thad.
Paul ACTIVELY supported and campaigned for McConnell.
It is regrettable that you do NOT see the difference.
Paul ran as Tea Party conservative.
He has been anything but A Tea Party Senator.
A difference you fail to notice, as well.
Lol Good Line
Something there is something about a candidate that just sets you off and gives you a glimpse of what’s inside - like Obama not placing his hand over his heart during the national anthem.
For me, it is watching Rand walk down congressional aisles with his hands behind his back. Who does that ?
Think Napoleon.
I read an attempt to soft pedal his pro-choice efforts, to find a positive way to describe his pro-choice campaigning.
Rand Paul is pushing an agenda on republicans when he spreads his message on abortion, he opposes the GOP on abortion and social issues.
Where do you read soft-pedal pro-choice? Is it where I say he’s not as bad as Romney and not as good as ‘life of mother’ advocates?
Do you know any life of mother advocates?
All the people carping about Rand Paul’s nastiness, etc., should go to the referenced article, skip to page 2 of it, and click on the interview Rand Paul had with Wolf Blitzer on CNN after he suggested that Wasserman-Schultz be asked about how the Dems should view a 7 pound baby in the womb.
He destroyed her, with her own words, and on CNN at that.
Anyone who doesn’t at least acknowledge that is so biased against Paul that you’re not being rational. You might not like him for President, but no other candidate, or prospective candidate, has managed to do what he did in that series of exchanges. No one.
I think Rand Paul's problem is that he really hasn't taken a position at all. He claims to be pro-life but does he really believe the principle of life beginning at conception or even with the first heartbeat? Would he take the position that the unborn from the first heartbeat to the last would have a right to live as much as the mother who is sitting in the abortion clinic contemplating ending that life?
One problem we have is that simply too many women have had abortions and are not willing to accept the fact that they are guilty of a heinous sin. American's have gotten away from the notion that acts against God's commandments are sinful. They justify their sins in order to appease their own consciences and as a result they are more than willing to accept sin as acceptable behavior both the the world and to God.
I really don't know where Rand Paul stands on a spiritual level in regard to issues of life. He seems to take a clinical approach to the subject, which tells me he is not going to push any pro-life agenda. He will mouth the right words to appease the Conservatives, but temper them so as not to overly offend the abortion loving crowd.
His approach to politics seems to be predicated more on appeasing his opponents than exciting his supporters.
If I was a Paul supporter, I would welcome your post 40, especially the part about him possibly being so much of a medical expert that he may be communicating over our heads and giving us an impression that he isn’t as pro-life as he might be.
At least your defense of him is weakening, and getting better than what it has been.
Rand Paul is an oddball. His father always seemed a little weird in the way he carried himself, paced his words, expressed his ideas. He is the same. Living across the river from Kentucky, I get to hear him a good amount. There’s always that odd delivery, posture, methodology.
I’ve never heard him asked when he thinks life begins. I imagine that libertarians hate getting nailed down on that, because it will automatically blow up any pro-choice notions that they might have. Libertarians can’t insist on the liberty of the individual and simultaneously be killing off individuals. It would be a glaring contradiction that they couldn’t avoid.
Rand Paul has definitely taken a position if one has followed him.
In 2010 he was clearly pro-life to win that election, there was no confusion about his claimed views, and after winning that election he switched to his current position, his true position, for the last couple of years he has been trying to move the GOP into a pro-choice party.
The thing is about abortionand about a lot of thingsis that I think people get tied up in all these details of, sort of, youre this or this or that, or youre hard and fast (on) one thing or the other, Paul told Elliott. Ive supported both bills with and without (exceptions), you know. In general, I am pro-life.
I suppose a politician might welcome being told they can’t nail down their position because they’re in the weeds, but I wouldn’t see it as a positive.
I keep hoping that all of the conservative leaning candidates wake up on all kinds of things. I think Walker has woken up on immigration. Maybe Paul will wake up and finally define when he thinks life begins.
Do you know anybody who is a ‘life of the mother’ pro-life?
“I read an attempt to soft pedal his pro-choice efforts, to find a positive way to describe his pro-choice campaigning.”
You can not like Paul all day but just flat out calling him pro choice because he supports 1 exception to abortion ban is pretty ignorant.
The only time he has said he sees an exception is when the life of the mother is threatened. He’s complelty against all other forms of abortion citing the 14th amendment. At that point the doctor and mother have to make the tough choice between losing the child and saving the mother or sticking with it and possibly losing both. I’m not sure if want a gov official getting involved in that situation. He’s not advocating any person going down to planned parenthood and getting an abortion as a form of birth control. We understand that Ted Cruz is your guy but simply lying about the other candidates is a democratic tactic perfected by Harry Reid. Don’t be like him.
What’s the difference between Sarah Palin supporting John McCain and Rand Paul supporting Mitch McConnell?
A lot of highly respected Conservatives voted for Mitch McConnell as Senate Majority Leader and John Boehner as Speaker.
If Rand Paul’s support of Mitch McConnell failed the litmus test then pretty much all of the candidates are going to fail the litmus test.
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.