Dana Milbank: Standing with Rand, nervously

supermario21

Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
4,060
Coming from a liberal (I think), this is pretty good.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...0cc-11e2-9cfd-36d6c9b5d7ad_story.html?hpid=z5


“Stand with Rand,” urged placards at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, where Sen. Rand Paul won last weekend’s presidential straw poll, cementing the Kentucky Republican’s status as a favorite of the conservative movement.

So it’s with some trepidation that I confess that I, too, Stand with Rand.

For the moment, I am Standing with Rand on one leg only; his isolationist foreign policy and his calamitous plan to eliminate federal deficits in five years make it imprudent to jump in with both feet. But consider:

On Tuesday, Paul endorsed a version of immigration reform that would allow the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants in this country to become legal.

Last week, he outlined an idea that would end government discrimination against gay marriage.

The week before, Paul defied the hawks in his party to lead a 13-hour filibuster in protest of the Obama administration’s secrecy over its drone warfare program — a stance Democrats would have championed if a Republican were president.

And the week before that, he was one of only four Republicans voting to confirm Chuck Hagel as defense secretary.

Taken together, these pleasant surprises suggest that Paul is more complex than his tea-party caricature and more savvy than the libertarian gadfly his father had been. In his speech to CPAC, the younger Paul didn’t even mention the Federal Reserve or the gold standard. He has spoken, instead, of reaching out to minorities, young voters and other Democratic constituencies.

“I’ve never met a new immigrant looking for a free lunch,” he told the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce on Tuesday, calling on his party to embrace higher levels of immigration. Paul proposed “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.”

At CPAC, Paul told the activists: “We must stand for something so powerful and so popular that it brings together people from the left and the right and the middle. We need a Republican Party that shows up on the South Side of Chicago and shouts at the top of our lungs: ‘We are the party of jobs and opportunity.’ ”

It would be naive to think that Paul, as he prepares for a 2016 presidential run, will pull off a mass conversion of Republicans to his libertarianism. But the senator, if he chooses, has the potential to build a force that could shake up politics — not a third party but perhaps an informal coalition that occupies a space between religious conservatives and tax-and-spend liberals.

Paul won’t get far if he persists with the foreign policy he laid out earlier this year at the Heritage Foundation; he describes himself as a “realist,” but his form of realism might have sounded good to Senate Republicans in the 1930s. And, like his father, he makes politically expedient exceptions to his libertarianism; last week he introduced the Life at Conception Act, which would effectively outlaw abortion.

Still, his message has the power of the early tea party’s theme before the movement was hijacked by religious and corporate interests. And it is powerful enough to have Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, fearing the junior senator from his home state. “Rand reminded the world that politics isn’t just about tactics,” McConnell gushed at CPAC, praising the filibuster he belatedly supported. “It’s about standing up for your values and your principles. It’s about courage. . . . It was truly inspiring.”

But will McConnell be inspired by the principles Paul advocated last week? That’s when Paul told reporters, in a session hosted by National Review, that even though he supports the “historical definition” of marriage, “I’m not for limiting contracts between adults.” He floated an idea “to make the tax code more neutral, where it doesn’t mention the word marriage.”

And will McConnell praise the courage and values Paul showed Tuesday, when he proposed legal status for illegal immigrants? Paul outlined a probationary system under which they could “get in line” for citizenship. “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.”

Paul said that Republicans, in “our zeal for border control,” have “sometimes obscured our respect and admiration for immigrants.” This was similar to his CPAC speech, in which he charged that “the GOP of old has grown stale and moss-covered.”

It’s not yet clear how dedicated Paul really is to moss removal. But as long as he’s scrubbing, I’ll Stand with Rand.
 
Next person that calls Ron a gadly is going to get a non-aggression mouthful from me.
 
Hillary is not a lock with all Democrats. She supported the iraq war and PATRIOT act and lost the nomination in 2008 thanks to that.
 
They said the same thing in 2005. She got beat then and can be beat again.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Republicans were against "gay" marriage and against amnesty for illegal immigrants in 2005.


Hillary Clinton most popular U.S. politician, poll shows
WASHINGTON | Fri Feb 8, 2013 11:16am EST

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/08/us-usa-politics-clinton-idUSBRE9170NZ20130208

Hillary Clinton most popular US politician, poll shows
By REUTERS 02/03/2013

http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=302629

jpost = The Jerusalem Post

Hillary Clinton surpasses Barack Obama as the most popular US politician
Feb 8, 2013

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...-popular-us-politician/slideshow/18406078.cms

Hillary Clinton Rise as Most Popular Politician Prompting Buyers’ Remorse
By John McCormick - Sep 15, 2011 9:00 PM PT

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-16/clinton-popularity-prompts-some-remorse-poll.html

Sweet revenge! Poll reveals Hillary Clinton is more popular
than Obama - and is now America's favourite politician

By HANNAH ROBERTS
UPDATED: 14:55 EST, 16 September 2011

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...as-popular-politician-One-wish-President.html
 
Last edited:
Hillary is not a lock with all Democrats. She supported the iraq war and PATRIOT act and lost the nomination in 2008 thanks to that.

She's also a huge supporter of the war on drugs. Rand could bring up all of those issues in a debate with her and actually take positions that resonate more with Democrats than her positions.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, Republicans were against "gay" marriage and amnesty for illegal immigrants in 2005.

She was popular in 2005 when she was a senator from New York so I don't care what the press say, she got beat before and can be beat again. No one will let her walk to the nomination. Someone will step forward probably to her left like Obama did.
 
...she got beat before and can be beat again...

Sure. But do you believe Obama came outta nowhere and ambushed her, or do you believe Obama constitutes fruition of a long-term project?


No one will let her walk to the nomination.

Biden WANTS it, but Biden is NOTHING if not a Blue Team player.


Someone will step forward probably to her left like Obama did.

Left of Socialist Obama would be WING NUT territory...fringe...non-starter.
 
Expect a liberal governor like Patrick, O'Malley or the CT one to give Hillary a run for her money in Iowa. Don't forget Iowa love their liberals (Harkin has been senator for 30 years) and they elevated Obama so there's no question she is vulnrable in an Iowa dog fight to someone on her left despite universal name ID, endorsements and a fawning press.
 
Expect a liberal governor like Patrick, O'Malley or the CT one to give Hillary a run for her money in Iowa.

Expect liberals to play TEAM BALL to keep the White House long enough for the ink on OBAMACARE IS THE LAW OF THE LAND to dry.


...she is vulnrable in an Iowa dog fight to someone on her left despite universal name ID, endorsements and a fawning press.

UNIVERSAL actually does apply to one-name-like-a-star Hillary's name recognition. Incredible, but true.

FAWNING PRESS is no trivial thing.

But Hillary may decide she doesn't WANT it. Globetrotting as a dot.org looks like less stress and bigger bucks, and I DO think Bill & Hillary LIKE each other. On the other hand, ambitious Bill and ambitious Hillary would really ENJOY another stint in the White House.
 
Expect liberals to play TEAM BALL to keep the White House long enough for the ink on OBAMACARE IS THE LAW OF THE LAND to dry.




UNIVERSAL actually does apply to one-name-like-a-star Hillary's name recognition. Incredible, but true.

FAWNING PRESS is no trivial thing.

But Hillary may decide she doesn't WANT it. Globetrotting as a dot.org looks like less stress and bigger bucks, and I DO think Bill & Hillary LIKE each other. On the other hand, ambitious Bill and ambitious Hillary would really ENJOY another stint in the White House.

There are plenty of liberal governors who can raise money and mount a grassroots campaign in Iowa and they will have visions of becoming president. They could care less about Hillary or what the press say if they think they can be president they will take her on and try and get her bogged down in Iowa which is pretty much what Obama pulled off last time...
 
Last edited:
There are plenty of liberal governors who can raise money and mount a grassroots campaign...

Like Hillary can? I think not.


They could care less about [the frontrunner] or what the press say if they think they can be president they will take her on and try and get her bogged down in Iowa...

Reads like a Liberty Moovement mission statement.


...which is pretty what Obama pulled off last time...

You think OBAMA pulled that off, do you? And you tell others to WAKE UP, as to the machinations behind/before the elections?
 
Like Hillary can? I think not.




Reads like a Liberty Moovement mission statement.




You think OBAMA pulled that off, do you? And you tell others to WAKE UP, as to the machinations behind/before the elections?

You don't need much money to win the Iowa caucus. Hillary has all the money and name ID in the world but she had in 08 as well and it didn't win her the nomination. She is vulnerable to a grassroots liberal campaigner who has visions of being president and there's plenty in governors mansions that will know that (MA, CT, NY, MD for starters)
 
She's also a huge supporter of the war on drugs. Rand could bring up all of those issues in a debate with her and actually take positions that resonate more with Democrats than her positions.


His LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION bill flies in the face of the suggestion that Rand can pull Democrats from Hillary-or-whoever.
 
Back
Top