How Rand Paul Is Helping To Reinvent Republicans

[philipped]

Rand needs to rage his focus on the economy and how his economic freedom zones (or something similar) would get people back to work no matter what their race or ethnicity is. Team up with the republican businesspeople and drive this home, it'll boost everyone that has a desire to improve their families. This is the crucible issue of our time and the only non-distraction at the moment. I realize that he can't force this into being but the message is something he should take everywhere and then make his points on other issues in a secondary manner.

An economically centered campaign focusing on populist constitutionally based issues.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

All the more reason to get gay marriage over with so that people won't be distracted by it anymore.

Principle is not a distraction. That's like arrogantly telling pro-lifers to "just get used to legalized child killing, already"---not gonna happen. Much or most of the moral traditionalist population is never going to be "over with" or "get used to" treating homosexual or sin-based unions as the same thing as a couple joined in HOLY matrimony. Sin is not holy, and cannot be blessed by God, which is what the rite of marriage implies.

And gay advocates are simply going to keep the "distractions" coming anyway, by moving on to pushing gay adoption, gay K-12 education, gay theology and whatever else the elites think they can force on the rest of us. The distractions don't end, they just get expanded to a new frontier, so the social right is going to continue taking a stand, if they have any principle in this area. Similarly , libertarians cannot "get over with" or just get used to ever expanding government, taxes, wars, or tyranny either. You end the distractions by confronting the establishment, not by rolling over to them front by front.

 

[Crashland]

Principle is not a distraction. That's like arrogantly telling pro-lifers to "just get used to legalized child killing, already"---not gonna happen. Much or most of the moral traditionalist population is never going to be "over with" or "get used to" treating homosexual or sin-based unions as the same thing as a couple joined in HOLY matrimony. Sin is not holy, and cannot be blessed by God, which is what the rite of marriage implies.

And gay advocates are simply going to keep the "distractions" coming anyway, by moving on to pushing gay adoption, gay K-12 education, gay theology and whatever else the elites think they can force on the rest of us. The distractions don't end, they just get expanded to a new frontier, so the social right is going to continue taking a stand, if they have any principle in this area. Similarly , libertarians cannot "get over with" or just get used to ever expanding government, taxes, wars, or tyranny either. You end the distractions by confronting the establishment, not by rolling over to them front by front.

The pro-life issue is not comparable. No one's human rights get violated when two consenting adults have a relationship.

I'm not asking anyone to treat gay marriage as holy, only that they keep the state out of deciding what is or isn't a holy sanctioned-by-God union. And those poor children that might get adopted by a gay couple... I suppose it would be better for them to leave them in state custody, or in the custody of parents who don't even want the child or who can't afford it, or with a single parent, or aborted...

 

[LawnWake]

People are overestimating how libertarian the Republican party has gotten and I fear that by the G.O.P. being wrongfully associated with libertarianism will hurt libertarianism more than it will help the Republican party.

 

[Crashland]

People are overestimating how libertarian the Republican party has gotten and I fear that by the G.O.P. being wrongfully associated with libertarianism will hurt libertarianism more than it will help the Republican party.

I think people are overestimating the current libertarianism of the GOP, but not overestimating the trend. It's just not happening overnight. I'm still hoping for a more swift political realignment rather than the GOP just slowly evolving, but not sure how realistic that is.

 

[Brett85]

People are overestimating how libertarian the Republican party has gotten and I fear that by the G.O.P. being wrongfully associated with libertarianism will hurt libertarianism more than it will help the Republican party.

I don't see how the GOP has become more libertarian at all when you see polls which show Romney and Bush way out in front of the other Republicans running. It's just really sad. It just seems like it's getting more and more hopeless all the time.

 

[Warlord]

I don't see how the GOP has become more libertarian at all when you see polls which show Romney and Bush way out in front of the other Republicans running. It's just really sad. It just seems like it's getting more and more hopeless all the time.

The early polls mean nothing. Guilani once led the polling in 2007 for a long time and was considered the frontrunner. He went no where in Iowa or NH> same for Bush

 

[Peace&Freedom]

The pro-life issue is not comparable. No one's human rights get violated when two consenting adults have a relationship.

I'm not asking anyone to treat gay marriage as holy, only that they keep the state out of deciding what is or isn't a holy sanctioned-by-God union.

The state should then BOTH stay out of doing that, and out of conferring legitimacy on the gay unions that the religious ceremony and term "marriage" conveys, by staying out of marriage altogether. The libertarian view is, separate marriage from state, not "keep the the social right from using the state on the issue, but allow the social left to use the state, to make their view the norm." What next, shall the state issue government baptism licenses to atheists, so that they can also declare themselves officially baptized, just like believers?

 

[Crashland]

The state should then BOTH stay out of doing that, and out of conferring legitimacy on the gay unions that the religious ceremony and term "marriage" conveys, by staying out of marriage altogether. The libertarian view is, separate marriage from state, not "keep the the social right from using the state on the issue, but allow the social left to use the state, to make their view the norm." What next, shall the state issue government baptism licenses to atheists, so that they can also declare themselves officially baptized, just like believers?

Yes, I share that opinion that gov't should stay out of "marriage". If anything, it could recognize only "civil unions" whether gay or straight, therefore it would not be making a religious statement by using the term which religions apparently have a monopoly on. Or, as you said the state could just not recognize anything. I don't have a particular preference.

 

[LawnWake]

I think people are overestimating the current libertarianism of the GOP, but not overestimating the trend. It's just not happening overnight. I'm still hoping for a more swift political realignment rather than the GOP just slowly evolving, but not sure how realistic that is.

I think the actual evolution that took place was in the perception of the party: it is perceived as becoming more libertarian. But any possible libertarian influx in there is not enough to really offset the party's trajectory. I do think there is an upwards trend in libertarian politics as a whole, thoguh. But I think this trend is mostly outside of American electoral politics.

I don't see how the GOP has become more libertarian at all when you see polls which show Romney and Bush way out in front of the other Republicans running. It's just really sad. It just seems like it's getting more and more hopeless all the time.

Yeah. I think the only trend in the GOP isn't them becoming more libertarian, but being called more libertarian.