Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance

[Brett85]

The GOP should stand for something more than just being against gay marriage.

The GOP never even talks about that issue. It's the Democrats and media that bring it up all the time and turn it into some kind of major issue.

 

[musicmax]

I don't think that Rand saying that the Republican Party should "soften its edge on social issues" his going to win him much support in the GOP primary in 2016. If he's bending over backwards to please the rank and file Republican voters on foreign policy issues, it doesn't make any sense to alienate them on social issues. He should make the states' rights argument on social issues, but not make it sound like the Republican Party should become liberal on social issues.

Article and Section of the Constitution authorizing federal encroachment into social issues at all, please.

 

[Brett85]

It just seems to me like Rand is trying too hard to please everyone here, and in the end will end up without a base at all. If you read through the comments on Facebook there are plenty of Republicans who are mad at him for his anti war post. So now he has some neo-conservative Republican voters mad at him for his foreign policy views, and he has people in the liberty movement mad at him for his foreign policy views. He needs to be much more consistent and actually pick a side.

 

[Brett85]

Article and Section of the Constitution authorizing federal encroachment into social issues at all, please.

What part of my comment did you not understand?

"He should make the states' rights argument on social issues."

 

[Dystopian]

It just seems to me like Rand is trying too hard to please everyone here, and in the end will end up without a base at all. If you read through the comments on Facebook there are plenty of Republicans who are mad at him for his anti war post. So now he has some neo-conservative Republican voters mad at him for his foreign policy views, and he has people in the liberty movement mad at him for his foreign policy views. He needs to be much more consistent and actually pick a side.

Good post. I agree.

 

[supermario21]

I don't think that Rand saying that the Republican Party should "soften its edge on social issues" his going to win him much support in the GOP primary in 2016. If he's bending over backwards to please the rank and file Republican voters on foreign policy issues, it doesn't make any sense to alienate them on social issues. He should make the states' rights argument on social issues, but not make it sound like the Republican Party should become liberal on social issues.

I think that's the point he's making. I think he's saying that we should be ok if Republicans say these things should be left to the states, and just fight the issues on the state level.

 

[Brett85]

I think that's the point he's making. I think he's saying that we should be ok if Republicans say these things should be left to the states, and just fight the issues on the state level.

Yeah, I hope he frames it that way in the future. I was reading through the Facebook comments and some of the comments criticized him for his statement on social issues. One guy was actually convinced that he's pro choice on the abortion issue because of the statement he made.

 

[supermario21]

Yeah, I hope he frames it that way in the future. I was reading through the Facebook comments and some of the comments criticized him for his statement on social issues. One guy was actually convinced that he's pro choice on the abortion issue because of the statement he made.

Are you kidding?! Rand was just at the big pro-life rally in DC talking about how abortion basically has to be illegal in all circumstances in order to protect liberty. Abortion is a big issue for me but I like the states rights or get government out of it completely stance on gay marriage.

 

[TheTyke]

It's not like having every position is a bad thing in a primary (See Romney... lol ) But in seriousness, keep in mind media articles aren't known for using full quotes.

Rand is right.. it's the liberty message that wins general elections, and any party that wants to win will have to adopt (and mean) that.

 

[supermario21]

Sen. Rand Paul, a first-term Kentucky Republican who is a physician, spoke about times he looked "into the eyes of one-pound babies … cradled their small bodies in the palm of one hand."

"I believe that great nations and great civilizations spring from a people who have a moral compass," Paul said. "Our nation is adrift, adrift in a wilderness where right and wrong have become subservient to a hedonism of the moment. I believe our country is in need of a revival."


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...paul-lead-abortion-opposition-march-for-life/

 

[Brett85]

Are you kidding?! Rand was just at the big pro-life rally in DC talking about how abortion basically has to be illegal in all circumstances in order to protect liberty. Abortion is a big issue for me but I like the states rights or get government out of it completely stance on gay marriage.

It's just that he'll get accused of flip flopping if he actually comes out in favor of gay marriage, since he said that he was opposed to it when he ran for the Senate and recently gave a speech to a group of social conservatives where he said he was opposed to it. It's not a huge issue to me, but it could hurt him in a GOP primary if he seems soft or like he's flip flopping on the issue. But, I basically think that all he has to say is something like, "I personally believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but the issue should be handled by the states." I don't think that kind of statement would cause much of a backlash at all.

 

[Carehn]

And yet he wants to go to war anytime Israel says so.

Ya... I don't know anymore.

 

[Carehn]

We just had a 36 page thread about this. Now we're going to bury our head and pretend it never happened? Go read his words. Rand Paul places Israeli interests over American interests. He will treat any attack on Israel as an attack on the United States. He said that, that's about as bellicose as it gets.

I'm sorry Rand, you can't be an Isreal-first neocon and a non-interventionist Ron Paul type. Pick a side and stop talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Yes! Yes! Now work the body! The body!

 

[Carehn]

It's just that he'll get accused of flip flopping if he actually comes out in favor of gay marriage, since he said that he was opposed to it when he ran for the Senate and recently gave a speech to a group of social conservatives where he said he was opposed to it. It's not a huge issue to me, but it could hurt him in a GOP primary if he seems soft or like he's flip flopping on the issue. But, I basically think that all he has to say is something like, "I personally believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but the issue should be handled by the states." I don't think that kind of statement would cause much of a backlash at all.

You know what! FUCK ALL THIS!

Rand needs to grow some fucking balls.

And all you people need to as well.

'ohhh, hes Ron's kid we have to support him'

I don't and I don't vote for fibbers! This movement best wake the hell up. We are becoming a joke if WE of all people start justifying what ''our'' politician is doing.

 

[DylanWaco]

It just seems to me like Rand is trying too hard to please everyone here, and in the end will end up without a base at all.

This is his fundamental problem on a national level.

 

[Rudeman]

Rand is trying to tightrope the line of supporting a strong national defense without being an aggressor. Even with Israel it was to support Israel in the case of an attack on Israel, not that we would support them in a preemptive attack.

Obviously it isn't a very easy thing to do.

 

[July]

The GOP never even talks about that issue. It's the Democrats and media that bring it up all the time and turn it into some kind of major issue.

Well, whether it is the GOP bringing it up or responding to the Dems or the media bringing it up first, it still becomes a major wedge issue that ends up trumping all other issues. It does matter how Republicans respond. So perhaps it would be better for Republicans to be more open to responding with something like "let the states decide". I think that is the more pro liberty stance anyway, than asking for a federal ban.

Plus I think that would go over much better in a state like, say, New Hampshire. I know people who refuse to listen to anything else Republicans might say because of this one issue, even though they aren't gay themselves, because they think it symbolizes how bigoted the party is. That is the perception. And from polling I've seen, there does seem to be a generational gap, with more younger people tending to support it, so I agree it does alienate youth to some degree.

 

[kathy88]

Pretty interesting to see the same people defending his Israel comments vilifying the social issues comments. Me thinks thou can't have it both ways.

 

[July]

This is his fundamental problem on a national level.

It's a problem for all Republicans, on the national level. What works to get elected in the primary is becoming more and more far removed from what works to get elected in the general. If we don't want the conservative base to shrink into oblivion, someone really needs to figure out how to tie a coherent message together that works both in the primary and general.

Rand definitely has his work cut out for him, that is true.

 

[Brett85]

Pretty interesting to see the same people defending his Israel comments vilifying the social issues comments. Me thinks thou can't have it both ways.

I actually criticized him on both. I'm a little bit more of a paleo conservative than a down the line libertarian. But I guess you can't always get everything you want in a politician. My ideal politician would probably be a paleo-con like Chuck Baldwin, who likely won't ever be President.