1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Rand Paul 2016 Tough to Stand with Rand as he keeps Changing

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by glynch, Apr 8, 2015.

  1. glynch

    glynch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    16,980
    Likes Received:
    2,738
    Rand tries to promote a sort of hip young image. He isn't just another conservative big money Republican. You can support market fundamentalism and have peace, too. Just don't ask him if private business owners should be allowed to refuse to serve African Americans or gays.

    Op-Ed 'Stand with Rand' Paul? But where, exactly?


    Where does Rand Paul stand--what does he really believe--on foreign policy? It's nearly impossible to tell

    Rand Paul's numerous & sometimes bizarre contradictions on foreign policy call into question his true beliefs

    "Stand With Rand." That's Sen. Rand Paul's main slogan as he launches his campaign for the White House. He's holding a "Stand With Rand" rally in his home state of Kentucky on Tuesday and is holding another "Stand With Rand" rally in New Hampshire, the traditional first primary state, on Wednesday. It's an unfortunate choice of words, because it underscores the chief problem with his candidacy. For the life of me, I can't figure out what he really believes — where he really stands, especially when it comes to foreign policy.


    At a January forum with fellow Republican Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, Paul challenged his colleagues' hawkish showboating on Iran: "Are you ready to send ground troops into Iran? Are you ready to bomb them? Are you ready to send in 100,000 troops? I'm a big fan of … trying the diplomatic option as long as we can. If it fails, I will vote to resume sanctions and I would vote to have new sanctions. But if you do it in the middle of negotiations, you're ruining it.'"

    Two months later, he was "ruining it" by putting his signature on an open letter to the Iranian leadership. Authored by arch-neoconservative Sen. Tom Cotton, the letter basically told Tehran that a Republican in the White House would nullify any deal negotiated by the Obama administration.



    His explanation for this complete reversal was baffling. He told Glenn Beck that it is "kind of crazy" for anyone to question his decision to sign: "Do I have any regrets about informing another country of how our Constitution works?"

    He told a different story at the SXSW Festival in Austin, Texas. Claiming to support the diplomatic talks
    , he said: "I want the president to negotiate from a position of strength, which means that he needs to be telling them in Iran, 'I've got Congress to deal with.'"

    How is it helpful to tell the Iranians that any agreement they sign may expire in two years? Cotton is nothing if not forthright: He has said he wants to "blow up" the negotiations, and certainly his letter aimed at doing just that. For Paul to join in this sabotage attempt was intellectually indefensible — and entirely in character.

    Rand Paul's record of policy contradictions is extensive.
    -
    As a U.S.-backed movement seized power in Kiev, Paul called for "respectful relations" with the Kremlin: "Some on our side are so stuck in the Cold War era that they want to tweak Russia all the time, and I don't think that is a good idea."


    A few months later he was demanding that President Vladimir Putin be "punished," invoking "our role as a global leader to be the strongest nation in opposing Russia's latest aggression." Putin, said Paul, was guilty of "violating the Budapest Memorandum, and Russia must learn that the U.S. will isolate it if it insists on acting like a rogue nation." Here's the thing: The Budapest Memorandum was never ratified by Congress. It was signed by President Clinton, who didn't bother to consult the Senate. It's kind of crazy, as Paul would say, that it's necessary to inform the senator how our Constitution works.

    Paul's record of contradictions is extensive. In 2011, freshly elected to the Senate, Paul proposed an alternative budget that zeroed out all foreign aid — including to Israel. The budget included a section explicitly eliminating aid to Israel on the grounds that it undermined "Israel's ability to conduct foreign policy, regain economic dominance, and support itself without the heavy hand of U.S. interests and policies."

    After the neoconservative wing of his party lashed out at him for being "anti-Israel," Paul started singing a different tune. His revised budget froze foreign aid at present levels. Yet even that modest attempt at fiscal discipline was thrown overboard when he voted to increase aid to Israel — and boasted about it in a statement issued by his office.

    The most bizarre part of the story is that the senator's office insists that Paul "has never proposed any legislation that targeted Israel's aid." It's one thing to change one's mind — it's quite another to deny that any change has taken place.

    Here's one last example. In June, Paul wrote an op-ed piece on the Islamic State crisis for the Wall Street Journal, asking: "What would airstrikes accomplish? We know that Iran is aiding the Iraqi government against ISIS. Do we want to, in effect, become Iran's air force? What's in this for Iran? Why should we choose a side, and if we do, who are we really helping?"


    Good questions, and yet it wasn't long before the senator was advocating airstrikes and calling for a formal declaration of war against Islamic State.

    I'm a libertarian and I was, as recently as a few months ago, enthusiastic about Paul.

    He started out as "a different kind of Republican" — a characterization his campaign never tires of invoking. But Paul's response to the barrage of attacks unleashed by GOP mandarins has been to deny this difference. This strategy threatens to nullify his attempt to broaden his appeal beyond conservative voters even as he alienates his libertarian base.

    Justin Raimondo is the editorial director of Antiwar.com and a longtime libertarian activist.

    http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0407-raimondo-paul-20150407-story.html
     
  2. Haymitch

    Haymitch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    25,147
    Likes Received:
    16,207
  3. JuanValdez

    JuanValdez Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    32,011
    Likes Received:
    9,828
    I don't find those positions as contradictory as the author does. But whatever; I don't like Rand, nor do I think he's likely to win out.
     
  4. DonnyMost

    DonnyMost clean your room bucko
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2003
    Messages:
    43,373
    Likes Received:
    10,528
    You kinda have to contradict yourself to win that nomination.

    3 different groups you have to cater to: Tea Party/Religious Right, Traditional Conservatives, Neo-Conservative/Libertarian.

    Too wide of a spectrum of values there.
     
  5. Remii

    Remii Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2013
    Messages:
    7,622
    Likes Received:
    106
    He's not his dad...
     
  6. Anticope

    Anticope Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2001
    Messages:
    2,018
    Likes Received:
    1,197
    While this is all true, I honestly think Rand Paul would have a better chance of eventually winning a Republican nomination down the road if he would build on the brand that Ron Paul had established of actually libertarian ideas instead of this "new type of Republican" branding that he's trying to run on. Instead, it's quite obvious he is well on his way to being a typical establishment Republican. In fact, it's hard to find an issue that he differs from the establishment on now, maybe mar1juana legalization, but that's about it.

    Now would this type of strategy win him the 2016 nomination? Definitely not, but he has no chance of winning the nomination in this election cycle anyways.
     
  7. Pizza_Da_Hut

    Pizza_Da_Hut I put on pants for this?

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2003
    Messages:
    11,323
    Likes Received:
    4,114
    Don't blame me, the Paul I voted for was Chris Paul.
     
  8. JuanValdez

    JuanValdez Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    32,011
    Likes Received:
    9,828
    That flopper?!?!?!?!?!? :mad:
     
  9. Pizza_Da_Hut

    Pizza_Da_Hut I put on pants for this?

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2003
    Messages:
    11,323
    Likes Received:
    4,114
    Well, according to this thread, Rand Paul is the real (flip) flopper!
     
  10. Rocketman95

    Rocketman95 Hangout Boy

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    48,911
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    I'd put a Ted Cruz for president bumper sticker on every car I own before I'd say a positive word about that flopping nut puncher assdick Chris Paul. And Ted Cruz killed a kid!
     
  11. A_3PO

    A_3PO Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    41,148
    Likes Received:
    3,799
    Not only that, you have the morphing of libertarian Rand Paul to candidate Rand Paul. Ain't no way Republicans are going to nominate a principled libertarian. I said a couple of years ago we would find out if ole Rand cared more about principles or trying to win. We have the answer already.
     
  12. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    38,186
    Likes Received:
    10,076
    Rand's problem is that his primary appeal is that he's different and can appeal to a different crowd. It may not work, but it's the only rationale for his candidacy. If he ditches that, there's not much reason for anyone to vote for him. If people want a traditional Republican, there are plenty of others to choose from that don't have the crazy past.
     
  13. Rashmon

    Rashmon Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2000
    Messages:
    17,207
    Likes Received:
    10,319
    A little bit of real exposure is already showing that he is not ready for prime time... He's too testy and prickly to handle the pressure of the limelight.

    AP Interview: Paul won't spell out abortion ban exceptions

    NASHUA, N.H. (AP) — Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a newly declared Republican presidential candidate, is dodging a central question about abortion: What exceptions, if any, should be made if the procedure were to be banned?

    In an interview with The Associated Press on Wednesday, Paul would not say if his opposition to abortion rights includes an exception in cases of rape, incest or risk to the life of the mother.

    "The thing is about abortion — and about a lot of things — is that I think people get tied up in all these details of, sort of, you're this or this or that, or you're hard and fast (on) one thing or the other," Paul said.

    In the past, Paul has supported legislation that would ban abortion with exceptions, while at other times, he's backed bills seeking a broader bar on abortion.

    Read the rest at the link.
     
  14. Buck Turgidson

    Buck Turgidson Mineshaft Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    63,614
    Likes Received:
    53,309
    It's so ****ing depressing that the only/best dirt I can get on ol' Teddy is that on Senior beach day he was the first b**** to pass out on the beach and he got one of his eyebrows shaved off.
     
  15. KingCheetah

    KingCheetah Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    48,829
    Likes Received:
    34,809
    Randy was pretty mean to sweet Savannah Guthrie this morning - I won't be voting for him.
     
  16. Dubious

    Dubious Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Messages:
    18,292
    Likes Received:
    5,004
    Why are Libertarians, Plutocrats and Theocrats all in the same political party?
    Why are Socialist and Corporatist in the same party?

    Rand Paul is stuck with the conundrum of a two party system that makes no sense. He's going to get twisted like Rosemary's baby.

    <iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Kl8ajhu_e5Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now