Republican Hawks Fear Rand Paul
As Mr. Paul opens new doors to younger voters and others who have turned away from Republicans, few issues have proved more persuasive for the libertarian-minded senator than his wariness of centralized authority and his skepticism of military intervention. Yet those same positions have alarmed powerful elements of the Republican base who have undertaken a campaign to portray Mr. Paul as dangerously misguided.
They include right-leaning supporters of Israel, neoconservative think tanks, veterans of the George W. Bush administration and the widely read writers of The Weekly Standard, National Review and the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal. Underscoring the potential threat to Mr. Paul, these are not just influential voices but people who hold considerable clout in the moneyed circles that control the flow of cash into campaigns and “super PACs.”
But Rand Paul is a refreshing voice for Republicans, and his ideas are grounded in practicality.
Click here for reuse options!Mr. Paul said he believes that war should be fought only when Congress authorizes it and that President Obama has overstepped his constitutional authority in using drones as a substitute for traditional military forces. Though Mr. Paul has been accused of having a weak policy of containment for dealing with Iran, he has insisted that his reluctance to publicly discuss the idea of a military strike there stems from his unwillingness to broadcast options to the nation’s enemies.
This less swaggering approach has won him applause as he has toured the country, visiting places like Berkeley, Calif., recently, and Cambridge, Mass. It dovetails with his efforts to rein in what he sees as examples of a runaway, unchecked executive branch that flouts the Constitution by spying on its citizens and fighting covert wars with drones.
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
8 responses to Republican Hawks Fear Rand Paul
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
TiredOfThemAll May 25th, 2014 at 08:17
Do they think that Rand Paul would be different than anybody else, once he was the president?
Um Cara May 25th, 2014 at 09:37
Yep, different presidents have different priorities. Obama is different than Bush, who was different than Clinton, who was different from Bush, who was different from RayGun, who was different than Carter…
I’m pretty sure Paul would be different from Obama in some good ways (use of assassination drones, picking DEA chiefs that are smart enough to know whether heroin is more dangerous than cannabis, etc…) and in some bad ways (which kinds of things should be publicly funded, women’s rights, gay rights, etc…)
Surely you agree all presidents are not alike? Take a look at supreme court justices & which flavors of presidents nominate which flavors of supreme court justices for additional differences… Don’t buy into the concept that voting doesn’t matter because ‘they are all alike’, Lefty.
TiredOfThemAll May 25th, 2014 at 10:37
Don’t buy into the concept that voting doesn’t matter because ‘they are all alike’, Lefty.
______
I don’t at all.
Paul already said, “If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him.”
I just don’t believe that any of them are willing to be blamed for an attack like Boston, no matter how silly I think that would be, when the deeper issue lies with the people being so easily scared.
In other words, I believe that if Obama had vetoed the Patriot Act, (while Romney’s crew was all neocons), and THEN Boston happened…
Obama would have been removed.
OldLefty May 25th, 2014 at 08:17
Do they think that Rand Paul would be different than anybody else, once he was the president?
Um Cara May 25th, 2014 at 09:37
Yep, different presidents have different priorities. Obama is different than Bush, who was different than Clinton, who was different from Bush, who was different from RayGun, who was different than Carter…
I’m pretty sure Paul would be different from Obama in some good ways (use of assassination drones, picking DEA chiefs that are smart enough to know whether heroin is more dangerous than cannabis, etc…) and in some bad ways (which kinds of things should be publicly funded, women’s rights, gay rights, etc…)
Surely you agree all presidents are not alike? Take a look at supreme court justices & which flavors of presidents nominate which flavors of supreme court justices for additional differences… Don’t buy into the concept that voting doesn’t matter because ‘they are all alike’, Lefty.
OldLefty May 25th, 2014 at 10:37
Don’t buy into the concept that voting doesn’t matter because ‘they are all alike’, Lefty.
______
I don’t at all.
Paul already said, “If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him.”
I just don’t believe that any of them are willing to be blamed for an attack like Boston, no matter how silly I think that would be, when the deeper issue lies with the people being so easily scared.
In other words, I believe that if Obama had vetoed the Patriot Act, (while Romney’s crew was all neocons), and THEN Boston happened…
Obama would have been removed.
Jonathan May 25th, 2014 at 09:37
I like Dr. Paul’s views on war and foreign policy. The problem is, he would slash social security and take food stamps away from poor children, leaving them to fend for themselves.
Jonathan May 25th, 2014 at 09:37
I like Dr. Paul’s views on war and foreign policy. The problem is, he would slash social security, kill Obamacare and take food stamps away from poor children. He’s as mean and selfish as any right-wing conservative.