ADVERTISEMENT

With the measurable rise in Rand Paul’s star power over the past six months, a fear has awakened within some Republican circles that the “noninterventionist foreign policy” message may be resonating with young voters for 2016. Many potential candidates will allude to Rand Paul, without mentioning his name, but connect the dots close enough.

ADVERTISEMENT

Report from Time:

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is hard at work laying the groundwork for an almost certain presidential campaign in 2016, but as he broadens his support among libertarian and younger voters, there’s a budding countercampaign to take him down if he becomes a threat to actually win the nomination.

“His edges aren’t as sharp as his father’s,” says Ari Fleischer, a former White House press secretary. “But there’s still a naiveté that’s going to be a problem. He represents a departure from something a lot of Republicans are used to.”

Several prominent GOP donors at the conference suggested that Adelson, who spent more than $100 million backing Newt Gingrich and Romney in 2012, is likely to spend vast sums against Paul if he appears to be well positioned in the Republican primaries. Adelson’s spending is largely motivated by his strong concern for Israel, and Paul’s positions may well put a target on his back.

I believe Rand Paul is aware of this push back which is why he’s taking his message to venues and audiences normally avoided by many GOP candidates. Paul is trying to build a coalition outside the establishment circles which he hopes will overwhelm whatever is thrown his way. This is a fascinating debate within the party which will go into high gear following the 2014 midterms.

22 COMMENTS

  1. Like the establishment branch of the republican party in 1964 they are willing to take “the extremist” down if he poses a threat to their candidate getting the nomination. This extremism is not however the extremism of 1964. Sen. Paul is being accused of being an “isolationist” in foreign policy instead of being accused a trigger happy war monger. Throw in the recent exploits of Russia and he has an up hill climb to the nomination that can crumble beneath his feet at any moment.

    First off “Isolationist” is used as a slur which interventionist love using in an attempt to cover their own ideology. The people who use the term are attempting to create anxiety about isolationism. These are the same people who supported going into Syria and Libya. The problem is interventionism is out of favor with the American public after Iraq and Afghanistan and it has nothing to do with pacifism. We’ve thrown billions of dollars at ungrateful, brutal regimes that have come back to bite us. Cutting military spending and aid to the likes of an Egyptian junta isn’t isolationism it’s common sense.

    The left constantly reminds the establishment wing that they can’t win an election with the anchor of the Tea Party around their neck. They harken back to the days when they could compromise with republican leaders. Those would be the same republican leaders who they then called the vile names they currently call the Tea Party members today. Yet the establishment buys into it and now we Conservatives who take the Constitution seriously are battling our own party. This would be the republicans who believe in “Big Government Conservatism” of the Bush family. The same establishment that didn’t mention the Tea Party as a cause of it’s defeat in 2012 in it’s “Autopsy Report” but did mention crony consultants and crony capitalism which is still in place.

    Gov. Christie of New Jersey a while back suggested to Sen. Paul that he might want to explain to the families of the 9/11 families his isolationist views. I could just as well suggest the good Governor might want answer to the families of those military members who died as a result of asinine political correctness that dominates our “rules of engagement.” If the establishment wants to have an honest dialogue we are willing to listen. But if you wish to continue to attack us I can guarantee as in 1964 which ever side gets the nomination the other side will not support.

    • Let me clarify myself. My above post was merely an observation and opinion of how I view Sen. Paul. I wouldn’t want oblivious/Surfisher toes to curl thinking he has an ally. I haven’t seen a candidate so far that has the gravitas needed.

      I must admit I agree with quite a lot that Victoria says below in regard to concern for Sen. Paul’s stance on Israel and Gov. Pence as a candidate however.

  2. I would like to hear Paul’s idea of modern military technology – less boots – more drones – EMP’s, Robots, Power Distribution destroyed – small nukes – cancel refurbishment lanes – Star wars (lasers in orbit as well as aerial, tanks, and seal teams) – Well ahead of BHO’s “modern” military.

    You can bet RINO’s don’t want to go there – they wants boots and entitlements.

  3. Rand’s father would take non-interventionist policy to the extreme of not even supporting Israel and that would be a disaster and, unfortunately, it is quite probably that he would follow in those footsteps politically . While we need a strong candidate to run in 2016 and Rand gives great speeches on policy change proposals, it seems to me that we could have the same T.E.A. Party fervor by nominating Ted Cruz to the ballot for the Presidency that year instead. A great ticket might be Cruz/Pence. Former Congressman and Indiana Governor Mike Pence would be a great asset to the ticket for that year.

  4. oblivious:

    In the article below entitled “Rand Paul Is Done Talking About Ron Paul……It Won’t Last” your candidate insists he is finished talking about his dad. If he finds his father is not relevant to his campaign any longer doesn’t this also mean President Clinton isn’t relevant to Sec. of State Clintons campaign and is thus “off limits”?

    http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/rand-paul-done-talking-about-ron-paul

  5. I think this thread shows that his idea of pandering to the establishment is folly. They’re not going to listen to him, anyway.

    And Rand is hardly “noniterventionist.” He gave a speech saying we would “come to the aid” of Christians–NOT Americans–ANYWHERE in the world.

    He is also sounding like a hawk on Crimea–opposite of Ron Paul’s protest that WE destabilized Ukraine with a billion-dollar covert operation there, so that Russia’s action was the right thing to do.

    And whoever said Rand wouldn’t support Israel?? He’s a Hawk on Israel, too. It’s RON who says we should not be subservient to Israel. And, please, in what universe would it be any kind of “disaster” if we didn’t cowtow to Israel?? A disaster for them, maybe, but not US.

    The bottom line is that Rand has strayed FAR from Ron’s ideals–and it still has not done him any good with the Ari Fleishers in this country.

  6. Rand Paul should not be considered as a serious contender — let us instead concentrate on the other candidates the GOP offers….

    Let Rand Paul stay in the background…till it actually matters (early 2016)….

    • Surf: That would be a good idea, since the “front-runner” has the biggest target painted on him/her.

      But it’s clear that Rand WANTS to be seen as the front-runner. He has been ubiquitous. Reminds me of the 1963 Dylan song, I Shall Be Free:

      “Now, the man on the stand he wants my vote
      He’s a-runnin’ for office on the ballot note
      He’s out there preachin’ in front of the steeple
      Tellin’ me he loves all kinds-a people
      (He’s eatin’ bagels
      He’s eatin’ pizza
      He’s eatin’ chitlins
      He’s eatin’ bullsh*t!)

      My guess is that Rand saw his dad didn’t “play nice with others,” so Rand wants to show that he’ll do anything and everything to be seen as “establishment.”

      • Goethe Behr — good one!

        Rand Paul HAS to say what the sheepeople need to hear…so they can be saved from their own folly.

  7. Rand Paul is very much his father’s son. They run their political office as a personal business concern. Ron Paul made over a million dollars per year from his tax-exempt newsletters alone. Rand Paul uses the same formula to fill his war chest. The ACLU filed a lawsuit six months ago against the NSA program. Rand Paul has now filed a class action suit–Rand Paul vs Barrack Obama, saying “I’m not against the NSA, I’m not against spying, I’m not against looking at phone records,” Paul said. “I just want you to go to a judge, have an individual’s name and [get] a warrant.” ( NSA takes information only from 20 percent of American calls, or less). Guess he conveniently forgot which party voted the NSA format in and who still support it. Here is Rand Paul’s Newsletter from which he, individually garnered millions and millions of dollars, tax exempt for his war chest:

    Dear Patriot,

    I’m looking for ten million Americans to stand with me and sue the federal government and TAKE BACK our rights.
    Can I count on your help?
    Without it, I truly fear where our fragile Republic could be headed . . .
    Recent news reports revealed that Barack Obama’s NSA is looking through billions of our emails and phone records every day.
    So yesterday morning, in an interview on Fox News, I announced I would be asking Internet providers and phone companies to join me in a class-action lawsuit to STOP this madness.
    But my friend, today I’m counting on your support, as well.
    As you’ll see, I’ve made up a Joining Statement for you to join my class-action lawsuit, and I’m counting on you to sign it IMMEDIATELY.
    You see, I believe this is an absolutely critical and defining moment . . .
    My hope is, it will be remembered for decades as the moment the American people stood up to their government and demanded our liberties be respected.
    But I fear, without your help, it could be the moment the American people quietly shrank from a fight and gave their last bit of approval over for government-run lives.
    I know there are those who argue Americans must give up every last one of their liberties to win our country’s ongoing fight against terrorism.
    “Trust us,” they say.
    I also know their promises of safety can be tantalizing.
    But today we know President Obama’s IRS routinely targeted his political opponents and grassroots conservatives.
    The Justice Department targeted reporters and their families for wiretapping and harassment for daring to criticize the administration.
    We see the Obama administration covering up Benghazi then tapping Susan Rice — who helped mislead the American people in the wake of that outrage — for a promotion.
    “Trust us” is out the window.
    And even if our rulers were angels — and you and I had nothing to fear from an overbearing and intrusive government — it doesn’t even work.
    One of my colleagues, defending this massive program, stated the recent Boston bombing proved why we need programs like this.
    Actually, it proves quite the opposite.
    Instead of acting on real intelligence warnings from at least one other nation about the dangers the Tsarnaev’s posed, they were too busy secretly sifting through the phone and email records of hundreds of millions of Americans.
    Instead of unreasonably targeting every American into a target for spying, they should be focusing on only the truly dangerous.
    What’s truly dangerous is if you and I allow this to go on.
    How long until these spying capabilities suffer some “mission creep” and they start using the GPS feature in your phone to track whether or not you go to gun shows?
    What if you go to the “wrong” church? Or read emails from or attend the rallies of the “wrong” candidate.
    What if you go to McDonalds a little “too much?”
    How long until Big Brother tries to “fix” you?
    That’s why your action today is so critical.
    As I mentioned, I’ve made up a Joining Statement so you can join the lawsuit, and I’m counting on you to sign it IMMEDIATELY.
    If you can, I hope you’ll forward it to as many friends and family members as you can.
    Go ahead and forward it to the uncle or cousin you always get in arguments with at Thanksgiving, as well.
    This isn’t a partisan issue. It’s an American one.
    And if you and I care at all about the future of our Republic, we need as many folks to stand up and fight back as possible.
    I believe each new name joining in this lawsuit increases the likelihood of ultimate victory.
    By joining my class-action lawsuit, you can help stop the government’s outrageous spying program on the American people.
    I’m asking phone companies and Internet service providers to enlist their customers, as well.
    I believe we can win this. As I mentioned yesterday, I’m prepared to take this all the way to the Supreme Court.
    If we can get tens of millions of Americans behind this effort, I believe we can win.
    But I can’t do that without your help.
    So please sign your Joining Statement to join my lawsuit IMMEDIATELY.

    And if you can, please agree to your most generous contribution of $500, $250, $100, $50 or $35 TODAY.
    If that’s too much, please chip in at least $10 or $20.
    Every dollar counts.
    With your support, I’ll immediately begin mobilizing Americans from all over the country to this fight.
    But to do that, I’ll have to pull out all the stops — and not just with email, Internet ads and social networking.
    I’ll have to use mail, phones and perhaps even radio and TV to get my message out, as well.

    This kind of program won’t be cheap.
    But it’s critical. It’s an absolutely critical one for the survival of our Republic.

    So please sign your Joining Statement and agree to your most generous contribution of $250, $100, $50, $35 — or even $10 or $20 — IMMEDIATELY.

    Thanks so much for your support.
    In liberty,

    Senator Rand Paul

    P.S. Just in the past few days, you and I have learned Obama’s NSA is looking through the phone records and emails of a billion Americans every day!
    Yesterday morning, in an interview on Fox News, I announced I would be asking Internet providers and phone companies to join me in a class-action lawsuit to STOP this madness.

    But I’m counting on you to sign your Joining Statement to join my class-action lawsuit, and make your most generous contribution of $250, $100, $50, $35 — or even $10 or $20 — IMMEDIATELY!
    .
    Remember: all this written, exaggerated fear mongering from Rand Paul, who said in public: “I’m NOT against the NSA, I’m NOT against SPYING, I’m NOT against looking at phone records,I just want you to go to a judge, have an individual’s name and [get] a warrant.”

  8. Sam…Sam..My post had nothing to do with Hillary. I have not heard or read any comment from Hillary about Rand Paul and his money gathering ways. Within days of sending the above letter it is known 250,000 people had made their pledge and sent money to Rand Paul. I find this offense because the $10.00 and $20.00 contributors comes from people who can ill afford it…the ones you call low information voters. 250,000 people x $20.00 is 5 million dollars in Rand Paul’s pocket and that is the bare minimum of what he will collect. Another charge of plagiarism is following him. Did he rip off the contents of the lawsuit he filed against President Obama? This one isn’t over.

    • Tess — you failed to post the site addy where these donations are made to Rand Paul!

      Here is the apodictic video why your ilk needs to be expunged (one way ticket to China for you and your kind) from our Free Nation…if USA is to remain FREE!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mPJBgGsmQ4

      MAKE THIS VIDEO VIRAL — Judge Napolitano’s statement I predict will be the final ruling in the Supreme Court (about 2 years from now): “Obama’s NSA found guilty, thus criminal charges against Obama and his underlings may be filed!”

    • “Any money donated through the petition page on http://www.ConstitutionDefenseFund.com will be going towards the legal costs of this suit,” FreedomWorks spokeswoman Jacqueline Bodnar confirmed after the event in an email. “We expect this case to go all the way to the Supreme Court, so it’s going to be expensive.”

      Donate here — if you want to stop Obama and his Big Brother NSA underlings:

      https://nsa.act.freedomworks.org/?source=CDFUND#primary_form

  9. Surfisher…please post clips that are informative and have some reasonable thoughts. The UTube video has been terminated and the other two are just asking for money donations.

    • MAKE THIS VIDEO VIRAL — Before it is removed again!

      Judge Napolitano’s statement I predict will be the final ruling in the Supreme Court (about 2 years from now): “Obama’s NSA found guilty, thus criminal charges against Obama and his underlings may be filed!”

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyqM5U3-Tm4

      • Judge Andrew P. Napolitano is a very questionable man to quote. Even Fox News found it fitting to fire him from their programming because of his viewpoints. This is the same Andrew Napolitano, who was on Fox News claiming that Arizona’s immigration law had made it into a Nazi state. This is the same Andrew Napolitano who referred to himself as the “Ayn Rand” of Fox News”. This is the same Andrew Napolitano who upholds and promotes the works of Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises. Believe at your own risk.

        • Tess — Judge Andrew P. Napolitano respects the US Constitution (something your cronies don’t)!

          No wonder he is a thorn to you and your likes… who want to destroy it.

          Keep posting more of your liberal tripe — it only helps the cause of Real Americans trying to save our nation, by exposing the likes of you who want USA to further slide down the path of Big Gov Dictatorship!

  10. Surfisher…you are so quick to accuse and condemn. I believe all Americans respect the United States Constitution…we simply have different interpretations. The constitution gives each of us this precious right. To say that my post is “liberal tripe — it only helps the cause of Real Americans trying to save our nation” strongly indicates that you choose to ignore (or do not know) the written words of our constitution.

    • Tess — wrong again. But keep on posting your liberal tripe, it only helps the Real Americans, to see what lies your kind stands for!

      “different interpretations” of the US Constitution — that’s the liberal politically “correct term” for Trying to Negate it!

  11. Surfisher…Reread your posts. You use supposition on top of supposition to try to distort any fact that is contrary to your personal ideology. As I posted earlier “you choose to ignore (or do not know) the written words of our constitution”.

Comments are closed.