Posted on 02/17/2013 11:35:25 AM PST by JohnPDuncan
Sen. Rand Paul says he'll wait until 2014 to decide whether to run for president, but he believes voters are ready for a Libertarian-minded Republican candidate.
"I would absolutely not run unless it were to win," the Kentucky Republican said on "Fox News Sunday." "Points have been made, and we we will continue to make points. But I think the country is really ready for the narrative coming — the Libertarian Republican narrative."
Voters want a "different face," he said.
In order to expand the party's reach, Paul believes the GOP should embrace candidates who are willing to push a less aggressive foreign policy, comprehensive immigration reform and less punitive measures on first offenders of nonviolent drug possession.
"We're doing fine in congressional seats, but we're becoming less and less of a national party," Paul said.
Paul has been making it clear for months that he's leaning toward a presidential run, but he added he won't make a final decision before next year.
In the interim, he said, he'll continue to make his points in the Senate, including over immigration. On the same program, Paul said he'll offer an amendment to the forthcoming bipartisan immigration bill that would require the Government Accountability Office to report annually whether the border is secure and force Congress to vote on those reports. That would occur before the 11 million illegal immigrants can achieve permanent residency, under Paul's plan.
"I do support the concept of telling the 11 million people here that if you want to work and you don't want to be on welfare, we're wiling to find a place for you in America," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
The headline was written by a journalist. I posted a direct quote. You and many others here have been misinformed about Rand Paul.
So, let me ask you how a person can claim to be pro-life when they vote in favor of transporting minors across state lines for abortion, without parental notification.
Or vote in favor of morning after pills.
Just how does that work?
NOT!!!
Your silly arguments are just silly.
As though the solution lay either in the “as it is” R party or anything to do with the Libertarian party.
They both suck big time.
What is needed is people in Congress, the Senate, and the Executive branch with the principles and character I described above.
Libertarianism is nuts, the plarty platform is downright eivl. The standard as it’s been GOP stinks and is utterly complicit in the destruction of our country especially because of cupidity and cowardice, although there are a handful of good one like Bachmann and a few others. BUt they alone can’t stem the tide.
So what is needed is PEOPLE with wisdom, moral principles, courage and with a deep understanding of the Constitution. And who cannot be bought.
It’s really simple.
Have you actually ever seen the Republican platform?
Nothing of what you said is in it.
I’m not familiar with those votes. Here are the facts:
Rating Group: National Right to Life Committee:
Rand Paul - 100%
http://votesmart.org/interest-group/252/rating/5939
Rating Group: NARAL Pro-Choice America:
Rand Paul - 0%
http://votesmart.org/interest-group/1016/rating/5938
Enough said.
No chance in hell.
Before I could even consider Paul for anything I would have to know a lot more about him to say the least. His daddy is enough to give Rand a lot of negative baggage right out of the gate. Rarely doe the acorn not fall too far from the tree. And besides it is way too early to start saying who we should or should not back. Need to see who all is getting in.
Holding out judgement on Rand Paul. The fruit doesn’t fall far from the tree.
Ron, do you regret voting for Bush considering he gave us No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, lied about Iraqi WMD, Wall Street Bailouts etc etc ?
Rand would not do any of that. In fact, he would reverse it all. So get ready to support him come 2016
His dad did one thing his entire tenure...we was a constant thorn in the side of big-gov’t. He was about the ONLY one to bring up the issue with the Fed and all matters Constitutional.
His paradigm ways of talking got people talking. You could just see the GOP/DEM party set their teeth every time.
And he opposed everything during the Bush years/, often as a lone voice. The sheer madness of expanding government. He warned about the housing bubble which then popped and gave us the Great Recession and which handed Obama the presidency. He warned about Fannie and Freddie and the banks and that it would all collapse and it did.
His audit the fed bill passed the house too.
Plus he ran twice for president finishing third in Iowa and 2nd in New Hampshire and won many admirers leaving a good base for Rand to build on in the early states in his quest for the presidency.
“What they are ready for is a conservative that supports everything in the Republican platform, and can articulate that in strong terms.”
Can you explain to all of the “Republican platform”? Based upon the GOP elected leadership it looks like supporting amnesty at all costs, capitulating on all fronts, bigger government, more spending, and supporting worthless liberal candidates like Romney with their money and efforts over true conservative candidates.
I think you are getting a good dose of “Republican platform” as we speak...from Boehnor, Rove, McCain, Cantor, Rubio, etc.
And your duplicitous lead-in is just....
Interesting that you’d think the (L), and I’ll even throw in the Constitutional (C) Party, are downright ‘evil’. Even if some of their planks are 180 to my own (L) thinking I yet to hear how their own following/interpretation of the Constitution differs from whatever party you’ve been supporting? Their platform is quite clear: A1S8, morality is not a gov’t function and all else is up to the States and/or the People. Boy, that sure is hard to grasp...
And yet, Bachmann and the ilk had a chance to stand up to/for her own principles/mortality. Instead, she voted to continue the farce you support by reaffirming Boehner. What else have your highly esteemed, principled people pushed??
Why would you want to act so silly now?!! Rand Paul is a through and through fiscal conservative who gives not one single darn for social conservatives or their positions or concerns. Actually I do know more than I need to know about the Paul name to suit me. Does that fit into that pipe of yours?! Ehh?! OBTW, while I did not vote for Bush he was at least interested for a time in the concerns of social conservatives, at least in his first term. I knew that in his heart that he was liberal or at least socialist leaning and his second term proved that.
How about just 'freedom'. If you want to be limited to economic only freedom that is your choice.
Me too.
A1S8, morality is not a gov’t function and all else is up to the States and/or the People. Boy, that sure is hard to grasp...
The official Real LP platform says nothing about moral issues being under the purview of the states.
They are PRO abortion, PRO all no holds barred no restrictions porn, PRO legalized prostitution, PRO legalizing all drugs, PRO the entire whammy of the homonazi agenda, and PRO open borders everyone’s welcome.
Nothing I said was duplicitous. I said what I meant, and meant what I said.
I don’t support any party. I suppor the Constitution and anyone who supports it AND MEANS IT which Libertarians, or if you prefer, libertarians, do not.
Did I say Bachmann is perfect? No? I have seen very, very perfect people in my decades on earth. But she sure isn’t a corrupt beastlike whore like most of them.
Sorry, I was talking about Ron Paul not Rand Paul.
If Rand is pro-life, that I like.
He says many things I really like, on occasion he sounds likes his dad, and that makes me nervous.
And the official Real Republican platform doesn't even mention the republic. I doubt if most of them could even give you a decent defintion of "republic" without Google.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.