|
 |
Posted on 02/18/2014 1:21:10 PM PST by SoConPubbie
Rand Paul enjoys talking a big game about being a fundamental change agent in Washington. He likes to line up for publicity stunts like filing a lawsuit against the NSA which will almost certainly be dismissed (and send out handy list-building emails based on these publicity stunts), or staging an almost completely pointless filibuster on drones, but when it comes to actual accomplishments that have changed the way things are done in Washington or even within the Senate GOP caucus, Paul’s cabinet is pretty empty. One area where Rand Paul might actually do some real good would be to help oust cancer Mitch McConnell, who last week singlehandedly gave Obama a blank check on the debt ceiling, and who fought tooth and nail for Rand Paul’s opponent in Paul’s primary. Here Paul might be able to do some real good where he is popular with the base in his home state in terms of using his national profile to raise awareness for Bevin’s campaign and help combat McConnell’s fundraising machine.
Instead, of course, Rand Paul has punted on his most significant opportunity to change Washington and is endorsing McConnell. What is most insulting about this decision is not that Paul made it, but the extraordinarily flimsy reasoning behind it. Look at this mealy-mouthed explanation allegedly given by Paul to Glenn Beck:
“You know things are complicated with endorsements. I’d say one because he asked me, and two because he asked me when he did not have an opponent, it wasn’t a choice at that time. And three I am someone that likes to bring people together.”
Wow. Well, that’s three compelling arguments, I guess.
First, he was asked. And who is he to say no to anyone? When someone akss you to do something, the answer always in all circumstances must be yes. To say otherwise would be impolite. One does not change the culture of Washington by being impolite, I guess.
Two, he was asked when McConnell did not have an opponent. Okay. Did he not consider that one might emerge? Were there literally no indications that this might be so? If not, why was McConnell calling in the first place? Now that a challenger has emerged, does he have any thoughts at all as to whether McConnell is better than this challenger?
Three, folks, Rand Paul has just said with a straight face that he’s a uniter, not a divider. Circle status: squared. Who can doubt Rand Paul’s reasons at this point?
The longer Rand Paul continues appearing at McConnell’s side, he is lending support to the very forces he purports to oppose, and that he loudly berates in his numerous fundraising and list-building pitches. If Rand Paul wants to make an actual difference in Washington instead of just talking about it, he needs to at the very least withdraw his endorsement of McConnell and remain neutral in this race, if not support Bevin’s campaign outright.
|
|
Paul has turned his back on those who helped elect him.
This article is so right about what Paul could do to change Washington.
Paul chose not to.
Yup. He caught Potomac Fever.
He strikes me as another false conservative, only taking actions that are guaranteed to fail, and even then only appearing to even take those actions.
But when it comes to actually making a difference, nothing.
As long as Rand Paul wants to run for POTUS more than he wants to serve his constituents he will remain under the thumb of the GOP Minority Leader.
Patience, patience....... the time for implementation of the rhetoric is coming....... soon
No democrats to criticize today? Can’t find one?
Rand Paul is not a Conservative...he is as Froot Loops as his dad
So tired of the spin from Randmesty cheerleaders on here
Paul endorsing Chinless was a rookie mistake, and may very well haunt him. An unforced error.
Indeed.
They magically expect Rand to move the mountain by himself...
Geez. How about getting him a supporting cast. Not much happens without 50 plus votes.
Sen Ted Cruz hasn’t/won’t endorse anyone in the TX primaries.
Stovall is looking great on paper, but what if he turns out to be a Chamber boy?
The author is right.
There are some things about Rand Paul I like. However, I would not support him for president because of his support for amnesty.
But at the very least, he should withdraw his endorsement of McConnell.
Any orderly house need Rand Paul in it.
Really?
This article begs to differ.
Redstate.com ^ | 2/18/2014 | Erick Erickson
Posted on Tuesday, February 18, 2014 8:23:54 AM by Paine in the Neck
According to Senator Ted Cruz, “Ken Paxton is a tireless conservative warrior.” Paxton is running for Texas Attorney General. As all of us know, we may not live in Texas, but Texas affects us and we all probably secretly or not so secretly want to live there.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott frequently describes his workday as, “I go into the office, I sue the federal government and I go home.” In fact, Abbott had filed 27 cases against President Obama’s administration as of the launch of his Gubernatorial bid last year. There can be no doubt as to the significant power that the Texas Attorney General wields against federal intrusion and lawlessness. Moreover, the future leadership of Texas is now being re-shaped as Governor Perry steps down. It’s imperative that Texas have strong conservative leadership – because as Texas goes, so goes America.
As a result, it is of interest to each of us who next holds that office. It’s a race Ken Paxton needs to win.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
And ...
Ted Cruz recommends—
Chief Justice Hecht
Supreme Court—
Place 6 Jeff Brown
Place 7 Jeff Boyd
Place 8 Phil Johnson
Yep - a wink is as good as a nod, in this case ;-)
Sen Cruz hasn’t done either...on the Senate race, as far as I know.
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.