Posted on 03/12/2014 6:47:43 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
It’s on! Ostensible allies for the last couple of years, senators Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and Rand Paul (R., Ky.) have commenced the battle for the unofficial title of conservative front-runner. That’s no surprise, but what is remarkable is their choice of weapons: foreign policy. For the last several years, there has been a lot of overblown hype about how the GOP, particularly the party base, is becoming isolationist. So it’s interesting that Cruz would seek to get to Paul’s right on the issue.
The first round began in earnest less than 24 hours after Paul — to no one’s surprise — won the Conservative Political Action Conference straw poll by a country mile. (Ron and Rand Paul have always overperformed in such contests, and Rand has his father’s machine working for him.)
“I’m a big fan of Rand Paul. He and I are good friends. I don’t agree with him on foreign policy,” Cruz said on ABC’s This Week. “I think U.S. leadership is critical in the world, and I agree with him that we should be very reluctant to deploy military force abroad. But I think there is a vital role, just as Ronald Reagan did. . . . The United States has a responsibility to defend our values.”
Paul responded almost immediately with an op-ed for Breitbart that was, depending on your reading, either a gentle rebuke or a not-so-passive-aggressive attack on Cruz. “Some politicians,” he wrote, “have used this time to beat their chest. What we don’t need right now is politicians who have never seen war talking tough for the sake of their political careers.”
Titled “Stop Warping Reagan’s Foreign Policy,” Paul’s op-ed is a clever bit of rhetorical jujitsu in which he criticizes others for using Reagan’s legacy while at the same time enlisting it for his own purposes. Paul offers a version of his father’s effort — during the 2008 and 2012 presidential primaries — to cast the Gipper as a noninterventionist who was plagued by hawks to his right.
Any analysis that casts the passionate anti-Communist invader of Grenada (without congressional approval), supporter of the Contras and Afghan mujahideen, champion of missile defense, bomber of Libya, and winner of the Cold War as a noninterventionist certainly gets points for creativity.
“I don’t claim to be the next Ronald Reagan nor do I attempt to disparage fellow Republicans as not being sufficiently Reaganesque,” Paul wrote, even as he disparaged politicians for distorting Reagan’s (allegedly) real record. “But I will remind anyone who thinks we will win elections by trashing previous Republican nominees or holding oneself out as some paragon in the mold of Reagan that splintering the party is not the route to victory.”
This last bit was a reference to Cruz’s CPAC speech in which Cruz mocked the GOP’s tendency to nominate moderates: “We all remember President Dole, President McCain, and President Romney.”
While probably sincere, Paul’s longstanding commitment to Reagan’s eleventh commandment — “Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican” — also serves as a shrewd attempt to inoculate himself against real vulnerability.
His father was an often vicious critic of his fellow Republicans, including Reagan. In 1987, Ron Paul left the GOP to run as a libertarian presidential candidate, in the process denouncing Reagan for “massive monetary inflation, indiscriminate military spending, an irrational and unconstitutional foreign policy, zooming foreign aid, the exaltation of international banking, and the attack on our personal liberties and privacy.” Reaganomics, said Paul the Elder, was simply “warmed-over Keynesianism.” Rand is a very different man than his father, but his big-tent conservatism is a bit ironic given the fact he worked on his father’s campaign and is the heir to the Paul machine.
I have no idea who will win this battle. Right now it’s hard to see how Cruz can get past Paul. It’s also hard to see how a mainstream media that unfairly turned Dole, McCain, and Romney into extremists won’t make easy sport of Paul.
Last, it’s worth keeping in mind that no Republican since Reagan has won the nomination by first seeking to be the standard-bearer of the conservative base. That’s one aspect of the Reagan legacy both are eager to inherit.
— Jonah Goldberg is the author of The Tyranny of Clichés, now on sale in paperback
Rather, continuing the legacy.
a million times more attractive take a look:
There will never be another RR, period. Besides the sheer impossibility of replacing the person, this country is very, very different than it was in 1980 or 1984. And by different, not different in a good way.
Ron Paul was anti-Reagan; considered the old star to be too much of a compromiser. How does Rand stand?
I certainly hope not. The hymns of praise she keeps singing to John McCain...to this day...eliminate her from contention for my vote for anything, forever.
I believe that Ted Cruz is Reagan’s heir. Rand Paul is Goldwater’s
“good” should be “bad”.
I don’t rust Rand Paul as far as I can throw him. I think he’s the ideological twin of his nutty father. He can’t hold a candle to Cruz as far as I’m concerned.
No way. Reagan was Goldwater's heir. Rand Paul is heir to no one but his batshit crazy old man.
Oh grow up!
LOL...because you gave no rebuttal! What a joke.
Why is it a shock that these two would choose foreign policy? They pretty much agree on everything else. What the MSM will miss is that Mr. Paul and Mr. Cruz can have an actual, intellectual disagreement and a good debate about it.
Go donate $ to your democrat Hillary Clinton
RE: I don’t rust Rand Paul as far as I can throw him. I think he’s the ideological twin of his nutty father.
RAND PAUL: MY FOREIGN POLICY IS THE SAME AS REAGAN’S PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH
That is one of the stupidest, most assinine and juvenile comments I've ever read on here in the 16 years I've been a Freeper. Your screen name fits!
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.