Skip to comments.Rand Paul: Republicans Need to Soften on Social Issues
Posted on 03/15/2014 12:24:23 PM PDT by TitansAFC
click here to read article
How about this, before you give the left all the social liberalism you guys want, first stop the welfare checks and social programs.
Mutually exclusive don't you think?
The boss was pulling your leg Titan. Wise up.
Fixed it for you.
You know what I was in High School in the early 50's and what you say will always happen. When it did it was a shameful thing.
Cart before the horse there Peter.
Never, as far as I can tell. But there are people running all over the board screaming that Cruz betrayed America but can never express WHAT he did. Other than mixing him up with Rubio.
Yep - the social issues are a diversion and a symptom, not a problem that can be effectively targeted. The Left knows this and the Right seems to have no idea. We will flail about and insist that a candidate has spittle flying from his lips, while ranting about how we need to take care of social issues, or he isn't pure enough in that regard. IOW, we demand qualities that are not going to be helpful if we want to move back toward a constitutional representative republic - the Left will continue to win as we attack the wrong targets.
If it is all about the money then we are nothing but slaves and widgets.
I’m afraid Rand wouldn’t be any better than Nixon in 1968. And I’m not saying Rand will win by the narrow margin of popular votes that Nixon did.
Rand is already on board with McC but may be hesitant about the “SC wonder of the media”.
Simple to us, but not to most uninformed Republican primary voters
Fiscal conservatisms will lead to social conservatism.
Cart before the horse there Peter.
Sorry, it is all about the money. Nothing changes until the money is gone.......................
I will take ANY advances in ANY Form. If some one want to got with fiscal conservatism, God Bless them, they have my support.
Social issues, as the liberals call them, fuel the spending of the overall government in ways that the average uninformed Republican primary voters cannot discern.
I will also argue that it is human nature to take the easy path. You can try to teach the work ethic while giving them free stuff, but the reality is they won’t work until they HAVE TO.
I have not abandoned morals, and Im not about to.
“I prefer not to live in a Sodom and Gamorrah just because it has a free market economy. And that free market economy would not last long in a immoral environment. We would be right back to crony capitalism and fascism.”
I think there is a lot...a LOT....of crony capitalism happening right now.
Good-bye, Rand. You have fallen to the bottom of my list for 2016.
It is? You want to tell God that?
Man’s law has no effect on God’s law. Everyone will have to account for themself before God. However, as a political matter in the US - no state that has gay marriage is going to get rid of it and there’s not going to be a Constitutional Amendment to ban it. The status quo will probably remain for the foreseeable future. So there’s no point in making it a campaign issue on a national level.
I will say what I always say: FISCAL CONSERVATISM *IS* SOCIAL CONSERVATISM. A massive reduction in the size of government will defund the social Left’s pet projects like Planned Parenthood, NPR, elementary school “fisting” instruction, etc.
While I agree, letting up on the social issues as a litmus test will help rally behind someone who is a lot more conservative than we have been getting. If we get folks who believe in the Constitution and allowing States to handle issues that aren't designated as being under the purview of the Federal government, things will begin to self-correct IAW what the People really believe. We won't have a DOJ suing the hell out of States that try to assert their rights and we won't have a "president" running rogue while the Congress (both houses) sits idly by.
When we focus on an across-the-board platform of social issues/abortion/homosexuals/immigration there will never be the "perfect" candidate that can be rallied behind.
These, while all important and having ill effects on our Freedoms, are all symptoms of the disease. The disease is politicians who hold no stock in the Constitution and feel that the Federal government trumps all - including the States. We allowed a united-front series of leftists to inch their agendas little-by-little over more than half a century. There will be no quick fix as so many seem to expect. We will have to claw our way back via the same dogged methodology and address one issue at a time if we are to make headway without being constantly distracted to total ineffectiveness.
Social conservatives need to learn the language of culture of critique. Social liberalism is a complete fail, learn to articulate that.
Good words and I agree with them. Thank you.
The war over sodomy is largely over... The war over infanticide is largely over... The war over euthanasia is largely over... The war over polygamy is largely over... The war over pedophilia is largely over... The war over bestiality is largely over... The war over cannibalism is largely over...
Lou Budvis, meet Slippery Slope.
I guess that makes more sense
Yeah, I’m not much of a Paul fan anyway. But what the bleep is he talking about? Every time I get a fundraising letter from the RNC I write back asking what the heck the platform is? The only thing they ever say is “beat democrats” which isn’t much of a plan. The notion that the republican party is somehow “socially conservative” is more BS than anything else. And I dare you to try and find out what S/C proposal(s) are out there just waiting to get enacted. As noted above, controlling spending would indeed be socially conservative and even that ain’t happening.
You could see this coming from the beginning of Paul’s run for the White House. He’s working the conservatives... to see what we will accept and what we won’t. Plus, how many of the Paulites he can count on. He punts and then backs off.. then punts again on something else. Testing.. testing... and he hopes to hit the jackpot.
I’m one of those absolutes... no grey areas... bending hasn’t worked in the past and certainly not now. McCain, Romney... both would not take obama on... and look where we are. Being nice to the left does NOT WORK!
Jim, you have a command of the subtle -- like running into barbed wire at night -- as well as any Navy I have ever known. Props (and thanks) to you as always.
That said, Paul is engaging both the freedom-from-government-abuse wing of the GOP as well as his dad's 10 percenter 'disgronified-with-everything' crew.
I may be crazy but I truly believe it's the way to beat Madame Cankles in 2016.
Sorry, pal. He’s a light in the loafers amnesty pusher and RINO loving surrender monkey.
Federal courts rewriting state laws or creating whole new state laws is unconstitutional. That is reality.
Turning off social conservatives is a losing strategy
Surrender is not a winning strategy!
It's his choice - if he wins the primary taking these positions his warnings will be taken seriously. Beyond that and he starts coming across like Nancy Pelosi who loves to give Republican free advice.
The contest between our champions exist to see which ideas work best... Rand Paul should not be trying to short circuit the process.
You think that, I think that.
But the courts don’t, neither do the governors of those states, neither do the people in them (if the people even disagreed with the results, which by and large they don’t).
So what are you and I to do?
I want to be able to say, like Paul the Apostle.......
I have fought the good fight......I have finished the race......I have kept the faith.
“I think that the Republican Party, in order to get bigger, will have to agree to disagree on social issues,” Paul advised. “The Republican Party is not going to give up on having quite a few people who do believe in traditional marriage. But the Republican Party also has to find a place for young people and others who dont want to be festooned by those issues......”
A sheep in sheep’s clothing. Social issues become economic issues.
As a Christian and social conservative and fiscal conservative I have no trouble supporting Rand Paul, it is the Republican Party I have given up on.
I never thought the govt had any business in the marriage business in the first place. And as far as I know Rand is solidly pro-life.
I supported his father Ron Paul who was the only one worth supporting in the last nomination process unlike Romney the quisling liberal.
The republican party could adopt the democrat platform and still lose as long as there is an “R” behind the candidate’s name.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Right on! A society forever blind to natural laws of creation and unwilling to strengthen moral decision and understanding will grow ever more dependent on government, in one way or another. It is why we are here, as a country, presently. It is frustrating why most people do not grasp the idea, that the better you improve yourself, the better you influence and can take care of your family, and thus society. We have a systemic problem and faulty conscience and faulty wisdom is at the forefront.
I agree 100% with you.I would rather die than support the killing of babies and every perversion seeking acceptance.
You can't have a free country run by hedonists and solipsists.
Bears repeating with emphasis.
You said it! Social Issues mean more to me than financial issues. IF we allow SOCIAL ISSUES to weaken we lose the nation, COMPLETELY.
WITHOUT a moral change America is on her way to JUDGEMENT!!!
WAKE UP AMERICA!!
IF RAND PAUL accepts gay marriage, et all......I STAY HOME and wait for Judgement to fall.....
I’m with you.