Skip to comments.Rand Casts a Paul Over Life Debate
Posted on 04/25/2014 11:48:21 AM PDT by GIdget2004
Republicans are still months away from kicking off the presidential race and that's a good thing for front-runners like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who could use the extra time to hone their messaging. In four years, the Kentucky leader has won over plenty of fans for his solid record on a whole range of issues, including life. But today, it isn't his record that's concerning people it's his rhetoric.
Wednesday, in a sit-down with former Obama insider David Axelrod, Sen. Paul surprised a lot of conservatives with his nonchalant attitude on abortion and his role in ending it. As president, Axelrod wanted to know, how hard would his White House push to overturn Roe v. Wade? The Senator's answer: not much. With the country so evenly divided on the issue, he thinks an incremental approach is best. I think the debate is about when life begins, said the lead sponsor of the Senate's Life at Conception Act. Is it okay for an eight-pound baby to be aborted one week before delivery?
Asked what his personal opinion on life at conception is, Sen. Paul said, My personal religious belief is that life begins at the very beginning. But, he explained, America is evenly divided between all life and no abortion, or all abortion and no life I think the law will come down in between. Later, he said, The country is in the middle, [and] we're not changing any of the laws until the country is persuaded otherwise.
Maybe it was inarticulate, or maybe these are the Senator's real feelings, but that last comment certainly set off alarm bells for social conservatives.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotpost.us ...
NO WAY does Rand Paul have enough passion to protect innocent unborn babies.
Jimmy Carter was “personally opposed BUT,” TOO.
In the same interview he said Republicans have overstated the voter fraud, it isn’t a problem according to Runt Paul.
He is a full blown moron!
Reagan was asked the same thing and as far as I know, basically answered the same way.
Those of us with half a brain need step back and see that abortion would not even be an issue if the federal government had not interfered with abortion which is outside their constitutional power to do so. At this juncture, it looks like states should begin nullifying federal abortion laws until the feds are cut down to size and retreat into their constitutional cage.
In the meantime, Rand, who is one of the most outspoken proponents of small government, will be cornered by issues which, if the unconstitutional portion of government were substantially cut, would be much less problematic. Rand Paul himself, just like Reagan, couldn't really do anything about abortion except use the bully pulpit to influence change. But Reagan was not very successful with that.
The source of our social, political, and economic ills is the $4 TRILLION government. Cutting it is the fist essential step in solving these other issues. In the meantime, let the states nullify the feds forced allowance of this infanticide disaster.
The MSM and others will do anything to pull the focus off of THE #1 political problem: the $4 trillion government. I agree that Rand needs to be very well prepared for these efforts.
I agree....hope you have your flame resistant clothes on
I know. At this point, I think I’m so charred that it doesn’t affect me anymore. Thanks for the encouragement.
Reagan was a deeply passionate and effective pro-lifer, his influence still resonates among the pro-life movement and some wasn’t reversed until 1996 under Clinton. Rand Paul clearly isn’t very pro-life and is starting to seem almost Romney/rino like on the issue.
Rand Paul isn’t just revealing weakness on abortion, he has also come out in support of big government by calling for an end to opposition to the left/libertarians on gay marriage and social issues.
Paul is running to head the federal government which controls gay marriage in the military, federal employment, and immigration, and federal policy on abortion, in regards to federal hospitals and foreign policy.
Based on Reagan’s record and his avoidance of the Roe v. Wade issuer during the campaign, you would have never even voted for him in the primaries.
I love Reagan and his presidency. I know what our primary issue must be. You see it differently. So be it. I am for Ted Cruz but Rand Paul has not said anything at this point to drive me away from supporting him if he is the nominee
“In the same interview he said Republicans have overstated the voter fraud, ..”
Yikes, has he been sleeping? Rand sure is naive, or else he’s a closet Dem.
Here’s another leftist Dem position he has:
“Rand Paul: Iran Wants Nukes Because It Feels Threatened”
We’ve got to get the word out about Rand Paul. He is NOT what too many people THINK he is.
That is a stupid thing to say, how can you say something so silly about reality, as though the 1980 election hasn’t happened yet?
That reality has already happened, Reagan had that campaign, and I supported him, largely because of his conviction for life.
Another silly thing you are trying, is trying to switch the thread over to “the” primary issue, rather than this conversation of how Rand keeps moving left on issue after issue, on this thread it is abortion.
We keep learning how Romney like Rand is, as he continues floundering and contradicting himself on issues that he shouldn’t be so confused about what his beliefs are, with the over all drift being that he is revealing his inner liberalism on issue after issue.
I remember the 1980 campaign and there were PLENTY of people not willing to turn out for Reagan because he wouldn’t make statements to their liking.
People didn’t vote for him in the primaries because he was divorced, too old, not pro life enough, stupid, a B grade actor.....any of dozens of idiotic reasons. It was nip and tuck for awhile.
Don’t go off on me as if I am some pariah. IF we do not come together on a good conservative candidate then all of those elites you fear so much will ram another doofus onto the ticket. I have already said my guy is Ted
If you think Rand is some how the same as Hilary or any other dimorat then you are confused. He is a libertarian at heart and he is being very consistent.
Don't tell me something this stupid, ""Based on Reagans record and his avoidance of the Roe v. Wade issuer during the campaign, you would have never even voted for him in the primaries.""
It is stupid on so many levels. What kind of person would post that to such a huge Reagan fan as I, who has actually already lived through that primary and know who I supported.
I also don't recall Reagan having such a tough time in the primary, the first column is Reagan's.
I’m a little disconcerted that Rand Paul has been bouncing all over the place lately but in all honesty the President of the United States is not able to overturn Roe v Wade. Paul says he is personally pro-life. I believe him.
To be fair I have not heard Ted Cruz ranting about overturning Roe v Wade either.
I haven’t noticed Ted Cruz weakening on abortion as this thread points out, Rand Paul is doing, have you?
This also fits in with Paul’s moving left on all social issues, including gay marriage.
“I havent noticed Ted Cruz weakening on abortion”
I didn’t say he was. I said I have not heard him ranting as in rabidly advocating for the the overturn of Roe v Wade in any recent interviews.
Why hold Rand Paul to a higher standard than Ted Cruz?
Rand Paul says he is pro life and opposes abortion. I believe that is what Ted Cruz also believes.
If you can link me to a video showing Ted Cruz promising to work tirelessly to overturn Roe v Wade I will take back the first part of this post.
What a strange way to drag in Cruz and protect Paul.
Rather than introduce a straw dog, why not deal with the issue at hand, there is no new news to discuss about Cruz and abortion, but there is this reporting of Paul’s weakening on his abortion position, just as he has done on other issues that libertarians are famous for opposing conservatives on.
“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.”
Rand Paul on abortion: Were not changing any of the laws until the country is persuaded otherwise
“He is a full blown moron!”
Actually just the opposite. He’s too intelligent for many morons to understand him.
He speaks the TRUTH. He is a tenth amendment guy. The abortion issue should be left up to the states.
He makes a valid point. Until “THE PEOPLE” decide on life issues, nothing is going to change. Rand Paul is a realist.
He is 100% pro life, the country isn’t. It is divided evenly on the abortion issue. If you remove exceptions, it drops to 20%.
Myself, the only exception I would support is for the LIFE of the mother. This is almost NEVER an issue. If one of them has to die, why let BOTH die?
Pregnancy due to rape or incest is no reason to MURDER a baby.
Just remember that we abhor and totally reject one person OWNING another human being.
Women do not OWN the baby in their womb. It is NOT part of HER body.
Reagan describes his federal pro-life efforts here. Over the first two years of my Administration I have closely followed and assisted efforts in Congress to reverse the tide of abortion-efforts of Congressmen, Senators and citizens responding to an urgent moral crisis. Regrettably, I have also seen the massive efforts of those who, under the banner of freedom of choice, have so far blocked every effort to reverse nationwide abortion-on-demand.
One resulting success is mentioned here.
Moreover, Reagans putting the Mexico City Policy during his presidency to cut off taxpayer-funding of groups that promoted and performed abortions in other nations has saved literally millions of lives in the decades since.
Thanx for the link.