Posted on 03/10/2014 4:35:26 PM PDT by Mariner
On Saturday, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul won the presidential straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference by a landslide for the second consecutive year. Conservative firebrand Texas Sen. Ted Cruz came in second, but he actually gained the most ground of any candidate year-over-year.
On Sunday, Cruz began making a play to draw foreign policy distinctions between himself and Paul, both of whom are considered two of the GOP's top presidential prospects.
"I'm a big fan of Rand Paul. He and I are good friends," Cruz said on ABC's "This Week" Sunday. "I don't agree with him on foreign policy. 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."
Cruz's comments came two days after Paul thrilled the CPAC audience by blasting President Barack Obama's drone policy. However, Paul didn't mention the preeminent ongoing geopolitical conflict — the crisis in Ukraine.
Paul's noninterventionist views on foreign policy have attracted a libertarian-leaning crowd. In the CPAC straw poll, 57 percent of respondents, when asked about the U.S.'s "role in the world," identified with this statement: "N early 70 years after the end of World War II, it's time for our European, Asian and other allies to provide for their own defense."
Only 37 percent, on the other hand, agreed with this statement: " As the world's only superpower, the U.S. needs to continue to bear the responsibility of protecting our allies in Europe, Asia and other parts of the world."
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
Libertarianism leads to hedonism which leads to perversity every time it is tried. "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798 John Adams
They had an even better one before that, in case you don't recall, it was not tolerated.
Well I served and can tell you absolutely that they did not serve with me.
At least openly they didn’t.
Typical Alinsky tactic.
Do you think it was wrong for the President to lie about ObamaCare?
I don't think anyone should lie, and certainly Bush told plenty.
How do we keep bank robbers from robbing banks?
No, I do not think that the federal government or any of it’s appendages has the slightest bit of business determining who is, or isn’t someones spouse.
Makes it easy to be against it while you are for it.
Alinsky?
Why don’t you try to explain how evading the gay marriage in the military reality that is actually happening, is answered by pretending that all marriage will be ended in the military?
Read the hours of posts where Alinsky continues to evade that issue as he promotes homosexuals in the military.
We don’t. If we did, there wouldn’t be any such thing as a “bank robber”.
As to the rest of your comment: What the heck are you sputtering about?
You are being dishonest there making up such a silly claim, but Rove would love your words, and he and the left, and the democrats, and the GOPe all also say them.
Libertarianism is a way to promote liberalism within the GOP and join with the GOPe and the openly left, in cutting off conservatism and God, and traditional America, and killing it, once and for all.
Libertarianism offers the transitory vocabulary and dialogue to move from conservatism, to liberalism, as your post shows, and every thread where conservatism comes under assault from the libbers, shows.
LOL, no I don’t accuse others of being “Alinskyish”, that is a stupid thing that libbers do, I reflected it back at a guy that used it against me this morning in a weird, irrelevant manner, in support of a gay agenda poster.
Libbers use the word all the time against conservatives, as they strive to advance his social liberalism, it is bizarre.
True, classical liberalism, of which you to not have the intellect to comprehend. Google classical liberalism sometime and read very very slowly. Repeat as often as necessary until you understand exactly what a little "l" libertarian is, as opposed to a big "L" Libertarian (member of the Libertarian Party).
Calling liberalism “classical liberalism” as you fight conservatism and advance the left’s social agendas, doesn’t change anything, nor does that silliness of little l, big l, oooh, oooh, I’m big l, no wait, little l, they are so totally different, they are like, opposites man.....
Conservatives call themselves conservatives, we all know what someone is saying when they describe themselves as “libertarian”, it means they reject and oppose two legs of conservatism, and only support it’s economics which of course is silly as well, since their agenda will destroy economic conservatism forever.
I cannot believe that anyone honestly believes that an even more socially and culturally liberal America, leads to people deciding to end the social programs and free money, and a life of leisure.
Tell us how using big government to push conservatism is conservative?
What Is Classical Liberalism?
Prior to the 20th century, classical liberalism was the dominant political philosophy in the United States. It was the political philosophy of Thomas Jefferson and the signers of the Declaration of Independence and it permeates the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers and many other documents produced by the people who created the American system of government. Many of the emancipationists who opposed slavery were essentially classical liberals, as were the suffragettes, who fought for equal rights for women.
Basically, classical liberalism is the belief in liberty. Even today, one of the clearest statements of this philosophy is found in Jefferson's Declaration of Independence. At that time, as is the case today, most people believed that rights came from government. People thought they only had such rights as government elected to give them. But following the British philosopher John Locke, Jefferson argued that it's the other way around. People have rights apart from government, as part of their nature. Further, people can form governments and dissolve them. The only legitimate purpose of government is to protect these rights.
People who call themselves classical liberals today tend to have the basic view of rights and role of government that Jefferson and his contemporaries had. Moreover, they do not tend to make any important distinction between economic liberties and civil liberties.
I am for classical liberalism, conservatism, I oppose what you are for libertarianism, an agenda that opposes conservatism.
If we were having this discussion in 1790, and the founding generations heard the libertarian agenda, they would lynch them.
I don’t support abortion on federal land, the military accepting homosexuals and the military accepting gay marriage, porn, etc, etc.
I don’t want to join the left in their social agenda.
I am against big government, as is conservatism, it is social liberals, the left, who have given us this America, especially since the growth of social liberalism/libertarianism of the last 50 years.
Social issues such as abortion on federal lands, homosexuals in the military, the feds accepting gay marriage in the military, federal employment and immigration?
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.