Rand Paul is not the guy for 2016 but Ted Cruz might be

renewamerica.com ^ | March 20, 2014 | Bryan Fischer

[GeronL]

100% correct

[SoConPubbie]

By repeating (six times) that Rand does not support social issues and comparing that to the GOP founding on the social issue of anti-salvery it is clear that the implication is that he is for slavery, therefore racist.

Sorry, but I think that is a connection only a support of Rand Paul would have made.

Most of us probably would not have made that connection.

[2big2fail]

The implication is that two dudes who want to get married is the moral equivalent of slavery. That’s absurd.

It seems to me that the GOP should be leading the effort to not let the federal government define what marriage is or isn’t. Why cede that power to the feds? Let churches define it. And/or municipalities. Whatever. And don’t let the federal government say you have to perform a gay wedding, or be forced to decorate a cake for such.

I think this issue is one of the least important issues of the day. What consequence is it to me and my marriage if two dudes in Cali get married? Whose rights are violated? Slavery, of course, is a whole ‘nuther ballgame. Obviously.

But this issue is perfect for sucking up a huge proportion of the political discourse, and for raising money. For both parties. That’s the real reason why we debate this. It helps keep the two-party system rollin’.

[Mariner]

"Therefore, by extension, Rand Paul is supporting Gay Marriage. "

With the current make-up of the courts it's likely going to take a Constitutional Amendment to stop homo marriage. It's also very likely the USSC will be required to vote on the issue prior to 2016.

[chuckles]

Cruz is my guy and I don't even know who all will run. I can't figger out why Cristy is even talked about, and you would think he's in the bag. Paul is just another libertarian, and if you don't know what a libertarian is, please find out before you invest too much in a loser. Perry is just a hair do with a drawl. The only ones that even keep my eyes open are Cruz, Palin, Walker, and on a bad day in desperation, maybe Rubio. Rubio has burnt his bridge, but he beats about half the rest of the pack.

Cruz is my guy and I hope I'm not holding my nose voting because a bunch of RINO's decided they needed someone "nicer".

[SoConPubbie]

Take gay marriage, for example. Apparently Paul would prefer to leave it up the states. To many on the right this is the same as supporting gay marriage. To many on the left this is the same as opposing gay marriage. People hear what they want to hear.

Furthermore, in state after state, Activist Federal Judges are striking down the prohibitions that were voted into place by the voters of each state.

Judge Strikes Down Michigan's Ban on Gay Marriage

Rand Paul knows this, and he knows about the "Equal Protection Clause" of the 14th Amendment as well.

His States Rights position on Gay Marriage is nothing but a SOP to conservatives whereby he gets to look like he is against Gay Marriage by taking a position he knows if bound to fail in the end.

Rand Paul also declares himself a Christian, and yet, he is willing to put his politics before his Christianity by trying to put Gay Marriage in the States Rights column, a position he knows will fail and eventually lead to Gay Marriage in all 50 states.

That way he gets to please his Libertarian supporters, and he stays true to his Libertarian principles.

Any man who puts his politics above his Christianity is not fit to lead and therefore, is not fit to be POTUS.

[The Iceman Cometh]

By walking away from the social issues, he's not fit to be POTUS. He is not a leader.

Then say hello to 8 years of Hillary. I disagree with people who put so much stock on the social issues. Social issues are not going to be solved by legislation considering the diseased judicial system we have. Social issues are best addressed at the grass roots level by winning hearts and minds.

Let's imagine a world where Rand Paul is in office. Does his lack of addressing social issues stop you from affecting change? I look at what people are doing at the local level like those secretly filming Planned Parenthood and local legislatures attempting to enact common sense guidelines for abortion centers.

I get so sick of those that dismiss a potential candidate cause they would rather sit home and pout over an 80% candidate and end up with a 0% liberal. It's just plain stupid.

[SoConPubbie]

With the current make-up of the courts it's likely going to take a Constitutional Amendment to stop homo marriage. It's also very likely the USSC will be required to vote on the issue prior to 2016.

So true, and it is the only defensible position that a conservative and a Christian can take.

Anything less and the politician involved is not being honest.

[SoConPubbie]

I get so sick of those that dismiss a potential candidate cause they would rather sit home and pout over an 80% candidate and end up with a 0% liberal. It's just plain stupid.

Sorry, but by supporting Amnesty and putting the Social Issues on the back burner, Rand Paul is no more that a 50% conservative and that is not acceptable.

Especially when we have potential candidates in Ted Cruz, and possibly Sarah Palin who are much closer to the 100% mark.

Then say hello to 8 years of Hillary. I disagree with people who put so much stock on the social issues. Social issues are not going to be solved by legislation considering the diseased judicial system we have. Social issues are best addressed at the grass roots level by winning hearts and minds.

Right and Wrong.

Both abortion and the Gay Marriage issue can and should be won by an Amendment to the Constitution.

Something I have not heard from Rand Paul and I don't believe I ever will.

[Mariner]

"Anything less and the politician involved is not being honest. "

You must be referring to, like, ALL of them?

[Mariner]

"Both abortion and the Gay Marriage issue can and should be won by an Amendment to the Constitution. "

Does Ted Cruz advocate for those Amendments? Any of the candidates?

[Lou Budvis]

Exactly right. Whether 2 guys get married has no effect on me. The ever increasing power of the welfare -surveillance state is a far greater threat to freedom.

[Drill Thrawl]

I have no favorites between Cruz and Paul. But I will take either of them over any of the RINO “front runners”.

[Zeneta]

The problem for many Republicans and conservative voters is that they are fatally purists and readily dismiss a candidate permanently if they don’t pass the test 100%.

Liberals, on the other hand, will take the chosen candidate regardless of any warts, fallacies, illegalities, or lies and vote like zombies.

Conservatives are generally more principled people and the strict adherence to those principles splits us and we lose.

---

Spot on !!!!

Liberals will vote on one or two issues that have been articulated to their satisfaction. They don’t hear the rest, they don’t care about the rest, they certainly don’t consider the implications of the whole.

Conservatives exclude candidates based on one or two issues, we listen to everything, we care about all the issues and consider the whole.

A liberal will vote for a Democrat because they agree with them on, say, gay marriage, even though they completely disagree with 0bamacare. They hear what they want to hear and ignore the rest.

[Berlin_Freeper]

The implication is that two dudes who want to get married is the moral equivalent of slavery. That’s absurd.

You left out bigamy... which is exactly where same sex "marriage" is heading.

If you allow for the creeps and weirdos to define marriage, which is what you are doing... then they will.

[Mariner]

Folks, we need a consensus candidate and we need them EARLY in the primary cycle.

In 1980 there was little doubt who the nominee would be...and we sailed to complete victory.

We haven't had that since.

Reagan was able to unite the conservatives and libertarians.

Who can do that now?

[The Iceman Cometh]

Both abortion and the Gay Marriage issue can and should be won by an Amendment to the Constitution. Something I have not heard from Rand Paul and I don't believe I ever will.

I'm doubtful there are the votes to get something done on abortion at this point in time. Maintaining marriage defined as a man and women would easily pass a popular vote but getting 2/3rd's of the states on board could be another issue. Also, the courts are a huge problem with gay marriage.

I am more of a fan of the efforts underway by pro-life groups that are attacking the safety of women's clinics and forcing enforcement of laws already in place that apply to other health care providers. We are seeing less and less providers out there.

All I can say is we need term limits and work to get the most conservative candidate possible on the ticket. This does NOT include Christie and any retreads like Santorum or Huckabee.

[alloysteel]

Not a hairpiece - it is a dead squirrel, which expired looking for nuts up there.

Ted Cruz is everything the world expects a Texan to be. Technically, he was born in Canada, but of one natural-born US citizen parent, which is at least as much as was found acceptable for the Current Occupant now squatting in the White Hut. And further, Sen. Cruz has renounced all right by birth to ever become a Canadian citizen. Dual citizenship by soil and by blood is not all that uncommon among US citizens, as witness the children of military servicemen born while stationed in any of a number of foreign countries. John Sidney McCain III was accorded US citizenship on just that technicality, and it was not successfully challenged at any time.

[Zeneta]

I agree.

We need to WIN First.

I also believe that many of our social/cultural issues would resolve themselves with a political structure in Washington that was committed to both limited government and the reduction of the Federal Government with the States calling their own shots.

BTW, as much as I love Reagan, he had a lot to do with advancing the Abortion business while Governor of CA.

[Zeneta]

Also.

Rand Paul actually connects with people.

For conservatives to vote for Paul in 2016 will require a degree of “trust”. Independents will vote for him.

For Independents to vote for Cruz in 2016 will require and be an expression of their need to have a strong leader. Conservatives will vote for him.