The Anti-Rand Paul Primary

[jct74]

The Anti-Rand Paul Primary

by Alex Pappas
6:31 PM 04/20/2015

Call it the anti-Rand primary.

There are at least three Republicans who seem likely to run for president in part so they can attack Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul’s libertarian-leaning foreign policy stances on the campaign trail.

These anti-Rand candidates — South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton and New York Rep. Peter King — are ramping up their criticism especially now that Paul has officially entered the race for the White House.

All three are the longest of long shots when it comes to actually winning their party’s nomination. But each of them — national security hawks who dismissively label Paul an “isolationist” — could cause issues for the senator by attacking his more restrained foreign policy views during nationally televised debates.

Asked about these attacks, one Paul adviser said in an email: “These politicians do a disservice to the American people when they mischaracterize Sen. Paul’s foreign policy views. Unsurprisingly, facts are not the strong suit of politicians to whom war is the only answer for every challenge.”

“These are the same politicians who claimed before the Iraq war that Saddam Hussein supported al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks,” the Paul aide added. “Despite a worsening insurgency, these are the politicians who proclaimed in 2005 that in Iraq ‘things are changing for the better.’”

...

read more:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/20/th...-paul-primary/

[Matt Collins]

Rubio's prime mission will be to block Rand in Nevada too

[adelina]

Nothing says "I'm anti-establishment" more than when two notorious RINOs and a former Bush II adviser admit they are out to get you.

[supermario21]

At some point, the more anti-Rand candidates, the better. It will also force folks like Cruz to potentially take bigger stances against Rand. I think this will only help us.

[Mr.NoSmile]

You know, at the very least, it's refreshing for the media to call it what it is.

[GunnyFreedom]

I wonder how much money these three have made in the last ten years from investments in companies that do all or most of their revenues in defense contracts or subcontracts thereof? I bet a lot. "I am sure you are not just saying that we need more military, Congressman King, on account of the $4 Million you made in the last 5 years from your investment in defence contractors?"

[squirl22]

Rubio's prime mission will be to block Rand in Nevada too

And Cruz is in to block Rand in Iowa. It's all about Rand!

[GunnyFreedom]

lol sorry, I just find it to be the perfect line of attack...

P: I am sure the $1.8 Million you made from (Company) had absolutely no influence on your voting to approve the 2007 contract for (whatever)

K: I represent the interests of my constituents, how dare you accuse me of..

P: I didn't.

K: Wha?

P: I said I am sure your investment had absolutely no influence on your vote to award their primary buyer a $36 million dollar contract.

K: Okay, sure, then why did you bring it up?

P: I the interest of full disclosure. Don't you think the voters have a right to know, given your platform of endless expansion of the DOD, that you made nearly six million dollars in the last ten years off of investments in companies who sell parts and materials to defense contractors?

K: Um.

[CPUd]

And Cruz is in to block Rand in Iowa. It's all about Rand!

Or Cruz could be in to block Huck and Walker in Iowa. From what we've seen from Rand's campaign over the last couple weeks, I would be surprised if they didn't have a stalking horse of their own.

[hells_unicorn]

One could not ask for a better set of enemies. A veritable 3 stooges, only in this case, all of them are Curly. I can't wait until the debates to see Rand make mincemeat out of these mental midgets. (apologies for gratuitous alliteration)

[JohnGalt1225]

It's sickening that people allow neocon $#@! statists to get away with calling the traditional conservative foreign policy of non-intervention to be a "disaster" and "dangerous" for America. What foreign policy is the single greatest threat to America? The chickenhawk neocon policy of never ending warfare and constant "preemptive" action and nation building.

The Bush/Cheney/McCain/Graham/Obama/Hillary foreign policy has been an unmitigated disaster. The only reason ISIS is so powerful is because we invaded Iraq and removed Saddam leaving a massive power vacuum behind. We intervened in Egypt leaving that nation a mess, we removed Gaddafi and allowed radical Islam to rise, and Lindsay and Hillary are itching to remove Assad which would definitely allow ISIS to take Damascus. And despite all of this, neocon statists have the unrepentant gall to suggest that Rand Paul would be dangerous? If Lindsay and his buttbuddy John McCain had their way we would be in about 7 different countries right now. ISIS and like minded radical Islamist groups would be even more powerful. Iran would be a country ran by radical Jihadists.

I hope all three of those son of a bitches run. The more Republicans in the race taking the side of Hillary Clinton against Rand Paul the better. On the fence Republicans are going to have a hard time reconciling voting for candidates who approve of Obama and Hillary's foreign policy decisions over Rand Paul who has the only distinct policy stances of the bunch. Rand needs to resist the urge to "adjust" his stance and stand tall. The American people are tired of constant warfare and Rand needs to speak truth to power.

Oh and one more thing, $#@! Lindsay for evoking Ronald Reagan's foreign policy. Not that I buy into the myth of Reagan that much but Rand's foreign policy is much closer to Reagan's than their policy of never ending war. If this was the 1980s Lindsay would be calling Reagan a coward and dangerous for not invading the USSR!

[newbitech]

will these people actually poll well enough to be in a national debate? I find it hard to believe Bolton and King would sniff anything like 5% nationally. Even Lindsey Graham who has better name recognition still comes off like an abhorrent pecker head sumbitch, he might get 6%

[GunnyFreedom]

will these people actually poll well enough to be in a national debate? I find it hard to believe Bolton and King would sniff anything like 5% nationally. Even Lindsey Graham who has better name recognition still comes off like an abhorrent pecker head sumbitch, he might get 6%

Those rules were an attempt to cut off Ron Paul. I expect to see them 'relaxed,' or just forgotten.

[cindy25]

Cruz is more hawkish than Graham. Bolton won't run-he still has his job at Fox. Peter King is running for senate, or possibly Governor. worry more about Fiorina who will play the sex card, and Huck who will win the Bible thumpers, who dominate early southern primaries.

[Matt Collins]

Cruz is more hawkish than Graham.

Cruz is a lot more sensible than Graham. He wants a declaration of war, not just unilateral military action.

[ctiger2]

The Zionists are too dumb to figure out this will actually help Paul.

[Bergie Bergeron]

Why do they keep choosing those awful pictures?

[presence]

thugscrum? they must be taking lesson from cops.

[rich34]

I'm thinking the more candidates they throw into the mix the hard it's going to be for them to defeat Rand, but on the other hand I'm positive they wouldn't be doing it unless they knew something we don't. My thinking is Rand should at least capture the vote total that went to Ron in 2012 while possibly adding more folks to the overall number. With the hardcore social con vote being split between Cruz, Huckabee, Walker, and for whatever reason Bush, I can't see this being good for them. The only other logical reason is to use them to be Bush's lapdogs and they're betting they'll cause enough damage to prevent Rand from bringing in all the new people he's hoping for while causing doubts in the existing base he has. Although I don't see the latter happening, but I do see their agenda to hit Rand from all sides using their "all stars" to prevent Rand from gaining any more inroads into the republican base. If Rand can pull this off it'll be a greater accomplishment than Goldwater defeating Rockefeller. They're going to use everything they got to defeat Rand and ensure baby Jeb gets the nomination.. Rand needs to stay on the offensive like he did with the abortion issue and don't let them get a chance to frame him in a certain way to turn off voters. Rand has to do whatever it takes to keep the media off his ass because they're going to attempt to drive up his negatives, even if it means using issues like abortion, guns, God, or whatever, he simply must prevent them from shaping him into whatever they desire. He's in for the fight of his life, because these $#@!ers won't stop and we've done seen with Santorum, it only takes them $#@!s two weeks to propel whatever candidate from 4% to winning a state election. Rand must solidify the support he has above all else. They're going to do everything they can to prevent him from pulling traditional republicans into his camp. Place your bets..

[AuH20]

Cruz is more hawkish than Graham. Bolton won't run-he still has his job at Fox. Peter King is running for senate, or possibly Governor. worry more about Fiorina who will play the sex card, and Huck who will win the Bible thumpers, who dominate early southern primaries.

No way. Graham wanted to annihilate the gyrocopter mailman.

[squirl22]

Cruz is more hawkish than Graham.

Or at least as hawkish. I notice a lot of people here seem to think Cruz is who he portrays himself to be. I don't buy it for a minute. If he is a stalking horse for anyone it's Jeb Bush. He is specifically running to defeat Rand, to take votes from him. There is no other reason. He really reminds me of Michelle Bachman and how she imitated everything Sarah Palin did. He has penis envy or something for Rand or, and this I really do believe, he is running to split the vote and will endorse Jeb at the end.

[r3volution 3.0]

Cruz is more hawkish than Graham.

No, not that I especially want to defend Cruz, but Graham is in his own category. He's more hawkish than McCain. Lucifer thinks Lindsey's too aggressive.

That "man" is not just your typical MIC shill, he's bat$#@! crazy.

[Sola_Fide]

Cruz is a lot more sensible than Graham. He wants a declaration of war, not just unilateral military action.

I don't believe for a second that Cruz wouldn't expand the wars beyond anyone's imagination. He is a nutcase.