Posts tagged Sen. Rand Paul
Is it a cold, apathetic heart that says we should avoid entangling alliances? Or is it a compassionate, thoughtful, long-sighted man who says we should mind our own business and let the bravest and youngest fight the wars the oldest and richest choose?
This week Senator Marco Rubio tried to grant the small country of Georgia (the former Soviet one, not The Georgia Satellites one) entrance into the entangling morass of diplomacy and war hawks known as NATO.
As the following article details, this is a move headed by the foisted and fought for by the foolish.
When John McCain proclaimed in 2008, “Today, we’re all Georgians,” unfortunately he was not talking about the Southern state. No, the 2008 Republican presidential nominee was declaring his — indeed, all of our — support for the nation of Georgia, which that year became involved in a brief military conflict with neighboring Russia over who had claim to the region of South Ossetia.
Which country’s soldiers fired first became a matter of international dispute, but the Bush administration made clear that this would not become America’s dispute; there would be no military response by the United States. Defense Secretary Robert Gates stressed that America had successfully avoided a shooting war with Russia during the Cold War and he saw “no reason to change that approach today.”
A few days ago, some Republican senators attempted to lay the groundwork for a shooting war with Russia. I wish I were exaggerating.
Last week, while most senators were focused on the important national issues of war funding and Americans’ constitutional liberties, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) seemed more concerned with the fate of a foreign country. Behind the scenes, Rubio moved to have a unanimous consent vote that would have hastened Georgia’s entry into NATO.
The unanimous consent vote never happened because Senator Rand Paul single-handedly prevented it.
This is not a triviality. Make no mistake: Bringing Georgia into NATO could lead to a new military conflict for the United States, which is why any move that would facilitate Georgia’s entry into the alliance should be publicly debated. Rubio’s attempt to push this through by unanimous consent — that is to say, without any formal debate or vote — is highly suspect and calls into question the senator’s better judgment.
But what Sen. Rubio is advocating is nothing new. Examining the political context of McCain’s declaration of solidarity with Georgia in 2008 should give Americans pause about the Washington establishment’s foreign policy agenda. After the 2008 South Ossetia conflict, Pat Buchanan wrote:
Who is Randy Scheunemann? He is the principal foreign policy adviser to John McCain and potential successor to Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski as national security adviser to the president of the United States. But Randy Scheunemann has another identity, another role. He is a dual loyalist, a foreign agent whose assignment is to get America committed to spilling the blood of her sons for client regimes who have made this moral mercenary a rich man.
From January 2007 to March 2008, the McCain campaign paid Scheunemann $70,000 — pocket change compared to the $290,000 his Orion Strategies banked in those same 15 months from the Georgian regime of Mikheil Saakashvili. What were Mikheil’s marching orders to Tbilisi’s man in Washington? Get Georgia a NATO war guarantee. Get America committed to fight Russia, if necessary, on behalf of Georgia. Scheunemann came close to succeeding.
We did fight a revolution to stop British soldiers from entering our homes without warrants written by a Judge—now law enforcement has that ability by decree of The Patriot Act.
We face a choice: active, determined, focused lives of action devoted to restoring our Republic by enlightening and inspring one man or woman at a time, or hiding our heads in ignorance, apathy or cowardice in the face of a gang of foolish, ignorant and arrogant bullies with a massive Achilles heel.
Or is that “right” actually slavery?
The infallibly insightful, historically accurate and painfully honest Tom Woods strikes again.
Mr. Woods cites this video from Sen. Ran Paul explaining how assuming this right indirectly enslaves the providers of the healthcare:
“I want to see the original long-form certificate of Donald Trump’s Republican registration.” Sen. Rand Paul.
Just when I thought I couldn’t be a bigger fan of The Paul Contigent, Rand nails born-again conservative D-Trump for his previous support of universal healthcare, high tarrifs, tax hikes, advocating a trade war with China, and luke warm opinion on the “North American Union” or NAFTA.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Thursday took a swipe at businessman Donald Trump, demanding his “Republican registration.”
While speaking at a breakfast with New Hampshire Republicans one day after “The Donald” visited the Granite State, Paul riffed off the potential GOP presidential candidate’s “birther” questions.
“I’ve come to New Hampshire today because I’m very concerned,” said Paul, according to The New York Times. “I want to see the original long-form certificate of Donald Trump’s Republican registration.”
Paul’s comments follow up on some GOP-aligned groups’ effort to discredit Trump as a conservative. The free-market Club for Growth has accused Trump of being a liberal for his previous support of universal healthcare and his desire to raise tariffs on China.
Trump, who is near the top of some polls, appeared in New Hampshire on Wednesday and spoke directly after President Obama released a copy of his long-form birth certificate to prove he was born in Hawaii, while calling people who question his citizenship “carnival barkers.”
Paul, a Tea Party favorite, said it would serve the GOP better to get behind a candidate who has better conservative credentials.
“Let’s look to Republicans who not only talk the talk, but walk the walk,” he said. “If we find the right candidate, I see no reason why we can’t win in 2012.”
Paul, whose father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), is almost certain to run for president, has questioned Trump’s potential candidacy before.
Asked by CNN in February about Trump’s chances, the younger Paul said: “I think his chances are less than my father’s.”
“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” -then Senator Barack Obama, December 2007.
President Obama’s military adventure in Lybia is an incredibly arrogant, Constitutionally ignorant and thoroughly offensive move by our President. Allowing a man (yes, Mr. President you’re still just a guy in a suit) to goto war at his discretion violates every principle of limited government and is a shameless affront to The American Way.
Obama’s attack–excuse me, liberation–on Lybia was launched without a “check or balance” on his power. It was authorized from start to finish by Barry Soetoro, oops President Barack Obama. This should be am impeachable offense.
If you believe that the need to go was so urgent please note that after Pearl Harbor we still managed to assemble Congress in 24 hours and VOTE before sending our brave men and women into the brutal and dangerous chaos of war. I seriously doubt this was as urgent a cause….
We hear that conservatives and “tea partiers” are the violent, ignorant and greedy for money and power ones in the world.
If I can offer a counter point: check out the comments attached to this youtube video.
You’ll have to view it on the site itself to see them, it’s kind of amazing.
Mainline Republican budget cuts are pathetic when viewed through the lens of reality without the 12 year single malt Scotch goggles that most politicians like to wear.
We will deal with the gravity of our situation one day or another.
Sonner will be much less painful than later.
Good interview with Letterman–it was interesting to hear Dave say that “I disagree with him but I don’t know why.”
Funny, I imagine there are lot of liberal folks out there who believe the way he does just because that’s what we hear in school!