Rand Paul blames 'hawks in our party' for Islamic State's rise

[cigaretteman]

Looks like he can pretty much kiss the GOP nomination goodbye.


Rand Paul says the Islamic State exists and increased in strength because of the hawkish wing of the Republican Party that provided weapons to the region “indiscriminately.”

The Kentucky senator and Republican presidential candidate blasted members of his own party like South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham for arguing that the terrorist group exists because of people like him.


“I would say it’s exactly the opposite. ISIS exists and grew stronger because of the hawks in our party who gave arms indiscriminately, and most of those arms were snatched up by ISIS. These hawks also wanted to bomb Assad, which would have made ISIS’ job even easier. They’ve created these people,” Paul said in an interview with MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough that aired Wednesday on “Morning Joe.”


Paul said the group is “all over Libya” because the “same hawks in my party loved — they loved Hillary Clinton’s war” in the country.

“They just wanted more of it, but Libya’s a failed state and it’s a disaster. Iraq really is a failed state or a vassal state now, of Iran,” he said. “So everything that they’ve talked about in foreign policy, they’ve been wrong about for 20 years, and yet they have somehow the gall to keep saying and pointing fingers otherwise.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...hawks-for-isil-rise-118315.html#ixzz3bLi3Q1zj

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Yet another position that sets Rand Paul head and shoulders above his GOP competitors.

This may be a criticism that can also be aimed at Hillary.

 

[fredjr82]

Is it safe to assume he'll run as a Democrat in 2020 if Hillary loses/dies before then? The guy has no real connection to the GOP that I can tell. Outside of hiring security detail that like to stomp on innocent people because their views are different of course. Other than that I think he'd give Hillary a real push on the Democratic side.

Can politicians (not named Joe Liberman) swap political parties mid election cycle?

 

[cigaretteman]

Is it safe to assume he'll run as a Democrat in 2020 if Hillary loses/dies before then? The guy has no real connection to the GOP that I can tell. Outside of hiring security detail that like to stomp on innocent people because their views are different of course. Other than that I think he'd give Hillary a real push on the Democratic side.

Can politicians (not named Joe Liberman) swap political parties mid election cycle?

He has the problem faced by all Libertarian candidates. They hold views that fit into the orthodoxies of the Republican Party and views that fit into the orthodoxies of the Democratic Party. They also hold views that are heretical to the Republican Party and views that are heretical to the Democratic Party. As long as the two parties pretty much have a strangle hold on political power in the country it will be difficult for Libertarian candidates. While certain of their views will appeal to Republicans and others to Democrats (with some that will appeal to both). It will be very difficult for a Libertarian to become the nominee of either party.

 

[ChrisVarick]

He better simmer down before he gets the other end of the heart attack gun.

 

[fredjr82]

He has the problem faced by all Libertarian candidates. They hold views that fit into the orthodoxies of the Republican Party and views that fit into the orthodoxies of the Democratic Party. They also hold views that are heretical to the Republican Party and views that are heretical to the Democratic Party. As long as the two parties pretty much have a strangle hold on political power in the country it will be difficult for Libertarian candidates. While certain of their views will appeal to Republicans and others to Democrats (with some that will appeal to both). It will be very difficult for a Libertarian to become the nominee of either party.

So riddle me this (because I'm too young to remember the early 90s election). How did Ross Perot get his name on the ballot in all 50 states as an Independent? Seems like the Republican and Democrat parties held a lot of power back then too. It's been almost 13 years since "I'm all ears" was all anyone could talk about and (in my opinon) I thought he had a real shot at beating both Clinton and Bush as an Independent.

 

[cigaretteman]

So riddle me this (because I'm too young to remember the early 90s election). How did Ross Perot get his name on the ballot in all 50 states as an Independent? Seems like the Republican and Democrat parties held a lot of power back then too. It's been almost 13 years since "I'm all ears" was all anyone could talk about and (in my opinon) I thought he had a real shot at beating both Clinton and Bush as an Independent.

It's not that hard to get on the ballot in most states. All kinds of minor parties field candidates in most, if not all, states every election cycle. It's just that none of them are able to draw enough votes away from the major parties to win (although there may have been cases where they affected to outcome of elections). One thing that's changed since the early 90s is the explosion of campaign money necessary to wage a successful campaign these days, especially since the Citizens United decision.

 

[LifelongHawk]

So riddle me this (because I'm too young to remember the early 90s election). How did Ross Perot get his name on the ballot in all 50 states as an Independent? Seems like the Republican and Democrat parties held a lot of power back then too. It's been almost 13 years since "I'm all ears" was all anyone could talk about and (in my opinon) I thought he had a real shot at beating both Clinton and Bush as an Independent.

Same way John Anderson did in 80 and Ralph Nader did in 00 and Ed Clarke (the actual Libertarian party nominee) did multiple times, complied with ballot laws in each state. Shoot, I think the communist party had a nominee on the ballot a few times.

Perot had no chance to win, same as Nader and all the others. They did, however, perhaps have the ability to 1) change the outcome by siphoning margins from major candidates and
2) marginally change the conversation.

 

[strummingram]

Good for Rand. There's hope for him yet! The "conservative" ideals his party big-wigs tout are not conservative at all. They're just... wrong. It would be nice to see more like him who understand the concept of blowback and how meddling, even if well-intentioned, can backfire. You pick your battles based on morality, not the profit of resource.