Senator Rand Paul’s Hopes Of Improving The Republican Party

“I think we have to go a different direction because we’re just not winning and we have to think about some different ideas.”  -Senator Rand Paul

(President Rand Paul?  He says maybe…)


In a recent interview with ABC News, Senator Rand Paul, son of famous (some might say infamous) retiring Congressman Ron Paul, makes clear his desire to see a Republican Party that better appeals to both the youth and minority voters, areas Republicans have faltered on the national stage for the last two presidential election cycles.   Senator Paul also hinted he may is willing to consider a presidential run:

“I’m not going to deny that I’m interested.”

Two of the primary areas where Paul differs from many of his current Republican counterparts is marijuana legalization and immigration.  While remaining firm on his desire to see a secured border, the Senator, similar to what Newt Gingrich proposed during the Republican primaries, believes some form of path to citizenship could be provided those illegal immigrants who have been long-standing contributors to society:

“We’re getting an ever dwindling percent of the Hispanic vote…We have to let people know, Hispanics in particular, we’re not putting you on a bus and shipping you home.”

That view will likely draw the ire of many conservatives who refuse to accept any option other than deportation of illegals.  Senator Paul appears to think such conservatives are in the minority of his party – while more and more are willing to approach the issue from a different perspective following the 2012 election.

True to his father’s influence, Paul comes out strongly opposed to any tax hikes, making clear the real issue with the budget is one of spending, not revenue.  He is also willing to include the military budget as an area where Republicans can compromise with their Democratic Party counterparts, who, according to the Senator, must then be willing to reduce entitlement spending:

“Republicans who think military spending, myself, who think national defense is important, should compromise and say, you know what, not every dollar spent on the military’s sacred, we can reduce the military spending, that’s a compromise. Democrats should compromise also — entitlements and welfare, the spending can come.”

As for the question of marijuana legalization, something Rand Paul personally opposes, he sees it more as an issue of states’ rights and not the federal government dictating what individual states can and cannot do:

“States should be allowed to make a lot of these decisions…I want things to be decided more at a local basis, with more compassion. I think it would make us as Republicans different.”


Full article and video  HERE


516 days ago by in News | You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
About the

Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence. -G. Washington

49 Comments to Senator Rand Paul’s Hopes Of Improving The Republican Party
    • SueK
    • So, it looks as if we’ll have yet another Repub pandering to the illegals?

      I’ll pass on this guy, too.

      Conservativism is dead if this is the type of politician we can look forward to in 2014 and 2016.

      • SBSpecks
      • SueK, the fact of the matter is that we are playing on DEMOCRAT RULES! I would rather have a legit path for illegals to become citizens (namely those that are strong contributors), rather than pay for all their crap while they aren’t even citizens. We need to look at reality, and that is it. Conservatism like what you want is what lost the election. It’s what will keep us LOSING until there is nothing left to lose. Your statement right there is proof of what the Liberals think of Conservatives, as hate-mongering, ignorant, uncompromising crybabies. We can’t play by Conservative standards anymore, because we are LOSING!

        We know that, when given the choice between someone who will let you and your family stay or get shipped back home, illegals are going to vote for the ones who let them stay. HOWEVER, knowing this, we can operate with the assumption that Dems will cheat somehow with illegal votes, but what if that works for us? I know a few illegal families in my area who are VERY good people, and if they were given a chance to become citizens of the United States they would take it. I would love to see that happen for these friends of mine. Under Rand Paul’s views, there would be a way for illegals to become contributing citizens rather than just deadweight loss on society and public spending.

        We gotta start somewhere, especially when we’re in the hole like we are. That’s what many folks aren’t getting, and that’s what’ll keep us losing if we operate how we have been. Sucks, sure, but how much are you willing to sacrifice when your personal freedoms are on the line?

        • silverdust
        • “We know that, when given the choice between someone who will let you and your family stay or get shipped back home, illegals are going to vote for the ones who let them stay”

          Wrong. Hispanics vote for free stuff. They could care LESS about who wants to give them amnesty. Google DEMOCRAT Heath McDonald’s report for HER PARTY that says freebies are why they vote for democrats. Rush covered this immmediately after the election.

        • SueK
        • I don’t know if this reply feature works; if not, I will post a separate entry.

          First of all, I will stick to my Conservative track, no matter; I refuse to play by the Socialists’ rules.

          Don’t know if you’re aware of this, but Mini-Me, ‘Governor’ Deval Patrick in MA is doing the exact same thing his Lord and Master, Obama, is doing as far as pandering to illegals; he is shoving through a law that illegals here in MA will be eligible for instate tuition at our colleges. The voters have shot this down again and again, but with direction from Obama, Patrick has pushed this travesty on the taxpayers, without the benefit of the Legislature,

          So, my friend’s daughter in neighboring NH willl have to pay the out of state rate (3X more expensive) to attend college in MA, while some illegal alien invader pays virtually nothing? Is this the type of ‘path to citizenship’ you have in mind: Rewarding these people who have broken the law and now, want every benefit a legitimate American citizen has? WE are becoming the minority in this country.

          Sorry, but I’m not going there. If they want to become American citizens (and many don’t; they just want to make money here to send back to their third world hellholes) then let them follow the rules, just like my friend from Ukraine who waited 12 years to do it the right way.

          Any politician who doesn’t take a tough stance on this issue does not get my vote. If the Repubs want to play the Dems’ game, so be it and if that’s the case, I will vote third party, or not at all; I refuse to become like ‘them.’

          Happy Thanksgiving.

    • SBSpecks
    • At a brief, cursory glance, Rand Paul is someone I could support whole-heartedly. I think his head is in the right place, and that Republicans need to work on re-inventing their image, and offering compromise that works. Giving power back to the states and back to the people. You want us to make cuts here? Then we can make cuts there too. And actually BACK that cooperation! Don’t let nay-sayers come out with exaggerated lies that build momentum among the voters! Pure, unadulterated truth is what’ll win out at this point. Hence why people fell for so many lies spun as truth, because the Republicans couldn’t come out and stand up straight against it.

      Like I said, cursory glance, but I like what I see so far. UM, might be worth digging more into, ya?

    • BigTexas
    • Being Texan born and bred I know all about border issues and so think I can comment on this subject. I like what Rand Paul laid out in this article. Secure the damn border right, and then deal with the immigrants who have been here for say 10 yrs or more and not gotten into trouble. Give them a path to be a citizen. I see nothing wrong with that. The problem we ran into before is that the border became too open, and people like Obama are telling states they can’t even enforce their own laws on illegals. Rand Paul seems to saying that needs to change so Im in line with what he thinks here. I also think the war on drugs is just way too much money and we could put a lot of scum bag dealers out of job if we at least let states decide on legalization of pot. So I’m with RP on that also. Guess I’m agreeing a lot with him on a lot of things. So if he is helping to get the Repubs some new ways of doing things I say go for it.

    • Essa
    • Rand Paul is the only one in Congress that I know of who actually stood up to Congress in opposition to the indefinite detention clause in the NDAA, who also advocated that all Americans be entitled to a speedy impartial jury trial in the event an American was arrested and detained on American soil by the Military.

    • cobra
    • If you want to see what excessive (illegal) immigration brings, just look at the state of CA.
      Broken hospitals, broken schools, broken budget, demshevik dictatorship.
      The illegals put the state $10.6Billion/year in the red.
      And the CA morons voted to raise taxes on themselves! Talk about stupid.
      The mexican mafia, along the state employees unions and the homosexual mafia transformed this state into a third world country.
      And it was the jewel of the USA only twenty years ago.
      If you bow to the NWO open border crowd, you completely lost the country.
      What happened in Yugoslavia in the 90′s will look like a picnic compared to what will happen here.

      • cobra
      • The mexican mafia has many working for them in the CA state assembly and senate.
        There is a guy Gill Cedillo, who for years, has one bill entered each year: give illegals driver license.
        He is no longer in the assembly, he was term limited, I think he is in the senate now.
        And he is only one example. That’s why CA is broke, it supports all the leaches leaking across the border, along the leaches in the state unions…

    • E.A.B.
    • Rand Paul, his father, and their supporters, are part of the problem.

      I for one am not interested in hearing a part of the problem try to dictate the solution to the problem.

      • M. Simon
      • Why yes. What some Republicans want is only voters who are just like them.

        No point in trying to get the youth who rally to Paul the elder.

        Let us do our best to keep them out of the Party? Right EAB?

        If we can get rid of every one who is not acceptable to EAB the Republicans will be winners for sure. Let the Democrats take the riff raff and see if they can win elections. RIGHT! Purity of Essence was the motto of General Bat Guano. And EAB has swallowed it whole.

        • E.A.B.
        • Principled conservatives are not willing to sell our their Constitutional values and their nation for the sake of pandering to backstabbing miscreants who prefer socialism anyway.

          By your twisted soul-selling logic, the Republican Party should adopt the Democratic Party’s platform so we can win elections.

          • SBSpecks
          • Not necessarily. It IS kinda tough to enact beneficial change when we aren’t in power though…

            America, back it its glory years, was founded on immigration. There is NOTHING wrong with it. The problem is ILLEGAL immigration, and that is giving all immigrants a bad rap, so-to-speak. What is wrong for giving others a chance to legitimately adopt Constitutional values as their own? It’s not “selling out”, it’s giving everyone a chance to be or do something great. Is that something Americans should horde?

          • M. Simon
          • “Principled Conservatives” what a laugh. Where is the Drug Prohibition Amendment and why aren’t you calling for an end to Prohibition until there is one?

            The only principled Constitutionalists I’m aware of are libertarians. The rest are cafeteria Constitutionalists. Like you my friend.

            • E.A.B.
            • Try the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which prohibit the taking of “life, liberty, or property”–the very three primary things that drugs take from people.

              Libertarians are neither principled nor Constitutionalist. They helped the single greatest enemy of Constitutional government ever to hold office get reelected this year. They had tried to help elect another one in 2004, but failed. They apparently prefer socialism over any form of conservatism.

              People like that are many things, but “principled” isn’t one of them.

            • M. Simon
            • Well alcohol takes life and property at a 20X rate of all the illegal drugs combined. So why aren’t you stumping for alcohol prohibition? Afraid it will make you appear stupid?

            • M. Simon
            • But EAB you don’t want Libertarian votes. And yet you are bitter about not getting them. Why? You didn’t get what you didn’t want. You should be very happy.

              Well there is that Obama thing. But you couldn’t put a big enough coalition together to beat him. Most unfortunate.

    • truthandjustice
    • Always liked Rand Paul but think he’s dreaming about Dems compromising anything. Surprised he said that. He knows they don’t. Anyway – I know UM and many have decided so far to just stick with the Repub. Party; however I tend to think Third Party – and thinking about Sarah Palin. I know many think that’s impossible and she won’t run, etc. but not me. I remembered her saying that a Third Party is a possiblity if Repubs. don’t improve – I found the link and here it is for anyone interested. I truly think it’s a very real possiblity – a Tea Party official party. THAT’s what I’m putting my hopes & prayers in.


      Sarah Palin said history could repeat itself and a third party could be created if Republicans don’t adhere to their principles, Fox News reported.

      When asked on Fox News if she would consider creating a third party, the former Alaska governor and 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee said, “If history is an indication it is a possibility. If the Republicans don’t remember what the planks in the platform represent . . . That is opportunity to prosper and thrive in the most exceptional nation in the world.”

      She added that “we do that through a free market. If the Republicans become like the liberal left and Democrats, I wouldn’t be surprised if history didn’t repeat itself.”

      Palin drew a comparison to the Whig Party, saying, “Look what happened in the mid 1800’s. The Whig party went away and the Republican Party surfaced,” she explained. “Because the electorate got sick and tired of the party fighting for power and not doing the will of the people.”

      She described the tea party movement as a “grassroot of independent Americans. They know that they are taxed enough already. They want to shrink government and make it smarter and make it as less relevant to us in our lives as possible.”

    • Essa
    • The United Nations is stealing the sovereignty of the United States by stealth. In all probability this may be the true explanation behind US election theft and fraud. It is all about Agenda 21 which is finally getting more and more attention. The theft of US sovereignty by stealth may also explain why Congress lacks power to do anything in order to protect our country or the people.

    • Candles
    • (Let’s see if this gets posted–LOL) I agree with him on many things, but since the military has been known to get the shaft under Democratic admins (Clinton and Obama), I disagree with funding the military less–these men and women deserve all the advantages as possible to protect themselves. I am assuming that Obama’s admin has hindered them. The ROEs have def changed which has put our troops to an unfair disadvantage. I am under the view of walk softly, but carry a big stick.

    • M. Simon
    • … the data shows [conservative Christians] are clearly losing the public. Another survey last week from the Public Religion Research Institute showed that while Mitt Romney has the support of 80% of younger white evangelical millennials (aged 18 to 25), this is a small and diminishing constituency: white evangelicals comprise only 12.3% of that age group. That’s less than half their proportion of the 50 to 64 population. The Pew survey showed that while 32% of Americans aged 50 to 64 are white evangelicals, only 13% of those aged 18 to 29 are.

      The Republicans can get with the program and devise new ways to relate to the younger generation or they will die as their older cohort dies.

      EAB my friend – what you wish to hang on to is passing. Either grab the balloon or hold on to the anchor. You can not reach the next generation by laying down the law. You have taught them to ignore the law. Prohibitions do that. They cause a decline in respect for all law.

      The Christian Right is losing power. And all your denigration of the Pauls and libertarians will not change that. It just makes you a bitter out of touch old man. Even if you are only 23.

    • Kat
    • Rand Paul seems a lot more common sense than his dad. Big on states rights, protect the border, small government, force the Democrats to compromise. Seems pretty smart to me. And he seems to be basically saying the same thing as Ulsterman’s republican insider that the republican party needs to update its message and stop fighting among itself all the time. That is totally right on.

      • E.A.B.
      • What Rand Paul is better at than his dad, is hiding what he actually believes.

        Don’t be fooled. Rand Paul is an ideological clone of his father. If it weren’t so, his extremist father would have disowned him, both politically and personally.

        The only difference is that Rand is better at hiding his views, and people are unwisely giving him the benefit of the doubt.

    • Xeno
    • Anyone who wholeheartedly endorsed the foreign policy of his father would get slaughtered in an election – and rightly so.

      Another tool in the shed to appeal to certain die-hards, but by no means anyone with leadership potential.

          • Randall
          • Think so? I think they’d have a good chance in winning. I kind of doubt the wisdom in electing those two, but I think you may be surprised by their electoral potency.

        • Xeno
        • Palin would no more be willing to team up with him than Gingrich would have. He 100% supported every single one of his father’s policy ideas to the hilt. You’d have to feel the same way about Ron Paul and that guy’s ideologically opposed to an awful lot of common sense, when it comes to foreign policy.

          Palin could POTENTIALLY help to win (there would have to be a very strong media team who could literally reverse eight years, if not more, of downright poisonous falsehoods and vitriol which has been directed at her), but either of the Pauls would simply muddy the waters.

          • M. Simon
          • Well OK. The Republicans don’t want the Paul voters. I will be working hard to see that the Republicans don’t get them. Maybe the Democrats will offer us something.

            Now I agree that Paul is an idiot when it comes to foreign policy. That is why I made him #2. But on domestic policy he is correct. Smaller government – in everything.

    • lovelypeace
    • I’m not going to reinvent the wheel, so I’m going to post part of an article I found on-line – mainly because I agree with it.


      Here are the three options we seem to have as a party (re: immigration):

      Embrace something like a path to citizenship. That can take many shapes and forms, with or without penalties, etc. If that’s “amnesty” to you and you oppose it then,

      Say we’re okay with the status quo and just ignore the citizenship/residency question for existing illegal immigrants while we fix the other problems with our borders and system, or

      Support either deporting illegal immigrants in mass (that’s right, rounding up millions and millions of adults and children and shipping them off) or creating a set of measures that makes the lives of millions of adults and children so terrible here that they feel that living under an oppressive dictatorship with a third world economy is better.

      I doubt many people can look themselves in the mirror and say they really support that third choice. And if someone can, I think the response of our party should be “we don’t need you as a Republican, you’re a bad person and you cost us votes, but mainly you’re just a bad person.”


      That said, I like Rand and I think that libertarian-leaning Republicans are the future.

    • lovelypeace
    • I have principles, but I also know that governing is a lot different that running for election. Governing is about compromise and doing what’s good for society as a whole – not just one group of people in society. So, we pick people who we believe will be good decision makers – not ideologues.

      I also came up with a list of assumptions that people in Gen X/Gen Y tend to have about the world because we don’t understand, then we deserve to lose in 2014.

      I’m not saying that we need to go crazy and be democrat-lite, but we at least need some basic clue about the audience we need to solicit votes from.

      Abortion has ‘always’ been legal.

      Contraception is not hard to get. It’s America. We have choices.

      Being a single mom is okay. In fact, a lot of us were raised by single parents, so if we are going to complain about a lack of two parent families, then we need to be prepared to explain that we understand the difficult choice faced by this mother….after all, she could have chosen to have an abortion. And more than likely, she’s working her ass off to provide for her kids because her man won’t or can’t.

      It’s not weird that parents have odd child care arrangements. A lot of us grew up at one parent’s house during the week and the other’s on the weekend and various holidays. It’s rare that we don’t know someone who’s been divorced. We have alternative ideas about what family is and how it works because we have half-siblings/step-siblings to fit into our idea of family too.

      The Great Society/Welfare programs have ‘always’ existed (since 1964). So what are Republicans going to do with these people if these programs aren’t funded anymore? Are Republicans prepared to deal with more homeless people?

      It’s one thing to complain about the ‘Obama phones’, but they solve a practical problem. If a land-line costs you $40/month and you can barely afford food or rent or the basics, then how are you going to dial 911 in an emergency?

      We don’t have a problem hanging out with gay people or calling them friends.

      We might have called ourselves “bi” in college, as well. Still, most people really don’t want to hear about your sex life in great detail – regardless of your status.

      We are okay w/admitting that we don’t like God, we’re agnostic or that we are have the most exciting relationship with Jesus/Buddha/or whatever God we choose to worship. It’s okay if we don’t share the same faith, but we need to respect people’s right to believe – or not.

      Also, we never went through the civil rights struggle, so when people get worked up about the blacks/Mexicans/Muslims, it is a valid question to ask WTH are you pissed about? Or think that Pete Hokestra’s ‘China Girl’ commercial was racist – despite the fact that Party elders simply couldn’t believe that anyone w/a brain would think that.

      Again, I’m not saying let’s go crazy and act like Dems. No, far from it.

      Still, this is the reality that a lot of us grew up in. Ironically, all the craziness has made some of us want to build traditional families for our kids.

      We can’t just give them a vision of 2-parent families and the ideal conservative, middle class world, but fail to be aware of the realities that Liberal social and economic policy has caused and have practical solutions to improve people’s lives where they are (so it makes it easier for them to rise up the economic ladder).

      Our values win because they work. However, we aren’t going to win, if we aren’t relevant to people’s lives. And we aren’t going to be relevant to people if we don’t speak to their experiences and lives.

      I’m a square. Romney was a bigger square than me and I loved the guy because of it.

      However, it’s not hard to see why some of my more moderate/independent friends really couldn’t vote for him because I know where my peers are on these issues. I don’t happen to agree, but they’ll tell you – it comes down to ‘choice’. It’s a choice and it’s okay if you make a different decision than I would.

      The constitution belongs to all Americans, not just Americans who subscribe to a one particular viewpoint. If you subscribe to the idea that the Constitution only applies to people who agree with you, then I wouldn’t be doing you any favors if I didn’t question your understanding of what America really is all about. People don’t have to agree with me to be ‘right’ or ‘American’.

      • M. Simon
      • You left out

        “When I was young half the kids smoked smoked weed. Most gave it up when they got a job but what is the big deal? Nothing like that reefer madness craziness happened to anyone I knew. Why are we filling our prisons with those people? Why are we wasting money chasing them?”

Leave A Response

* Required