GOP Hawks Reaching Breaking Point With Rand Paul

Non-interventionism and criticism of government surveillance still not in vogue

The Republican Party's hawks are finally saying it out in the open: This aggression will not stand, Rand.

After three years of watching the GOP's non-interventionist wing gather strength, there are mounting signs that a more combative set of national security conservatives have reached their breaking point. Now, prominent conservative leaders in what used to be considered the Bush-Cheney mold are increasingly taking the offensive against their intra-party rivals.

Comments

[Gorilla tactics]

oh look...Neocons,

And of course that shit eating prick Kristol

[Sevo]

Darn that Rand! Why can't he support all the war-boner guys?

[Ted S.]

Because intervening in other countries is small-government.

[Harvey_birdman]

The Dems and the Reps are indistinguishable on this issue. It's really quite disgusting.

[Inigo M.]

They are indistinguishable on a lot of issues.

[John Galt]

That's because they're both equal halves of the same big fascist government crap ball.

[Prisoner Zero]

We must raise taxes to pay for more invasions!

/kristol

[Jeff]

This lack of aggression will not stand!

[?J?? de ?guila]

HAH! ""WE condemn Rand's aggressive promotion of non-aggressive foreign and domestic policy!""

MORE WARS, MORE INTERVENTIONS, MORE INVASIVE SURVEILLANCE.

[SIV]

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who was a vocal and at times caustic critic of Rand Paul's father, former Texas Rep. Ron Paul, during the 2012 primaries, called it a welcome development that "people are starting to push back."

"There was a lot of talk, particularly during the Republican primary last year, of, 'Well, we don't want to alienate these voters," Santorum said, recalling that he'd been criticized as "too bellicose" and "too warlike. "I can tell you, the Paulistas who were active on the state level in 2012 were not interested in the Republican Party as it now exists. They are interested in a very different kind of model."

Well no shit. Even much of the more hawkish constituency of the GOP wants a different model.

[GroundTruth]

Hey, Santorum is dead right. The model is a true "big tent", focused on republican values, i.e. preserving the Republic and the Constitution which it defines.

[?J?? de ?guila]

Every time I think the Demonicrat party has the sickest of the sick fucks, I am reminded of the X-tian Nazis like Santorum. Of course, tomorrow, I'll read something about Diane Feinstein and........

Paulistas are not interested.........

[Cytotoxic]

So the Neocon 'fightback' consists of...Santorum, Liz Cheney, King, some other asshole I'd never heard of before, and the star player is...Chris Christie. Wow. I'm sure Rand and Amash are trembling in their boots. I can really see why Kristol is so confident.

[-Umbriel-]

I don't think it accurate to say that Christie somehow represents the Republican party's foreign policy hawks -- I don't think his influence reaches all that widely in the party, and how much foreign policy involvement has he ever had in his political career?

Rather, I think Christie subscribes to the theory that the party is being weakened by its "extremists", and is trying to use tension over foreign policy to "triangulate" and set himself up as a Republican "centrist" for 2016. I think his photo ops with Obama were partly intended in the same vein -- "I'm the moderate who can break gridlock and work with the Democrats to make Big Government effective again!"

I find it all fairly nauseating and have lost the respect I had developed watching him fight Washington's efforts to ram unwanted rail funding down NJ's throat. He's a prosecutor at heart after all, and an enemy of big government only when it's not doing his bidding.

[Inigo M.]

From the linked article in Politico: "...optimistic Republicans argue that the GOP base cheers for tirades against drones and the NSA out of hostility toward the Obama administration, rather than the actual substance of those issues."

Uh, no. Not really. It would be no more acceptable under a different administration, and by all accounts, it started under the previous one anyway.

When your rights are being stomped on, who cares about the color of the boots doing the stomping?

[-Umbriel-]

"When your rights are being stomped on, who cares about the color of the boots doing the stomping?"

Obviously, many of the Democrats who were bent out of shape over Dubya's abuses.

[Daily Beatings]

It's the color of the socks doing the stomping. Jackboots are almost always black.

[PM]

RACIST!

[GroundTruth]

Talk is nice folks, but Paul, Amash, Cruz etc are going to need a bit of "our Fortunes" if they're going to be able to continue to stand up for "our Lives ... and our Sacred Honor" in the next election cycle. Contrariwise, Representative King and Senator McCain could use heap of emails and letters to let them know that it's time to realize they they are the problem, not the solution and that they are no longer wanted.

[?J?? de ?guila]

King and McCain would report you to DHS and FBI if you challenged them by email.

"We're getting menacing emails from people who don't want global warfare."

[DEATFBIRSECIA]

I had a buddy who went out and got himself some grow lights, nutrient kit, and some kick-ass seeds and started his own pot farm! He now makes so much money, he just tosses it in an empty room whenever someone pays him and just pulls out a big wad when he needs to go get drunk at the strip club.

[?J?? de ?guila]

You didn't post a link!