politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Rand Paul: Lindsey Graham and McCain ‘Lapdogs for Obama’
Source:
Mediaite
URL Source: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rand-pau ... -and-mccain-lapdogs-for-obama/
Published: Apr 21, 2015
Author: Andrew Kirell
Post Date: 2015-04-21 20:55:00 by GeorgiaConservative
Keywords: graham, mccain, paul
Views: 1420
Comments: 10
Rand Paul is not going to take insults from the Republican Party’s hawkish senators lying down. During a Tuesday morning appearance on Fox News, the GOP presidential candidate blasted Sens. Lindsey Graham and John McCain as “lapdogs” for President Barack Obama‘s policies. On Monday morning, Sen. Graham told Morning Joe that Paul is “more wrong than right” on foreign policy, and that “even Obama” is stronger than the libertarian-leaning senator when it comes to dealing with threats abroad. The U.S. Senator from South Carolina accused Sen. Paul of wanting to “lead from behind” on global issues. Additionally, Sen. McCain — Graham’s best friend for life — charged that Paul “just doesn’t understand” foreign policy. Paul fired back at both senators during an interview with Fox’s Bill Hemmer:
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: GeorgiaConservative (#0)
HotAir had a piece on this, as did many other sites. They included the Hemmer video as well. Via RCP, a smart, well prepared retort to superhawks like Graham, who’s already started beating on Paul during his quasi-2016 media tour. Rand seems to relish taking tropes that are common to interventionist critiques and turning them against his interventionist critics. Back in December, after Rubio tore into him for supporting Obama’s outreach to Cuba, Paul accused Rubio of behaving like an “isolationist” for refusing to engage diplomatically with a neighbor. Same move here. It’s not me who’s a shill for Obama’s foreign policy, says Paul, it’s McCain, Graham, and the other hawks who unfailingly cheer O on every time he intervenes somewhere abroad, pausing occasionally to criticize him only for not intervening more forcefully. I wonder if Rand likes that sort of tu quoque on a visceral level, because he enjoys watching hawks squirm when they get accused of “weakness” or being dupes for Obama, or if there’s a strategy behind it. Probably both: A counterattack like this could work better than we think at the debates, when plenty of low-information Republican voters will be watching without much of a sense of how Paul differs from conventional GOP hawkery. That’s why critiques about “isolationism” and shilling for Obama are so potent and dangerous to him potentially. The average Republican voter may not know the ins and outs of foreign conflicts and whether intervening is a good or bad idea, but hearing that Rand Paul is on Obama’s side on some of them will be received as shorthand for “Rand Paul is weak and too far left.” Paul’s strategy is to counter that by pointing out how many times hawks have been on Obama’s side too. Even if he doesn’t win many voters over with that argument, it’ll be a huge victory for him if he succeeds in neutralizing hawkish attacks by convincing Republicans that his points of agreement with O are really no more damning than Graham’s are. But will it work? What you’re seeing in the clip is a classic libertarian critique of Obama’s foreign policy. Conservatives view O as weak and passive, the quintessential liberal Democrat; libertarians view him as overly aggressive, the quintessential post-9/11 overreaching pol. Paul’s trying to find the lowest common denominator between those positions — “Obama can’t be trusted with national defense” — in hopes that mainstream righties will see Rand as “one of us” on foreign policy even if they don’t agree with him on the particulars. Because, let’s face it, that’s really what the foreign policy attacks on Paul are about, especially among casual voters: Is he one of us? “At least as much as John McCain is” is the message Rand’s tacitly settled on. Gonna be hard to pull that off when there are 18 other guys onstage insisting it’s not true and when Rand is on record as supporting continuing negotiations with Iran at a moment when most GOP pols are urging O to pull the plug, but that’s his task. Hammering the point that he’s opposed Obama as much as the interventionists have is a shrewd place to start. . . . Anyway, all these articles about Rand are right in that this is the shape of Rand's answer to accusations of isolationism and pointing out the absolutely miserable record of failure amassed for the last 15 years from the neocon dominance in foreign policy and warmaking. Rand has to force the rest of the GOP to confront the failure of Iraq and the impending failure of Afghanistan. Make them face that the neocon project for the Mideast is an utterly failed and criminal enterprise that has left a wake of destruction and human tragedy across the entire region under Bush and Obama. Any recovery will take generations and things are likely to get worse before they get better.
You couldn't be more wrong. It's the Rats who lost these wars that had been won. The Rats have been doing this since Korea. The failure that the Pubs need to confront is allowing the leftists at home to misrepresent the great victory that had been won.
What victory is that?
If you don't know there isn't any point in discussing the middle east, or foreign policy with you.
Oh, you mean the GREAT V-I-C-T-O-R-Y by GWBush: That V-I-C-T-O-R-Y?
What victory is that?
You guys are going to make these neocons start crying. Then they'll want to be comforted at the teat of Lady Lindsey, the Dark Dominiatrix (and notorious gun moll of McStain and Liebertroll).
It is my hope & prayer towards the Great Constitutional God in the sky that your prophesy comes true.
That is what scares these types and why they are in full attack mode on Paul. We forget Eisenhower ran for president on the promise to end the Korean war and that Republicans used to complain Democrats were the starter or wars (VP Bob Dole said that back in the 70s) and now the Republicans are the pro war cock suckers.
The Democrats wanted to keep fighting the Korean war. The Republicans under Ike won because Eisenhower promised to end the war and pull out no matter if the treaty was a bad one and left the commies in place. Rand Paul is the last vestige of those 50s and 60s Eisenhower Republicans in foreign policy.
Rand Paul: It’s McCain and Lindsey Graham who are “lapdogs” for Obama’s foreign policy, not me
posted at 6:01 pm on April 21, 2015 by Allahpundit
#2. To: TooConservative (#1)
Rand has to force the rest of the GOP to confront the failure of Iraq and the impending failure of Afghanistan.
#3. To: wmfights (#2)
The failure that the Pubs need to confront is allowing the leftists at home to misrepresent the great victory that had been won.
#4. To: buckeroo (#3)
#5. To: wmfights (#4)
If you don't know there isn't any point in discussing the middle east, or foreign policy with you.
#6. To: wmfights (#2)
The failure that the Pubs need to confront is allowing the leftists at home to misrepresent the great victory that had been won.
#7. To: buckeroo, Fred Mertz (#3)
What victory is that?
#8. To: TooConservative, Fred Mertz (#7)
You guys are going to make these neocons start crying.
#9. To: TooConservative (#1)
Rand has to force the rest of the GOP to confront the failure of Iraq and the impending failure of Afghanistan. Make them face that the neocon project for the Mideast is an utterly failed and criminal enterprise that has left a wake of destruction and human tragedy across the entire region under Bush and Obama. Any recovery will take generations and things are likely to get worse before they get better.
#10. To: wmfights (#2)
You couldn't be more wrong. It's the Rats who lost these wars that had been won. The Rats have been doing this since Korea.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]