Watch Live: Second House Hearing on IRS Scandal

Check Out Today’s Hot Posts on TheBlaze Blog!

Politics

Pot and Amnesty: Rand Paul’s Surprising New Agenda For the GOP

Nov. 13, 2012 5:50pm Mytheos Holt

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is generally seen as the Tea Partier to end all Tea Partiers among his Senate brethren, and probably no one is less likely to be moved by a call to moderate or fudge his principles than Paul.

So it may surprise many that in the battle over whether the GOP needs to “modernize” by moving left on some issues or dig in its heels and stand pat, Paul is unabashedly siding with the modernizers. For some, this particular choice on Paul’s part may smack of betrayal. For those familiar with his career and his ideological background, it should be less of a surprise.

But how exactly is Paul helping to modernize the GOP? Politico reports on the “evolution” he is attempting to bring to the party:

In the wake of Barack Obama’s reelection win and ahead of a possible 2016 White House bid of his own, the Kentucky Republican plans to mix his hard-line tea party conservatism with more moderate policies that could woo younger voters and minorities largely absent from the GOP coalition. It’s the latest tactic of the freshman senator to inject the Libertarian-minded views shared by his retiring father into mainstream Republican thinking as the party grapples with its future.

In an interview with POLITICO, Paul said he’ll return to Congress this week pushing measures long avoided by his party. He wants to work with liberal Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy and Republicans to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for pot possession. He wants to carve a compromise immigration plan with an “eventual path” to citizenship for illegal immigrants, a proposal he believes could be palatable to conservatives. And he believes his ideas — along with pushing for less U.S. military intervention in conflicts overseas — could help the GOP broaden its tent and appeal to crucial voting blocs that handed Democrats big wins in the West Coast, the Northeast and along the Great Lakes.

Laxer positions on marijuana laws and immigration are historically seen as liberal positions, but coming from Paul, such shifts are likely to enjoy a good deal more credibility as a sign of a changing GOP perspective. On that superficial level, therefore, Paul is positioning himself well as an intra-party reformer, especially if he plans to run for president in 2016.

But how much of a change would Paul actually be bringing to the GOP, or to its conservative principles? Actually, not much of one. In fact, Paul’s specific proposed changes – a shift toward a less puritanical Drug War and a move toward normalizing the status of illegal immigrants – are right in line not only with his libertarian ideology, but arguably with the roots of conservatism generally.

This is especially the case with respect to drugs, where Paul’s position arguing for the legalization of marijuana fits right in line with the position taken by the founder of National Review (and arguably the founder of modern conservatism in America), William F. Buckley Jr. Watch Buckley defend the notion that drugs should be legalized in a debate with Jesse Jackson below:

As to immigration, the question there is more complex. Certainly, the conservative movement has been opposed to the granting of amnesty for illegal immigration — citing concerns over the rule of law — and firmly opposed to granting citizenship to illegal immigrants — citing their proclivity to vote for liberal policies. Libertarians, on the other hand, argue for a completely free labor market where people are free to work wherever they like, and open borders are the reality.

Paul accepts neither of these positions completely:

Paul plans to inject himself into the middle of the GOP’s emotional immigration debate in the wake of Romney losing swing states with heavy Latino populations like Florida, Colorado and Nevada. Paul is working on a novel plan that he says would “assimilate” many of the 12 million illegal immigrants currently in the country. Those individuals, he said, could apply for legal status, but immigration would then be clamped down in the interim. He also says his plan would toughen security at the border.

“I want to show what conservatives would or can accept,” he said in describing his plan. “If we assimilate those who are here, however they got here — don’t make it an easy path for citizenship. There would be an eventual path, but we don’t make anybody tomorrow a citizen who came here illegally. But if they’re willing to work, willing to pay taxes, I think we need to normalize those who are here.”

This is, in essence, a compromise position for both libertarians and conservatives. Libertarians are obliged to allow for a toughening of the border, while conservatives are obliged to back down a bit on the idea that deportation is the only acceptable punishment for illegal immigrants already in America. Is it a functional compromise? Time will tell, but it certainly is a compromise made with an eye toward conservative voters. If the other major voice on immigration in the Senate GOP – Florida Sen. Marco Rubio – accepts this compromise, though, it could easily become the law of the land.

And if that happens, look for Senator Rand Paul’s stock to rise.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (180)

JUSTANOTHEROPINION
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:55pm
Marijauna should be legalized with the very same restrictions and laws on it as alcohol does. On the imigration issue, I believe all of those that are not legally here for atleast two years should be deported and all of those that have been here two years or more should be presented with a path to citizenship unless they are felons and only on the codition that the borders be closed to any and all illegal crossings.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Kathleen3
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:05pm
  Based on your thinking are we to then grant tax amnesty only to those who have not paid taxes for longer than two years?
  
  The law is the law and whether it is 5 minutes, 5 years, or 5 decades if an illegal alien resides here they must return to their homeland. Our SS is going bankrupt and you want to open the door to people who, at best, have a HS education and who will, almost immediately be entitled to government entitlements, including EITC, and in many cases Social Security? There is nothing noble in taking care of others who have violated our laws while our law-abiding citizens go hungry
  
  Report this comment
- ShyLow
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:27pm
  Anyone that wants prohibition should be taxed 100% to pay for the prisons and ATF.
  Don’t build a fence if you plan on building a super-highway from Brazil to Canada.
  Tea Party needs to embrace free-market transportation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BByhlLFzmMw&feature=relmfu
  Tea Party needs to stop trying to legislate a moral agenda from the federal level
  
  Report this comment
- frust@ted
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:34pm
  kathleen,
  
  The rules are rules argument is just too simple for a problem that is this complex. For too many years illegal imigrants have come to the country and been allowed to work, live and raise a family. Yes this was against the law and should not have been done, but it was allowed.
  
  As a parent if you set a rule for your daughter, lets say a no dating policy when she turned 12 and cant date until she is 18. When 13 came around she started dating a boy you said nothing. At 15 she started staying out until midnight with her boyfriend, you do nothing. By 16 She became pregnant and had a child, you do nothing. By 17 she is planning on moving out and in with her boyfriend, at wihch point you decide to remind her of the house rule of no dating until she is 18, and are now going to strictly enforce it. The time to enforce the rule was 13, it’s far to late to try to enforce the rule at 17.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:56pm
  if someone wants to come into this country to work and is willing to fill out the paperwork and pay taxes – we should let them. We should not put caps on the number of people who come into this country – our best years were when the USA was the refuge of the whole world. Our federal government has also set an arbitrary price floor on the wage a person can make….Like everything else, that only encourages the black market and illegal activity.
  
  In order to address these issues, republicans would be better off seeking more freedom in EVERYTHING
  
  Report this comment
- Secret Squirrel
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 10:26pm
  .
  Think about it. The republicans go for gay marriage, free abortions,
  legal pot, and amnesty, do you know how many votes they’ll get? 0.
  Why vote for a liberal lite when you can vote democrat and get the real liberal?
  
  Reagan got 37% of the Hispanic vote. So he gave amnesty to 3.5 million illegals.
  In the next election, GHW Bush got 30% of the Hispanic vote. Less after amnesty.
  
  What the republicans are telling me is that they have no core values,
  and will compromise on anything. to get elected.
  I’ll go Libertarian next time.
  
  Report this comment
- glassaudioguy
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 11:19pm
  @Shylow- Free trade is good, but making sure we don’t have our national identity wiped out is even more important. For that reason I’d totally be against it as it isn’t entirely necessary for good trade anyway.
  
  Report this comment
- NeilChapin
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 6:05am
  This is the completely wrong way for Republicans to proceed. It assumes we lost the election because of immigration and pot policy. We lost because the majority of Americans now see the government as Santa Clause. Read fresh political commentary at: http://smallcraftadvisorychronicles.blogspot.com/
  
  Report this comment
- brother_ed
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 9:53am
  @NEILCHAPIN
  
  Well said.
  
  This election was in no way a mandate for Obama or the policies of the Left. Obama convinced people that Romney was the anti-Christ that would bring back slavery and take away women’s rights, and the less informed bought it.
  
  Legalizing pot, allowing homosexual marriage and granting amnesty may get you votes just as being ‘easy’ may get you dates – but it does no good for your reputation and will not bring happiness in the long run.
  
  Report this comment
- keepswimn
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 10:03am
  Reagan gave amnesty to over three million illegals in the 80′s with the promise of closing the boarders, quess what they forgot to get the boarders closed. This time close the boarders first. Why would we want to give 20 million mexican amnesty when we have 50 million Americans out of a job now. Let get these people to do the job that these mexican are willing to do.
  
  Report this comment
- CobraBill
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 11:47am
  Maybe Romney lost because:
  When you call 47% of Americans lazy and no good, they won’t vote for you.
  He changed his position every few weeks depending what way the wind is blowing.
  He is a liberal from MA pretending to be a conservative.
  
  Report this comment
Fcbarcelona101
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:55pm
Don’t ever make the mistake of thinking that hispanics main problem with the GOP and the right in general is immigration. I was born in Venezuela and lived 20 years of my life over there before moving here. It is true that The majority of the hispanic population in our countries is socially conservative, but it is also very liberal on economic issues. It is a culture that celebrates government intervention and dependency, and that is why they vote democrat.

Even a great number of people that fiercely oppose Chavez agree with Obama’s and the Democrat party’s policies, something I find very telling. The hispanic culture does not encourage personal responsibility or free markets.

I am here on a student visa and the fact that illegals can pay less than I do seems to me as rewarding illegal behavior while punishing those of us who actually followed the rules. I do not expect amnesty or an easy way to become a resident of this country, and I do hope that conservatives in the US stick to the values that made this country the greatest place to live.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Daddy Hawg
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 9:12pm
  FC, best of luck in your endeavor here. I agree with your thinking and also would like to see the republican party espouse more conservative vlues. The reality of the situation however points to the opposite. In order to gain a foothold on the immigration issue, we need to seal the border and prevent the illegal population from growing by the influx of more illegals. Once the border issue isaddressed we can then address the issue of those that are here by developing a means to gain citizenship and put a deadline on it as well. Our socila systems are being stretched to the max and no one seems to really care. The systems will soon reach a breaking point and somehting will be done, hopefully in a non-violent way.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 11:06pm
  Iniesta!!!!
  
  Report this comment
- Mil-Dot
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 8:20am
  All of this crap is the GOP’s fault. All this “let millions of Mexicans and other illegals sneak in and they will vote for us” crap. If we would have sealed our borders decades ago we could have beat back and chased down these commie progs. But now, since they let about 30-40 million low-life third world leeches pour in and get freebies, and, no voter ID laws, the vote in the commies. Disgusting Gopper sellouts.
  
  Report this comment
gbrittain
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:52pm
AMNESTY = STACKING THE VOTING DECK FOR THE DEMS.

Amnesty will add 10-20 million voters who will break at best 60/40 and probably 70/30 plus for the Dems.

Amnesty will make all of America like CA politically, governed by far left Dems. That’s why the Dems want amnesty.

Don’t take political advice from your opponents.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:58pm
  Well hell…..
  
  Why not just let the illegal immigrants bring the legal pot over the border at free will.
  
  Both problems solved.
  
  (end sarcasm)
  
  Report this comment
- resme
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:34pm
  @monk,east,just,soy, anyone who cares :). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0S2vb5RcPWY
  
  Report this comment
- justangry
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:10pm
  @gbrittain, I don’t know if you’re right or not. I’m guessing Rand believes his policy would soften the racist tag associated with the GOP. People rarely listen to those they believe hate them based on who they are. Perhaps it’s too idealistic. Regardless sure beats the current policy, no?
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:19pm
  i hate the amnesty position of Rand Paul too – this is the first i have heard of it
  
  Of course, our economy desperately needs low wage workers. Many of the manufacturing jobs left this country because we dont have enough people willing to do low wage work (because of entitlements and inflation) and our government has put minimum wage laws that push operations overseas.
  
  Rand Paul is no Ron Paul. I would rather see Rand talk about expanding legal immigration and ending the federal minimum wage laws (let the states set their own minimum wage)
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:33pm
  Hi Resme,
  
  I watched the video. If someone is selling a product that is illegal and dangerous to sell and that product is made legal… then it’s not as dangerous to sell.
  
  So any business selling that product will thrive more than before because the danger is gone.
  
  This guy in the video may know some facts about our Gov but he has the rest wrong.
  
  Report this comment
- resme
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 10:20pm
  “So any business selling that product will thrive more than before because the danger is gone”
  
  We could grow it here. Which would you choose; Ma and Pa pharmacy or a shady drug dealer?
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 11:59pm
  Hi Resme,
  “We could grow it here. Which would you choose; Ma and Pa pharmacy or a shady drug dealer?”
  
  People already grow it here and Ma and Pa will be subjugated by the cartels to sell “their stuff” just like the mafias still do today all over the World. IMHO
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 12:04am
  Hi Resme,
  
  Or are you anti-Gov people suggesting to buy it from the Gov?
  
  You really don’t think that the Gov won’t be involved I hope.
  
  How else will they be able to collect taxes on it unless they control it?
  
  And they will control it….
  
  Report this comment
- resme
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 12:34am
  “Or are you anti-Gov people suggesting to buy it from the Gov?
  
  You really don’t think that the Gov won’t be involved I hope.
  
  How else will they be able to collect taxes on it unless they control it?
  
  And they will control it….”
  
  I just want the ability to grow it and not go to prison for 30 years for a ounce. No, I do not smoke pot and never have. Now if a neighbor hates you, the swat team raids your house. It’s tons of other reasons to legalize pot besides trying to put the cartels out of business. Hemp is a good start to legalize instead of buying it from canada, Wouldn’t you agree? Hemp gives more ethanol than corn.
  
  Report this comment
- Chuck Stein
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 2:09am
  If they are going to go for another round of amnesty, they should limit the “anchor baby” situation in accordance with the holding in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 694 (1898):
  
  Chinese persons, born out of the United States, remaining subjects of the emperor of China, and not having become citizens of the United States, are entitled to the protection of and owe allegiance to the United States, so long as they are permitted by the United States to reside here; and are ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’ in the same sense as all other aliens residing in the United States.
  
  Yup: “so long as they are permitted by the United States to reside here” Congress can make that clearer. The 14th Amendment empowers Congress to make such laws. The scope of birthright citizenship should be a part of any “comprehensive” immigration reform.
  
  Report this comment
Lloyd Drako
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:50pm
Krauthammer, Hannity, Kristol, Cantor, Paul–will this cavalcade of sellouts never end? The conservative “movement” and the Republican Party are starting to look like a worn-out baseball, taking too many hits and coming apart at the seams.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- bpodlesnik
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:04pm
  Put aside the other people, and tell me how, after reading this article, that Paul is a sell out.
  
  Report this comment
P8riot
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:46pm
Wow. Its just as amazing that the WH didn’t know about the sex scandals until a couple days after the election as it is that Rand Paul didn’t know he was for legalizing weed and amnesty until a couple days after the election.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Kupo
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:50pm
  Dude, Rand Paul has always been for legalizing cannabis. Try to keep up.
  
  Report this comment
- justangry
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:22pm
  P8triot, Rand’s philosophy is much like his father’s. I think the only difference is Rand appears like he’s compromising and endorsed Romney.
  
  Report this comment
- P8riot
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 9:50am
  @justangry –
  
  Thanks for the info. I thought he was more on the republican side of things rather than the libertarian… so that’s good to know :)
  
  @kupo – “try to keep up” – geesh – you really don’t need to be so defensive :)
  
  Report this comment
- brother_ed
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 10:05am
  @P8RIOT
  
  In the end, we may find that Libertarianism and Liberalism are one in the same…anything goes. The only difference being who gets to spend my money, me or the government. In that regard, Libertarianism is attractive, but that is the only quality I agree with.
  
  Looks like the masks of both sides are coming off.
  
  I know you can’t legislate morality. I also am for limited government. Rules are something people resist, but I believe that we need some rules.
  
  Those that would swap their principles for power are of no use to me.
  
  Of course, someone will tell me I need to ‘keep up’ and post links to web-sites to educate me, but I stand firm.
  
  Report this comment
Chrono_Sleuth
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:43pm
Hold on a second. Wait a minute. Ron Paul was NOT for open borders. He was for making it harder for illegals to come over, but opening the door to legal immigration by bringing the troops back to stand in defense of the homeland (border), reorganize the government and streamline laws and remove beaurocratic red tape so organizing for whatever border plan is faster and easier…all while increasing visa’s, making legal immigration easier, citizenship easier to obtain, and opening the borders of business and making it easier for more businesses to be built in this country by removing all the excess regulations that help no one and streamlining/simplifying the tax code.

There are two camps in the Libertarian movement who want fully open borders. Left = progressive libertarians, and right = economic anarchism (though this group also toys with the notion of Kings). The rest are mixes and everywhere in between. There are like 12 independent schools of thought, 6 on the left and 6 on the right of the movement.

Do you ever do research? Or is it that the blaze is too bloody lazy and would rather label a single ideology to a single group where anywhere from 10-40% of it’s membership agrees to one degree or another (hard to say, given many of us shift here and there as we learn…granted we tend to read a LOT). Even then for those who do, it’s not that simple…it just gets more complex depending on who you talk to. I should expect better, but I see no reason to.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Kathleen3
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:51pm
  Say what?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:56pm
  Always keep in the back of your mind what Ron Paul wrote in his book “Liberty Defined”…
  
  “In the ideal Libertarian world, borders would be blurred and open.”
  
  Report this comment
- RepubliCorp
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:10pm
  BS!…….. Ron Kook Paul voted NO on putting the military on the border
  
  Report this comment
- ShyLow
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:15pm
  Thank you Time_TO_End, for Obama 2
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:07pm
  Yes Time2, that would be ideal because all government would be local and there would not be wars
  
  Report this comment
- Chrono_Sleuth
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 9:39pm
  In the ideal Libertarian world, yes, as Paul ascribes to the Austrian School, which is an anarcho capitolist right-wing libertarian position. However, until that point he’s very much a constitutionalist.
  
  Also, he did advocate to bring the troops home and several times mentioned one of the reasons is due to the escalating conflict on the border, of course the main reason being we shouldn’t be the police of the world. The point of many constitutional libertarians who are also anarcho capitolists, is that until there’s a shift in the world towards true capitolism, and a natural progression towards working together between individuals of various countries, rather than their governments, there has to be some level of sovereignty maintained by the border.
  
  Also republicorp, I did not know that, I’ll have to look into that and read his reasoning if he ever left one.
  
  Report this comment
Oldmantex
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:36pm
Darn these Libertarians wanting people to be able to live free.
Darn them for supporting states rights!!
Darn them for wanting to stop policing the entire world!!
Darn them for wanting people of faith to be free to worship how they want!!
Darn them for wanting lower taxes, less government, and to dismantle the FED.
What tyrants, asking people to live how they choose and the rest of the world to leave them alone, how unAmerican!!
Dont you people know that Republican rule is always better than Democrat rule or complete freedom!!

Well forget that crap, I want to be free again. I don’t need either party telling me how to live.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:05pm
  Then put a candidate up for National attention who isn’t 75% freakin’ bat crap crazy (Paul) or a fraud (Johnson) !
  
  Report this comment
- Oldmantex
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:31pm
  OH someone like Romney? Yea that worked out real well didn’t it TIME2?
  
  The fact is, living under Republican rule is no different than Democrat rule, just different restrictions.
  Why not try limiting restrictions on everyone and see if we can find a middle ground.
  
  For instance, Republicans are the first to yell that Gun laws only stop law abiding citizens from owning guns, the criminal is going to get a gun no matter what.
  
  These same Republicans will then scream and yell that we need laws against abortion?
  
  Really??? Why because it will stop people from getting abortions? NO it wont.
  
  Do you know what prohibition birthed? Basically organized crime.
  
  The point is laws don’t stop people from doing what they want. So the real battle is at the heart. Allow freedom for all because people like freedom, then work on their hearts, so THEY choose not to get an abortion.
  
  To many republicans fell into the trap of the late 70s with the moral majority, when the Christians decided to take over congress and write laws to make people moral. Well that has worked out really well hasn’t it?
  Nope not a single law stops a woman that wanted an abortion in the past. Not a single law stops a thief from stealing, or a mad man from misusing a gun.
  
  So the conservatives and I believe Libertarians need to get back to states rights, and working on the hearts of Americans. Then we will have a truly free society.
  
  Republican rule is just that….being ruled.
  
  Report this comment
- ShyLow
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:34pm
  Crazy, is thinking you can make everything illegal, expand the police state, and not have to pay for it through higher taxes.
  If you are taxed enough, stop spending on a police nation
  
  Report this comment
Detroit paperboy
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:34pm
It’s NOT IMMIGRATION………IT IS COLONIZATION….wake the f%#€ UP……

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Dave.the.Blaze
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:51pm
  So, the Mexicans are colonizing us? Wow. They really need some lessons in colonization because it’s the sloppiest effort in human history. As a white man, I probably won’t get any sleep tonight knowing they are colonizing me one manual-labor job at a time.
  
  Report this comment
- geomann
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:36pm
  Don’t underestimate colonization. It takes time, but it is working. Look at birth rates and demographic changes and you will see. If you can’t beat them, become them…
  
  Report this comment
usedCZARsalesman
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:32pm
SOY, I was asking a legit question asshat…you other comment wasn’t up when I replied

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:08pm
  roger that. I commented on your comment
  
  Report this comment
Rational Man
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:29pm
I’m disapointed. I thought I was going to be “surprised”…………

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
fancynancy
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:28pm
True conservatism wins. We have not had a truly conservative candidate since Reagan in my mind. I voted for Bush and McCain with my nose pinched and Romney was minimally better. But still, if true conservatism is promoted, people vote for it.
Rand wants to show what conservatives could or should go for? Democrats would never move away from their social issues. Conservatives should not either, WE need someone who can make the message plain. Of course, it would help to have a neutral media…instead of being in the tank for liberalism.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- justangry
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:16pm
  The problem is both parties’ social issues are progressive. Democrats are happy to call them what they are. Republicans are in denial. Personally, I don’t how Republicans consider issues that will expand, or keep the federal government the same size conservative. Small = conservative Big government = progressive/liberal.
  
  Report this comment
Theodwulf
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:26pm
Pot and amnesty?!?! So this is what defeat is like? While he is at it , why not include food stamps and medicare for all? Better yet why not adopt the democratic party platform and be done with it? Paulites can NOT even win a primary and they want to give advice.. really?

News flash the Tea Party lost to “Occupy”, that is the sad facts. It only gets worse as more people get their hands out. The more they can use their votes to punish those who have more than them. The politics of envy won the day.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Gonzo
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:22pm
Why stop there? Let’s offer free pot for votes! Democrats are restricting my access to the chronic! The Democrat war on weed!
Hey man it’s me Rand, open up I’ve got the stuff…Rand’s not here

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- AvengerK
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:45pm
  GONZO…we’re going to hit the wall soon enough and the democrat brand will evaporate. We have to do some strategizing for the midterms but it’s a sure thing that Obama will..to use Obama’s own metaphor…drive the economy into a ditch. We dont’ need to re-assess our positions..we need to strengthen them and re-assert them. Sure..change the approach to hispanics..instead of deporting, tell them about opportunities..do an Obama on them…flatter them..but don’t become democrat lite or we’re toast.
  
  Report this comment
- Tractorboy
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:53pm
  Hey Gonzo, do you thinks in a thousand years this country will be bigger or smaller than the state of Connecticut?
  
  Report this comment
tutula
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:19pm
I think the low turnout were all the Ron Paul people who now have elected Barack Obama. And we are supposed to listen to his son? He’s a big corporation/establishment Republican it sounds like to me. He has misinterpretted this election and has become an opportunist.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Dave.the.Blaze
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:30pm
  I don’t see that. Obama won the popular vote by 3.3 million over Mitt. Gary Johnson snagged only around 1.1 million votes, so he didn’t lose anything for Romney. The Libertarians weren’t in play for any elector college votes either.
  
  Report this comment
- midwesthippie
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:43pm
  …TUT…romney lost the catholic vote…the white women vote…the black vote…the hispanic vote…the asian vote…the youth vote…the GOP put up a candidate they knew could not win…ask yourself why…
  
  Report this comment
tutula
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:16pm
A guy loses by a mere 2% against a very popular president who is known for being a good campaigner and that’s about it– and Republicans are about to sell their values and get on the “shallow and cheap” bus. Changing policies that are wise- like not rewarding those that broke the law- is important. Reagan rewarded those breaking the law, and look what we are doing now- same thing. It just perpetuates law breaking and leads to the demise of public services who are expended on those that aren’t paying in. If we have a picnic and only a few bring food, and 1000s more show up to eat, then are we going to be surprised when we don’t have anything to eat anymore. Schools, hospital care, it all has been run down by illegal immigration.

The policy of AMNESTY is actually one against blacks, mexicans and those that take jobs in restaurants, retail, cleaning. There are a lot of people out there that want these jobs now. Giving amnesty takes the right for citizens to get these jobs. Citizens better think long and hard giving up jobs they may never get back. Hard times are coming and without these jobs, people will be hurthing more. So most Americans oppose a flux of illegal population into our country. These Republicans- like Bush and Rove- are for big business and Corporations– so these corporations can go ahead and keep their illegal workers. That is why they want it! Paul, Rove and GWBush are sell outs. That is not want this election was even about. Paul’s a po

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
midwesthippie
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:15pm
…ron paul tried to save the republican party…which later committed political suicide…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 2MINUTESTOMIDNIGHT
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:16pm
  Not true.
  
  Report this comment
- truthnstuff
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:47pm
  midwesthippie. Ron Paul did nothing for the republican party. He selfishly chose to support 0bama by not supporting freedom and liberty. He stuck it to America. Shame on him!
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:08pm
  Romnicide
  
  Report this comment
- Creativethinker
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:27pm
  Oh the liberal midwest troll is back… Obama stole the election there is more and more proof everyday
  
  Report this comment
- justangry
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:31pm
  Really Ron Paul tried to save the country from the ate up policies of both parties which are remarkably similar.
  
  Report this comment
Eric_The_Red_State
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:13pm
Change both party names to “PROGRESSIVE PARTY” and “CONSERVATIVE PARTY” — now let’s pick sides.

I pick the Conservative Party

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Chrono_Sleuth
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:30pm
  Praytell, how is the Republican party not being run by progressives? How is there agenda that much different? Aside from the difference that both are steering us towards the same cliff, only democrats prefer turning on the turbos.
  
  Report this comment
- Kathleen3
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:57pm
  There is virtually no difference between the Democrats and Republicans and their common agenda other than the letters R or D following their name. One can, however, quickly identify Republicans by the lack of a spine and the Democrats by their lack of a conscience.
  
  Report this comment
KickinBack
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:12pm
Illegal aliens don’t care about amnesty issues. They want free stuff. Republicans may become more likeable towards them by talks of amnesty, but the Democrats will get their votes by doing what they always do, portraying themselves as Santa Claus.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- AvengerK
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:29pm
  You’re on the right track KICKINBACK. Much is being touted about Mexicans being catholics etc. They’re socialists before they’re catholics. Look at their country..abortion is illegal there. They’re taught marxism and socialism in their schools. They truly believe the government should pay for them. Obama knows this, the left knows this that they’ll vote for whoever promises them the most stuff.
  Granting them amnesty is merely opening the floodgates to a surge of voters who will vote for the candidate who offers them the most tax payer funded perks their catholicism isn’t a major factor. It’s a disaster for the country. Paul should know better than that.
  These people are taught that Americanis are rich and can pay for them better than the places they come from..that’s why they’re here. They’re not here to start businesses..first of all how can they when they’re here illegally? They’re here to sponge off what they perceive as an affluent country that can spare the money. It’s time to tell them if you want Mexico’s problems on a larger scale vote democrat. And do you think they’d have any national loyalty if things went really bad here? They’d scurry back across the border like they did during the mortgage crisis. It’s time for an honest discussion, not a discussion about how best to pander to hispanics.
  
  Report this comment
Polarized America
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:10pm
.
..Tea Party ..( scrap that ) …Pot Party.. ======***

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DEFCON4
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:32pm
  (after that)….a…pizza party….lol..
  
  Report this comment
Smokey_Bojangles
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:09pm
Seems odd that now after a loss,republicans (Other that Rand Paul) are grasping more libertarian views. I am still not a big fan of Amnesty unless it has some strict rules and guidelines(Self Sufficiency,Speak English((You don’t have to be great at it.I Speak Red Neck Myself)) maybe eat a hot dog and some apple pie now and then……..)
We have 4 years to fight Obama and rearrange The Republican party.Maybe not make the mistake of a Mitt Romney Or a John McCain again?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Triple7
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:04pm
Damn Tea Party types. Old angry racist white guys.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- rwmccrory
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:23pm
  really, and you get this from what? so all older white people are racist. I’d consider myself a teapartyer and i’m in my 30′s and have 2 mixed (black) sons, so where you get this ******** from you read it on twitter or something. moron
  
  Report this comment
HappyStretchedThin
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:02pm
So lemme get this straight. Paul wants the GOP to adopt his father’s policy stances on drugs and foreign policy? Because we should ALL take advice from Ron Paul on how to win national elections, right?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:08pm
  Rand wants all the fox hole isolationists to smoke one for dear old Daddy and join the GOP…
  
  Report this comment
- Kupo
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:12pm
  Yeah because we can absolutely rely on the people behind the Romney campaign to win elections, right?
  
  Oh wait…
  
  Report this comment
- KickinBack
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:14pm
  Almost sounds like Rand Paul is growing a pair…Antennae that is…
  
  Report this comment
- HappyStretchedThin
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:18pm
  Yes, and waive the right to a meaningful national border as well, apparently. Seriously, illegals: what was so wrong about coming into our house at the front door?
  
  Report this comment
- HappyStretchedThin
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:22pm
  @Kupo,
  You’d suggest maybe we take advice from Clinton or Obama?
  Think you’re missing the point a little.
  It’s about more Reaganism, not more pandering.
  We’ll win if we stay true to conservatism, and work hard to help make the PEOPLE more conservative too.
  
  Report this comment
- HappyStretchedThin
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:25pm
  @ Kupo
  p.s. Romney commanded 48% of the US popular vote. How much did your guy get? (hint: 0.3%)
  Get out of your lala land and get significant, stop withholding your help and making the perfect and enemy of the good.
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:29pm
  “It’s about more Reaganism, not more pandering.”
  
  Libertarians (especially the Rothbard / Paul isloationist strain) absolutely loathed Reagan. LOATHED the man.
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:40pm
  Hi HappyStretchedThin,
  
  Nice to see you back !
  
  Hope all has been well with you. : )
  
  Report this comment
- WakingSheep
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:03pm
  You people make me laugh.
  Keep ignoring the fed.
  Keep ignoring the TSA.
  Keep ignoring NDAA.
  Keep ignoring indivualism and personal responsibility.
  The liberty movement lost us the election.
  Obama stole the election.
  The media stole the election.
  The left committed fraud.
  
  You wont even watch the fraud your own party took in the primaries.
  You won’t watch the media blackout of Ron Paul during the primaries.
  
  Good luck with McCain 3.0 in 2016!
  
  Report this comment
- KC1
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:13pm
  Yes, you all love your stupid pot jokes dont you. Funny how you spout this drivel while resting your beer can on your over sized unwashed gut.
  Never the less if you want to stop loosing elections to fabian socialists watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC9Q7ufUsl4
  If you want to keep loosing elections support that dweeb Santorum or the diviant Newt.
  
  Report this comment
- justangry
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:23pm
  Reagan was the best president I’ve seen in my life, but he’s looked upon as the greatest president ever, which I don’t understand. I mean he expanded Jimmy Carter’s government, deficit and national debt. I honestly believe people were captivated by his charm more than his policies.
  
  Report this comment
- Kupo
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:24pm
  I understand the issue just fine. What YOU fail to understand is that there is not one single word in the Constitution which gives Congress the power to make cannabis illegal. It is clearly a 10th Amendment issue; therefore any government which seeks to take away that power from the states is Progressive and statist. Because of this, there is no reason why any true conservative would ever seek to federally ban the substance.
  
  Regarding immigration, people will NEVER stop trying to come into this country while our standard of living remains where it is. It doesn’t matter how many fences you build. There are fences up already and there are holes everywhere. You could litter the border with minefields and people would still find ways in. Without deploying the U.S. military to continuously patrol the Mexican border, illegal immigration will be here to stay. The only way to mitigate this is to streamline the process for acquiring citizenship.
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:27pm
  KC1. The difference between alcohol (and I’m no drinker) and pot is that you can drink alcohol WITHOUT GETTING intoxicated.
  
  The sole purpose of smoking pot is to GET intoxicated.
  
  Drunks and pot heads are useless to society and both will get innocent bystanders killed.
  
  Report this comment
- Kupo
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:36pm
  T2
  
  completely beside the point. Just because something will get you intoxicated does not mean that it should be illegal. Please give me a logical answer how the prohibition of cannabis jives with the 10th Amendment.
  
  Report this comment
- Kupo
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:38pm
  Time2
  
  Further, if the intoxicating nature of marijuana was the rationale for making it illegal and the rationale for keeping alcohol legal is that it doesn’t necessarily get you drunk, then by your logic it should be illegal to be drunk on alcohol period. Alcohol would be outlawed unless it was drunk below the intoxicating threshold.
  
  Report this comment
- resme
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 7:40pm
  “Drunks and pot heads are useless to society and both will get innocent bystanders killed.”
  
  Shall we practice eugenics, Hitler? Jus saying. I can see it now the perfect TIME_2_END_ALL_IMMORAL_HUMANS campaign.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:10pm
  Time2 just doesnt know what to do about his screen name….Ron Paul ended his campaign at the RNC and we are nearly at 2013.
  
  Report this comment
Dave.the.Blaze
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:00pm
Well, I can’t say I agree with Rand Paul on a lot of things, but I do so on these two issues. His take on both is surprisingly…..rational. I don’t smoke weed but it makes no sense that it’s illegal and booze is. And an amnesty process is the only reasonable approach to illegal immigration.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:03pm
  i do agree with Rand Paul on nearly everything – but i dont like his immigration policy. I think we need a lot more legal immigration and the illegals can just take a hike – no need to cater to them
  
  Report this comment
- oldguy49
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:04pm
  time for an american party
  
  Report this comment
- Dave.the.Blaze
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:12pm
  Soybomb, I agree that we need to have legal immigration, but millions of illegals are already here and working. We can’t logically deport them all nor would we want to — our economy is so dependent on their cheap labor. And that’s the kind of labor most “real” Americans won’t do.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:22pm
  we dont need to deport them. We need to bring in enough legals to take their place. Employers would rather have legal immigrants than illegal immigrants anyways
  
  Report this comment
- Rob in Katy
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:42pm
  Make it illegal to pay an illegal less than a legal, caught 1 year in jail and 10,000 fine. You can probably convince the illegals that vote that you are doing them a favor ;)
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:51pm
  Hi Soybom315,
  “i do agree with Rand Paul on nearly everything – but i dont like his immigration policy.”
  
  Let me change 2 words and you might understand…..
  
  “i do agree with Ron Paul on nearly everything – but i dont like his foreign policy.”
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:01pm
  @Monk
  Good….So basically you are a fan of Ron Paul like i am a fan of Rand Paul. That works for me
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:45pm
  Hi Soybom315,
  
  Would you vote for Rand Paul if he wanted completely open US borders where we let anyone do whatever they wanted?
  
  Yep, real question and not being funny.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:51pm
  i know that is not his position so i will not answer your question
  
  I am against the notion of open borders and i dont know anyone who is advocating for it
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 9:07pm
  Hi Soybom315,
  
  The key word was “if”…. because I think someone who has those views of our border is just like Dr Paul’s views on foreign policy.
  
  So, how about “if”?
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 9:16pm
  Ron Paul is not talking about getting rid of the military
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 9:41pm
  Hi Soybom315,
  
  I know exactly what Ron Paul is/was talking about.
  
  If you can’t answer a simple question honestly… well, why should I bother?
  
  Geez…..
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 9:50pm
  Show me when Ron Paul said to get rid of the whole military. I am not going to play your apples to apples game until you correctly state his foreign policy position
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 10:08pm
  Hi Soybom315,
  
  I never said Ron Paul want to, “get rid of the whole military”. You tried to put those words in my mouth.
  
  You see, one just can’t have a dialog with you. I’ve seen so many Ron Paul speeches I know exactly what his policy is. But, that has nothing to do with my question. So, goodbye Soybom315, I tried one last time to talk with you but it’s just hopeless. And I do mean “last”.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 10:24pm
  “Would you vote for Rand Paul if he wanted completely open US borders where we let anyone do whatever they wanted? ”
  
  “The key word was “if”…. because I think someone who has those views of our border is just like Dr Paul’s views on foreign policy.”
  
  Yes, you were trying to get me to answer an ‘open borders’ question because you think Ron Paul has a ‘no military’ strategy. It isnt the case, so i will not engage in it. I said I am against open borders so that should be enough to satisfy your curiosity.
  
  Report this comment
2MINUTESTOMIDNIGHT
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 5:59pm
How did I know SOYBURGER would be the first to post on this story?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
soybomb315_II
Posted on November 13, 2012 at 5:55pm
theblaze is on a roll the last couple days….keep the interesting articles/discussion going

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:05pm
  Figures… the guy who voted for the BIG government POT HEAD would be the first in line to congratulate The Blaze on a story about how to pacify dopes and bring ‘em into the Conservative fold with a joint, er, carrot at the end of a Liberal stick…
  
  Report this comment
- DEFCON4
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:08pm
  SOY, I agree, the two articles on the right to secede, drew over 1400 “spirited-replies”…….
  
  Report this comment
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:08pm
  You support amnesty for illegals SOY? I’m 100% behind the legalizing of pot, but after the 70/30 Hispanic vote in favor of marxism, I think it’s clear that Hispanics are a BIG part of the problem. Amnesty will only make it worse.
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:18pm
  What about the surge in marijuana use in states that have softened laws against it? The heavy use has surged. Do you really believe it has no consequences?
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:24pm
  @Used
  Nice assumption – read above….You know what that makes you….
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:40pm
  Seriously…don’t kid yourselves…Mexicans, central and south Americans are socialists. Much is said about their being catholics and thus susceptible to the right messaging but they are socialists before they are catholics. They are taught in their schools and have it constantly drummed into them in their countries that the government is to pay for them. They know their countries are basket cases so they come to America where they believe there’s plenty of money to pay for their stuff. They have no idea of the fiscal situation facing this nation and the demcorats won’t tell them about it because it’s bad for business. Granting them amnesty is essentially ensuring a democrat majority that will pander to a class that demands more and more from the government….we’ll never recover from it. Rand Paul is playing with fire. A wiser move is to look at who’s here, offer a special VISA to selected numbers where they may stay and work (you’ll have a PR disaster on your hands if you deport them) then tell them to take a number and wait for applying for citizenship just like every LEGAL immigrant has to.
  Some experts are saying “tell them about opportunities not deportations…sure you can adjust the approach of the message but amnesty is a death sentence. You’ll inject around 12 million people into an economy that are under-educated socialists who believe the government is there to provide for them.
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:47pm
  BINGO AVENGERK…. great assessment…. knowledgeable points to ponder.
  
  Report this comment
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:53pm
  Your other comment wasn’t posted when I posted mine…it was a legit question, as I often have NO IDEA what goes on in the minds of RP supporters
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 13, 2012 at 8:03pm
  @Used
  Ok i see maybe you were asking an honest question.
  
  But now lets get serious….Lets not pretend the republicans are anti-amnesty. Two days after the election Sean Hannity is going around saying republicans need to be pro-amnesty and nobody says a peep about it. SCARY!
  
  Report this comment
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on November 14, 2012 at 10:39am
  SOY…I’m not pretending anything, I want some g*ddam balls on these pathetic “conservatives”! Raid every one of their damn houses, kick them and their children south of the border, pull our Afghan troops out and start doing “tours of duty” on the border. Shoot a couple thousand of these socialists TAKERS as they cross and guess what? THEY’LL STOP CROSSING! I’m beyond done with this PC garbage. Every b l a c k that calls racism, send em back to africa. Every gay that cries about discrimination, send em to europe and let em hump male sheep if they want. ALL muslims GONE…I want my moth#$fu%$ing America back…NOW
  
  ok, I took a xanax, I’m calm now…
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.